Sign typology

1. Sign typology

2. The basis of all these tripartitions is Peirce�s distinction of three fundamental categories. For Peirce, categories are not, as for Aristotle, "modes of proposition," but phenomenological modes. The three categories designate all possible modes something may appear to us. Thus, they are absolutely basic for Peirce�s epistemology and his semiotics as well. To avoid misunderstandings, Peirce names his categories simply "Firstness," "Secondness," and "Thirdness." Something may appear to us either as a "First," a "Second," or a "Third," there is no other possibility: ... From: Michael H.G. Hoffmann. The 1903 Classification of Triadic Sign-Relations. http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/hoffmann/p-sighof.htm

3. Each of this three elements of a sign relation "is mediated through the others: the ability of the sign to represent also requires, inherently, its power to be interpreted as a sign of that object in some respect; the ability of the sign to be interpreted can only work if it is interpreted as representing an object in some respect; and it can only be understood as representing an object in some respect if it is interpreted as representing an object as such." From: Michael H.G. Hoffmann. The 1903 Classification of Triadic Sign-Relations. http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/hoffmann/p-sighof.htm

4. Representamen "A sign, or representamen, is something which stands to somebody for something in some respect or capacity. It addresses somebody, that is, creates in the mind of that person an equivalent sign, or perhaps a more developed sign. That sign which it creates I call the interpretant of the first sign. The sign stands for something, its object. It stands for that object, not in all respects, but in reference to a sort of idea, which I have sometimes called the ground of the representamen. "Idea" is here to be understood in a sort of Platonic sense, very familiar in everyday talk; I mean in that sense in which we say that one man catches another man's idea, in which we say that when a man recalls what he was thinking of at some previous time, he recalls the same idea, and in which when a man continues to think anything, say for a tenth of a second, in so far as the thought continues to agree with itself during that time, that is to have a like content, it is the same idea, and is not at each instant of the interval a new idea." (A Fragment, CP 2.228, c. 1897) Terms Used in Peirce's Semiotics. http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/semiterms.htm

5. Object "By an object, I mean anything that we can think, i.e. anything we can talk about." (Peirce. [Reflections on Real and Unreal Objects], MS 966, not dated) [A sign] must be determined to correspond, according to some principle, and by some species of causation, with something else, called its Object. In a word, whether physically, rationally, or otherwise directly or indirectly, its Object, as agent, acts upon the sign, as patient." ('The Basis of Pragmaticism', MS 283, 1905) Terms Used in Peirce's Semiotics. http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/semiterms.htm

6. Interpretant "I define a Sign as anything which is so determined by something else, called its Object, and so determines an effect upon a person, which effect I call its Interpretant, that the latter is thereby mediately determined by the former. My insertion of "upon a person" is a sop to Cerberus, because I despair of making my own broader conception understood." (A Letter to Lady Welby, SS 80-81, 1908) "A sign, or representamen, is something which stands to somebody for something in some respect or capacity. It addresses somebody, that is, creates in the mind of that person an equivalent sign, or perhaps a more developed sign. That sign which it creates I call the interpretant of the first sign." (A Fragment, CP 2.228, c. 1897) Terms Used in Peirce's Semiotics. http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/semiterms.htm

7. Peircean typology of the signs Problems with Peirce http://jameselkins.com/Texts/Peirce.pdf

8. Other version of the table Sign relation. Contemporary discussion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sign_relation; Deledalle, G�rard (2000), C.S. Peirce's Philosophy of Signs, Indiana Univesity Press.

9. From: Michael H.G. Hoffmann. The 1903 Classification of Triadic Sign-Relations. http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/hoffmann/p-sighof.htm

10. Qualisign, sinsign, legisign Peirce:"As it is in itself, a sign is either of the nature of an appearance, when I call it a qualisign; or secondly, it is an individual object or event, when I call it a sinsign (the syllable sin being the first sillable [sic] of semel, simul, singular, etc); or thirdly, it is of the nature of a general type, when I call it a legisign." (A Letter to Lady Welby, SS 32, 1904) Terms Used in Peirce's Semiotics. http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/semiterms.htm

11. Difference between token (sinsign) and type token (sinsign) A particular instance of a word or sign, as opposed to the abstract kind or type it exemplifies. Thus, for example, the preceding sentence is 18 words long (token), but contains only 16 words (type), since "a" and "or" are each used twice. Difference between token and type Token � concrete utterance of a sign, localized in space and time Type � the sign itself, of which the token is an occurrence �Boys will be boys� 2 tokens of one type

12. Rheme, dicent, argument Peirce:"In regard to its relation to its signified interpretant, a sign is either a Rheme, a Dicent, or an Argument. This corresponds to the old division Term, Proposition, & Argument, modified so as to be applicable to signs generally. [---] A rheme is any sign that is not true nor false, like almost any single word except 'yes' and 'no', which are almost peculiar to modern languages. [---] A rheme is defined as a sign which is represented in its signified interpretant as if it were a character or mark (or as being so)." (A Letter to Lady Welby, SS 33-34,1904) Terms Used in Peirce's Semiotics. http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/semiterms.htm

13. Icon, index, symbol Peirce:"... I had observed that the most frequently useful division of signs is by trichotomy into firstly Likenesses, or, as I prefer to say, Icons, which serve to represent their objects only in so far as they resemble them in themselves; secondly, Indices, which represent their objects independently of any resemblance to them, only by virtue of real connections with them, and thirdly Symbols, which represent their objects, independently alike of any resemblance or any real connection, because dispositions or factitious habits of their interpreters insure their being so understood.�('A Sketch of Logical Critics', EP 2:460-461, 1909) Terms Used in Peirce's Semiotics. http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/semiterms.htm

16. Iconic Sign An iconic sign is a sign where the representamen relates to the object through resemblance. A sign is iconic when it actually looks like the object in question. Iconic signs involve the most direct relationship between representamen and object. This image represents the actual person Rilla, through a photographic image of her.

17. Iconic sign, example: a document In the user-interface, iconic signs directly represent objects. The document icon represents the documents through resemblance to actual documents.

18. Indexical Sign An indexical sign occurs when the representamen relates to the object through causation. Indexical signs are less literal than iconic signs, but are still related in a real way to the object. A weathervane represents the direction of the wind through the wind causing it to point a certain way.

19. Symbolic Sign A symbolic sign occurs when the relationship between the representamen and the object is conventional and arbitrary. Symbolic signs are the least direct in their connection between representamen and object. The image represents �no smoking� through a symbol people associate with that concept.

20. Difference between symbol and index Symbol � a sign represents symbolically when it is conventionally associated with the thing it represents Index � a sign represents indexically when its tokens are �existentially� associated with the thing represented, e.g. tears are an index of distress

21. Ten types Among the mathematically possible 27 triadic combinations only 10, however, can really occur, as Peirce says. The reason for that results from combining the following points: (Cf. Lieb 1977� <1953>, p.161; Liszka, p.45) If you consider the sign relation under the aspect of determination, this means that a sign will generally be determined, as we have seen, by an object, while itself determines its interpretant. This is to say that an interpretant will always be determined firstly by the kind of� sign itself (S) and, secondly, by the kind of the object relation (OR). Peirce assumes that a First can only determine a First, and that a Third can only be determined by a Third. This means that if the sign itself (S) is a First, the object relation (OR) represented and the interpretant determined can only be a First as well. If the sign (S), against that, is a Second or a Third, there is a corresponding increase in possibilities of categorically determined sign aspects with regard to the other relata. This results in a list of 10 possible types or classes of sign relations From: Michael H.G. Hoffmann. The 1903 Classification of Triadic Sign-Relations. http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/hoffmann/p-sighof.htm

22. Table: Ten types (out of 27) Problems with Peirce http://jameselkins.com/Texts/Peirce.pdf

23. 9 and 10 sign types Floyd Merrell. Peirce's Basic Classes of Signs in a Somewhat Different Vein. http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/floyd/p-peiflo.htm

24. 10 sign types presented in 3-dimensional space From: Michael H.G. Hoffmann. The 1903 Classification of Triadic Sign-Relations. http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/hoffmann/p-sighof.htm

25. Links Michael H.G. Hoffmann. The 1903 Classification of Triadic Sign-Relations. http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/hoffmann/p-sighof.htm Terms Used in Peirce's Semiotics. http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/semiterms.htm Triadism and the Universal Categories. In: Charles Sanders Peirce http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/peirce/ Charles S. Peirce. On a New List of Categories. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 7 (1868), 287-298. http://www.peirce.org/writings/p32.html Charles S. Peirce. What Is a Sign? http://www.ukzn.ac.za/undphil/collier/308/Peirce/What%20Is%20a%20Sign_.pdf Problems with Peirce http://jameselkins.com/Texts/Peirce.pdf. Note: you are reading an excerpt from: James Elkins, �Visual Culture: A Skeptical Reader� (work in progress). Revised October 12, 2001. Floyd Merrell. Peirce's Basic Classes of Signs in a Somewhat Different Vein. http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/floyd/p-peiflo.htm ANNE FREADMAN "The Classification of Signs (I): 1867-1885"http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/p-186fre.htmIn Digital Encyclopedia of Charles S. Peirce , ed. Jo�o Queiros, S�o Paulo (PUC)http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/ "The Classification of Signs (II): 1903"http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/p-190fre.htmIn Digital Encyclopedia of Charles S. Peirce , ed. Jo�o Queiros, S�o Paulo (PUC)http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/ Digital Encyclopedia of Charles S. Peirce. http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/home.htm

26. Written assignment (hardcopy) Analyze the text by Michael H.G. Hoffmann. The 1903 Classification of Triadic Sign-Relations. http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/hoffmann/p-sighof.htm and formulate your own opinion on the topic: sign classification Due: next week

27. Peircean paradox An icon is a sign, 3 (thirdness), but it is firstness as well.