Semiotics

Semiotics (/ˌsiːmiˈɒt ɪks, ˌsɛm-, -maɪ-/ SEE-mee-OT-iks, SEM-, -⁠my-) is t he syst emat ic st udy of
sign processes and t he communicat ion of meaning. In semiot ics, a sign is defined as anyt hing
t hat communicat es int ent ional and unint ent ional meaning or feelings t o t he sign's int erpret er.

Semiosis is any act ivit y, conduct , or process t hat involves signs. Signs can be communicat ed
t hrough t hought it self or t hrough t he senses. Cont emporary semiot ics is a branch of science
t hat st udies meaning-making and various t ypes of knowledge.[1]

The semiot ic t radit ion explores t he st udy of signs and symbols as a significant part of
communicat ions. Unlike linguist ics, semiot ics also st udies non-linguist ic sign syst ems.
Semiot ics includes t he st udy of indicat ion, designat ion, likeness, analogy, allegory, met onymy,
met aphor, symbolism, significat ion, and communicat ion.

Semiot ics is frequent ly seen as having import ant ant hropological and sociological dimensions.
Some semiot icians regard every cult ural phenomenon as being able t o be st udied as
communicat ion.[2] Semiot icians also focus on t he logical dimensions of semiot ics, examining
biological quest ions such as how organisms make predict ions about , and adapt t o, t heir
semiot ic niche in t he world.

Fundament al semiot ic t heories t ake signs or sign syst ems as t heir object of st udy. Applied
semiot ics analyzes cult ures and cult ural art ifact s according t o t he ways t hey const ruct
meaning t hrough t heir being signs. The communicat ion of informat ion in living organisms is
covered in biosemiot ics including zoosemiot ics and phyt osemiot ics.
History and terminology
The import ance of signs and significat ion has been recognized t hroughout much of t he hist ory
of philosophy and psychology. The t erm derives from Ancient Greek σημειωτικός
(sēmeiōtikós) 'observant of signs'[3] (from σημεῖον (sēmeîon) 'a sign, mark, t oken').[4] For t he
Greeks, 'signs' (σημεῖον sēmeîon) occurred in t he world of nat ure and 'symbols' (σύμβολον
sýmbolon ) in t he world of cult ure. As such, Plat o and Arist ot le explored t he relat ionship
bet ween signs and t he world.[5]

It would not be unt il August ine of Hippo[6] t hat t he nat ure of t he sign would be considered
wit hin a convent ional syst em. August ine int roduced a t hemat ic proposal for unit ing t he t wo
under t he not ion of 'sign' (signum) as t ranscending t he nat ure-cult ure divide and ident ifying
symbols as no more t han a species (or sub-species) of signum.[7] A monograph st udy on t his
quest ion would be done by Manet t i (1987).[8][a] These t heories have had a last ing effect in
West ern philosophy, especially t hrough scholast ic philosophy.

The general st udy of signs t hat began in Lat in wit h August ine culminat ed wit h t he 1632
Tractatus de Signis of John Poinsot and t hen began anew in lat e modernit y wit h t he at t empt
in 1867 by Charles Sanders Peirce t o draw up a "new list of cat egories". More recent ly
Umbert o Eco, in his Semiotics and the Philosophy of Language, has argued t hat semiot ic
t heories are implicit in t he work of most , perhaps all, major t hinkers.

John Locke
John Locke (1690), himself a man of medicine, was familiar wit h t his 'semeiot ics' as naming a
specialized branch wit hin medical science. In his personal library were t wo edit ions of
Scapula's 1579 abridgement of Henricus St ephanus' Thesaurus Graecae Linguae, which list ed
"σημειωτική" as t he name for 'diagnost ics',[9] t he branch of medicine concerned wit h
int erpret ing sympt oms of disease ("sympt omat ology"). Indeed, physician and scholar Henry
St ubbe (1670) had t ranslit erat ed t his t erm of specialized science int o English precisely as
"semeiotics ," marking t he first use of t he t erm in English:[10]
 "…nor is there any thing to be relied upon in Physick, but an exact knowledge of
medicinal phisiology (founded on observation, not principles), semeiotics,
method of curing, and tried (not excogitated, not commanding) medicines.…"

Locke would use t he t erm sem(e)iotike in An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (book
IV, chap. 21),[11][b] in which he explains how science may be divided int o t hree part s:[12]: 174

All that can fall within the compass of human understanding, being either, first,
the nature of things, as they are in themselves, their relations, and their manner
of operation: or, secondly, that which man himself ought to do, as a rational and
voluntary agent, for the attainment of any end, especially happiness: or, thirdly,
the ways and means whereby the knowledge of both the one and the other of
these is attained and communicated; I think science may be divided properly
into these three sorts.

Locke t hen elaborat es on t he nat ure of t his t hird cat egory, naming it "Σημειωτική"
(Semeiotike), and explaining it as "t he doct rine of signs" in t he following t erms:[12]: 175

Thirdly, the third branch [of sciences] may be termed σημειωτικὴ, or the
doctrine of signs, the most usual whereof being words, it is aptly enough termed
also Λογικὴ, logic; the business whereof is to consider the nature of signs the
mind makes use of for the understanding of things, or conveying its knowledge
to others.

Juri Lot man would int roduce East ern Europe t o semiot ics and adopt Locke's coinage
("Σημειωτική") as t he name t o subt it le his founding at t he Universit y of Tart u in Est onia in
1964 of t he first semiot ics journal, Sign Systems Studies .
Ferdinand de Saussure
Ferdinand de Saussure founded his semiot ics, which he called semiology, in t he social
sciences:[13]

It is…possible to conceive of a science which studies the role of signs as part of

social life. It would form part of social psychology, and hence of general
psychology. We shall call it semiology (from the Greek semeîon, 'sign'). It would
investigate the nature of signs and the laws governing them. Since it does not
yet exist, one cannot say for certain that it will exist. But it has a right to exist, a
place ready for it in advance. Linguistics is only one branch of this general
science. The laws which semiology will discover will be laws applicable in
linguistics, and linguistics will thus be assigned to a clearly defined place in the
field of human knowledge.

Thomas Sebeok[c] would assimilat e "semiology" t o "semiot ics" as a part t o a whole, and was
involved in choosing t he name Semiotica for t he first int ernat ional journal devot ed t o t he
st udy of signs. Saussurean semiot ics have exercised a great deal of influence on t he schools
of St ruct uralism and Post -St ruct uralism. Jacques Derrida, for example, t akes as his object
t he Saussurean relat ionship of signifier and signified, assert ing t hat signifier and signified are
not fixed, coining t he expression différance, relat ing t o t he endless deferral of meaning, and t o
t he absence of a 't ranscendent signified'.

Charles Sanders Peirce

In t he ninet eent h cent ury, Charles Sanders Peirce defined what he t ermed "semiot ic" (which
he would somet imes spell as "semeiot ic") as t he "quasi-necessary, or formal doct rine of
signs," which abst ract s "what must be t he charact ers of all signs used by…an int elligence
capable of learning by experience,"[14] and which is philosophical logic pursued in t erms of
signs and sign processes.[15][16]
Peirce's perspect ive is considered as philosophical logic st udied in t erms of signs t hat are not
always linguist ic or art ificial, and sign processes, modes of inference, and t he inquiry process
in general. The Peircean semiot ic addresses not only t he ext ernal communicat ion mechanism,
as per Saussure, but t he int ernal represent at ion machine, invest igat ing sign processes, and
modes of inference, as well as t he whole inquiry process in general.

Peircean semiot ic is t riadic, including sign, object , int erpret ant , as opposed t o t he dyadic
Saussurian t radit ion (signifier, signified). Peircean semiot ics furt her subdivides each of t he
t hree t riadic element s int o t hree sub-t ypes, posit ing t he exist ence of signs t hat are symbols;
semblances ("icons"); and "indices," i.e., signs t hat are such t hrough a fact ual connect ion t o
t heir object s.[17]

Peircean scholar and edit or Max H. Fisch (1978)[d] would claim t hat "semeiot ic" was Peirce's
own preferred rendering of Locke's σημιωτική.[18] Charles W. Morris followed Peirce in using
t he t erm "semiot ic" and in ext ending t he discipline beyond human communicat ion t o animal
learning and use of signals.

While t he Saussurean semiot ic is dyadic (sign/synt ax, signal/semant ics), t he Peircean

semiot ic is t riadic (sign, object , int erpret ant ), being conceived as philosophical logic st udied in
t erms of signs t hat are not always linguist ic or art ificial.

Peirce's list of categories

Peirce would aim t o base his new list direct ly upon experience precisely as const it ut ed by
act ion of signs, in cont rast wit h t he list of Arist ot le's cat egories which aimed t o art iculat e
wit hin experience t he dimension of being t hat is independent of experience and knowable as
such, t hrough human underst anding.

The est imat ive powers of animals int erpret t he environment as sensed t o form a "meaningful
world" of object s, but t he object s of t his world (or "Umwelt", in Jakob von Uexküll's t erm)[19]
consist exclusively of object s relat ed t o t he animal as desirable (+), undesirable (–), or "safe
t o ignore" (0).

In cont rast t o t his, human underst anding adds t o t he animal "Umwelt" a relat ion of self-
ident it y wit hin object s which t ransforms object s experienced int o 't hings' as well as +, –, 0
object s.[20][e] Thus, t he generically animal object ive world as "Umwelt", becomes a species-
specifically human object ive world or "Lebenswelt" (life-world), wherein linguist ic
communicat ion, root ed in t he biologically underdet ermined "Innenwelt" (inner-world) of
humans, makes possible t he furt her dimension of cult ural organizat ion wit hin t he ot herwise
merely social organizat ion of non-human animals whose powers of observat ion may deal only
wit h direct ly sensible inst ances of object ivit y.

This furt her point , t hat human cult ure depends upon language underst ood first of all not as
communicat ion, but as t he biologically underdet ermined aspect or feat ure of t he human
animal's "Innenwelt", was originally clearly ident ified by Thomas A. Sebeok.[21][22] Sebeok also
played t he cent ral role in bringing Peirce's work t o t he cent er of t he semiot ic st age in t he
t went iet h cent ury,[f] first wit h his expansion of t he human use of signs ("anthroposemiosis ")
t o include also t he generically animal sign-usage ("zoösemiosis "),[g] t hen wit h his furt her
expansion of semiosis t o include t he veget at ive world ("phytosemiosis "). Such would init ially
be based on t he work of Mart in Krampen,[23] but t akes advant age of Peirce's point t hat an
int erpret ant , as t he t hird it em wit hin a sign relat ion, "need not be ment al".[24][25][26]

Peirce dist inguished bet ween t he int erpret ant and t he int erpret er. The int erpret ant is t he
int ernal, ment al represent at ion t hat mediat es bet ween t he object and it s sign. The
int erpret er is t he human who is creat ing t he int erpret ant .[27] Peirce's "int erpret ant " not ion
opened t he way t o underst anding an act ion of signs beyond t he realm of animal life (st udy of
"phyt osemiosis" + "zoösemiosis" + "ant hroposemiosis" = biosemiotics ), which was his first
advance beyond Lat in Age semiot ics.[h]

Ot her early t heorist s in t he field of semiot ics include Charles W. Morris.[28] Writ ing in 1951,
Jozef Maria Bochenski surveyed t he field in t his way: "Closely relat ed t o mat hemat ical logic is
t he so-called semiot ics (Charles Morris) which is now commonly employed by mat hemat ical
logicians. Semiot ics is t he t heory of symbols and falls in t hree part s;

1. logical syntax, the theory of the

mutual relations of symbols,
2. logical semantics, the theory of the
relations between the symbol and
what the symbol stands for, and
 3. logical pragmatics, the relations
between symbols, their meanings
and the users of the symbols."[29]
Max Black argued t hat t he work of Bert rand Russell was seminal in t he field.[30]

Formulations and subfields

Color-coding hot- and cold-water

faucets (taps) is common in many
cultures but, as this example shows,
the coding may be rendered
meaningless because of context. The
two faucets (taps) probably were
sold as a coded set, but the code is
unusable (and ignored), as there is a
single water supply.

Semiot icians classify signs or sign syst ems in relat ion t o t he way t hey are t ransmit t ed. This
process of carrying meaning depends on t he use of codes t hat may be t he individual sounds
or let t ers t hat humans use t o form words, t he body movement s t hey make t o show at t it ude
or emot ion, or even somet hing as general as t he clot hes t hey wear. To coin a word t o refer t o
a thing, t he communit y must agree on a simple meaning (a denot at ive meaning) wit hin t heir
language, but t hat word can t ransmit t hat meaning only wit hin t he language's grammat ical
st ruct ures and codes. Codes also represent t he values of t he cult ure, and are able t o add new
shades of connot at ion t o every aspect of life.

To explain t he relat ionship bet ween semiot ics and communicat ion st udies, communicat ion is
defined as t he process of t ransferring dat a and-or meaning from a source t o a receiver.
Hence, communicat ion t heorist s const ruct models based on codes, media, and cont ext s t o
explain t he biology, psychology, and mechanics involved. Bot h disciplines recognize t hat t he
t echnical process cannot be separat ed from t he fact t hat t he receiver must decode t he
dat a, i.e., be able t o dist inguish t he dat a as salient , and make meaning out of it . This implies
t hat t here is a necessary overlap bet ween semiot ics and communicat ion. Indeed, many of t he
concept s are shared, alt hough in each field t he emphasis is different . In Messages and
Meanings: An Introduction to Semiotics , Marcel Danesi (1994) suggest ed t hat semiot icians'
priorit ies were t o st udy significat ion first , and communicat ion second. A more ext reme view is
offered by Jean-Jacques Nat t iez who, as a musicologist , considered t he t heoret ical st udy of
communicat ion irrelevant t o his applicat ion of semiot ics.[31]: 16

Syntactics
Semiot ics differs from linguist ics in t hat it generalizes t he definit ion of a sign t o encompass
signs in any medium or sensory modalit y. Thus it broadens t he range of sign syst ems and sign
relat ions, and ext ends t he definit ion of language in what amount s t o it s widest analogical or
met aphorical sense. The branch of semiot ics t hat deals wit h such formal relat ions bet ween
signs or expressions in abst ract ion from t heir significat ion and t heir int erpret ers,[32] or—more
generally—wit h formal propert ies of symbol syst ems[33] (specifically, wit h reference t o
linguist ic signs, synt ax)[34] is referred t o as syntactics .

Peirce's definit ion of t he t erm "semiot ic" as t he st udy of necessary feat ures of signs also has
t he effect of dist inguishing t he discipline from linguist ics as t he st udy of cont ingent feat ures
t hat t he world's languages happen t o have acquired in t he course of t heir evolut ions. From a
subject ive st andpoint , perhaps more difficult is t he dist inct ion bet ween semiot ics and t he
philosophy of language. In a sense, t he difference lies bet ween separat e t radit ions rat her
t han subject s. Different aut hors have called t hemselves "philosopher of language" or
"semiot ician." This difference does not mat ch t he separat ion bet ween analyt ic and
cont inent al philosophy. On a closer look, t here may be found some differences regarding
subject s. Philosophy of language pays more at t ent ion t o nat ural languages or t o languages in
general, while semiot ics is deeply concerned wit h non-linguist ic significat ion. Philosophy of
language also bears connect ions t o linguist ics, while semiot ics might appear closer t o some
of t he humanit ies (including lit erary t heory) and t o cult ural ant hropology.
Cognitive semiotics
Semiosis or semeiosis is t he process t hat forms meaning from any organism's apprehension
of t he world t hrough signs. Scholars who have t alked about semiosis in t heir subt heories of
semiot ics include C. S. Peirce, John Deely, and Umbert o Eco. Cognit ive semiot ics is combining
met hods and t heories developed in t he disciplines of semiot ics and t he humanit ies, wit h
providing new informat ion int o human significat ion and it s manifest at ion in cult ural pract ices.
The research on cognit ive semiot ics brings t oget her semiot ics from linguist ics, cognit ive
science, and relat ed disciplines on a common met a-t heoret ical plat form of concept s,
met hods, and shared dat a.

Cognit ive semiot ics may also be seen as t he st udy of meaning-making by employing and
int egrat ing met hods and t heories developed in t he cognit ive sciences. This involves
concept ual and t ext ual analysis as well as experiment al invest igat ions. Cognit ive semiot ics
init ially was developed at t he Cent er for Semiot ics at Aarhus Universit y (Denmark), wit h an
import ant connect ion wit h t he Cent er of Funct ionally Int egrat ed Neuroscience (CFIN) at
Aarhus Hospit al. Amongst t he prominent cognit ive semiot icians are Per Aage Brandt , Svend
Øst ergaard, Peer Bundgård, Frederik St jernfelt , Mikkel Wallent in, Krist ian Tylén, Riccardo
Fusaroli, and Jordan Zlat ev. Zlat ev lat er in co-operat ion wit h Göran Sonesson est ablished CCS
(Cent er for Cognit ive Semiot ics) at Lund Universit y, Sweden.

Finite semiotics
Finite semiotics , developed by Cameron Shackell (2018, 2019),[35][36][37][38] aims t o unify
exist ing t heories of semiot ics for applicat ion t o t he post -Baudrillardian world of ubiquit ous
t echnology. It s cent ral move is t o place t he finit eness of t hought at t he root of semiot ics
and t he sign as a secondary but fundament al analyt ical const ruct . The t heory cont ends t hat
t he levels of reproduct ion t hat t echnology is bringing t o human environment s demands t his
repriorit isat ion if semiot ics is t o remain relevant in t he face of effect ively infinit e signs. The
shift in emphasis allows pract ical definit ions of many core const ruct s in semiot ics which
Shackell has applied t o areas such as human comput er int eract ion,[39] creat ivit y t heory,[40] and
a comput at ional semiot ics met hod for generat ing semiot ic squares from digit al t ext s.[41]
Pictorial semiotics
Pictorial semiotics [42] is int imat ely connect ed t o art hist ory and t heory. It goes beyond
t hem bot h in at least one fundament al way, however. While art hist ory has limit ed it s visual
analysis t o a small number of pict ures t hat qualify as "works of art ", pict orial semiot ics
focuses on t he propert ies of pict ures in a general sense, and on how t he art ist ic convent ions
of images can be int erpret ed t hrough pict orial codes. Pict orial codes are t he way in which
viewers of pict orial represent at ions seem aut omat ically t o decipher t he art ist ic convent ions
of images by being unconsciously familiar wit h t hem.[43]

According t o Göran Sonesson, a Swedish semiot ician, pict ures can be analyzed by t hree
models: (a) t he narrat ive model, which concent rat es on t he relat ionship bet ween pict ures and
t ime in a chronological manner as in a comic st rip; (b) t he rhet oric model, which compares
pict ures wit h different devices as in a met aphor; and (c) t he Laokoon model, which considers
t he limit s and const raint s of pict orial expressions by comparing t ext ual mediums t hat ut ilize
t ime wit h visual mediums t hat ut ilize space.[44]

The break from t radit ional art hist ory and t heory—as well as from ot her major st reams of
semiot ic analysis—leaves open a wide variet y of possibilit ies for pict orial semiot ics. Some
influences have been drawn from phenomenological analysis, cognit ive psychology,
st ruct uralist , and cognit ivist linguist ics, and visual ant hropology and sociology.

Globalization
St udies have shown t hat semiot ics may be used t o make or break a brand. Cult ure codes
st rongly influence whet her a populat ion likes or dislikes a brand's market ing, especially
int ernat ionally. If t he company is unaware of a cult ure's codes, it runs t he risk of failing in it s
market ing. Globalizat ion has caused t he development of a global consumer cult ure where
product s have similar associat ions, whet her posit ive or negat ive, across numerous market s.[45]

Mist ranslat ions may lead t o inst ances of "Engrish" or "Chinglish" t erms for unint ent ionally
humorous cross-cult ural slogans int ended t o be underst ood in English. When t ranslat ing
surveys, t he same symbol may mean different t hings in t he source and t arget language t hus
leading t o pot ent ial errors. For example, t he symbol of "x" is used t o mark a response in
English language surveys but "x" usually means "no" in t he Chinese convent ion.[46] This may be
caused by a sign t hat , in Peirce's t erms, mist akenly indexes or symbolizes somet hing in one
cult ure, t hat it does not in anot her.[47] In ot her words, it creat es a connot at ion t hat is
cult urally-bound, and t hat violat es some cult ure code. Theorist s who have st udied humor
(such as Schopenhauer) suggest t hat cont radict ion or incongruit y creat es absurdit y and
t herefore, humor.[48] Violat ing a cult ure code creat es t his const ruct of ridiculousness for t he
cult ure t hat owns t he code. Int ent ional humor also may fail cross-cult urally because jokes are
not on code for t he receiving cult ure.[49]

A good example of branding according t o cult ural code is Disney's int ernat ional t heme park
business. Disney fit s well wit h Japan's cult ural code because t he Japanese value "cut eness",
polit eness, and gift giving as part of t heir cult ure code; Tokyo Disneyland sells t he most
souvenirs of any Disney t heme park. In cont rast , Disneyland Paris failed when it launched as
Euro Disney because t he company did not research t he codes underlying European cult ure. It s
st orybook ret elling of European folkt ales was t aken as elit ist and insult ing, and t he st rict
appearance st andards t hat it had for employees result ed in discriminat ion lawsuit s in France.
Disney souvenirs were perceived as cheap t rinket s. The park was a financial failure because
it s code violat ed t he expect at ions of European cult ure in ways t hat were offensive.[50]

On t he ot her hand, some researchers have suggest ed t hat it is possible t o successfully pass
a sign perceived as a cult ural icon, such as t he logos for Coca-Cola or McDonald's, from one
cult ure t o anot her. This may be accomplished if t he sign is migrat ed from a more
economically developed t o a less developed cult ure.[50] The int ent ional associat ion of a
product wit h anot her cult ure has been called Foreign Consumer Cult ure Posit ioning (FCCP).
Product s also may be market ed using global t rends or cult ure codes, for example, saving t ime
in a busy world; but even t hese may be fine-t uned for specific cult ures.[45]

Research also found t hat , as airline indust ry brandings grow and become more int ernat ional,
t heir logos become more symbolic and less iconic. The iconicit y and symbolism of a sign
depends on t he cult ural convent ion and, are on t hat ground in relat ion wit h each ot her. If t he
cult ural convent ion has great er influence on t he sign, t he signs get more symbolic value.[51]

Semiotics of dreaming
The flexibilit y of human semiot ics is well demonst rat ed in dreams. Sigmund Freud[52] spelled
out how meaning in dreams rest s on a blend of images, affect s, sounds, words, and
kinest het ic sensat ions. In his chapt er on "The Means of Represent at ion," he showed how t he
most abst ract sort s of meaning and logical relat ions can be represent ed by spat ial relat ions.
Two images in sequence may indicat e "if t his, t hen t hat " or "despit e t his, t hat ." Freud t hought
t he dream st art ed wit h "dream t hought s" which were like logical, verbal sent ences. He
believed t hat t he dream t hought was in t he nat ure of a t aboo wish t hat would awaken t he
dreamer. In order t o safeguard sleep, t he midbrain convert s and disguises t he verbal dream
t hought int o an imagist ic form, t hrough processes he called t he "dream-work."

Musical topic theory

Semiot ics can be direct ly linked t o t he ideals of musical t opic t heory, which t races pat t erns in
musical figures t hroughout t heir prevalent cont ext in order t o assign some aspect of
narrat ive, affect , or aest het ics t o t he gest ure. Danut a Mirka's The Oxford Handbook of Topic
Theory present s a holist ic recognit ion and overview regarding t he subject , offering insight int o
t he development of t he t heory.[53] In recognizing t he indicat ive and symbolic element s of a
musical line, gest ure, or occurrence, one can gain a great er underst anding of aspect s
regarding composit ional int ent and ident it y.

Philosopher, Charles Pierce, discusses t he relat ionship of icons and indexes, in relat ion t o
significat ion and semiot ics. In doing so, he draws on t he element s of various ideas, act s, or
st yles t hat can be t ranslat ed int o a different field. Whereas indexes consist of a cont ext ual
represent at ion of a symbol, icons direct ly correlat e wit h t he object or gest ure t hat is being
referenced.

In his 1980 book, Classic Music: Expression, Form, and Style, Leonard Rat ner amends t he
conversat ion surrounding musical t ropes—or "t opics"—in order t o creat e a collect ion of
musical figures t hat have hist orically been indicat ive of a given st yle. Rat ner's discussion of
t opic t heory primarily consist s of musical t opics t hat he finds t o be part icularly prevalent in
Baroque-st yle music.[54]

Robert Hat t en cont inues t his conversat ion in his 1994 publicat ion, Beethoven, Markedness,
Correlation, and Interpretation , in which he st at es t hat , "richly coded st yle t ypes which carry
cert ain feat ures linked t o affect , class, and social occasion such as church st yles, learned
st yles, and dance st yles. In complex forms t hese t opics mingle, providing a basis for musical
allusion." Hat t en, t herefore, is able t o expand t he realm in which musical t opics are recognized
as such.[55]

List of subfields
Subfields t hat have sprout ed out of semiot ics include, but are not limit ed t o, t he following:

Biosemiotics: the study of semiotic

processes at all levels of biology, or a
semiotic study of living systems (e.g.,
Copenhagen–Tartu School). Annual
meetings ("Gatherings in
Biosemiotics") have been held since
2001.
Semiotic anthropology and
anthropological semantics.
Cognitive semiotics: the study of
meaning-making by employing and
integrating methods and theories
developed in the cognitive sciences.
This involves conceptual and textual
analysis as well as experimental
investigations. Cognitive semiotics
initially was developed at the Center
for Semiotics at Aarhus University
(Denmark), with an important
connection with the Center of
Functionally Integrated Neuroscience
(CFIN) at Aarhus Hospital. Amongst
the prominent cognitive semioticians
are Per Aage Brandt, Svend Østergaard,
Peer Bundgård, Frederik Stjernfelt,
Mikkel Wallentin, Kristian Tylén,
Riccardo Fusaroli, and Jordan Zlatev.
Zlatev later in co-operation with Göran
Sonesson established the Center for
Cognitive Semiotics (CCS) at Lund
University, Sweden.
Comics semiotics: the study of the
various codes and signs of comics and
how they are understood.
Computational semiotics: attempts to
engineer the process of semiosis, in
the study of and design for human–
computer interaction or to mimic
aspects of human cognition through
artificial intelligence and knowledge
representation.
Cultural and literary semiotics:
examines the literary world, the visual
media, the mass media, and
advertising in the work of writers such
as Roland Barthes, Marcel Danesi, and
Juri Lotman (e.g., Tartu–Moscow
Semiotic School).
Cybersemiotics: built on two already-
generated interdisciplinary approaches:
cybernetics and systems theory,
including information theory and
science; and Peircean semiotics,
including phenomenology and
pragmatic aspects of linguistics,
attempts to make the two
interdisciplinary paradigms—both
going beyond mechanistic and pure
constructivist ideas—complement each
other in a common framework.[56]
Design semiotics or product semiotics:
the study of the use of signs in the
design of physical products;
introduced by Martin Krampen and in a
practitioner-oriented version by Rune
Monö while teaching industrial design
at the Institute of Design, Umeå
University, Sweden.
Ethnosemiotics: a disciplinary
perspective which links semiotics
concepts to ethnographic methods.
Film semiotics: the study of the various
codes and signs of film and how they
are understood. Key figures include
Christian Metz.
Finite semiotics: an approach to the
semiotics of technology developed by
Cameron Shackell. It is used to both
trace the effects of technology on
human thought and to develop
computational methods for performing
semiotic analysis.
Gregorian chant semiology: a current
avenue of palaeographical research in
Gregorian chant, which is revising the
Solesmes school of interpretation.
Hylosemiotics: an approach to
semiotics that understands meaning
as inference, which is developed
through exploratory interaction with the
physical world. It expands the concept
of communication beyond a human-
centered paradigm to include other
sentient beings, such as animals,
plants, bacteria, fungi, etc.[57]
Law and semiotics: one of the more
accomplished publications in this field
is the International Journal for the
Semiotics of Law, published by
International Association for the
Semiotics of Law.
Marketing semiotics (or commercial
semiotics): an application of semiotic
methods and semiotic thinking to the
analysis and development of
advertising and brand communications
in cultural context. Key figures include
Virginia Valentine, Malcolm Evans, Greg
Rowland, Georgios Rossolatos.
International annual conferences
(Semiofest) have been held since
2012.
Music semiology: the study of signs as
they pertain to music on a variety of
levels.
Organisational semiotics: the study of
semiotic processes in organizations
(with strong ties to computational
semiotics and human–computer
interaction).
Pictorial semiotics: an application of
semiotic methods and semiotic
thinking to art history.
Semiotics of music videos: semiotics
in popular music.
Social semiotics: expands the
interpretable semiotic landscape to
include all cultural codes, such as in
slang, fashion, tattoos, and advertising.
Key figures include Roland Barthes,
Michael Halliday, Bob Hodge, Chris
William Martin and Christian Metz.
Structuralism and post-structuralism in
the work of Jacques Derrida, Michel
Foucault, Louis Hjelmslev, Roman
Jakobson, Jacques Lacan, Claude
Lévi-Strauss, Roland Barthes, etc.
Theatre semiotics: an application of
semiotic methods and semiotic
thinking to theatre studies. Key figures
include Keir Elam.[58]
Urban semiotics: the study of meaning
in urban form as generated by signs,
symbols, and their social connotations.
Visual semiotics: analyses visual signs;
prominent modern founders to this
branch are Groupe µ and Göran
Sonesson.[59]
Semiotics of photography: is the
observation of symbolism used within
photography.
Artificial intelligence semiotics: the
observation of visual symbols and the
symbols' recognition by machine
learning systems. The phrase was
coined by Daniel Hoeg, founder of
Semiotics Mobility, due to Semiotics
Mobility's design and learning process
for autonomous recognition and
perception of symbols by neural
networks.[60][61] The phrase refers to
machine learning and neural nets
application of semiotic methods and
semiotic machine learning to the
analysis and development of robotics
commands and instructions with
subsystem communications in
autonomous systems context.
Semiotics of mathematics: the study
of signs, symbols, sign systems and
their structure, meaning and use in
 mathematics and mathematics
education.

Notable semioticians

Signaling and communication

between the Astatotilapia burtoni

Thomas Carlyle (1795–1881) ascribed great import ance t o symbols in a religious cont ext ,
not ing t hat all worship "must proceed by Symbols"; he propounded t his t heory in such works
as "Charact erist ics" (1831),[62] Sartor Resartus (1833–4),[63] and On Heroes (1841),[64] which
have been ret roact ively recognized as cont aining semiot ic t heories.

Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–1914), a not ed logician who founded philosophical pragmat ism,
defined semiosis as an irreducibly t riadic process wherein somet hing, as an object , logically
det ermines or influences somet hing as a sign t o det ermine or influence somet hing as an
int erpret at ion or interpretant, it self a sign, t hus leading t o furt her int erpret ant s.[65] Semiosis is
logically st ruct ured t o perpet uat e it self. The object may be qualit y, fact , rule, or even
fict ional (Hamlet ), and may be "immediat e" t o t he sign, t he object as represent ed in t he sign,
or "dynamic", t he object as it really is, on which t he immediat e object is founded. The
int erpret ant may be "immediat e" t o t he sign, all t hat t he sign immediat ely expresses, such as
a word's usual meaning; or "dynamic", such as a st at e of agit at ion; or "final" or "normal", t he
ult imat e ramificat ions of t he sign about it s object , t o which inquiry t aken far enough would be
dest ined and wit h which any int erpret ant , at most , may coincide.[66] His semiotic [67] covered
not only art ificial, linguist ic, and symbolic signs, but also semblances such as kindred sensible
qualit ies, and indices such as react ions. He came c. 1903[68] t o classify any sign by t hree
int erdependent t richot omies, int ersect ing t o form t en (rat her t han 27) classes of sign.[69]
Signs also ent er int o various kinds of meaningful combinat ions; Peirce covered bot h semant ic
and synt act ical issues in his speculat ive grammar. He regarded formal semiot ic as logic per se
and part of philosophy; as also encompassing st udy of argument s (hypot het ical, deduct ive,
and induct ive) and inquiry's met hods including pragmat ism; and as allied t o, but dist inct from
logic's pure mat hemat ics. In addit ion t o pragmat ism, Peirce provided a definit ion of "sign" as a
representamen , in order t o bring out t he fact t hat a sign is somet hing t hat "represent s"
somet hing else in order t o suggest it (t hat is, "re-present " it ) in some way:[70][H]

A sign, or representamen, is something which stands to somebody for something

in some respect or capacity. It addresses somebody, that is, creates in the mind of
that person an equivalent sign. That sign which it creates I call the interpretant
of the first sign. The sign stands for something, its object not in all respects, but
in reference to a sort of idea.

Ferdinand de Saussure (1857–1913), t he "fat her" of modern linguist ics, proposed a dualist ic
not ion of signs, relat ing t he signifier as t he form of t he word or phrase ut t ered, t o t he
signified as t he ment al concept . According t o Saussure, t he sign is complet ely arbit rary—i.e.,
t here is no necessary connect ion bet ween t he sign and it s meaning. This set s him apart from
previous philosophers, such as Plat o or t he scholast ics, who t hought t hat t here must be
some connect ion bet ween a signifier and t he object it signifies. In his Course in General
Linguistics , Saussure credit s t he American linguist William Dwight Whit ney (1827–1894) wit h
insist ing on t he arbit rary nat ure of t he sign. Saussure's insist ence on t he arbit rariness of t he
sign also has influenced lat er philosophers and t heorist s such as Jacques Derrida, Roland
Bart hes, and Jean Baudrillard. Ferdinand de Saussure coined t he t erm sémiologie while
t eaching his landmark "Course on General Linguist ics" at t he Universit y of Geneva from 1906
t o 1911. Saussure posit ed t hat no word is inherent ly meaningful. Rat her a word is only a
"signifier." i.e., t he represent at ion of somet hing, and it must be combined in t he brain wit h t he
"signified", or t he t hing it self, in order t o form a meaning-imbued "sign." Saussure believed t hat
dismant ling signs was a real science, for in doing so we come t o an empirical underst anding of
how humans synt hesize physical st imuli int o words and ot her abst ract concept s.

Jakob von Uexküll (1864–1944) st udied t he sign processes in animals. He used t he German
word umwelt, "environment ," t o describe t he individual's subject ive world, and he invent ed t he
concept of funct ional circle (funktionskreis ) as a general model of sign processes. In his
Theory of Meaning (Bedeutungslehre, 1940), he described t he semiot ic approach t o biology,
t hus est ablishing t he field t hat now is called biosemiot ics.
Valent in Voloshinov (1895–1936) was a Soviet -Russian linguist , whose work has been
influent ial in t he field of lit erary t heory and Marxist t heory of ideology. Writ t en in t he lat e
1920s in t he USSR, Voloshinov's Marxism and the Philosophy of Language (Russian: Marksizm
i Filosofiya Yazyka) developed a count er-Saussurean linguist ics, which sit uat ed language use in
social process rat her t han in an ent irely decont ext ualized Saussurean langue.

Louis Hjelmslev (1899–1965) developed a formalist approach t o Saussure's st ruct uralist

t heories. His best known work is Prolegomena to a Theory of Language, which was expanded in
Résumé of the Theory of Language, a formal development of glossematics , his scient ific
calculus of language.

Charles W. Morris (1901–1979): Unlike his ment or George Herbert Mead, Morris was a
behaviorist and sympat het ic t o t he Vienna Circle posit ivism of his colleague, Rudolf Carnap.
Morris was accused by John Dewey of misreading Peirce.[71]

In his 1938 Foundations of the Theory of Signs , he defined semiot ics as grouped int o t hree
branches:

1. Syntactics/syntax: deals with the

formal properties and interrelation
of signs and symbols, without
regard to meaning.
2. Semantics: deals with the formal
structures of signs, particularly the
relation between signs and the
objects to which they apply (i.e.
 signs to their designata, and the
objects that they may or do denote).
3. Pragmatics: deals with the biotic
aspects of semiosis, including all
the psychological, biological, and
sociological phenomena that occur
in the functioning of signs.
Pragmatics is concerned with the
relation between the sign system
and sign-using agents or
interpreters (i.e., the human or
animal users).
Thure von Uexküll (1908–2004), t he "fat her" of modern psychosomat ic medicine, developed a
diagnost ic met hod based on semiot ic and biosemiot ic analyses.

Roland Bart hes (1915–1980) was a French lit erary t heorist and semiot ician. He oft en would
crit ique pieces of cult ural mat erial t o expose how bourgeois societ y used t hem t o impose it s
values upon ot hers. For inst ance, t he port rayal of wine drinking in French societ y as a robust
and healt hy habit would be a bourgeois ideal percept ion cont radict ed by cert ain realit ies (i.e.
t hat wine can be unhealt hy and inebriat ing). He found semiot ics useful in conduct ing t hese
crit iques. Bart hes explained t hat t hese bourgeois cult ural myt hs were second-order signs, or
connot at ions. A pict ure of a full, dark bot t le is a sign, a signifier relat ing t o a signified: a
ferment ed, alcoholic beverage—wine. However, t he bourgeois t ake t his signified and apply
t heir own emphasis t o it , making "wine" a new signifier, t his t ime relat ing t o a new signified: t he
idea of healt hy, robust , relaxing wine. Mot ivat ions for such manipulat ions vary from a desire t o
sell product s t o a simple desire t o maint ain t he st at us quo. These insight s brought Bart hes
very much in line wit h similar Marxist t heory.

Algirdas Julien Greimas (1917–1992) developed a st ruct ural version of semiot ics named,
"generat ive semiot ics", t rying t o shift t he focus of discipline from signs t o syst ems of
significat ion. His t heories develop t he ideas of Saussure, Hjelmslev, Claude Lévi-St rauss, and
Maurice Merleau-Pont y.

Thomas A. Sebeok (1920–2001), a st udent of Charles W. Morris, was a prolific and wide-
ranging American semiot ician. Alt hough he insist ed t hat animals are not capable of language,
he expanded t he purview of semiot ics t o include non-human signaling and communicat ion
syst ems, t hus raising some of t he issues addressed by philosophy of mind and coining t he
t erm zoosemiot ics. Sebeok insist ed t hat all communicat ion was made possible by t he
relat ionship bet ween an organism and t he environment in which it lives. He also posed t he
equat ion bet ween semiosis (t he act ivit y of int erpret ing signs) and life—a view t hat t he
Copenhagen-Tart u biosemiot ic school has furt her developed.

Juri Lot man (1922–1993) was t he founding member of t he Tart u (or Tart u-Moscow) Semiot ic
School. He developed a semiot ic approach t o t he st udy of cult ure—semiot ics of cult ure—and
est ablished a communicat ion model for t he st udy of t ext semiot ics. He also int roduced t he
concept of t he semiosphere. Among his Moscow colleagues were Vladimir Toporov,
Vyacheslav Ivanov and Boris Uspensky.

Christ ian Met z (1931–1993) pioneered t he applicat ion of Saussurean semiot ics t o film t heory,
applying synt agmat ic analysis t o scenes of films and grounding film semiot ics in great er
cont ext .

Eliseo Verón (1935–2014) developed his "Social Discourse Theory" inspired in t he Peircian
concept ion of "Semiosis."

Groupe µ (founded 1967) developed a st ruct ural version of rhet orics, and t he visual semiot ics.

Umbert o Eco (1932–2016) was an It alian novelist , semiot ician and academic. He made a wider
audience aware of semiot ics by various publicat ions, most not ably A Theory of Semiotics and
his novel, The Name of the Rose, which includes (second t o it s plot ) applied semiot ic
operat ions. His most import ant cont ribut ions t o t he field bear on int erpret at ion, encyclopedia,
and model reader. He also crit icized in several works (A theory of semiotics , La struttura
assente, Le signe, La production de signes ) t he "iconism" or "iconic signs" (t aken from Peirce's
most famous t riadic relat ion, based on indexes, icons, and symbols), t o which he proposed
four modes of sign product ion: recognit ion, ost ension, replica, and invent ion.

Julia Krist eva (born 1941), a st udent of Lucien Goldmann and Roland Bart hes, Bulgarian-French
semiot ician, lit erary crit ic, psychoanalyst , feminist , and novelist . She uses psychoanalyt ical
concept s t oget her wit h t he semiot ics, dist inguishing t he t wo component s in t he significat ion,
t he symbolic and t he semiot ic . Krist eva also st udies t he represent at ion of women and
women's bodies in popular cult ure, such as horror films and has had a remarkable influence on
feminism and feminist lit erary st udies.

Michael Silverst ein (1945–2020), a t heoret ician of semiot ics and linguist ic ant hropology. Over
t he course of his career he creat ed an original synt hesis of research on t he semiot ics of
communicat ion, t he sociology of int eract ion, Russian formalist lit erary t heory, linguist ic
pragmat ics, sociolinguist ics, early ant hropological linguist ics and st ruct uralist grammat ical
t heory, t oget her wit h his own t heoret ical cont ribut ions, yielding a comprehensive account of
t he semiot ics of human communicat ion and it s relat ion t o cult ure. His main influence was
Charles Sanders Peirce, Ferdinand de Saussure, and Roman Jakobson.

Current applications

Chart semiotics of social networking

Some applicat ions of semiot ics include:

Representation of a methodology for

the analysis of "texts" regardless of the
medium in which it is presented. For
these purposes, "text" is any message
preserved in a form whose existence is
independent of both sender and
receiver;
By scholars and professional
researchers as a method to interpret
meanings behind symbols and how the
meanings are created;
Potential improvement of ergonomic
design in situations where it is
important to ensure that human beings
are able to interact more effectively
with their environments, whether it be
on a large scale, as in architecture, or
on a small scale, such as the
configuration of instrumentation for
human use; and
Marketing: Epure, Eisenstat, and Dinu
(2014) express that "semiotics allows
for the practical distinction of
persuasion from manipulation in
marketing communication."[72]: 592
Semiotics are used in marketing as a
persuasive device to influence buyers
to change their attitudes and behaviors
in the market place. There are two
ways that Epure, Eisenstat, and Dinu
(2014), building on the works of Roland
Barthes, state in which semiotics are
used in marketing: Surface: signs are
used to create personality for the
product, creativity plays its foremost
role at this level; Underlying: the
concealed meaning of the text,
imagery, sounds, etc.[72] Semiotics can
also be used to analyze advertising
effectiveness and meaning. Cian
(2020),[73] for instance, analyzed a
specific printed advertisement from
two different semiotic points of view.
He applied the interpretative
instruments provided by the Barthes'
school of thinking (focused on the
description of explicit signs taken in
isolation). He then analyzed the same
advertising using Greimas' structural
semiotics (where a sign has meaning
only when it is interpreted as part of a
system).
In some count ries, t he role of semiot ics is limit ed t o lit erary crit icism and an appreciat ion of
audio and visual media. This narrow focus may inhibit a more general st udy of t he social and
polit ical forces shaping how different media are used and t heir dynamic st at us wit hin modern
cult ure. Issues of t echnological det erminism in t he choice of media and t he design of
communicat ion st rat egies assume new import ance in t his age of mass media.

Main institutions
A world organisat ion of semiot icians, t he Int ernat ional Associat ion for Semiot ic St udies, and
it s journal Semiotica , was est ablished in 1969. The larger research cent ers t oget her wit h
t eaching program include t he semiot ics depart ment s at t he Universit y of Tart u, Universit y of
Limoges, Aarhus Universit y, and Bologna Universit y.

Publications
Publicat ion of research is bot h in dedicat ed journals such as Sign Systems Studies ,
est ablished by Juri Lot man and published by Tart u Universit y Press; Semiotica , founded by
Thomas A. Sebeok and published by Mout on de Gruyt er; Zeitschrift für Semiotik; European
Journal of Semiotics ; Versus (founded and direct ed by Umbert o Eco), et al.; The American
Journal of Semiotics ; and as art icles accept ed in periodicals of ot her disciplines, especially
journals orient ed t oward philosophy and cult ural crit icism.

The major semiot ic book series Semiotics, Communication, Cognition, published by De

Gruyt er Mout on (series edit ors Paul Cobley and Kalevi Kull) replaces t he former "Approaches
t o Semiot ics" (more t han 120 volumes) and "Approaches t o Applied Semiot ics" (series edit or
Thomas A. Sebeok). Since 1980 t he Semiot ic Societ y of America has produced an annual
conference series: Semiotics: The Proceedings of the Semiotic Society of America .
See also

Ecosemiotics
Ethnosemiotics
Index of semiotics articles
Language-game (philosophy)
Medical sign
Outline of semiotics
Private language argument
Semiofest
Semiotic theory of Charles Sanders
Peirce
Social semiotics
Structuralist semiotics
Universal language
References

Footnotes

a. See also Andrew LaVelle's discussion of

Romeo on Peirce-l (http://permalink.gman
e.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/3
252) Archived (https://web.archive.org/w
eb/20181001220553/http://permalink.g
mane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peir
ce/3252) 2018-10-01 at the Wayback
Machine.

b. Locke (1700) uses the Greek word

"σημιωτική" [sic] in the 4th edition (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=hGeKsjjt
u6EC) of his Essay concerning Human
Understanding (p. 437). He notably writes
both (a) "σημιωτικὴ" and (b) "Σημιωτική":
when term (a) is followed by any kind of
punctuation mark, it takes the form (b). In
Chapter XX, titled "Division of the
Sciences," which concludes the 1st edition
of Locke's Essay (1689/1690), Locke
introduces "σημιωτική" in § 4 as his
proposed name synonymous with "the
Doctrine of Signs" for the development of
the future study of the ubiquitous role of
signs within human awareness. In the 4th
edition of Locke's Essay (1700), a new
Chapter XIX, titled "Of Enthusiasm," is
inserted into Book IV. As result, Chapter
XX of the 1st edition becomes Chapter
XXI for all subsequent editions. It is an
important fact that Locke's proposal for
the development of semiotics, with three
passing exceptions as "asides" in the
writings of Berkeley, Leibniz, and
Condillac, "is met with a resounding
silence that lasts as long as modernity
itself. Even Locke's devoted late modern
editor, Alexander Campbell Fraser,
dismisses out of hand 'this crude and
superficial scheme of Locke'" Deely adds
"Locke's modest proposal subversive of
the way of ideas, its reception, and its
bearing on the resolution of an ancient
and a modern controversy in logic." In the
Oxford University Press critical edition
(1975), prepared and introduced by Peter
Harold Nidditch, Nidditch tells us, in his
"Foreword," that he presents us with "a
complete, critically established, and
unmodernized text that aims at being
historically faithful to Locke's final
intentions";: vii that "the present text is
based on the original fourth edition of the
Essay;: xxv and that "readings in the other
early authorized editions are adopted, in
appropriate form, where necessary, and
recorded otherwise in the textual
notes.": xxv The term "σημιωτική" appears
in that 4th edition (1700), the last
published (but not the last prepared)
within Locke's lifetime, with exactly the
spelling and final accent found in the 1st
edition. Yet if we turn to (the final) chapter
XXI of the Oxford edition (1975, p. 720),
we find not "σημιωτικὴ" but rather do we
find substituted the "σημειωτικὴ" spelling
(and with final accent reversed). Note that
in Modern Greek and in some systems for
pronouncing classical Greek, "σημιωτική"
and "σημειωτική" are pronounced the
same.
c. The whole anthology, Frontiers in
Semiotics, was devoted to the
documentation of this pars pro toto move
of Sebeok.

d. Max Fisch has compiled Peirce-related

bibliographical supplements in 1952,
1964, 1966, 1974; was consulting editor
on the 1977 microfilm of Peirce's
published works and on the
Comprehensive Bibliography associated
with it; was among the main editors of the
first five volumes of Writings of Charles S.
Peirce (1981–1993); and wrote a number
of published articles on Peirce, many
collected in 1986 in Peirce, Semeiotic, and
Pragmatism. See also Charles Sanders
Peirce bibliography.
e. "The distinction between the being of
existing Dasein and the Being of entities,
such as Reality, which do not have the
character of Dasein...is nothing with which
philosophy may tranquilize itself. It has
long been known that ancient ontology
works with 'Thing-concepts' and that there
is a danger of 'reifying consciousness'.
But what does this 'reifying' signify?
Where does it arise? Why does Being get
'conceived' 'proximally' in terms of the
present-at-hand and not in terms of the
ready-to-hand, which indeed lies closer to
us? Why does reifying always keep
coming back to exercise its dominion?
This is the question that the
Umwelt/Lebenswelt distinction as here
drawn answers to." Martin Heidegger
1962/1927:486
f. Detailed demonstration of Sebeok's role
of the global emergence of semiotics is
recorded in at least three recent volumes:
1. Semiotics Seen Synchronically.
The View from 2010 (Ottawa:
Legas, 2010).

2. Semiotics Continues To Astonish.

Thomas A. Sebeok and the
Doctrine of Signs (Berlin: Mouton
De Gruyter, 2011)—a 526-page
assemblage of essays, vignettes,
letters, pictures attesting to the
depth and extent of Sebeok's
promotion of semiotic
understanding around the world,
including his involvement with Juri
Lotman and the Tartu University
graduate program in semiotics
 (currently directed by P. Torop, M.
Lotman and K. Kull).

3. Sebeok's Semiotic Prologues

(Ottawa: Legas, 2012)—a volume
which gathers together in Part I all
the "prologues" (i.e., introductions,
prefaces, forewords, etc.) that
Sebeok wrote for other peoples'
books, then in Part 2 all the
"prologues" that other people
wrote for Sebeok.

g. See Sebeok, Thomas A. "Communication

in Animals and Men." A review article that
covers three books: Martin Lindauer,
Communication among Social Bees
(Harvard Books in Biology, No. 2;
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,
1961, pp. ix + 143); Winthrop N. Kellogg,
 Porpoises and Sonar (Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press, 1961, pp. xiv
+ 177); and John C. Lilly, Man and Dolphin
(Garden City, New York: Doubleday), in
Language 39 (1963), 448–466.

h. For a summary of Peirce's contributions to

semiotics, see Liszka (1996) or Atkin
(2006).

Citations

1. Campbell, C., Olteanu, A., & Kull, K. (2019).

Learning and knowing as semiosis:
Extending the conceptual apparatus of
semiotics (https://ojs.utlib.ee/index.php/s
ss/article/view/SSS.2019.47.3-4.01) .
Sign Systems Studies 47(3/4), 352–381.
2. Caesar, Michael (1999). Umberto Eco:
Philosophy, Semiotics, and the Work of
Fiction. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 55. ISBN 978-
0-7456-0850-1.

3. Liddell, Henry George, and Robert Scott.

1940. "σημειωτικός." A Greek-English
Lexicon. Revised and augmented by H. S.
Jones and R. McKenzie. Oxford:
Clarendon Press. Available via Perseus
Digital Library (https://www.perseus.tufts.
edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3
A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3Dshmeiwtik
o%2Fs) .

4. σημεῖον (https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/h
opper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A199
9.04.0057%3Aentry%3Dshmei%3Don) ,
Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A
Greek-English Lexicon, on Perseus
5. "Semiotics for Beginners: Signs" (http://vi
sual-memory.co.uk/daniel/Documents/S4
B/sem02.html) . visual-memory.co.uk.
Retrieved 2017-03-26.

6. Deely, John. 2009. Augustine & Poinsot:

The Protosemiotic Development.
Scranton: University of Scranton Press.
[provides full details of Augustine's
originality on the notion of semiotics.]

7. Romeo, Luigi. 1977. "The Derivation of

'Semiotics' through the History of the
Discipline." Semiosis 6(2):37–49.

8. Manetti, Giovanni. 1993 [1987]. Theories

of the Sign in Classical Antiquity,
translated by C. Richardson. Bloomington,
IN: Indiana University Press. [Original: Le
teorie del segno nell'antichità classica
(1987). Milan: Bompiani.]
 9. "Semiotics." Oxford English Dictionary
(1989). ["The branch of medical science
relating to the interpretation of
symptoms."]

10. Stubbes, Henry. 1670. The Plus Ultra

reduced to a Non Plus. London. p. 75.

11. Encyclopedia Britannica. 2020 [1998].

"Semiotics: Study of Signs (https://www.b
ritannica.com/science/semiotics) ."
Encyclopedia Britannica. Accessed 8 April
2020 Web.

12. Locke, John. 1963 [1823]. An Essay

Concerning Human Understanding.

13. Cited in Chandler, Daniel. Semiotics for

Beginners. "Introduction."

14. Peirce, Charles Sanders. Collected Papers

of Charles Sanders Peirce, vol. 2: para.
227.
15. Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1998 [1902].
"Logic, Regarded As Semeiotic (http://ww
w.cspeirce.com/menu/library/bycsp/l75/l
75.htm) ," [manuscript L75] Arisbe: The
Peirce Gateway, edited by J. Ransdell.

16. Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1998 [1902]. "On

the Definition of Logic (http://www.cspeirc
e.com/menu/library/bycsp/l75/ver1/l75v
1-05.htm#m12) ." [memoir 12]. Arisbe:
The Peirce Gateway, edited by J. Ransdell.

17. Atkin, Albert (2023), "Peirce's Theory of

Signs" (https://plato.stanford.edu/archive
s/spr2023/entries/peirce-semiotics/) , in
Zalta, Edward N.; Nodelman, Uri (eds.),
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
(Spring 2023 ed.), Metaphysics Research
Lab, Stanford University, retrieved
2023-03-21
18. Fisch, Max H. (1978), "Peirce's General
Theory of Signs" in Sight, Sound, and
Sense, ed. T. A. Sebeok. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press, pp. 31–70.

19. 2001. "Umwelt". Semiotica 134(1). Pp.

125–135. [special issue on "Jakob von
Uexküll: A paradigm for biology and
semiotics," guest-edited by K. Kull.]

20. Heidegger, Martin. 1962 [1927]. Being and

Time, translated by J. Macquarrie and E.
Robinson. New York: Harper & Row. p.
487.
21. Sebeok, Thomas A. 1986.
"Communication, Language, and Speech.
Evolutionary Considerations." Pp. 10–16
in I Think I Am A Verb. More Contributions
to the Doctrine of Signs. New York:
Plenum Press. Published lecture. Original
lecture title "The Evolution of
Communication and the Origin of
Language," in International Summer
Institute for Semiotic and Structural
Studies Colloquium on 'Phylogeny and
Ontogeny of Communication Systems'
(June 1–3, 1984).

22. Sebeok, Thomas A. 2012. "Afterword (htt

p://www.augustoponzio.com/files/12._De
ely.pdf) ." Pp. 365–83 in Semiotic
Prologues, edited by J. Deely and M.
Danesi. Ottawa: Legas.
23. Krampen, Martin. 1981. "Phytosemiotics."
Semiotica 36(3):187–209.

24. Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1934 [1907] "A

Survey of Pragmaticism." P. 473. in The
Collected Papers of Charles Sanders
Peirce 5, edited by C. Hartshorne and P.
Weiss. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press. [originally titled "Excerpt from
"Pragmatism (Editor [3])"]

25. Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1977 [1908].

"letter to Lady Welby 23 December 1908"
[letter]. Pp. 73–86 in Semiotic and
Significs: The Correspondence between
C. S. Peirce and Victoria Lady Welby,
edited by C. S. Hardwick and J. Cook.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
26. Peirce, Charles Sanders. 2009. "Semiosis:
The Subject Matter of Semiotic Inquiry."
Pp. 26–50 in Basics of Semiotics (5th
ed.), edited by J. Deely. Tartu, Estonia:
Tartu University Press. See especially pp.
31,38– 41.

27. "LOGOS – Multilingual Translation Portal"

(http://courses.logos.it/EN/2_18.html) .
courses.logos.it. Retrieved 2017-03-26.

28. 1971, orig. 1938, Writings on the general

theory of signs, Mouton, The Hague, The
Netherlands
29. Jozef Maria Bochenski (1956)
Contemporary European Philosophy,
trans. Donald Nichols and Karl
Ashenbrenner from 1951 edition,
Berkeley, CA: University of California,
Section 25, "Mathematical Logic,"
Subsection F, "Semiotics," p. 259.

30. Black, Max. 1944. The Philosophy of

Bertrand Russell 5. Library of Living
Philosophers.

31. Nattiez, Jean-Jacques (1990). Music and

Discourse: Toward a Semiology of Music.
Translated by Carolyn Abbate. Princeton:
Princeton University Press.

32. "Definition of Syntactics by Merriam-

Webster" (https://www.merriam-webster.c
om/dictionary/syntactics) . Merriam-
Webster Inc. Retrieved May 29, 2019.
33. "Syntactics definition and meaning" (http
s://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/
english/syntactics) . HarperCollins
Publishers. Retrieved May 29, 2019.

34. "Syntactics" (https://web.archive.org/we

b/20200807022533/https://www.lexico.c
om/definition/syntactics) . Lexico UK
English Dictionary. Oxford University
Press. Archived from the original (http://w
ww.lexico.com/definition/Syntactics) on
August 7, 2020.
35. Shackell, Cameron (2019-03-05). "Finite
semiotics: Recovery functions,
semioformation, and the hyperreal" (http
s://eprints.qut.edu.au/101207/1/Finite%2
0semiotics%20-%20recovery%2C%20semi
oformation%20and%20hyperreality%20-%
20Cameron%20Shackell.docx) .
Semiotica. 2019 (227): 211–26.
doi:10.1515/sem-2016-0153 (https://doi.
org/10.1515%2Fsem-2016-0153) .
ISSN 0037-1998 (https://www.worldcat.or
g/issn/0037-1998) . S2CID 149185917 (h
ttps://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:1
49185917) .
36. Shackell, Cameron (2018-04-25). "Finite
cognition and finite semiosis: A new
perspective on semiotics for the
information age" (https://eprints.qut.edu.a
u/84630/1/Finite%20Semiotics%20-%20C
ameron%20Shackell.docx) . Semiotica.
2018 (222): 225–40. doi:10.1515/sem-
2018-0020 (https://doi.org/10.1515%2Fs
em-2018-0020) . ISSN 0037-1998 (http
s://www.worldcat.org/issn/0037-1998) .
S2CID 149817752 (https://api.semanticsc
holar.org/CorpusID:149817752) .
37. Shackell, Cameron (2019-07-26). "Finite
semiotics: Cognitive sets, semiotic
vectors, and semiosic oscillation" (https://
eprints.qut.edu.au/115293/1/Finite%20se
miotics%20-%20cognitive%20sets%20se
miotic%20vectors%20and%20semiosic%2
0oscillation.docx) . Semiotica. 2019
(229): 211–35. doi:10.1515/sem-2017-
0127 (https://doi.org/10.1515%2Fsem-20
17-0127) . ISSN 1613-3692 (https://www.
worldcat.org/issn/1613-3692) .
S2CID 67111370 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:67111370) .
38. Shackell, Cameron. 2018. "Finite
semiotics: A new theoretical basis for the
information age (https://www.ebooks.ktu.
lt/eb/1461/cross-inter-multi-trans-procee
dings-of-the-13th-world-congress-of-the-in
ternational-association-for-semiotic-studie
s-iass/ais/) Archived (https://web.archiv
e.org/web/20200125042330/https://ww
w.ebooks.ktu.lt/eb/1461/cross-inter-multi
-trans-proceedings-of-the-13th-world-con
gress-of-the-international-association-for-
semiotic-studies-iass/ais/) 2020-01-25 at
the Wayback Machine." Cross-Inter-Multi-
Trans: Proceedings of the 13th World
Congress of the International Association
for Semiotic Studies (IASS/AIS). IASS
Publications & International Semiotics
Institute. Retrieved 2020-01-25.
39. Shackell, Cameron, and Laurianne Sitbon.
2018. "Cognitive Externalities and HCI:
Towards the Recognition and Protection
of Cognitive Rights." Pp. 1–10 in Extended
Abstracts of the 2018 CHI Conference on
Human Factors in Computing Systems –
CHI '18. Montreal: ACM Press.
doi:10.1145/3170427.3188405 (https://d
oi.org/10.1145%2F3170427.3188405) .
ISBN 978-1-4503-5621-3.
40. Shackell, Cameron, and Peter Bruza.
2019. "Introducing Quantitative Cognitive
Analysis: Ubiquitous reproduction,
Cognitive Diversity and Creativity (https://c
ognitivesciencesociety.org/past-conferenc
es/) ." Pp. 2783–9 in Proceedings of the
41st Annual Meeting of the Cognitive
Science Society (CogSci 2019), edited by
C. Freksa. Cognitive Science Society.
ISBN 978-1-5108-9155-5. Retrieved 2020-
01-25.
41. Shackell, Cameron; Sitbon, Laurianne
(2019-09-12). "Computational opposition
analysis using word embeddings: A
method for strategising resonant informal
argument" (https://doi.org/10.3233%2FA
AC-190467) . Argument & Computation.
10 (3): 301–317. doi:10.3233/AAC-
190467 (https://doi.org/10.3233%2FAAC-
190467) .

42. "Pictorial Semiotics" (https://web.archive.

org/web/20180920124019/http://oxfordi
ndex.oup.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.
20110803100326357) . Oxford Index.
Oxford University Press, n.d. Web.
Archived from the original (http://oxfordin
dex.oup.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.2
0110803100326357) on 2018-09-20.
Retrieved 2014-10-31.
43. "Pictorial Codes" (https://web.archive.org/
web/20141031201421/http://oxfordinde
x.oup.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.201
10803100326343?rskey=TyYRDS&result=
6) . Oxford Index. Oxford University Press,
n.d. Web. Archived from the original (htt
p://oxfordindex.oup.com/view/10.1093/o
i/authority.20110803100326343?rskey=T
yYRDS&result=6) on 2014-10-31.
Retrieved 2014-10-31.

44. Sonesson, Göran (1988). "Methods and

Models in Pictorial Semiotics": 2–98.
{{cite journal}}: Cite journal
requires |journal= (help)
45. Alden, Dana L; Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict
E. M; Batra, Rajeev (1999). "Brand
Positioning Through Advertising in Asia,
North America, and Europe: The Role of
Global Consumer Culture". Journal of
Marketing. 63 (1): 75–87.
doi:10.2307/1252002 (https://doi.org/10.
2307%2F1252002) . JSTOR 1252002 (htt
ps://www.jstor.org/stable/1252002) .
46. Pan, Yuling; Sha, Mandy (2019-07-09).
The Sociolinguistics of Survey Translation
(https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/m
ono/10.4324/9780429294914/sociolingu
istics-survey-translation-yuling-pan-mandy
-sha-hyunjoo-park) . London: Routledge.
pp. 72–75. doi:10.4324/9780429294914
(https://doi.org/10.4324%2F9780429294
914) . ISBN 978-0-429-29491-4.
S2CID 198632812 (https://api.semanticsc
holar.org/CorpusID:198632812) .

47. Chandler, Daniel. 2007 [2001]. Semiotics:

The Basics. London: Routledge.
48. Spotts, Harlan E; Weinberger, Marc G;
Parsons, Amy L (1997). "Assessing the
Use and Impact of Humor on Advertising
Effectiveness: A Contingency Approach".
Journal of Advertising. 26 (3): 17.
doi:10.1080/00913367.1997.10673526
(https://doi.org/10.1080%2F00913367.19
97.10673526) .

49. Beeman, William O (1981). "Why Do They

Laugh? An Interactional Approach to
Humor in Traditional Iranian Improvisatory
Theater: Performance and Its Effects".
The Journal of American Folklore. 94
(374): 506–526. doi:10.2307/540503 (htt
ps://doi.org/10.2307%2F540503) .
JSTOR 540503 (https://www.jstor.org/sta
ble/540503) .
50. Brannen, Mary Yoko (2004). "When
Mickey Loses Face: Recontextualization,
Semantic Fit, and the Semiotics of
Foreignness". Academy of Management
Review. 29 (4): 593–616.
doi:10.5465/amr.2004.14497613 (https://
doi.org/10.5465%2Famr.2004.1449761
3) . JSTOR 20159073 (https://www.jstor.
org/stable/20159073) .

51. Thurlow, Crispin; Aiello, Giorgia (2016).

"National pride, global capital: A social
semiotic analysis of transnational visual
branding in the airline industry". Visual
Communication. 6 (3): 305.
doi:10.1177/1470357207081002 (https://
doi.org/10.1177%2F147035720708100
2) . S2CID 145395587 (https://api.seman
ticscholar.org/CorpusID:145395587) .
52. Freud, Sigmund. 1900 [1899]. The
Interpretation of Dreams. London:
Hogarth

53. Mirka, Danuta, ed. The Oxford handbook

of topic theory. Oxford Handbooks, 2014.

54. Ratner, Leonard Gilbert. "Classical Music:

Expression, Form, and Style." (1980).

55. Hatten, Robert S. Musical meaning in

Beethoven: Markedness, correlation, and
interpretation. Indiana University Press,
2004.

56. Brier, Søren (2008). Cybersemiotics: Why

Information Is Not Enough!. Toronto:
University of Toronto Press. ISBN 978-0-
8020-9220-5.
57. Storm, Jason Ānanda Josephson.
"Hylosemiotics." Metamodernsim: The
Future of Theory, The University of
Chicago Press, 2021, p. 149-203.

58. Keir Elam, The Semiotics of Theatre and

Drama, Routledge, 2003.

59. Sonesson, Göran (1989). Pictorial

concepts. Inquiries into the semiotic
heritage and its relevance for the analysis
of the visual world. Lund: Lund University
Press.
60. Butkovic, Marija. "Meet The Female
Founder And Impact Investor On A
Mission To Expand Investment
Opportunities For BIPOC And Female
Venture Capital Managers" (https://www.f
orbes.com/sites/marijabutkovic/2021/0
5/28/meet-the-female-founder-and-impac
t-investor-on-a-mission-to-expand-investm
ent-opportunities-for-bipoc-and-female-ve
nture-capital-managers/) . Forbes.
Retrieved 7 April 2023.

61. "semiotics.tech" (https://web.archive.org/

web/20230401193522/http://semiotics.t
ech/) . semiotics.tech. Archived from the
original (http://semiotics.tech/) on 1
April 2023. Retrieved 7 April 2023.
62. Treadwell, James (1998-07-01). " 'Sartor
Resartus' and the work of writing" (https://
go.gale.com/ps/i.do?p=LitRC&sw=w&issn
=00140856&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA21
112577&sid=googleScholar&linkaccess=a
bs) . Essays in Criticism. 48 (3): 224–244.
doi:10.1093/eic/48.3.224 (https://doi.org/
10.1093%2Feic%2F48.3.224) .

63. Jackson, Leon (1999). "The Reader

Retailored: Thomas Carlyle, His American
Audiences, and the Politics of Evidence" (h
ttps://www.jstor.org/stable/30227300) .
Book History. 2: 146–172. ISSN 1098-
7371 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/109
8-7371) . JSTOR 30227300 (https://www.
jstor.org/stable/30227300) .
64. "Sincere Idolatry: Carlyle and Religious
Symbols" (https://victorianweb.org/author
s/carlyle/heroes/rose10.html) .
victorianweb.org. Retrieved 2023-02-16.
65. For Peirce's definitions of signs and
semiosis, see under "Sign (http://www.hel
sinki.fi/science/commens/terms/sign.htm
l) " and "Semiosis, semeiosy (http://www.
helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/semi
osis.html) " in the Commens Dictionary of
Peirce's Terms (http://www.helsinki.fi/scie
nce/commens/dictionary.html) ; and "76
definitions of sign by C. S. Peirce (http://p
erso.numericable.fr/robert.marty/semioti
que/access.htm) " collected by Robert
Marty. Peirce's "What Is a Sign (http://ww
w.iupui.edu/~peirce/ep/ep2/ep2book/ch
02/ep2ch2.htm) Archived (https://web.ar
chive.org/web/20100528062034/http://w
ww.iupui.edu/~peirce/ep/ep2/ep2book/c
h02/ep2ch2.htm) 2010-05-28 at the
Wayback Machine" (MS 404 of 1894,
 Essential Peirce v. 2, pp. 4–10) provides
intuitive help.

66. See Peirce, excerpt from a letter to

William James, March 14, 1909, Collected
Papers v. 8, paragraph 314. Also see
under relevant entries in the Commens
Dictionary of Peirce's Terms (http://www.h
elsinki.fi/science/commens/dictionary.ht
ml) . On coincidence of actual opinion
with final opinion, see MS 218,
transcription (http://www.cspeirce.com/m
enu/library/bycsp/logic/ms218.htm) at
Arisbe, and appearing in Writings of
Charles S. Peirce v. 3, p. 79.
67. He spelt it "semiotic" and "semeiotic." See
under "Semeiotic (http://www.helsinki.fi/s
cience/commens/terms/semeiotic.html)
[etc.] in the Commens Dictionary of
Peirce's Terms.

68. Peirce, Collected Papers v. 2, paragraphs

243–263, written c. 1903.

69. He worked on but did not perfect a finer-

grained system of ten trichotomies, to be
combined into 66 (Tn+1) classes of sign.
That raised for Peirce 59,049
classificatory questions (59,049 = 310, or 3
to the 10th power). See p. 482 in
"Excerpts from Letters to Lady Welby",
Essential Peirce v. 2.
70. Ryan, Michael (2011). The Encyclopedia
of Literary and Cultural Theory (http://ww
w.credoreference.com/entry/wileylitcul/s
emiotics) . Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
ISBN 978-1-4051-8312-3.

71. Dewey, John (1946). "Peirce's Theory of

Linguistic Signs, Thought, and Meaning".
The Journal of Philosophy. 43 (4): 85–95.
doi:10.2307/2019493 (https://doi.org/10.
2307%2F2019493) . JSTOR 2019493 (htt
ps://www.jstor.org/stable/2019493) .

72. Epure, M.; Eisenstat, E.; Dinu, C. (2014).

"Semiotics And Persuasion In Marketing
Communication" (https://www.ceeol.com/
search/article-detail?id=30143) .
Linguistic & Philosophical Investigations.
13: 592–605.
 73. Cian, Luca (2012). "A comparative
analysis of print advertising applying the
two main plastic semiotics schools:
Barthes' and Greimas' ". Semiotica. 2012
(190): 57–79. doi:10.1515/sem-2012-
0039 (https://doi.org/10.1515%2Fsem-20
12-0039) .

Bibliography

Atkin, Albert. (2006). "Peirce's Theory of

Signs (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/peir
ce-semiotics/) ", Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy.

Barthes, Roland. ([1957] 1987).

Mythologies. New York: Hill & Wang.

Barthes, Roland ([1964] 1967). Elements of

Semiology. (Translated by Annette Lavers &
Colin Smith). London: Jonathan Cape.
Chandler, Daniel. (2001/2007). Semiotics:
The Basics. London: Routledge.

Clarke, D. S. (1987). Principles of Semiotic.

London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Clarke, D. S. (2003). Sign Levels. Dordrecht:
Kluwer.
Culler, Jonathan (1975). Structuralist
Poetics: Structuralism, Linguistics and the
Study of Literature. London: Routledge &
Kegan Paul.
Danesi, Marcel & Perron, Paul. (1999).
Analyzing Cultures: An Introduction and
Handbook. Bloomington: Indiana UP.

Danesi, Marcel. (1994). Messages and

Meanings: An Introduction to Semiotics.
Toronto: Canadian Scholars' Press.
Danesi, Marcel. (2002). Understanding
Media Semiotics. London: Arnold; New York:
Oxford UP.
Danesi, Marcel. (2007). The Quest for
Meaning: A Guide to Semiotic Theory and
Practice. Toronto: University of Toronto
Press.
Decadt, Yves. 2000. On the Origin and
Impact of Information in the Average
Evolution: From Bit to Attractor, Atom and
Ecosystem [Dutch]. Summary in English
available at The Information Philosopher (ht
tp://www.informationphilosopher.com/soluti
ons/scientists/decadt/) .
Deely, John. (2005 [1990]). Basics of
Semiotics. 4th ed. Tartu: Tartu University
Press.
Deely, John. (2000), The Red Book: The
Beginning of Postmodern Times or: Charles
Sanders Peirce and the Recovery of Signum.
Sonesson, Göran (1989). "Pictorial
concepts. Inquiries into the semiotic
heritage and its relevance for the analysis of
the visual world" (Document). Lund: Lund
University Press.Sonesson, Göran, 1989,
Pictorial concepts. Inquiries into the
semiotic heritage and its relevance for the
analysis of the visual world, Lund: Lund
University Press.(578 KiB)Pictorial concepts.
Inquiries into the semiotic heritage and its
relevance for the analysis of the visual
world"Eprint" (http://www.helsinki.fi/scienc
e/commens/papers/greenbook.pdf)
(PDF). (571 KiB).
Deely, John. (2001). Four Ages of
Understanding. Toronto: University of
Toronto Press.
Deely, John. (2003), "On the Word Semiotics,
Formation and Origins", Semiotica 146.1/4,
1–50.
Deely, John. (2003). The Impact on
Philosophy of Semiotics. South Bend: St.
Augustine Press.
Deely, John. (2004), " '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.
Deely, John. (2006), "On 'Semiotics' as
Naming the Doctrine of Signs", Semiotica
158.1/4 (2006), 1–33.
Derrida, Jacques (1981). Positions.
(Translated by Alan Bass). London: Athlone
Press.
Eagleton, Terry. (1983). Literary Theory: An
Introduction. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Eco, Umberto. (1976). A Theory of

Semiotics. London: Macmillan.

Eco, Umberto. (1986) Semiotics and the

Philosophy of Language. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press.
Eco, Umberto. (2000) Kant and the Platypus.
New York, Harcourt Brace & Company.
Eco, Umberto. (1976) A Theory of Semiotics.
Indiana, Indiana University Press.
Emmeche, Claus; Kull, Kalevi (eds.) (2011)
Towards a Semiotic Biology: Life is the
Action of Signs. London: Imperial College
Press. pdf (https://www.academia.edu/727
564/Towards_a_Semiotic_Biology_Life_is_t
he_Action_of_Signs)
Foucault, Michel. (1970). The Order of
Things: An Archaeology of the Human
Sciences. London: Tavistock.

Greimas, Algirdas. (1987). On Meaning:

Selected Writings in Semiotic Theory.
(Translated by Paul J Perron & Frank H
Collins). London: Frances Pinter.
Herlihy, David. 1988–present. "2nd year
class of semiotics". CIT.
Hjelmslev, Louis (1961). Prolegomena to a
Theory of Language. (Translated by Francis
J. Whitfield). Madison: University of
Wisconsin Press
Hodge, Robert & Kress, Gunther. (1988).
Social Semiotics. Ithaca: Cornell UP.

Lacan, Jacques. (1977) Écrits: A Selection.

(Translated by Alan Sheridan). New York:
Norton.
Lidov, David (1999) Elements of Semiotics.
New York: St. Martin's Press.
Liszka, J. J. (1996) A General Introduction to
the Semeiotic of C.S. Peirce. Indiana
University Press.
Locke, John, The Works of John Locke, A
New Edition, Corrected, In Ten Volumes,
Vol.III, T. Tegg, (London), 1823. (facsimile
reprint by Scientia, (Aalen), 1963.)
Lotman, Yuri M. (1990). Universe of the
Mind: A Semiotic Theory of Culture.
(Translated by Ann Shukman). London: I.B.
Tauris.
Matthiessen, F. O. 1949. American
Renaissance: Art and Expression in the Age
of Emerson and Whitman. Harvard, Boston

Meyers, Marvin 1957 The Jacksonian

Persuasion: Politics and Belief Stanford
Press, California

Morris, Charles W. (1971). Writings on the

general theory of signs. The Hague: Mouton.
Menchik, Daniel A; Tian, Xiaoli (2008).
"Putting Social Context into Text: The
Semiotics of E-mail Interaction" (http://hub.h
ku.hk/bitstream/10722/141740/1/Content.
pdf) (PDF). American Journal of Sociology.
114 (2): 332–70. doi:10.1086/590650 (http
s://doi.org/10.1086%2F590650) .
hdl:10722/141740 (https://hdl.handle.net/1
0722%2F141740) . S2CID 8161899 (https://
api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:816189
9) .
Nattiez, Jean-Jacques. (1990). Music and
Discourse: Toward a Semiology of Music.
Translated by Carolyn Abbate. Princeton:
Princeton University Press. (Translation of:
Musicologie générale et sémiologue.
Collection Musique/Passé/Présent 13.
Paris: C. Bourgois, 1987).
Peirce, Charles S. (1934). Collected papers:
Volume V. Pragmatism and pragmaticism.
Cambridge, MA, US: Harvard University
Press.
Petrilli, Susan (2009). "Semiotics as
semioethics in the era of global
communication". Semiotica. 2009 (173):
343–67. doi:10.1515/SEMI.2009.015 (http
s://doi.org/10.1515%2FSEMI.2009.015) .
S2CID 143553063 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:143553063) .
Ponzio, Augusto & S. Petrilli (2007)
Semiotics Today. From Global Semiotics to
Semioethics, a Dialogic Response. New York,
Ottawa, Toronto: Legas. 84 pp. ISBN 978-1-
894508-98-8
Romeo, Luigi (1977), "The Derivation of
'Semiotics' through the History of the
Discipline", Semiosis, v. 6 pp. 37–50.
Sebeok, T.A. (1976), Contributions to the
Doctrine of Signs, Indiana University Press,
Bloomington, IN.
Sebeok, Thomas A. (Editor) (1977). A
Perfusion of Signs. Bloomington, IN: Indiana
University Press.
Signs and Meaning: 5 Questions, edited by
Peer Bundgaard and Frederik Stjernfelt,
2009 (Automatic Press / VIP). (Includes
interviews with 29 leading semioticians of
the world.)
Short, T.L. (2007), Peirce's Theory of Signs,
Cambridge University Press.
Stubbe, Henry (Henry Stubbe), The Plus
Ultra reduced to a Non Plus: Or, A Specimen
of some Animadversions upon the Plus Ultra
of Mr. Glanvill, wherein sundry Errors of
some Virtuosi are discovered, the Credit of
the Aristotelians in part Re-advanced; and
Enquiries made...., (London), 1670.

von Uexküll, Thure (1982). "Semiotics and

medicine". Semiotica. 38 (3–4).
doi:10.1515/semi.1982.38.3-4.205 (https://
doi.org/10.1515%2Fsemi.1982.38.3-4.20
5) . S2CID 201698735 (https://api.semantic
scholar.org/CorpusID:201698735) .
John William Ward 1955. Andrew Jackson,
Symbol for an Age. New York: Oxford
University Press.
 John William Ward. 1969 Red, White, and
Blue: Men, Books, and Ideas in American
Culture. New York: Oxford University Press

Williamson, Judith. (1978). Decoding

Advertisements: Ideology and Meaning in
Advertising. London: Boyars.

Zlatev, Jordan. (2009). "The Semiotic

Hierarchy: Life, Consciousness, Signs and
Language, Cognitive Semiotics". Sweden:
Scania.

External links

Look up semiotics in Wiktionary, the

free dictionary.
Wikimedia Commons has media
related to Semiotics .
Library resources about
Semiotics
Resources in your library (https://ftl.toolfor
ge.org/cgi-bin/ftl?st=wp&su=Semiotics)

Signo (http://www.signosemio.com/)
— presents semiotic theories and
theories closely related to semiotics.
The Semiotics of the Web (http://pauill
ac.inria.fr/~codognet/web.html)
Center for Semiotics (http://www.hum.
au.dk/semiotics/) — Denmark: Aarhus
University
Semiotic Society of America (https://w
ww.semioticsocietyofamerica.org/)
Open Semiotics Resource Center (htt
p://www.semioticon.com/) — includes
journals, lecture courses, etc.
Peircean focus

Arisbe: The Peirce Gateway (http://ww

w.cspeirce.com/)
Semiotics according to Robert Marty (h
ttp://perso.numericable.fr/robert.mart
y/semiotique/anglais.htm) , with 76
definitions of the sign by C. S. Peirce (h
ttp://perso.numericable.fr/robert.mart
y/semiotique/access.htm)
The Commens Dictionary of Peirce's
Terms (http://www.helsinki.fi/science/
commens/dictionary.html)

Journals and book series

American Journal of Semiotics (https://

www.pdcnet.org/ajs) , edited by J.
Deely and C. Morrissey. US: Semiotic
Society of America.
Applied Semiotics / Sémiotique
appliquée (AS/SA) (http://french.chass.
utoronto.ca/as-sa/) Archived (https://w
eb.archive.org/web/20181226162651/h
ttp://french.chass.utoronto.ca/as-sa/)
2018-12-26 at the Wayback Machine,
edited by P. G. Marteinson & P. G.
Michelucci. CA: University of Toronto.
Approaches to Applied Semiotics (htt
p://www.degruyter.de/view/serial/1622
8) (2000–09 series), edited by T.
Sebeok, et al. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Approaches to Semiotics (http://www.d
egruyter.de/view/serial/16067) (1969–
97 series), edited by T. A. Sebeok, A.
Rey, R. Posner, et al. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Biosemiotics (https://www.springer.co
m/life+sciences/evolutionary+%26+dev
elopmental+biology/journal/12304) ,
edited by M. Barbieri (eic). International
Society for Biosemiotic Studies (http://
www.biosemiotics.org/) .
Cybernetics and Human Knowing (htt
p://www.chkjournal.com/) , edited by S.
Brier, (chief).
International Journal of Marketing
Semiotics (https://ijmarketingsemiotics.
com/) , edited by G. Rossolatos,
(chief).
International Journal of Signs and
Semiotic Systems (IJSSS) (http://www.i
rma-international.org/journal/internation
al-journal-signs-semiotic-systems/4102
4/) , edited by A, Loula & J. Queiroz.

The Public Journal of Semiotics (http://

semioticsonline.org/) , edited by P.
Bouissac (eic), A. Cienki (assoc.), R.
Jorna, and W. Nöth.
S.E.E.D. Journal (Semiotics, Evolution,
Energy, and Development) (http://www.li
brary.utoronto.ca/see/pages/SEED_Jour
nal.html) Archived (https://web.archive.
org/web/20130225080114/http://www.
library.utoronto.ca/see/pages/SEED_Jo
urnal.html) 2013-02-25 at the Wayback
Machine (2001–7), edited by E.
Taborsky. Toronto: SEE (http://www.libr
ary.utoronto.ca/see/index.html)
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/
20120503121407/http://www.library.ut
oronto.ca/see/index.html) 2012-05-03
at the Wayback Machine.
The Semiotic Review of Books (http://pr
ojects.chass.utoronto.ca/semiotics/ind
ex.html) Archived (https://web.archive.
org/web/20181215115549/http://proje
cts.chass.utoronto.ca/semiotics/index.h
tml) 2018-12-15 at the Wayback
Machine, edited by G. Genosko (gen.)
and P. Bouissac (founding ed.).
Semiotica (https://web.archive.org/we
b/20080610163330/http://www.degruyt
er.de/journals/semiotica/) , edited by
M. Danesi (chief). International
Association for Semiotic Studies (htt
p://iass-ais.org/) .
Semiotiche (https://web.archive.org/we
b/20160823202805/http://www.ananke
-edizioni.com/ananke/?s=Semiotiche) ,
edited by A. Valle and M. Visalli.
Semiotics, Communication and
Cognition (http://www.degruyter.de/vie
w/serial/41472) (series), edited by P.
Cobley and K. Kull.
Semiotics: Yearbook of the Semiotic
Society of America (https://www.pdcne
t.org/cpsem) , edited by J. Pelkey. US:
Semiotic Society of America.
SemiotiX New Series: A Global
Information Bulletin (http://www.semioti
con.com/semiotix/) , edited by P.
Bouissac, et al.
Sign Systems Studies (http://www.ut.e
e/SOSE/sss/index.htm) , edited by K.
Kull, K. Lindstrom, M. Lotman, T. Maran,
S. Salupere, P. Torop. Estonia: Dept. of
Semiotics, U. of Tartu (http://www.ut.e
e/SOSE/eng.html) .
Signs and Society (http://www.press.uc
hicago.edu/ucp/journals/journal/sas.ht
ml) , edited by R. J. Parmentier.
Signs: International Journal of
Semiotics (https://web.archive.org/we
b/20120416202924/http://vip.iva.dk/si
gns/) , edited by M. Thellefsen, T.
Thellefsen, and B. Sørensen, (chief
eds.).
Tartu Semiotics Library (http://www.ut.e
e/SOSE/tsl.html) (series), edited by P.
Torop, K. Kull, S. Salupere.
Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce
Society (https://web.archive.org/web/2
0071011065724/http://peircesociety.or
g/transactions.html) , edited by C. de
Waal (chief). The Charles S. Peirce
Society (http://www.peircesociety.or
g/) .
 Versus: Quaderni di studi semiotici (http
s://web.archive.org/web/20080308152
226/http://versus.dsc.unibo.it/) ,
founded by U. Eco.

Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Semiotics&oldid=1215019754"

This page was last edited on 22 March 2024, at

17:14 (UTC). •
Content is available under CC BY-SA 4.0 unless
otherwise noted.