Sign Relations • Comment 3

Re: Semiotic TriangleJohn Corcoran

A sign relation L \subseteq O \times S \times I is a formal structure that satisfies a very general definition, on the same order of generality as a mathematical group or geometry.  So any consideration of what a particular sign relation contains will be very context-dependent.

We can study sign relations in the abstract or in connection with particular applications.  In applications, sign relations describe structures of interpretation, for example, the conduct of sign-using interpreters.  Applications divide broadly into descriptive and normative types.

Descriptively, we could be describing the interpretive conduct of someone named “Socrates” who happens to speak English and who uses the word “I” to denote himself.  In that case, we would probably want to include the signs “Socrates” and “I” in both the sign domain and the interpretant domain of the sign relation that we use to describe the usage of that agent.

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

3 Responses to Sign Relations • Comment 3

  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

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter 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.