Helmut, List: HR: And the sign itself is a relation, so it may be called sign-sign-relation as well.
This is incorrect. The *sign *is a correlate, not a relation. It is the first (simplest) correlate of the genuine triadic relation of *representing *or (more generally) *mediating*. HR: Note, that Peirce called them "classes of signs", not of sign triads. Indeed, Peirce's taxonomies are for classifying *signs*, not for classifying *triads*, i.e., genuine triadic relations. In fact, Peirce's tenth trichotomy for classifying signs in 1906-8 is "according to the Triadic Relation of the Sign to the Dynamical Object and to its Normal Interpretant" (CP 8.344, EP 2:483, 1908). HR: So I also do not see the real difference between sign and sign triad. Again, the sign is a *correlate *of the triad, not the triad *itself*. Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt / twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 6:13 AM Helmut Raulien <[email protected]> wrote: > Jon, Edwina, List, > > I think, we always have to distinguish between categorial composition > (categorial parts of something), and categorial classification (categorial > kinds of something). There are e.g. two compositions: the sign triad > consists of sign, object, interpretant, and the sign relation triad > consists of the sign itself (aka the S-S-relation), the S-O-relation, and > the S-I- relation. However, I donot see a great difference between these > two compositions, neither between the sign itself and the > sign-sign-relation. This is so, because the object already is a relation > with the sign, as is the interpretant. When there is no sign to denote > something for object, there isn´t an object, just a not interpreted (so > there too isn´t an interpretant) something. And the sign itself is a > relation, so it may be called sign-sign-relation as well. > > Further compositions are the object consisting of two, and the > interpretant of three parts. Categorially, the `nesses of the parts of a > sign triad are: 1 ; 2.1. ; 2.2. ; 3.1. ; 3.2. ; 3.3. > > Now to classification: Although the sign as correlate is a 1ness in the > composition of the triad, it can be classified by the categories in quali-, > sin-, and legisign. The object and the interpretant aka the > object-sign-relation and the interpretant-sign-relation too can be > classified in the three categories. Classes of compositions of three of one > of each of these three blocks can be had not in 27, but only in 10 ways to > have 10 classes of signs. Note, that Peirce called them "classes of signs", > not of sign triads. So I also donot see the real difference between sign > and sign triad. This difference is only due to what you are talking about: > The correlates of the sign triad in the first place, there the sign is one > of three correlates. Or in the second place, the correlates of the sign > again: Sign, object, interpretant. This is funny, that A consists of A, B, > and C., so something consists of itself and other things. But funny doesn´t > mean impossible: In a functional (or relational) composition it is > possible, it is a functional re-entry-thing. And it is a functional, not a > spatial composition like a gear box, because it is all about relations, not > of material things. So the DO too can be part of the sign relation, > although it may be far away. In a functional (or relational) composition > things are possible, that would not be possible in a spatial composition. > > Kind regards > > Helmut >
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ARISBE: THE PEIRCE GATEWAY is now at https://cspeirce.com and, just as well, at https://www.cspeirce.com . It'll take a while to repair / update all the links! ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the body. More at https://list.iu.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
