semiotics

33
What do these mean to you?

Upload: zanne59

Post on 28-Jan-2015

920 views

Category:

Business


6 download

DESCRIPTION

 

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Semiotics

What do these mean to you?

Page 2: Semiotics
Page 3: Semiotics
Page 4: Semiotics
Page 5: Semiotics
Page 6: Semiotics
Page 7: Semiotics
Page 8: Semiotics

Semiology: The Science of Signs

How do we understand the world?

Page 9: Semiotics

Homework for Thurs

• Bring in a simple object that you think refers to something about yourself

• Bring the object in a bag and list on a piece of paper in the bag what the object signifies

• Keep both things secret!

Page 10: Semiotics

The desire to make meanings

‘We think only in signs' (Peirce)

Page 11: Semiotics

Are these signs?

A B C D E F GH I J K L M NP Q R S T U V

W X Y Z

Page 12: Semiotics

A sign is only a sign if someone interprets it as signifying something.

It refers or stands for something else.

Page 13: Semiotics

So is this a sign?

HORSE

Page 14: Semiotics

'Nothing is a sign unless it is interpreted as a sign’

Signs take the form of words, images, sounds, odours, flavours, acts or objects, but such things have no intrinsic meaning and become signs only when we invest them with meaning.

Page 15: Semiotics

The Two Dominant Models

• Ferdinand de Saussure• Charles Sanders Peirce

Page 16: Semiotics

Saussure’s two part model

• a 'signifier’ - the form which the sign takes• the 'signified’ - the concept it represents.

Page 17: Semiotics

Signification

• The sign is the whole that results from the association of the signifier with the signified (Saussure 1983).

• The relationship between the signifier and the signified is referred to as 'signification’

Page 18: Semiotics

Can you see a problem with this theory?

Page 19: Semiotics

What about the importance of the active process of interpretation?

Saussure’s Model

Content= meaning

Where does our interpretation happen?

Page 20: Semiotics

Peirce

This highlights the process of semiosis (which is very much a Peircean concept). The meaning of a sign is not contained within it, but arises in its interpretation.

Page 21: Semiotics

Time to play a game…

Page 22: Semiotics

Signified= Frenchness

Make a television show that conveys ‘Frenchness’

You can only convey using images and not words.

Page 23: Semiotics

What signifiers will you use?

Page 24: Semiotics

The gestalt

- Collection of images, each reinforcing one another

Page 25: Semiotics

What was the point of the game?

Page 26: Semiotics
Page 27: Semiotics

Symbol/symbolic

A mode in which the signifier does not resemble the signified but which is fundamentally arbitrary or purely conventional - so that the relationship must be learnt: e.g. language in general, numbers, morse code, traffic lights, national flags

Page 28: Semiotics
Page 29: Semiotics

Icon/iconic

A mode in which the signifier is perceived as resembling or imitating the signified (recognisably looking, sounding, feeling, tasting or smelling like it) - being similar in possessing some of its qualities.

Page 30: Semiotics
Page 31: Semiotics

Index/indexical

A mode in which the signifier is not arbitrary but is directly connected in some way (physically or causally) to the signified - this link can be observed or inferred: e.g. 'natural signs' (smoke, thunder, footprints), medical symptoms (pain, a rash, pulse-rate), measuring instruments (weathercock, thermometer, clock, spirit-level), 'signals' (a knock on a door, a phone ringing), pointers (a pointing 'index' finger, a directional signpost), recordings (a photograph, a film, video or television shot, an audio-recorded voice), personal 'trademarks' (handwriting, catchphrase) and indexical words ('that', 'this', 'here', 'there').

Page 32: Semiotics

Iconic and indexical signs are more likely to be read as 'natural' than symbolic signs when making the connection between signifier and signified has become habitual. Iconic signifiers can be highly evocative. Kent Grayson observes: 'Because we can see the object in the sign, we are often left with a sense that the icon has brought us closer to the truth than if we had instead seen an index or a symbol' (Grayson 1998, 36). He adds that 'instead of drawing our attention to the gaps that always exist in representation, iconic experiences encourage us subconsciously to fill in these gaps and then to believe that there were no gaps in the first place... This is the paradox of representation: it may deceive most when we think it works best' (ibid., 41).

Page 33: Semiotics

From Signifier

To Signified