Sign Theory and the Materiality of Discourse

2020 ◽  
pp. 282-305
Author(s):  
Jack Sidnell
Keyword(s):  
Sign Theory

The Medieval Life of Language

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Amsler
Keyword(s):  
Critical Discourse Analysis ◽  
Social History ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Margery Kempe ◽  
Pragmatic Theory ◽  
Sign Theory ◽  
Philosophy And Literature ◽  
Social Discourses ◽  
History Of Linguistics ◽  
History Of

The Medieval Life of Language: Grammar and Pragmatics from Bacon to Kempe explores the complex history of medieval pragmatic theory and ideas and metapragmatic awareness across social discourses. Pragmatic thinking about language and communication are revealed in grammar, semiotics, philosophy, and literature. Part historical reconstruction, part social history, part language theory, Amsler supplements the usual materials for the history of medieval linguistics and discusses the pragmatic implications of grammatical treatises on the interjection, Bacon's sign theory, logic texts, Chaucer's poetry, inquisitors' accounts of heretic speech, and life writing by William Thorpe and Margery Kempe. Medieval and contemporary pragmatic theory are contrasted in terms of their philosophical and linguistic orientations. Aspects of medieval pragmatic theory and practice, especially polysemy, equivocation, affective speech, and recontextualization, show how pragmatic discourse informed social controversies and attitudes toward sincere, vague, and heretical speech. Relying on Bakhtinian dialogism, critical discourse analysis, and conversation analysis, Amsler situates a key period in the history of linguistics within broader social and discursive fields of practice.

Componential analysis: the sememe and the concept of distinctiveness

1974 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodney Huddleston
Keyword(s):  
Semantic Structure ◽  
Sign Theory ◽  
Semantic Domain ◽  
Componential Analysis ◽  
Semantic Component ◽  
Separate Treatment ◽  
Basic Concepts

The term ‘componential analysis’ is used here to refer to the theory of semantic structure developed by Goodenough (1956, 1965, etc.), Lounsbury (1956, 1964, etc.) and others. Obviously the notion of a semantic component - or ‘feature,’ or whatever other term is applied - is common to a wide variety of semantic theories, and ‘componential analysis’ is sometimes used (e.g. by Lyons 1968) to cover the whole of this wider field; nevertheless the Goodenough-Lounsbury theory is sufficiently unified and different from others to warrant separate treatment.Although the theory is intended to be, and undoubtedly is, much more widely applicable, a great deal of the descriptive work in componential analysis is in the field of kinship terminologies, and the basic concepts of the theory may conveniently be exemplified from this semantic domain. Drawing on the sign theory of Charles Morris, Goodenough distinguishes between the denotatum, designatum and significatum of a word (1965: 286 n.3):

scholarly journals Psycho-semiotic model of thinking. Combining Klein and Peirce theory of symbol for more comprehensive model of mind

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-67
Author(s):  
Marta Iwaszuk
Keyword(s):  
Object Relations ◽  
Object Representation ◽  
Object Relation ◽  
Melanie Klein ◽  
Sign Theory ◽  
Semiotic Model ◽  
Proposed Model ◽  
Individual Potential ◽  
Semiotic Perspective ◽  
Definition Of

Thesis: Aim of the paper is to present Melanie Klein and Charles S. Peirce concept of symbol in order to combine them into scheme that presents conscious and unconscious aspect of thinking through symbolic signs (signs based on convention). Presented concepts: Paper presents concept of symbol in psychoanalytical and semiotic perspective. Psychoanalytical view is based on interpretation of symbol according to object relation paradigm proposed by Klein. There are two reasons for selecting her theory for the model: it is most closely bound with interdependency between communication and thinking plus her concept of proper symbol fulfills definition of symbolic sign in Peirce theory, due to deployment of matter of absence in substitution process. Peirce theory however is selected to present semiotic perspective not only for its good linkage to Klein’s “proper symbol” but also for its accurate understating of object representation in quasi- mind through Representamen and as a result recognition of symbol embedment in code through unlimited semiosis. Chosen concepts are consolidated into psycho-semiotic model of thinking which recognizes symbol to be co-created by unique internal world of unconscious phantasy with simultaneous employment of semiotic devices oriented to external, group order perspective. Results and conclusions: Proposed psycho-semiotic model of thinking enhances psychoanalytic view, based on drive for object, by recognizing communication means required for meaningful relation and with that for thinking itself. As a result conceptualizing thinking processes is enriched with semiotic discoveries such as mechanics and structure of Representamen and Interpretant, along with indispensable code rules, with unlimited semiosis at its core. In turn psychoanalytical view adds to semiotic perspective sensitivity to individual potential and constrains when code is in use and with that raises precision of exploration in the field. Contribution to the field: Proposed model enriches theory of thinking based on object relations with semiotic sign theory, which being focused on communication serves as a frame for establishing object relations and their conceptualization. In turn employing psychoanalytic perspective into semiotic field brings back code theory to actual code usage, and by that expands it to various unconscious forces, which ultimately determine Interpretant

The Sign Theory of Language and the form-meaning interface / La Théorie du langage basée sur le signe et l’interface forme-sens

2019 ◽  
Vol 64 (02) ◽  
pp. 171-215
Author(s):  
Frederick J. Newmeyer
Keyword(s):  
Significant Degree ◽  
Linguistic Theory ◽  
Sign Theory ◽  
External Pressures ◽  
Theory Of Language ◽  
External Motivation

AbstractThis article examines a key feature of Denis Bouchard's Sign Theory of Language, namely theSubstantive Hypothesis(SH), the idea that “the most explanatory linguistic theory is one that minimizes the elements (ideally to zero) that do not have an external motivation in the prior properties of the perceptual and conceptual substances of language”. The article argues that the strongest form of the SH is challenged by two widespread classes of phenomena: morphosyntactic generalizations that are not sign-based, and non-sign-based external pressures on grammars. It concludes with some speculative remarks on why, to a significant degree, grammatical patterning is not sign-based.

Applying general sign theory to testing language (verbal) and nonverbal abilities

2000 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 377-396 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.W. Oller Jr ◽  
K. Kim ◽  
Y. Choe
Keyword(s):  
Sign Theory ◽  
General Sign
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document