Dear Sung, lists -
Interesting proposal, might be right.
Best
F
Den 13/09/2014 kl. 20.46 skrev Sungchul Ji
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
:
(For undistorted Table 1, see the attached.)
Frederik wrote:
" . . . all of science, no exception, is conducted IN signs. (091314-1)
But this does not imply that all those sciences are ABOUT
signs."
It seems to be that this statement may be derived logically from Peirce's
classification of signs into 9 types (see Table 1 below) and 10 classes,
which entails the sign having two complementary aspects - the formal (also
called phenomenological or syntactic) and the material (also called
ontological or semantic). For convenience, I referred to the 9 types of
signs as "elementary signs" and 10 classes of signs as "composite signs"
in formulating the "quark model of Peircean signs" in [1].
________________________________________________________________________
Table 1. Peirce's classification of signs into 9 types (here called
"elementary signs'). An elementary sign can be denoted as S_x,y,
where x and y vary from 1 to 3 as shown below.
_______________________________________________________________
MATERIAL (y)
________________________________________
FORMAL (x) 1ns 2ns 3ns
________________________________________________________________
1ns (Representamen) qualisign sinsign legisign
S11 S12 S13
________________________________________________________________
2ns (Object) icon index symbol
S21 S21 S23
________________________________________________________________
3ns (Interpretant) rheme dicisign argument
S31 S32 S33
________________________________________________________________
Out of these 9 elementary signs , Peirce generated 10 composite signs,
each produced by combining 3 elementary signs chosen and arranged in such
a manner that the following two conditions are met:
(i) The order of the first index, x, must be 3, 2 and 1, resulting in the
composite sign, S3,i-S2,j-S1,k, and
(ii) the order of the second index, y, in the composite sign, denoted as
i, j and k, must obey the rule that i cannot be larger than j which in
turn cannot be larger than k, which was referred to as the Peircean
selection rule [1].
The essence of these rules is that, although the order of the first
indexes of the three elementary signs constituting a composite sign is
fixed as 3ns, 2ns and 1ns, the order of the second indexes is not so
rigidly fixed so that one category can be represented more than once (as
in S31-S21-S12, called "rhematic iconic sinsgin", an individual diagram)
or not at all (as in S32-S22-S12, " dicisign indexical sinsign", pointer
position in a meter).
This is why I have been claiming that
"All signs are triadic formally but can be (091314-2)
less that triadic materially."
which to me is synonymous with (091314-1).
With all the best.
Sung
-----------------------------
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 the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
