A third aspect of a sign’s complete meaning concerns the relation between its objects and its interpretants, which has no standard name in semiotics. It would be called an induced relation in graph theory or the result of relational composition in relation theory. If an interpretant is recognized as a sign in its own right then its independent reference to an object can be taken as belonging to another moment of denotation, but this neglects the mediational character of the whole transaction in which this occurs. Denotation and connotation have to do with dyadic relations in which the sign plays an active role but here we are dealing with a dyadic relation between objects and interpretants mediated by the sign from an off-stage position, as it were.
As a relation between objects and interpretants mediated by a sign, this third aspect of meaning may be referred to as the ennotation of a sign and the dyadic relation making up the ennotative aspect of a sign relation may be notated as Information about the ennotative aspect of meaning is obtained from by taking its projection on the object-interpretant plane. We may visualize this as the “shadow” casts on the 2-dimensional space whose axes are the object domain and the interpretant domain The ennotative component of a sign relation variously written in any of the forms, and is defined as follows.
As it happens, the sign relations and are fully symmetric with respect to exchanging signs and interpretants, so all the data of is echoed unchanged in and all the data of is echoed unchanged in
Tables 5a and 5b show the ennotative components of the sign relations associated with the interpreters and respectively. The rows of each Table list the ordered pairs in the corresponding projections,
- Charles S. Peirce (1902), “Parts of Carnegie Application” (L 75), in Carolyn Eisele (ed., 1976), The New Elements of Mathematics by Charles S. Peirce, vol. 4, 13–73. Online.
- Awbrey, J.L., and Awbrey, S.M. (1995), “Interpretation as Action : The Risk of Inquiry”, Inquiry : Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 15(1), pp. 40–52. Archive. Journal. Online (doc) (pdf).