scholarly journals 50 years of Sign Systems Studies

2014 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 429-434
Author(s):  
From the Editors
Keyword(s):  

-

2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 616-650 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahti-Veikko Pietarinen

In this commentary, I reply to the fourteen papers published in the Sign Systems Studies special issue on Peirce’s Theory of Signs, with a view on connecting some of their central themes and theses and in putting some of the key points in those papers into a wider perspective of Peirce’s logic and philosophy.


2012 ◽  
Vol 40 (1/2) ◽  
pp. 18-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mihhail Lotman

Poetry is an important challenge for semiotics, and a special area of study for the Tartu-Moscow semiotic school, since the first volume of Sign Systems Studies was Juri Lotman’s monograph Lectures on Structural Poetics (1964). From then on the concept of poetry as one of the secondary modelling systems has evolved, since in relation to poetry, the primary modelling system is natural language. In this paper, the concept of semiotic system has been re-examined and the treatment of primary and secondary semiotic systems has been significantly revised. A semiotic system can be characterized not only by its internal structure and other systems to which it is related, but also by the field upon what it is realized. The latter aspect has gained almost no attention in any treatment of semiotics; the execution of a sign is understood in the spirit of Saussure and Hjelmslev as a material realization of an abstract element (for instance, a chess piece knight can be realized with wood or plastic, but it can also remain purely virtual). At first, distinction is made between language and sign system. Every sign system consists of language and field. There are three different kinds of fields: 1) just a background – footprints on sand are a sign on the background of sand; 2) a material structured field (a football ground or a chess board in the game called Chapayev) and 3) an abstract structured field, which in its turn consists of other fields (for instance, the chess board which consists of 64 fields). Differently from a football ground, a chess board can be a purely virtual one on which virtual pieces are moved (for instance, in case of blindfold or correspondence chess). The field in its turn can be language and one language can use another language as its field. In this case we speak of primary and secondary sign systems. For instance, the prosodic system of language is a field for a verse metre, while the semantic system of language is a field for a narrative.


2010 ◽  
Vol 38 (1/4) ◽  
pp. 9-17
Author(s):  
Timo Maran ◽  
Ester Võsu

This issue of Sign Systems Studies includes twelve papers on semiotics of resemblance. Readers competent in semiotics may argue that there is no such field as semiotics of resemblance and they would indeed be right. In this case, resemblance should be considered to be an umbrella term that covers various concepts, such as iconicity, iconic signs, similarity, analogy, categorization, metaphors, mimesis, mimicry, onomatopoeia, and others. These terms are used in different fields within and outside of semiotics. Accordingly, semiotics of resemblance should be treated as a possibility for establishing commonalities between different paradigms, from aesthetics to evolutionary biology and from theoretical semiotics to literary studies.


2011 ◽  
Vol 39 (2/4) ◽  
pp. 249-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juri Lotman

This article by Juri Lotman from the third volume of Trudy po znakovym sistemam (Sign Systems Studies) in 1967, deals with the problem of artistic modelling. The general working questions are whether art displays any characteristic traits that are common for all modelling systems and which could be the specific traits that can distinguish art from other modelling systems. Art is seen as a secondary modelling system, more precisely, as a play-type model, which is characterised simultaneously by practical and conventional behaviour and constant awareness of the possibility of alternate meanings to the one that is currently being perceived. At the same time art has play-like elements but is not the same as play, since play is inherently rule-bound, whereas art is a more flexible model the purpose of which is truth. Art is a special type of modelling system, since it is on one hand suitable for storing very large amount of complex information, but on the other hand it can increase the stored information and transform the consumer.


2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (2/3) ◽  
pp. 347-364
Author(s):  
Edna Andrews

The following paper is based on a presentation given as the Juri Lotman Lecture at the University of Tartu conference “Creative Continuity: 50 years of Sign Systems Studies”, on December 5th, 2014. The focus of the current analysis is to bring to light important new directions in cognitive neuroscience and cognitive neurolinguistics and how Lotman’s work contributes to deepening our understanding of the complex relationship of language(s) and brain(s) and the ever present dynamic cultural context.


2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 205-229
Author(s):  
Juri Lotman ◽  
Wilma Clark

This article, first published in Russian in 1984 in Sign Systems Studies, introduces the concept of semiosphere and describes its principal attributes. Semiosphere is the semiotic space, outside of which semiosis cannot exist. The ensemble of semiotic formations functionally precedes the singular isolated language and becomes a condition for the existence of the latter. Without the semiosphere, language not only does not function, it does not exist. The division between the core and the periphery is a law of the internal organisation of the semiosphere. There exists boundary between the semiosphere and the non- or extra-semiotic space that surrounds it. The semiotic border is represented by the sum of bilingual translatable “filters”, passing through which the text is translated into another language (or languages), situated outside the given semiosphere. The levels of the semiosphere comprise an inter-connected group of semiospheres, each of them being simultaneously both participant in the dialogue (as part of the semiosphere) and the space of dialogue (the semiosphere as a whole).


2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (1/2) ◽  
pp. 111-127
Author(s):  
Rebecca C. Potter

Responding to Jean-Claude Gens’ article, “Uexküll’s Kompositionslehre and Leopold’s ‘land ethic’ in dialogue”, which appeared in Sign Systems Studies in 2013, the article further develops a direct connection between Aldo Leopold’s approach to ecology and Jakob von Uexküll’s umwelt theory. The connection between Uexküll and Leopold is especially evident in Leopold’s descriptions of animal behaviour that he presents in the first part of his seminal work, A Sand County Almanac. In this work specifically, Leopold illustrates the biosemiotic processes described by Uexküll, and does so with a purpose: to reshape our understanding of the biotic community as a place of semiotic interaction.


2013 ◽  
Vol 41 (2/3) ◽  
pp. 355-370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juri Lotman
Keyword(s):  

First published as Лотман, Ю. М. 1992. О динамике культуры. Труды по знаковым системам (Sign Systems Studies) 25: 5–22.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document