Peirce’s Categories • 11

Re: Peirce ListHelmut Raulien

There is a kind of “second cousin” kinship between category markers and grammatical aspects, moods, or tenses.  In several drafts of an earlier comment I experimented with grammatical terms like conjugation, declension, diacritic, inflection, etc.  to explain the function of category markers.  But I eventually decided this laid too much stress on their grammatical aspect and distracted from their main function, which is to focus the relation between formal expressions and formal objects.

Resources

cc: Systems ScienceStructural ModelingOntolog ForumLaws of FormCybernetics

This entry was posted in Abstraction, Aristotle, C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce's Categories, Phenomenology, Pragmatic Maxim, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Triadic Relations, Triadicity, Type Theory and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Peirce’s Categories • 11

  1. Pingback: Survey of Precursors Of Category Theory • 1 | 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 )

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.