Dear Frederik, I am glad you think so.
With all the best. Sung > 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 .
