Chinese Semiotic Studies· 2019Q2
Foundations of the Theory of Signs (1938)
- 1,199citations
- Q2SCImago
- 2019year
Short summary
A 2019 analysis argues Charles W. Morris's 1938 "Foundations of the Theory of Signs" had limitations, lacking logical rigor in its discussions on semiotics as meta-science, sign classification, and the three dimensions of semiosis, notably omitting sign transformation.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Morris's 1938 "Foundations of the Theory of Signs" is critically assessed for logical rigor and scope.
- Key areas of inadequacy include semiotics as meta-science, sign classification, and the three dimensions of semiosis.
- The abstract highlights the significant omission of sign transformation, a universal sign activity.
- The analysis suggests enriching triadic sign relations, semiotics, and translation semiotics.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
Abstract “Foundations of the theory of signs,” published by Charles W. Morris in 1938, deals with the relations between semiotics and science, and those between semiosis and semiotics, among others. Compared with previous research regarding the aspects of semiotics being meta-science, the three dimensions of semiosis, semiotic as organon of the sciences, etc., this article does push forward the development of linguistics and semiotics since the late 1930s. However, its discussions on semiotics being meta-science, the nature and classification of signs, the three dimensions of semiosis, organism in the sign relations, universals and universality of signs, and thing-language are either not logically rigid or inadequate in content and scope. For a piece of work discussing the theoretical foundations of signs, it does not consider sign transformation, a universal and ubiquitous sign activity, which is not consistent with the keyword “foundations” in its title. A critical analysis of these problems involving the aspects mentioned above may not only enrich the visions of triadic sign relations, semiotics, and translation semiotics, but also inspire future semiotic studies and even other new research related to signs.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Chinese Semiotic Studies, 2019 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Literature and Literary Theory
Literature and Literary TheoryArts and Humanities