Semeiotic
Encyclopedia
Semeiotic is a spelling variant of a word used by Charles Sanders Peirce, likewise as "Semiotic," "Semiotics", and "Semeotic", to refer to his philosophical logic, which he cast as the study of signs, or semiotic. Some, not all, Peircean scholars have used "semeiotic" to refer to distinctly Peircean semiotic; and it is seldom if ever used in reference to semiotics
more broadly. For more on Peirce's theory, see the first two links above. The remainder of this article is on the scholarly issue of the spelling of the word and on how that issue has become connected to the question of how strongly the Peircean semiotic theory should be distinguished from the rest of that which is currently called "semiotics".
’s Σημιωτική. That spelling has been used by some Peirce scholars to distinguish Peirce's semiotic from others, especially from those more in the "dyadic" Saussurian
tradition (signifier, signified), formerly called "Semiology", with its foundation in linguistics and its emphasis on language and symbol. Peircean semiotic is triadic (sign, object, interpretant), and is conceived of as philosophical logic studied in terms of signs that are not always linguistic or artificial, and sign processes, modes of inference, and the inquiry process in general, with emphases not only on symbols but also on signs that are semblances (icons) and signs that are signs by being factually connected (indices) to their objects.
Thomas L. Short
in his 2007 book Peirce's Theory of Signs, says in a footnote on p. xi in the Preface, "I use ‘semeiotic’, in Peirce’s occasional spelling, for his theory or theories of signs, and the more usual ‘semiotic’ for that movement which originated in Europe ... independently of Peirce and that later appropriated him, with confusion all around."
John Deely
has argued against Fisch's claim about Peirce's preference for the spelling and singular form "Semeiotic". Deely cites Peirce's use not only of "Semeiotic" but also "Semeiotics", "Semiotic", and "Semeotic", which last Peirce once stated might be the best rendering. (The spelling "semeiotic" gained some currency as a result of Fisch's use of it, but Short does not cite Fisch's claim as justification.)
Short aims not only to distinguish Peircean semiotic from Saussure's semiology but, furthermore, to separate it from much of current semiotics. Short's 2007 preface begins: "Peirce’s theory of signs, or semeiotic, misunderstood by so many, has gotten in amongst the wrong crowd. It has been taken up by an interdisciplinary army of ‘semioticians’ whose views and aims are antithetical to Peirce’s own, and meanwhile it has been shunned by those philosophers who are working in Peirce’s own spirit on the very problems to which his semeiotic was addressed." Short means philosophers in the analytic tradition
. Short continues, "Those problems are two: to construct a naturalistic but nonreductive account of the human mind, and to explain and defend the claim that the sciences are objective in their mode of inquiry and in fact yield knowledge of an independently existing reality."
Deely, in his paper cited above, responds that Peirce wrote in 1908 of hoping for his semiotics to have "future explorers" — by whom, says Deely, Peirce couldn't have meant the pioneers of philosophy's analytic school who already surrounded Peirce. Deely adds that they could hardly be today's analytic philosophers, to whom he ascribes tendencies against philosophical realism
and toward a reduction of sign action to animals' purposive behaviors (he may be accusing Short himself of that reduction), whereas Peirce was a Scholastic realist and moreover saw (a) logic as (formal) semiotics, (b) semiosis as sign action (the irreducibly tri-relative influence from object through sign to interpretant sign), and (c) semiotics (logic) as proving pragmaticism
, "not the reverse". Deely: "With Fisch, in originally creating the myth that Peirce preferred 'Semeiotic', the claim for the preference was innocuous. But as Short takes up and extends the myth, the motivation ... [is] aimed ... from the start to cut Peirce off from those very 'future explorers' who take up the doctrine of signs centered on semeiosis as Peirce understood it to be: the action of signs, not the behavior of animals when using signs."
It is not yet clear whether many other scholars intend to join the argument.
Semiotics
Semiotics, also called semiotic studies or semiology, is the study of signs and sign processes , indication, designation, likeness, analogy, metaphor, symbolism, signification, and communication...
more broadly. For more on Peirce's theory, see the first two links above. The remainder of this article is on the scholarly issue of the spelling of the word and on how that issue has become connected to the question of how strongly the Peircean semiotic theory should be distinguished from the rest of that which is currently called "semiotics".
The smaller and larger issues
The Peirce scholar and editor Max H. Fisch claimed in 1978 that "Semeiotic" was Peirce's own preferred rendering of LockeJohn Locke
John Locke FRS , widely known as the Father of Liberalism, was an English philosopher and physician regarded as one of the most influential of Enlightenment thinkers. Considered one of the first of the British empiricists, following the tradition of Francis Bacon, he is equally important to social...
’s Σημιωτική. That spelling has been used by some Peirce scholars to distinguish Peirce's semiotic from others, especially from those more in the "dyadic" Saussurian
Ferdinand de Saussure
Ferdinand de Saussure was a Swiss linguist whose ideas laid a foundation for many significant developments in linguistics in the 20th century. He is widely considered one of the fathers of 20th-century linguistics...
tradition (signifier, signified), formerly called "Semiology", with its foundation in linguistics and its emphasis on language and symbol. Peircean semiotic is triadic (sign, object, interpretant), and is conceived of as philosophical logic studied in terms of signs that are not always linguistic or artificial, and sign processes, modes of inference, and the inquiry process in general, with emphases not only on symbols but also on signs that are semblances (icons) and signs that are signs by being factually connected (indices) to their objects.
Thomas L. Short
Thomas L. Short
Thomas Lloyd Short is a published philosopher of science, teleology, semeiotics, and conceptual change, specializing in the philosophy of Charles Sanders Peirce.-Career:...
in his 2007 book Peirce's Theory of Signs, says in a footnote on p. xi in the Preface, "I use ‘semeiotic’, in Peirce’s occasional spelling, for his theory or theories of signs, and the more usual ‘semiotic’ for that movement which originated in Europe ... independently of Peirce and that later appropriated him, with confusion all around."
John Deely
John Deely
John Deely is an American philosopher and semiotician. He is a Professor of Philosophy at the Center for Thomistic Studies of the University of St. Thomas ....
has argued against Fisch's claim about Peirce's preference for the spelling and singular form "Semeiotic". Deely cites Peirce's use not only of "Semeiotic" but also "Semeiotics", "Semiotic", and "Semeotic", which last Peirce once stated might be the best rendering. (The spelling "semeiotic" gained some currency as a result of Fisch's use of it, but Short does not cite Fisch's claim as justification.)
Short aims not only to distinguish Peircean semiotic from Saussure's semiology but, furthermore, to separate it from much of current semiotics. Short's 2007 preface begins: "Peirce’s theory of signs, or semeiotic, misunderstood by so many, has gotten in amongst the wrong crowd. It has been taken up by an interdisciplinary army of ‘semioticians’ whose views and aims are antithetical to Peirce’s own, and meanwhile it has been shunned by those philosophers who are working in Peirce’s own spirit on the very problems to which his semeiotic was addressed." Short means philosophers in the analytic tradition
Analytic philosophy
Analytic philosophy is a generic term for a style of philosophy that came to dominate English-speaking countries in the 20th century...
. Short continues, "Those problems are two: to construct a naturalistic but nonreductive account of the human mind, and to explain and defend the claim that the sciences are objective in their mode of inquiry and in fact yield knowledge of an independently existing reality."
Deely, in his paper cited above, responds that Peirce wrote in 1908 of hoping for his semiotics to have "future explorers" — by whom, says Deely, Peirce couldn't have meant the pioneers of philosophy's analytic school who already surrounded Peirce. Deely adds that they could hardly be today's analytic philosophers, to whom he ascribes tendencies against philosophical realism
Philosophical realism
Contemporary philosophical realism is the belief that our reality, or some aspect of it, is ontologically independent of our conceptual schemes, linguistic practices, beliefs, etc....
and toward a reduction of sign action to animals' purposive behaviors (he may be accusing Short himself of that reduction), whereas Peirce was a Scholastic realist and moreover saw (a) logic as (formal) semiotics, (b) semiosis as sign action (the irreducibly tri-relative influence from object through sign to interpretant sign), and (c) semiotics (logic) as proving pragmaticism
Pragmaticism
Pragmaticism is a term used by Charles Sanders Peirce for his pragmatic philosophy starting in 1905, in order to distance himself and it from pragmatism, the original name, which had been used in a manner he did not approve of in the "literary journals"...
, "not the reverse". Deely: "With Fisch, in originally creating the myth that Peirce preferred 'Semeiotic', the claim for the preference was innocuous. But as Short takes up and extends the myth, the motivation ... [is] aimed ... from the start to cut Peirce off from those very 'future explorers' who take up the doctrine of signs centered on semeiosis as Peirce understood it to be: the action of signs, not the behavior of animals when using signs."
It is not yet clear whether many other scholars intend to join the argument.
Literature
- Deely, JohnJohn DeelyJohn Deely is an American philosopher and semiotician. He is a Professor of Philosophy at the Center for Thomistic Studies of the University of St. Thomas ....
- (2000), The Red Book: The Beginning of Postmodern Times or: Charles Sanders Peirce and the Recovery of Signum, 79 pages, text prepared for the Metaphysical Club of the University of Helsinki. U Helsinki Commens .
- (2000), The Green Book: The Impact of Semiotics on Philosophy, 65 pages, prepared for the First Annual Hommage à Oscar Parland at the University of Helsinki, U Helsinki Commens .
- (2003), "On the Word Semiotics, Formation and Origins", Semiotica 146.1/4, 1–50.
- (2004a), Why Semiotics?, Legas: catalog page, Ottawa, Canada.
- (2004b), "'Σημειον' to 'Sign' by Way of 'Signum': On the Interplay of Translation and Interpretation in the Establishment of Semiotics", Semiotica 148–1/4, 187–227.
- (2006), "On 'Semiotics' as Naming the Doctrine of Signs", Semiotica 158.1/4 (2006), 1–33.
- (2008 draft), "Clearing the Mists of a Terminological Mythology concerning Peirce", Arisbe PDF Eprint.
- Peirce, C.S., Bergman, Mats (ed.) & Paavola, Sami (ed.), Commens Dictionary of Peirce's Terms, University of Helsinki, Finland. Peirce's own definitions and characterizations, often many per term across the decades. Eprint
- Romeo, Luigi (1977), "The Derivation of 'Semiotics' through the History of the Discipline", Semiosis, v. 6 pp. 37–50. Retraces evolution and usage of term "Semiotics" from antiquity to Locke and on up to the late 1800s when Peirce first employed it.
- Sebeok, T.A. (1976), Contributions to the Doctrine of Signs, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN. Continues the story (see Romeo, Luigi, above) into the 20th Century.
- Short, T.L.Thomas L. ShortThomas Lloyd Short is a published philosopher of science, teleology, semeiotics, and conceptual change, specializing in the philosophy of Charles Sanders Peirce.-Career:...
(2007), Peirce's Theory of Signs, Cambridge University Press: catalog page. See publisher's description, edition information, table of contents, and Short's preface at Cambridge PDF Eprint.- List of Short's articles on Peirce.
- Google search on all variants of T. L. Short's name in connection with Peirce.