|Symbols: The concept of a symbol has, in a broader sense, the same meaning as the concept of a sign. The special use of the concept in different authors differs in some respects fundamentally, for example, with regard to which role conventions play in the formation of symbols and whether symbols form a system. See also signs, icons, conventions, meaning, reference, picture theory, representation, substitution, code._____________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. |
Symbols/Gärdenfors: since the imitation of domains of object categories is difficult, arbitrarily chosen symbols are more efficient for the cooperation of humans. (Tylén et al., 2010(1), p.6).
Symbolic Language/Gärdenfors: Thesis: intersubjectivity and the sharing of corresponding semantic domains form the decisive characteristics of human cooperation and these mechanisms form the evolutionary background for the formation of communicative abilities leading to symbolic languages.
Symbols/Semantic Web/Gärdenfors: Symbol processing (symbolic thinking) should be replaced by calculation in the conceptual space. This is something quite different from what happens in symbolic inference engines.
1. Tylén, K., Weed, E., Wallentin, M. Roepstoorf, A., & Frith, C. D. (2010). Language as a tool for interacting minds. Mind and Language, 25, 3-29._____________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. The note [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.
The Geometry of Meaning Cambridge 2014