RE: Re: [PEIRCE-L] RE: signs, correlates, and triadic relations

This can’t be correct, Sung, since you don’t distinguish between ‘exists’ (you use it improperly) and ‘is real’. Firsts are real, but they don’t exist. Seconds exist (and are real). Thirds are real, and may have a mode of existence through seconds. John Collier Professor Emeritus, UKZN http://w

Re: [PEIRCE-L] signs, correlates, and triadic relations

> On Nov 29, 2015, at 9:03 PM, CLARK GOBLE wrote: > > I assume this refers to the types of relations one finds in say Duns Scotus. > For those interested the SEP has an entry on medieval theories of relations > that is helpful. > > http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/relations-medieval/ >

Re: [PEIRCE-L] signs, correlates and triadic relations

> On Nov 26, 2015, at 7:44 AM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: > > Again, Peirce uses the term of 'sign' to refer to both the Representamen and > the full triadic set of relations. You have to be careful of the context to > figure out which one he is referring to. This is definitely true and can thr

Re: [PEIRCE-L] signs, correlates, and triadic relations

> On Nov 28, 2015, at 10:34 AM, g...@gnusystems.ca wrote: > > Jon, if you can point out where Peirce's text or mine in this thread is > conducive to the kind of confusion you are warning us about, I'll see what I > can do to clarify things. But I don't really have the time for a wild goose > c

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The categorial "mirror image" of 'determination' and 'representation'.

Gary F, List, Thanks for your comments, questions, and the attached manuscript snippet. I'll be reflecting on all of that--and more--in the next few days. For now, and since you haven't yet explicitly addressed the mirroring notion here, Ifor now I'll copy a paragraph from my reply to you in the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] RE: signs, correlates, and triadic relations

Gary F., List, Gary, I'm glad my recent posts have got you considering extending your 'mini-study'. For now I'd like to address but one point. You quoted me then commented: [Y]ou mention here the “triadic quasi-movement whereas the object (2ns) determines the sign (1ns) for the interpretant sign

RE: [PEIRCE-L] RE: signs, correlates, and triadic relations

Continuing our study of NDTR: Having narrowed his topic from triadic relations in general to those of the type R-O-I, and then further to the Representamen as First Correlate of that relation, and finally to the Sign as the best-known type of Representamen, Peirce introduces the three tricho

Re: [PEIRCE-L] by way of answering your questions

Jerry, List,All languages change by making the relationship between sets of sounds (signs) and sets of meanings (immediate objects) more and more diagrammatic (iconic). This is the processwhereby the fundamental arbitrariness between sounds and meanings is attenuated. A diagram is an icon of relati

Re: [PEIRCE-L] by way of answering your questions

Michael, List: On Nov 28, 2015, at 1:13 PM, Michael Shapiro wrote: > > "Attenuation of Arbitrariness in the Semantics of Quantification > > The overall drift in language development is toward greater > diagrammaticity (iconicity) between sound and meaning, which thereby > necessa

RE: [PEIRCE-L] RE: signs, correlates, and triadic relations

Gary R, These last two posts of yours have made this thread a lot more interesting, to me at least, because they open up dimensions of the subject that I hadn’t anticipated. Actually I was going to wrap up my mini-study today, but now I think it may take awhile longer to draw out some of the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] by way of answering your questions

Michael, List: The november 2015 TED talkk by Geneieve von Petzinger ("Why are these 32 symbols found in ancient caves all over Europe") that I just found out this morning might be relevant and possibly early evidence for diagrammaticity and iconic motivation for sign functions, semiosis, a

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] RE: signs, correlates, and triadic relations

Gary R., Gary F., list, Yes! It is very helpful, and your post too! To me it points at two different kinds of analysis: The analysis of the laws of a general affair, and the analysis of specialization possibilities (Im sure there may be better terms). In both kinds of analysis the Peircean modal