Philosophy Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Semiotics: Semiotics is the broader study of signs and symbols in all their manifestations, while semiology is the study of signs and symbols within a particular system, such as a language, a culture, or a discipline. See also Semiology, Signs, Symbols, Signals, Meaning, Reference, Sense.
_____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Paul Ricoeur on Semiotics - Dictionary of Arguments
II 7 Semiotics/Ricoeur: (...) [the] two sciences [semiotics and semantics] are not just distinct, but also reflect a hierarchical order. The object of semiotics - the sign — is merely virtual. Only the sentence is actual as the very event of speaking. This is why there is no way of passing from the word as a lexical sign to the sentence by mere extension of the same methodology to a more complex entity. The sentence is not a larger or more complex word, it is a new entity. There is therefore no linear progression from the phoneme to the lexeme and then on to the sentence and to linguistic wholes larger than the sentence. Each stage requires new structures and a new description. II 8 The distinction between two kinds of linguistics - semiotics and semantics - reflects this network of relations. Semiotics, the science of signs, is formal to the extent that it relies on the dissociation of language into constitutive parts. Semantics, the science of the sentence, is immediately concerned with the concept of sense (...). Ricoeur: For me, the distinction between semantics and semiotics is the key to the whole problem of language (...). II 21 If language were not fundamentally referential, would or could it be meaningful? (>Dialogue/Ricoeur). How could we know that a sign stands for something, if it did not receive its direction towards something for which it stands from its use in discourse? Finally, semiotics appears as a mere abstraction of semantics. And the semiotic definition of the sign as an inner difference between signifier and signified presupposes its semantic definition as reference to the thing for which it stands. >Utterer’s Meaning/Ricoeur, ((s) Cf. >Semantics, >Speaker Meaning)._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Ricoeur I Paul Ricoeur De L’interprétation. Essai sur Sigmund Freud German Edition: Die Interpretation. Ein Versuch über Freud Frankfurt/M. 1999 Ricoeur II Paul Ricoeur Interpretation theory: discourse and the surplus of meaning Fort Worth 1976 |
||
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2024-04-19