An Outline of Peirce’s Semiotics

  • Klaus Oehler
Part of the Topics in Contemporary Semiotics book series (TICSE)


This chapter is divided into four parts. After an introduction, which shows Peirce’s place in the history of semiotics, part 1 exhibits the different stations which Peirce passed in his foundation of semiotics. It starts with Peirce’s Harvard Lectures, held in 1865, on “The Logic of Science” and ends with the correspondence between Peirce and Lady Welby which ran from 1903 to 1911. Part 2 analyses the foundations of Peirce’s semiotics from a systematic point of view. Part 3 is concerned with the fundamental and universal role, which Peirce ascribes to “the most general science,” that is, semiotics, and its significance for a new theory of knowledge constructed in semiotic terms. Part 4 discusses some aspects of Peirce’s consensus theory in relation to possible pragmatic universals and goes some way towards answering the question of whether, and in what way, situative speech (in contrast to abstract “language”) can be made the object of logical analysis.


Real Object Ideal Community Triadic Relation Esthetic Sign Semiotic Study 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Apel, K.-O. (1973). Transformation der Philosophie, I, II. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  2. Apel, K.-O. (1975), Der Denkweg von Charles S. Peirce. Eine Einführung in den amerikanischen Pragmatismus. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  3. Buzelli, D. E. (1972). “The Argument of Peirce’s `New List of Categories.’ ” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 8: 63–89.Google Scholar
  4. Eisele, C. (1979). Studies in the Scientific and Mathematical Philosophy of Charles S. Peirce. Essays. Ed. R. M. Martin. The Hague, Paris and New York: Mouton.Google Scholar
  5. Fisch, M. H., and Turquette, A. (1966). “Peirce’s Triadic Logic.” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 2: 71–85.Google Scholar
  6. Fisch, M. H. (1978). “Peirce’s General Theory of Signs.” In: T. A. Sebeok, ed. Sight, Sound and Sense. Bloomington, Indiana University Press, pp. 31–70.Google Scholar
  7. Fitzgerald, J. J. (1966). Peirce’s Theory of Signs as Foundation for Pragmatism. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
  8. Freeman, E., ed. (1980). “The Relevance of Charles Peirce.” The Monist, 63, no. 3.Google Scholar
  9. Greenlee, D. (1973). Peirce’s Concept of Sign. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
  10. Günther, G. (1983). Grundzüge einer neuen Theorie des Denkens in Hegels Logik. 2. Aufl. Leipzig: Meiner. Hamburg, 1978.Google Scholar
  11. Hardwick, C. S., ed. (1977). Semiotic and Signifies. The Correspondence between Charles S. Peirce and Victoria Lady Welby. Bloomington and London: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Henrich, D. (1967). Fichtes ursprüngliche Einsicht. Frankfurt a. M.Google Scholar
  13. Henrich, D. (1976), Identität and Objektivität. Eine Untersuchung über Kants transzendentale Deduktion. Heidelberg (Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenshaften. Philosophisch-Historische Klasse. Erste Abteilung. Jahrgang 1976 ).Google Scholar
  14. Herzberger, H. G. (1979). “Peirce on Definability.” In: J. G. Slater, S. Wilson, K. W. Summer, eds. Pragmatism and Purpose: Essays Presented to Thomas A. Goudge.Google Scholar
  15. Jakobson, R. (1975). Coup d’oeil sur le développement de la sémiotique. (Studies in Semiotics 3.) Bloomington, Ind.: Research Center for Language and Semiotic Studies.Google Scholar
  16. Lieb, J. (1977). “On Peirce’s Classification of Signs.” In: C. S. Hardwick, ed. Semiotic and Significs. [Appendix B.] Bloomington and London: Indiana University Press, p. 160 ff.Google Scholar
  17. Martens, E. (1975). Texte der Philosophie des Pragmatismus: Peirce James Schiller Dewey. Stuttgart: Reclam.Google Scholar
  18. Martens, E. (1981). “Pragmatismus.” In: Handwörterbuch der Wirtschaftswissenschaft (HdWW), pp. 146–153.Google Scholar
  19. Michael, E. (1974). “Peirce’s Early Study of the Logic of Relations 1865–67.” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 10: 63–75.Google Scholar
  20. Oehler, K. (1976). “Zur Logik einer Universalpragmatik.” Semiosis, 1:14–23.Google Scholar
  21. Oehler, K. (1978). “A New Tool for Peirce Research.” Semiotica.Google Scholar
  22. Oehler, K. (1979). “Peirce’s Foundation of a Semiotic Theory of Cognition. In: Peirce Studies, I. Lubbock: Texas Tech University Press: 67–76.Google Scholar
  23. Oehler, K. (1981a). “Peirce contra Aristotle. Two Forms of the Theory of Categories.” In: Proceedings of the C. S. Peirce Bicentennial International Congress, Amsterdam /976.Google Scholar
  24. Oehler, K. (198lb). “Ein in Vergessenheit geratener Zeichentheoretiker des Deutschen Idealismus.” In: Akten 2. Symposiums der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Semiotik.Google Scholar
  25. Oehler, K. (198Ic). “Logic of Relations and Inference from Signs in Aristotle.” ars semeiotica,4.Google Scholar
  26. Oehler, K. (1981d). “On the Reception of Pragmatism in Germany.” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 17, 3.Google Scholar
  27. Ormiston, G. L. (1977). “Peirce’s Categories: Structure of Semiotic.” Semiotica, 19: 202–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pearson, C. (1977). “A Theory of Sign Structure,” Semiotic Scene 1, No. 2: 1–22.Google Scholar
  29. Peirce, C. S. (1931–35). Collected Papers,vol. 1–6. Ed. C. Hartshorne and P. Weiss. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Peirce, C. S. (1958). Collected Papers, vol. 7–8. Ed. A. W. Burks. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Peirce, C. S. (1968). Ober die Klarheit unserer Gedanken. Einleitung, Übersetzung und Kommentar von K. Oehler. Frankfurt a.M.: Vittorio Klostermann.Google Scholar
  32. Peirce, C. S. ( 1967, 1970). Schriften, 1, IL Übersetzt von G. Wartenberg. Mit einer Einführung hrsg. von K.-O. Apel. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  33. Peirce, C. S. (Ms). Manuscripts. Harvard University.Google Scholar
  34. Peirce, C. S. (1976). The New Elements of Mathematics, vol. 1–4. Ed., C. Eisele, The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
  35. Peirce, C. S. (1977a). Complete Published Works Including Secondary Materials. Microfiche Edition. Ed. K. Ketner, C. Kloesel, J. Ransdell und C. Hardwick. Greenwich, Conn.: Johnson.Google Scholar
  36. Peirce, C. S. (1977b). A Comprehensive Bibliography and Index of the Published Works with a Bibliography of Secondary Studies. Ed. K. Ketner, C. Kloesel, J. Ransdell and C. Hardwick. Greenwich, Conn.: Johnson.Google Scholar
  37. Stiebing, H. M. (1976). “Dreistelligkeit der Relationenlogik–Kommentierende Bemerkungen zu Peirces `The Logic of Relatives.’ ” Semiosis, 3: 20–25.Google Scholar
  38. Tugendhat, E. (1976). Vorlesungen zur Einführung in die sprachanalytische Philosophie. Frankfurt a.M.Google Scholar
  39. Turquette, A. R. (1967). “Peirce’s phi and psi Operators for Triadic Logic.” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 3: 66–73.Google Scholar
  40. Turquette, A. R. (1969). “Peirce’s Complete System of Triadic Logic.” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 5: 199–210.Google Scholar
  41. Walther, E. (1974). Allgemeine Zeichenlehre. Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlagsanstalt.Google Scholar
  42. Walther, E. (1976a). “Erste Überlegungen zur Semiotik von C. S. Peirce in den Jahren 1860–1866.” Semiosis, 1: 35–41.Google Scholar
  43. Walther, E. (19766). “Die Haupteinteilungen der Zeichen von C. S. Peirce.” Semiosis, 3: 32–41.Google Scholar
  44. Wells, R. S. (1977). “Peirce’s Notion of the Symbol,” Semiotica, 19: 197–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zeman, J. J. (1977a). “Peirce’s Theory of Signs.” In: T. A. Sebeok, ed., A Perfusion of Signs. Bloomington and London: Indiana University Press, pp. 22–39.Google Scholar
  46. Zeman, J. J. (1977b). “The Esthetic Sign in Peirce’s Semiotic.” Semiotica, 19: 241–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Klaus Oehler
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of HamburgHamburgWest Germany

Personalised recommendations