Jon, List,
I like very much your supply of a mathematical approach to all of this! Though I am disable of understanding the formulas.
I understood, that the relation between the object and the interpretant is an induced one, mathematically a composed one, and ennotated or projected by the sign. I guess "object" is both the dynamical plus the immediate. If I look at both objects separately, I wonder if it is like this, I foresee I am completely wrong again, but I try anyway, guessing the following:
The Oi is a subset of the sign and of the object. Od and Oi are both subsets of O, completely make O, but do not overlap, are separate. Od and S are separate too. The Oi and the sign have a relation, and they, respectively the sign, which includes both relation partners (itself and its subset Oi) project or ennotate this relation on the Od-S-plane.
I wonder, is it so, that an ennotation is the same or a general of what otherwise is called "rational relation" in contrast to "natural relation"? In the case of being the same, "rational" suggests a mind. so in this case, ennotation can only be done by a piece of mind, e.g. by a sign, and from a relation between such a piece of mind and another thing?
Best,
Helmut
29. Juni 2020 um 19:45 Uhr
"Jon Awbrey" <jawb...@att.net>
wrote:
"Jon Awbrey" <jawb...@att.net>
wrote:
Cf: Sign Relations • Ennotation
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2020/06/29/sign-relations-%e2%80%a2-ennotation/
A third aspect of a sign's complete meaning concerns the reference its objects have to its interpretants, which has no
standard name in semiotics. It would be called an “induced relation” in graph theory or the result of “relational
composition” in relation theory. If an interpretant is recognized as a sign in its own right then its independent
reference to an object can be taken as belonging to another moment of denotation, but this neglects the mediational
character of the whole transaction in which this occurs. Denotation and connotation have to do with dyadic relations in
which the sign plays an active role but here we are dealing with a dyadic relation between objects and interpretants
mediated by the sign from an off-stage position, as it were.
As a relation between objects and interpretants mediated by a sign, this third aspect of meaning may be referred to as
the “ennotation” of a sign and the dyadic relation making up the “ennotative aspect” of a sign relation L may be notated
as Enn(L). Information about the ennotative aspect of meaning is obtained from L by taking its projection on the
object-interpretant plane. We may visualize this as the “shadow” L casts on the 2-dimensional space whose axes are the
object domain O and the interpretant domain I. The ennotative component of a sign relation L, alternatively written in
any of forms, proj_OI L, L_OI, proj_13 L, and L_13, is defined as follows.
• Enn(L) = proj_OI L = {(o, i) ∈ O × I : (o, s, i) ∈ L for some s ∈ S}.
As it happens, the sign relations L_A and L_B are fully symmetric
with respect to exchanging signs and interpretants, so all the data
of proj_OS L_A is echoed unchanged in proj_OI L_A and all the data
of proj_OS L_B is echoed unchanged in proj_OI L_B.
Tables 5a and 5b show the ennotative components of the sign relations
associated with the interpreters A and B, respectively. The rows
of each Table list the ordered pairs (o, i) in the corresponding
projections, Enn(L_A), Enn(L_B) ⊆ O × I.
Tables 5a and 5b. Ennotative Components Enn(L_A) and Enn(L_B)
https://inquiryintoinquiry.files.wordpress.com/2020/06/sign-relation-twin-tables-enn-la-enn-lb.png
Regards,
Jon
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu .
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by The PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2020/06/29/sign-relations-%e2%80%a2-ennotation/
A third aspect of a sign's complete meaning concerns the reference its objects have to its interpretants, which has no
standard name in semiotics. It would be called an “induced relation” in graph theory or the result of “relational
composition” in relation theory. If an interpretant is recognized as a sign in its own right then its independent
reference to an object can be taken as belonging to another moment of denotation, but this neglects the mediational
character of the whole transaction in which this occurs. Denotation and connotation have to do with dyadic relations in
which the sign plays an active role but here we are dealing with a dyadic relation between objects and interpretants
mediated by the sign from an off-stage position, as it were.
As a relation between objects and interpretants mediated by a sign, this third aspect of meaning may be referred to as
the “ennotation” of a sign and the dyadic relation making up the “ennotative aspect” of a sign relation L may be notated
as Enn(L). Information about the ennotative aspect of meaning is obtained from L by taking its projection on the
object-interpretant plane. We may visualize this as the “shadow” L casts on the 2-dimensional space whose axes are the
object domain O and the interpretant domain I. The ennotative component of a sign relation L, alternatively written in
any of forms, proj_OI L, L_OI, proj_13 L, and L_13, is defined as follows.
• Enn(L) = proj_OI L = {(o, i) ∈ O × I : (o, s, i) ∈ L for some s ∈ S}.
As it happens, the sign relations L_A and L_B are fully symmetric
with respect to exchanging signs and interpretants, so all the data
of proj_OS L_A is echoed unchanged in proj_OI L_A and all the data
of proj_OS L_B is echoed unchanged in proj_OI L_B.
Tables 5a and 5b show the ennotative components of the sign relations
associated with the interpreters A and B, respectively. The rows
of each Table list the ordered pairs (o, i) in the corresponding
projections, Enn(L_A), Enn(L_B) ⊆ O × I.
Tables 5a and 5b. Ennotative Components Enn(L_A) and Enn(L_B)
https://inquiryintoinquiry.files.wordpress.com/2020/06/sign-relation-twin-tables-enn-la-enn-lb.png
Regards,
Jon
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu .
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by The PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by The PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
