Abstract
Semiotics has been traditionally based on such oppositions as conventional/natural, arbitrary/motivated, digital/ analogical. While such oppositions have proved useful in classifying signs, mutually exclusive typologies are inadequate foundations for semiotics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Unless otherwise indicated, references to Peirce will be taken from Philosophical Writings of Peirce, ed. Justus Buchler (1955).
David Savan in An Introduction to C. S. Peirce’s Semiotics (1976) is very perceptive on how context shapes the nature of the sign: “Empirically, no sign belongs exclusively to one of these classes” (qualisigns, sinsigns, legisigns), p. 14.
See Max H. Fisch, “Peircefs General Theory of Signs,” in Sight, Sound, and Sense, ed. Thomas Sebeok (1978), p. 44.
References
Critchley, M., 1970, “Aphasiology and Other Aspects of Language,” Edward Arnold, London.
Feibleman, J., 1969, “An Introduction to the Philosophy of Charles S. Peirce,” MIT Press, Cambridge.
Fisch, M., 1978, Peirce’s General Theory of Signs, in: “Sight, Sound, and Sense,” T. A. Sebeok, ed., Indiana University Press, Bloomington.
Guiraud, P., 1973, “La Semiologie,” Presses Universitaires De France, Paris.
Jakobson, R., 1956, Two Aspects of Language and Two Types of Aphasic Disturbance, in: “Fundamentals of Language,” Mouton, The Hague.
Peirce, C. S., 1955, “Philosophical Writings of Peirce,” J. Peirce, J. Buchler, ed., Dover, New York.
Savan, D., 1976, “An Introduction to C. S. Peirce’s Semiotics: Part I. ( Monographs, Working Papers, and Prepublications),” Toronto Semiotic Circle, Toronto.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1983 Plenum Press, New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Giordano, M.J. (1983). Icon and Symbol: A Reappraisal of the Resemblance Debate. In: Deely, J.N., Lenhart, M.D. (eds) Semiotics 1981. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-9328-7_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-9328-7_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4615-9330-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-9328-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive