Re: [peirce-l] "On the Paradigm of Experience Appropriate for
Semiotic"CORRECTION, sorry. - Best, Ben
----- Original Message -----
From: Benjamin Udell
To: Neal Bruss ; PEIRCE-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2011 4:07 PM
Subject: Re: [peirce-l] ³On the Paradigm of Experience Appropriate for Semiotic²
Neal, list,
Peirce's views on the classification evolved over time. I don't know of a
single source with fully elaborated examples of each and every kind of sign. I
hope other peirce-listers can chime in with some help.
*The 'canonical' 9-fold classification was set forth in MS 540 from 1903,
published in Collected Peirce v. 2 paragraphs 233-272 and contains a number of
examples, though not always happily elaborate. This appears as "Nomenclature of
Triadic Relations, as Far as They Are Determined" in The Essential Peirce v. 2,
pp. 289-299. The 9-fold consists of three trichotomies of classes of signs. The
trichotomies are not fully independent; for example, legisigns include all
symbols, some but not all indices, and [CORRECTION not 'no icons'] some but not
all icons [END CORRECTION]. This works out so that the 9 classes intersect to
form 10 (rather than 27) sign classes fully specified at the level of analysis
constituted by the 9-fold.
Peirce's Ten Classes of Sign (from CP 2.254-263 1903) (I put this table into
Wikipedia) Sign's own
phenome-
nological
category Relation
to
object Relation
to
interpretant Specificational redundancies
in parentheses Some examples
(I) Qualisign Icon Rheme (Rhematic Iconic) Qualisign A feeling of "red"
(II) Sinsign Icon Rheme (Rhematic) Iconic Sinsign An individual diagram
(III) Index Rheme Rhematic Indexical Sinsign A spontaneous cry
(IV) Dicisign Dicent (Indexical) Sinsign A weathercock or photograph
(V) Legisign Icon Rheme (Rhematic) Iconic Legisign A diagram, apart from
its factual individuality
(VI) Index Rheme Rhematic Indexical Legisign A demonstrative pronoun
(VII) Dicisign Dicent Indexical Legisign A street cry (identifying the
individual by tone, theme)
(VIII) Symbol Rheme Rhematic Symbol (-ic Legisign) A common noun
(IX) Dicisign Dicent Symbol (-ic Legisign) A proposition (in the
conventional sense)
(X) Argument Argument (-ative Symbolic Legisign) A syllogism
*Decads (sets of ten) of trichotomies.* Peirce sought to analyze sign classes
more finely, by adding more trichotomies. The general idea was that each added
trichtomy would take the total number of sign classes up to the next triangular
number T. So the number of classes would be the (n+1)th triangular number
(i.e., T_(n+1)). One trichotomy, 3 classes. Two trichotomies, 6 classes. Three
trichotomies, 10 classes, and so on. Peirce made various attempts to divide
signs into ten trichotomies (leading to 66 classes) but he did not reach a
satisfactory conclusion and left the work incomplete. I once read a paper
online, something related to education, which gave good, interesting,
elaborated examples of the kinds of representation and interpretation embodied
by some of these trichotomies, but I can't remember the paper's name and I
vaguely think that the author or one of the authors was Phyllis Chiasson.
*Instances/replicas.* Additionally, Peirce discussed how sinsigns (tokens) can
serve as 'instances' or 'replicas' of legisigns (types), and how legisigns
(including all symbols) need such instances/replicas in order to be actually
expressed. The general word 'horse' is a symbol, but its individual utterance
is an indexical sinsign to your experience of a horse. Eventually Peirce also
wrote of replicas that are not individual things/events. The term 'horse',
apart from its expression in any particular language, is a symbol (and
legisign) which has, as replicas, symbols (the words 'horse,' _caballo_,
_equus_, etc.) that prescribe qualities of appearance (depending on language)
for their individual replicas, which are individual indices (indexical
sinsigns) such as individual utterances 'horse', 'caballo', etc. Peirce's sign
theory's setting is not in a putative deductive formalism, so Quine's 'gavagai'
questions of translational indeterminacy are not a burning issue in Peircean
semiotics.
*Images, diagrams, metaphors. Peirce also divided 'hypoicons' (icons apart from
any attached indices) into images, diagrams, and metaphors. He had a great deal
to say about diagrams. He held that mathematical thought proceeds
diagrammatically, and he makes his distinction between corollarial and
theorematic reasoning in terms of uses of diagrams. A diagram can be
geometrical, or consist in an array of algebraic expressions or even in a
common form like "All ___ is ___" which is subject, like any diagram, to
logical/mathematical transformation.
I tried to cover much of the above, and to note some of Peirce's changes of
view, and many of his changes of terminology, compendiously in a section
"Classes of signs"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiotic_elements_and_classes_of_signs#Classes_of_signs
of a Wikipedia article. Lots of footnotes with links. An indispensable
starting point on many issues is the Commens Dictionary of Peirce's Terms,
edited by Mats Bergman and Sami Paavola of the University of Helsinki.
http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/dictionary.html. Peirce's own
definitions, often many per term across the decades. Be sure to look up
'image', 'diagram', 'metaphor' there. Also check out Atkin's "Peirce's Theory
of Semiotics" http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/peirce-semiotics and Liszka's
Synopsis of A General Introduction to the Semeiotic of Charles S. Peirce
http://hosting.uaa.alaska.edu/afjjl/LinkedDocuments/LiszkaSynopsisPeirce.htm
Peirce also divided interpretants into more than one trichotomy, and there have
been arguments among scholars about which of these trichotomies are really the
same and which are really different. Albert Atkin covered at least some of this
issue (along with much else) in "Peirce's Theory of Semiotics"
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/peirce-semiotics in the Stanford Encyclopedia
of Philosophy. When I first read it some years ago, I was so shocked by some of
what I found there about determination among kinds of interpretants that I sent
an idiotic post to peirce-l claiming that Atkin didn't know what he was talking
about. But he did know what he was talking about, and I didn't.
Best, Ben
----- Original Message -----
From: Neal Bruss
To: Benjamin Udell ; PEIRCE-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2011 3:20 AM
Subject: Re: [peirce-l] ³On the Paradigm of Experience Appropriate for Semiotic²
Can any of you recommend a source on the fully-elaborated classification of
signs with good examples for each and every variety?
Neal Bruss
On 11/24/11 2:59 PM, "Benjamin Udell" <bud...@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
Forwarded to peirce-l, partly as a test. Post intended for peirce-l from
Claudio Guerri. - Best, Ben
-------- Mensaje original --------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the PEIRCE-L
listserv. To remove yourself from this list, send a message to
lists...@listserv.iupui.edu with the line "SIGNOFF PEIRCE-L" in the body of the
message. To post a message to the list, send it to PEIRCE-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
