Sign Relations • Comment 2

Re: Semiotic TriangleJohn Corcoran

In a typical sign relation where Socrates belongs to the object domain O, one sign in the sign domain S could be the name “Socrates” and one interpretant in the interpretant domain I could be the name “Socrates”.

Slightly more interesting examples are discussed in the following article and section:

This entry was posted in C.S. Peirce, Inquiry, Logic of Relatives, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Sign Relations • Comment 2

  1. Pingback: Survey of Pragmatic Semiotic Information • 4 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  2. Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 1 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  3. Pingback: Survey of Pragmatic Semiotic Information • 5 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  4. Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 1 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  5. Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 2 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  6. Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 3 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  7. Pingback: Survey of Pragmatic Semiotic Information • 6 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  8. Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 4 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.