Where does Peirce talk about an "immediate representamen" (or an "immediate 
sign")?  I can't think of any use he would have for such a term.

Joe Ransdell


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Frances Kelly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Peirce Discussion Forum" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 9:17 PM
Subject: [peirce-l] Re: 1st image of triangle of boxes (MS799.2)


Frances to Ben and others...

In the decadic table or model, the ten classes of signs seem to deal
with immediate objects, and dynamic objects, and sparse selections of
immediate and dynamic and final interpretants. The decagon does not
seem to deal with immediate representamens whatsoever, except perhaps
indirectly or subsequently through immediate objects.

The first class of signs, posited as qualisigns and sinsigns and
legisigns, deals with the immediate objects of a representamen, and
probably not with the representamen or sign vehicle itself alone. My
guess is that immediate representamen are posited as potisigns and
actisigns and famsigns, but are removed from the decadic table or
model of semiosis, likely for some reason of expediency by way of
illustrating the correlation and interrelation of signs. The present
condensed table or model of semiotics as offered in its many forms
does seem to serve that basic purpose well enough.

The second class of signs, posited as icons and indexes and symbols,
deals with the dynamic objects of immediate interpretants, of which
immediate rhemes are merely one class of interpretant and indeed only
one class of immediate interpretant.

The third class of signs, posited as rhemes and dicents and arguments,
deals partly with those interpretants that are respectively immediate
and dynamic and final. They are only a partial selection, because they
are not all the interpretants that are offered in semiosis. They are
however trichotomic exemplars of their respected categories, in that
rhemes are the first of three immediate interpretants offered, and
dicents are the second of three dynamic interpretants offered, and
arguments are the third of three final interpretants offered. This
condensation actually yields a diagonal layout, which is unusual for
categorical trichotomies, which are usually horizontal. Nonetheless,
even this architectonic scaffolding is not categorically consistent
with the structured trichotomies of phenomena, in that there should be
only one immediate class, but two dynamic classes, yet three final
classes. The class members of such monadic firstness and dyadic
secondness and triadic thirdness would also each fall under there own
class holder, presumably of zeroness.

It is my suspicion that all the interpretants posited for semiosis are
not all of grammatics, the first of the three grand semiotic divisions
before critics and rhetorics; and grammatics which is also the sole
basis of the decagon. One thorn here for me then is whether all the
subsequent signs of critics and rhetorics are indeed only various
kinds of grammatic or other interpretants. Another thorn here for me
is whether semiotics can be complete at least to some degree, for say
nonhuman mechanisms or organisms or even for mature humans, if only
the grammatic division of signs is present as information, to the
exclusion of critics and grammatics in any particular situation of
semiosis. This of course implies that making signs to some extent, and
thus making the logic of signs to some extent, and thus making the
ideal sought seem real to some extent, is not limited only to mature
intelligent humans.

If this speculation of mine is correct, then just what role the
decadic table or model of signs is intended to fully play as a
degenerate condensation of logical semiosis becomes unclear to me, and
there surely must be an important role. Given what is now known of
Peirce, it would not be reasonable to hold the decagon as confused.



---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber [EMAIL PROTECTED]



-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.0/368 - Release Date: 6/16/2006




-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.0/368 - Release Date: 6/16/2006


---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber [email protected]

Reply via email to