scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Topic

Sign (semiotics)

About: Sign (semiotics) is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 4080 publications have been published within this topic receiving 70333 citations. The topic is also known as: semiotic sign.


Papers
More filters
Book
01 Jan 1982
TL;DR: In this article, Tzvetan Todorov analyzes the diverse theories of symbolism and interpretation that have been elaborated over the centuries and considers their contribution to a general theory of verbal symbolism, discussing a wide range of thinkers from the Sanskrit philosophers and Aristotle to the German Romantics and contemporary semioticians.
Abstract: In Symbolism and Interpretation, Tzvetan Todorov examines two aspects of discourse: its production, which has traditionally been the domain of rhetoric, and its reception, which has always been the object of hermeneutics. He analyzes the diverse theories of symbolism and interpretation that have been elaborated over the centuries and considers their contribution to a general theory of verbal symbolism, discussing a wide range of thinkers, from the Sanskrit philosophers and Aristotle to the German Romantics and contemporary semioticians. Todorov begins by examining general ideas of linguistic symbolism and the interpretive process. He then turns to a detailed consideration of two of the most influential and pervasive interpretative strategies in Western thought: the patristic exegesis of Augustine and Aquinas, and the philological exegesis foreshadowed in the work of Spinoza, developed by Wolf, Ast, Boeckh, and Lanson, and criticized by Schleiermacher. Todorov clarifies in masterly fashion the intricacies of the many schools of thought and refines the concepts crucial to critical theory today, including the distinctions between language and discourse, direct and indirect meaning, sign and symbol. Ably translated by Catherine Porter, Symbolism and Interpretation provides a coherent and innovative framework that is indispensable to the study of semiotics, its history, and its future.

43 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The aim of this article is to consider to what extent the extension of iconicity theory to new domains will necessitate the development of new models.
Abstract: Practically all theories of iconicity are denunciations of its subject matter (for example, those of Goodman, Bierman and the early Eco). My own theory of iconicity was developed in order to save a particular kind of iconicity, pictoriality, from such criticism. In this interest, I distinguished pure iconicity, iconic ground, and iconic sign, on one hand, and primary and secondary iconic signs, on the other hand. Since then, however, several things have happened. The conceptual tools that I created to explain pictoriality have been shown by others to be relevant to linguistic iconicity. On the other hand, semioticians with points of departure different from mine have identified mimicry as it is commonly found in the animal world as a species of iconicity. In the evolutionary semiotics of Deacon, iconicity is referred to in such a general way that it seems to be emptied of all content, while in the variety invented by Donald the term mimesis is used for a particular phase in the evolution of iconic meaning. The aim of this article is to consider to what extent the extension of iconicity theory to new domains will necessitate the development of new models.

43 citations

Book ChapterDOI
17 Mar 1999
TL;DR: It is attempted to demonstrate that sign languages are linguistic objects which provide us with increasingly tangible means of accessing cognitive activity.
Abstract: In this article, I shall attempt to demonstrate that sign languages are linguistic objects which provide us with increasingly tangible means of accessing cognitive activity. This is possible by virtue of the existence in language of the visible, iconic manifestation of a dynamic process, which is set in motion by deaf signers to speak of experience outside of the situation of the utterance.

43 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jul 1999
TL;DR: In this paper, Darras and Kindler proposed a model of artistic development as a semiotic process mediated by the socio-cultural context in which it unfolds, which is congruent with the assumption underlying our model that regards what has been referred to as "development in art," as a semi-linear process.
Abstract: Whether or not we agree with Arthur Danto's (1997) idea of living in the "after the end of art" era, one thing is certain: At the end of the 20th century the concept of art constitutes, more than ever before, an ill-defined category. The understanding of what art is, could be, or should be is guided by the universe of classification rules too vast to allow for an operational definition that would hold to the scrutiny of various social, political, cultural, ethnic, racial, religious, ideological, or aesthetic perspectives. While the notion of art as an open concept has been advocated from the late 1950s when Morris Weitz (1959) warned that the "contention that 'art' is amenable to real or any kind of true definition is false" (p.435), recent years have stretched the boundaries of this concept even further. This situation clearly poses a challenge to the field of art education. It necessitates re-examination of what art education should be in the "after the end of art" era to account for a variety of pictorial repertoires and visual languages reflecting the open texture of the concept of art. It offers an opportunity to incorporate in art education realms of pictorial representation that have traditionally remained outside its boundaries. It calls for re-evaluation of our understanding of the notion of artistic development and ways in which such growth should be encouraged and supported. Re-thinking Learning in Art: Artistic Development as Development in Repertoires of Pictorial Representation The road to a revised understanding of artistic development has been outlined by researchers who have argued that there is a non-linear progression in artistic growth (e.g., Darras, 1992; Golomb, 1994; Wolf & Perry, 1988; Wolf, 1994; Pariser, 1997; Kindler & Darras, 1994, 1997, 1998). Wolf & Perry (1988) called for freeing our thinking about development in art from a compulsive search for "endpoints." They argued that the world of visual imagery is broader than what classical stage models could account for, noting that children are often capable of constructing and using a range of "styles" in pictorial representation within the time frame of a single "stage." Wolf and Perry suggested that at various points in the development of graphic symbolization children "construct a range of visual languages with which to portray their experience or ideas." (p.31) This point has been well demonstrated by Atkinson (1991) who offered some convincing examples testifying to children's ability to access multiple pictorial systems. Bernard Darras and I have also suggested that in order to look at artistic development in a comprehensive way it is necessary to explore not only the analysis of pictorial evidence produced by infants, young children, adolescents and adults, but also to examine the semiotic process that underlies the production of visual imagery (e.g., Darras & Kindler, 1993, 1997; Kindler, 1998; Kindler & Darras, 1994, 1997, 1997a, 1998). We have indicated that emergence of pictorial representation can be traced back to early iconic gestures, often long before first tangible marks are produced. This recognition of aspects of movement as iconic signs, bears serious implications to the discussion of development of pictorial representation. It shifts emphasis to the semiotic function of an iconic sign, whether this sign is tangible and permanent or not. It is congruent with the assumption underlying our model that regards what has been referred to as "development in art," as a semiotic process mediated by the socio-cultural context in which it unfolds. The understanding of artistic development that we have proposed highlights the significance of this context. It exposes the actual and potential influence of culture in guiding choices of pictorial repertoires that are favored, valued, and taught. In the "after the end of art" era, this model is particularly relevant as it considers multiple possible teleologies, purposes, and ambitions that may guide human pictorial behavior. …

43 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Two of the approaches at the forefront of contemporary sociological interest in meaning, symbolic interactionism and structuralism, share an interest in the role of signs and symbols in social life as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Two of the approaches at the forefront of contemporary sociological interest in meaning, symbolic interactionism and structuralism, share an interest in the role of signs and symbols in social life...

43 citations


Network Information
Related Topics (5)
Popular culture
15.1K papers, 287.6K citations
68% related
Modernity
20.2K papers, 477.4K citations
68% related
Metaphor
18.9K papers, 396.2K citations
66% related
National identity
20.9K papers, 335.6K citations
66% related
Sociolinguistics
9.7K papers, 309.3K citations
65% related
Performance
Metrics
No. of papers in the topic in previous years
YearPapers
20222
2021178
2020196
2019188
2018186
2017177