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 published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
•
01 Jan 2000
TL;DR: Preliminaries signs and signification the direct sign or the "neutral" image the image and perceived reality the shot iconic significations indexical significations the inference of montage concerning syntagmatic codes and codification images an speech narratives symbols and metaphors rhythm sense and nonsense image, language and thought.
Abstract: Preliminaries signs and signification the direct sign or the "neutral" image the image and perceived reality the shot iconic significations indexical significations the inference of montage concerning syntagmatic codes and codification images an speech narrative structures symbols and metaphors rhythm sense and nonsense image, language and thought.
32 citations
••
01 Jan 2018TL;DR: This chapter argues that the Construction Morphology approach leads to a uniform analysis of core and classifier signs alike, without resorting to an a priori distinction between language and gesture.
Abstract: In this chapter, we extend a usage-based theory of Construction Morphology to the analysis of sign language structure, to address two long-standing categorization problems in sign language linguistics. Sign language linguistics traditionally distinguishes monomorphemic core lexical signs from multimorphemic classifier construction signs, based on whether or not a sign form exhibits analyzable morphological structure (“the Core vs. Classifier problem”). In this tradition, core signs are retrieved from the lexicon, while classifier signs are derived productively via grammatical rules. Sign linguists are also accustomed to classifying discrete and listable aspects of sign structure as language, while aspects of signing that exhibit more holism or gradience are considered to be gesture (“the Language vs. Gesture problem”). These categories of core vs. classifier on the one hand and language vs. gesture on the other derive from a shared source: the assumption that linguistic forms are built up from discrete building blocks. Instead, we analyze multimodal usage events in terms of constructions, conventional patterns of meaning and form containing both fixed elements and variable slots and organized in a structured network. We argue that the Construction Morphology approach leads to a uniform analysis of core and classifier signs alike, without resorting to an a priori distinction between language and gesture.
31 citations
•
02 Jul 2015
TL;DR: This paper motivates the use of computational argumentation for evaluating ‘concept blends’ and other forms of combinatorial creativity, and presents a semiotic system for representing icons, showing how they can be described in terms of interpretations and how they are related by sign patterns.
Abstract: This paper motivates the use of computational argumentation for evaluating ‘concept blends’ and other forms of combinatorial creativity. We exemplify our approach in the domain of computer icon design, where icons are understood as creative artefacts generated through concept blending. We present a semiotic system for representing icons, showing how they can be described in terms of interpretations and how they are related by sign patterns. The interpretation of a sign pattern conveys an intended meaning for an icon. This intended meaning is subjective, and depends on the way concept blending for creating the icon is realised. We show how the intended meaning of icons can be discussed in an explicit and social argumentation process modeled as a dialogue game, and show examples of these following the style of Lakatos (1976). In this way, we are able to evaluate concept blends through an open-ended and dynamic discussion in which concept blends can be improved and the reasons behind a specific evaluation are made explicit. In the closing section, we explore argumentation and the potential roles that can play at different stages of the concept blending process.
31 citations
••
28 Jul 2016TL;DR: This chapter demonstrates that the Information Structure notions Topic and Focus are relevant for sign languages, just as they are for spoken languages, and shows how information, contrastive, and emphatic focus is linguistically encoded.
Abstract: This chapter demonstrates that the Information Structure notions Topic and Focus are relevant for sign languages, just as they are for spoken languages. Data from various sign languages reveal that, across sign languages, Information Structure is encoded by syntactic and prosodic strategies, often in combination. As for topics, we address the familiar semantic (e.g. aboutness vs. scene-setting topic) and syntactic (e.g. moved vs. base-generated topic) classifications in turn and we also discuss the possibility of topic stacking. As for focus, we show how information, contrastive, and emphatic focus is linguistically encoded. For both topic and focus constructions, special attention is given to the role of non-manual markers, that is, specific eyebrow and head movements that signal the information structure status of constituents. Finally, aspects that appear to be unique to languages in the visual-gestural modality are highlighted.
31 citations
••
TL;DR: In this article, the authors propose a phenomenological description of a few kinds of meaning, which is not meant to be exhaustive, but still should give an idea of the complexity of the task.
Abstract: In order to differentiate the semiotic capacities of animals and human beings we need to understand more exactly what these properties are. Instead of identifying all vehicles of meaning with signs, we certainly have to specify the notion of sign, but it will also be necessary to provide an inventory of other kinds of meaning, starting out from perception, and going through a number of intermediate notions such as affordances, markers, and surrogates before reaching signs and sign systems. This essay proposes a phenomenological description of a few kinds of meaning, which is not meant to be exhaustive, but still should give an idea of the complexity of the task. It suggests that not only the setting up of semiotic levels and hierarchies of evolution and development, but even, to some extent, the comparison of the capacities of animals and human beings must go hand in hand with advances in phenomenological observations.
31 citations