Suchergebnisse

Abstract
In this essay, eight fallacies of elementary semiotics are presented, analyzed from an empirical viewpoint, and corrected to the best of my present knowledge. These eight fallacies are called:


The Sign Fallacy
The Fallacy of Interpretation at a Distance
The Fallacy of Instantaneous Interpretation
The One-Way Interpretability Fallacy
The Inference Fallacy
The Fallacy of Things
The Fallacy of Isolation
The Realism Fallacy


By properly sensing and correcting these eight fallacies, we may see more deeply into semiotic structure, allowing us to develop theories more representative of that structure and thus reach a better understanding of the underlying semiotic reality. This advance in depth of understanding is comparable to the difference in depth of understanding of physical reality allowed by Aristotelian physics and that allowed by Newtonian physics. We can be optimistic, however, since we have the Einsteinian revolution in semiotics to look forward to.

Abstract
I have previously discussed various ways of designing semiotics experiments. One method that plays a very important role is governed by the Principle of Paradigm Inversion. The word "paradigm" here refers not to what Kuhn called the overall scientific paradigm, but to what experimentalists call the experimental paradigm - the design principle of the particular experiment. In this essay, I discuss this unique design method in more detail. How do you invert an experimental paradigm? How do you turn the semiotic sock inside out? When is it possible to invert an experimental paradigm and obtain a semiotics experiment? How do you establish the measurement scale for an inverted paradigm? What kinds of experiments are ripe for inversion? What are the performance parameters of the inverted experimental design? These and other important experimental semiotics questions are discussed in this essay.

Abstract
These pages introduce the three papers on the works of Charles Peirce and their authors. The authors and their papers are: Eliseo Fernández, "Semiosis between Action and Passion"; Charls Pearson, "Paradigm Inversion: An Important Principle of Experimental Semiotics"; and Xu Peng, "Application of the Pragmatic Maxim to Mathematical Concepts".

Abstract
In this paper I discuss the metaphysics of symmetry and then illustrate several of the most obvious symmetries in the theory of sign structure. By breaking one of these symmetries, a new and more powerful theory is displayed: the theory of the structure of the dialogic sign. However, there are many symmetries remaining to investigate in this theory.

Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to warn that, as a new science, semiotics will introduce new problems, new ways of thinking, and new ways of solving all problems. These new characteristics must be discovered by the hard work of trial and error. The first two sections of the paper introduce a new way of looking at the world semiotically. Section 3 details how semiotic structure makes this new woridview possible. Section 4 suggests that this new woridview can lead to a unification of science and phenomenology, while section 5 suggests that this unification of science and phenomenology can provide an analytical continuity between the two, similar to the analytical continuity between algebra and geometry provided by analytical geometry. Section 6 provides several examples of new ways of thinking including my favorite whipping boy-a new golden age of mathematics is coming; it will be a triadic mathematics and it must be developed by us, the semioticists of the 21st century, in order to solve the problems encountered by the new semiotic science. Other examples are also discussed or suggested.

Abstract
Bakhtin regarded every sign as a dialogic sign while Peirce regarded every sign as a sign of thought. But a sign of thought is in dialog with the self. Thure von UexkOII even said that" life is always and everywhere a dialogue between self and self". Thus troth thinkers agreed on the dialogic nature of all signs. All three thinkers even agreed on the presence in the sign of two interpreters-the self and other, thus displaying a unity in their three theories.
The current standard theory of semiotics, the USST-2000, handles the presence of two interpreters quite well but is not able to explain the semiotic details of dialog. Since dialog is a well attested function of signs, there is an empirical need to modify the USST-2000.
This paper attempts to make the minimum adjustments to the USST- 2000 in order to bring dialog within its explanatory power. The theory presented here is successful in doing that and I therefore refer to it as the USST-2010.
The structure of the USST-2010 still maintains a recognizable Peircean heritage and hence can be regarded as a further extension of Peirce's original semiotic theory.