Auke, List: What I am suggesting can be summarized as follows.
- Every Token has a different *Dynamic *Object and *Dynamic *Interpretant--whatever it *actually does* denote and signify, respectively, on that particular occasion. - Every Type has a different *Immediate *Object and *Immediate *Interpretant--whatever it *possibly could* denote and signify, respectively, in accordance with the Sign System to which it belongs. - Every Sign has a different *General *Object and *Final *Interpretant--whatever it *necessarily would* denote and signify, respectively, after infinite inquiry by an infinite community; i.e., in the Ultimate Opinion. In other words, two *individual *Instances of the same Type always have different *individual *Dynamic Objects and different *individual *Dynamic Interpretants; while two different Types of the same Sign always have at least *somewhat *different Immediate Objects and Immediate Interpretants within their different Sign Systems. I am still pondering whether it is *also *possible for two Instances of the same Type to have different *Immediate *Interpretants, when they are accompanied by different Tones--font changes for emphasis, punctuation marks, voice inflections, etc.--or if those only affect their different *Dynamic *Interpretants. Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 7:32 AM Auke van Breemen <a.bree...@chello.nl> wrote: > JAS, List, > > > > We must not forget that a sign needs to be considered in the context of > semiosis in actu if we want to become determinate as to which sign aspects > take what value on each of the trichotomies. For only that what contributes > to the result, i.e. the responding sign, takes part in the semiotic process > we study (See Hulswit’s *A semiotic account of causation*.) > > > > With regard to the dynamical object the tokens ‘man’ and ‘homme’ both can > be regarded as of the same type, just as the spoken and written forms of > ‘there’ can be regarded as the same type, although this probably is not the > rule. I agree that with regard to what the terms connote, respectively > English, French language with man and homme and written, spoken form with > ‘there’ they are definitely regarded as of different type. > > > > Best, > > > > Auke van Breemen > >
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
