Gary R, one question for you too. You wrote,
“Can one say that the Dynamic Object determines the Immediate Object which
determines the Sign? That, at least, has been my understanding.”
This suggests to me that either (a) you have abandoned the idea that the
Immediate Object is a part of the Sign, or (b) you are assuming that a Sign can
be determined by a part of itself. Which is it?
Gary f.
} We read the world wrong and say that it deceives us. [Tagore] {
<http://gnusystems.ca/wp/> http://gnusystems.ca/wp/ }{ Turning Signs gateway
From: Gary Richmond <[email protected]>
Sent: 20-Mar-18 14:05
To: Peirce-L <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Three Interpretants
Jon, list,
Thanks for this very helpful analysis of the three interpretants of Peirce's
late semeiotic. My first impression is, from what I can grasp of it, that it
seems correct and complete, a succinct and subtle analysis. But I'll want to
study it further as there are some points which are still a bit unclear to me,
for example:
JA: The essential ingredient of the utterer is the Dynamic Object, which
determines the Sign; that of the interpreter is the Dynamic Interpretant, which
the Sign determines; and that of the Commens is the Sign itself, which welds
the utterer and interpreter into one Quasi-mind (cf. CP 4.551).
When you say that the Dynamic Object determines the Sign, what part does the
Immediate Object play in that determination? I am for now assuming that it is
the Form which the Sign will represent. Can one say that the Dynamic Object
determines the Immediate Object which determines the Sign? That, at least, has
been my understanding.
In any event, your analysis should allow semioticians interested in this aspect
of Peirce's late semiotic to get a handle on it sufficient to springboard into
further analysis. This is, of course, not to suggest that it may not need some
correction (or at least tweaking), but for me for now it makes more sense of
the three interpretants than anything else I've read in years. And, again, that
it does it succinctly is in my mind a definite virtue (esp. for the purposes of
study).
Best,
Gary
-----------------------------
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 .
