Psychologism in the study of children’s semiotic development

Abstract

This essay discusses the notion of ‘semiotic development in child development’ and highlights potential concerns for ‘psychologism’ when semiotics turns into cognitive semiotics. The notion of ‘semiotic development in child development’ indicates a transdisciplinary approach involving both semiotics, the general study of meaning and signs, and child psychology. This, however, invites the criticism of committing the fallacy of psychologism. Piaget was aware of this dilemma when developing his theory of the semiotic function as a united capacity in children’s cognitive development. Sonesson’s proposal of a general definition of signs in meaning-making is suggested to, at some points, meet the dilemma with psychologism in studies of children’s semiotic development. Starting from a phenomenological point of view in semiotics and integrating Piaget’s theory on cognitive development and meaning-making meet the study of subjectivity in intersubjectivity. On the one hand, the sign as a theoretical object is not reducible to any given psychological process or processes; on the other hand, sign meaning can only exist if there are beings (consciousnesses) capable of grasping and using signs.