RSSWhy the notion of a monostratal semiotic system is nonsensical
May 20
By definition, a semiotic system has at least two levels of symbolic abstraction.
By definition, a symbol is something that means something other than itself.
Here is what I take to be the logical error.
The claim is that because content is paradigmatic and expression is syntagmatic,
there is only one stratum (& by this logic there is only one axis).
This is like saying
all my squares are blue and all my triangles are red,
therefore there is only one shape (and only one colour).
If content conflates with paradigm and expression conflates with syntagm, then:
content/paradigm is realised by expression/syntagm.
This conflates
content is realised by expression
and
paradigm is realised by syntagm.
There are still 2 strata and 2 axes in this conflation.
eldon
May 21, 2010 @ 14:15:10
i have not heard this claim…
where has it been made and by what mandate?
if on the list, i admit to not having read it properly of late.
also, i did not know that
content is paradigmatic and
expression syntagmatic.
i spose this could be the case, but now that it is brought to my attention, i do not see the logic of monstratiality anyway.
not at all.
a cursory reading of birminghamian types will dispel this too.
e.g. sinclair.
penelope panjandrum
May 24, 2010 @ 10:48:49
We’ve been here before.
Like, the map is not the territory.
… depends from where you look at it.
If like me, you are ‘into’ maps, then my map IS my territory.
Oh its lovely greens and browns and shades of blue, the representation of highs and lows… but wait… ditch that word ‘representation’… the mirror of course shows me the reality of my haggard visage, no more, no less.
Indeed I am IN the map, I am OF the map, I AM the map dammit.
All you others just follow my lead.
eldon
May 27, 2010 @ 11:44:15
i do not think wikipedia is that bad.
it is much better than any other, ahem, encyclopaedia i have come across.
it is a good starting place for many researches….