Pub Date : 2024-06-03DOI: 10.1515/cogsem-2024-2006
Gunnar Sandin
This reflection on Göran Sonesson’s writings and theoretical engagement in art is also a survey of a set of semiotic concepts related to this area. As a semiotician Sonesson wrote about varying sub-genres like fine art, photography, film and architecture. The reflection is also a personal recollection – as a colleague, friend and participant in the Lund circle of semiotics – of ideas and discussions highlighting the relation between semiotics, art theory and artistic practice. This reflection captures a couple of notions of importance in Sonesson’s contributions to semiotic theory relating to pictoriality, art and culture, such as “secondary iconicity”, “projected Ego, Alter and Alius”, “sedimentation of impressions”, “picture subject and picture object”, etc. The reflection ends in stating the importance of the specifically Lifeworld-based semiotic contribution by Sonesson to art theory, a contribution perhaps yet to be fully appreciated, and how this contribution also corresponds with how practicing artists reach out to, but also goes beyond, the art world itself.
{"title":"Art, pictoriality and semiotics – a reflection on Göran Sonesson’s contribution to art theory","authors":"Gunnar Sandin","doi":"10.1515/cogsem-2024-2006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2024-2006","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This reflection on Göran Sonesson’s writings and theoretical engagement in art is also a survey of a set of semiotic concepts related to this area. As a semiotician Sonesson wrote about varying sub-genres like fine art, photography, film and architecture. The reflection is also a personal recollection – as a colleague, friend and participant in the Lund circle of semiotics – of ideas and discussions highlighting the relation between semiotics, art theory and artistic practice. This reflection captures a couple of notions of importance in Sonesson’s contributions to semiotic theory relating to pictoriality, art and culture, such as “secondary iconicity”, “projected Ego, Alter and Alius”, “sedimentation of impressions”, “picture subject and picture object”, etc. The reflection ends in stating the importance of the specifically Lifeworld-based semiotic contribution by Sonesson to art theory, a contribution perhaps yet to be fully appreciated, and how this contribution also corresponds with how practicing artists reach out to, but also goes beyond, the art world itself.","PeriodicalId":52385,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Semiotics","volume":"1 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141228889","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-24DOI: 10.1515/cogsem-2024-2009
Sara M. Lenninger
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.
{"title":"Psychologism in the study of children’s semiotic development","authors":"Sara M. Lenninger","doi":"10.1515/cogsem-2024-2009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2024-2009","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 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.","PeriodicalId":52385,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Semiotics","volume":"5 21","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141099340","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-21DOI: 10.1515/cogsem-2024-2005
John M. Kennedy, Selene Carboni
Sighted children drawing an apple with a pin through it show the hidden parts of the pin. That is, not only is the pin shown running towards the apple and out the other side, it is also shown inside the apple, without a single break, and so the sketch depicts the occluded parts of the pin. Several investigators have offered theories of the observation. We report here on tangible raised-line drawings by young blind people who are novices at drawing. They also include occluded segments of the pin. To explain the drawings we use the John Willats region theory. In this account, enclosed regions represent the volumes of 3D objects. According to region theory, what is in the interior of an object should be shown in the drawing even if it cannot be seen or touched. As a result, since occluded parts of the pin are inside the apple, blind children, like sighted children, include them in their drawings. In region theory, for both the blind and the sighted, long lines on a 2D pictorial surface represent elongated objects in the scene and regions on the surface represent 3D objects and their contents. The basis of region theory may be that sensory information for pins and lines has high-frequency components, and for apples and regions has lower-frequency components.
{"title":"Apple-and-pin drawings by blind novices show occluded features: region theory","authors":"John M. Kennedy, Selene Carboni","doi":"10.1515/cogsem-2024-2005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2024-2005","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Sighted children drawing an apple with a pin through it show the hidden parts of the pin. That is, not only is the pin shown running towards the apple and out the other side, it is also shown inside the apple, without a single break, and so the sketch depicts the occluded parts of the pin. Several investigators have offered theories of the observation. We report here on tangible raised-line drawings by young blind people who are novices at drawing. They also include occluded segments of the pin. To explain the drawings we use the John Willats region theory. In this account, enclosed regions represent the volumes of 3D objects. According to region theory, what is in the interior of an object should be shown in the drawing even if it cannot be seen or touched. As a result, since occluded parts of the pin are inside the apple, blind children, like sighted children, include them in their drawings. In region theory, for both the blind and the sighted, long lines on a 2D pictorial surface represent elongated objects in the scene and regions on the surface represent 3D objects and their contents. The basis of region theory may be that sensory information for pins and lines has high-frequency components, and for apples and regions has lower-frequency components.","PeriodicalId":52385,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Semiotics","volume":"116 14","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141115755","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-21DOI: 10.1515/cogsem-2024-2003
Hongbing Yu
Sonesson’s vision of the diversity of meaning-generation coincides well with the purview of the cultural semiotics of Jingshen, in which semiotic inquiry is envisioned to improve mental capacity, the expansion of mental/cognitive space, and ultimately the liberation of human thinking. When embracing new epistemologies for cognitive semiotics, semiotic inquiry can work well as a form of art of thinking that has the potential to maintain “cognitive homeostasis”, the tendency towards a relatively stable equilibrium that can be maintained in the holistic flux of mind, vitality, and creativity. A plausible path to this equilibrium is through a balance between the left and right hemispheres, between analytical thinking and synthetic thinking. In this sense, what we are facing is essentially a problem of “ecology of cognition” or “ecological cognition”, that is, viewing cognition from an ecological perspective or considering cognition as a form of ecological activity. The focus of cognitive semiotics nowadays must transcend not only words or other external symbols, but even the traditional sense of “humanity” needs to be reconsidered.
{"title":"The cultural semiotics of Jingshen and cognitive homeostasis","authors":"Hongbing Yu","doi":"10.1515/cogsem-2024-2003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2024-2003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Sonesson’s vision of the diversity of meaning-generation coincides well with the purview of the cultural semiotics of Jingshen, in which semiotic inquiry is envisioned to improve mental capacity, the expansion of mental/cognitive space, and ultimately the liberation of human thinking. When embracing new epistemologies for cognitive semiotics, semiotic inquiry can work well as a form of art of thinking that has the potential to maintain “cognitive homeostasis”, the tendency towards a relatively stable equilibrium that can be maintained in the holistic flux of mind, vitality, and creativity. A plausible path to this equilibrium is through a balance between the left and right hemispheres, between analytical thinking and synthetic thinking. In this sense, what we are facing is essentially a problem of “ecology of cognition” or “ecological cognition”, that is, viewing cognition from an ecological perspective or considering cognition as a form of ecological activity. The focus of cognitive semiotics nowadays must transcend not only words or other external symbols, but even the traditional sense of “humanity” needs to be reconsidered.","PeriodicalId":52385,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Semiotics","volume":"8 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141117164","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-20DOI: 10.1515/cogsem-2024-2008
A. Rédei
This essay begins with a brief account of the French linguistic structuralism and very briefly some aspects of the post-structuralist critique of it, here represented by Lacan and, Deleuze, and Guattari as a response to it. Against this backdrop, the purpose of the essay is to show a critique of structuralism that came earlier than the post-structuralist one, namely that of the Russian philosopher of the dialogic speech and literary scholar Mikhail Bakhtin in the 1920s. The concept of the dialogical word has had a major influence in cultural semiotics, literary – and film studies and existential psychotherapy. A second purpose of this essay is to briefly show in what way the ethics of the dialogical word is important in the latter, in existential psychotherapeutic work. Translations from Swedish and French are mine.
{"title":"Dialogue and the “miracle of language”: the early and late Bakhtin","authors":"A. Rédei","doi":"10.1515/cogsem-2024-2008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2024-2008","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This essay begins with a brief account of the French linguistic structuralism and very briefly some aspects of the post-structuralist critique of it, here represented by Lacan and, Deleuze, and Guattari as a response to it. Against this backdrop, the purpose of the essay is to show a critique of structuralism that came earlier than the post-structuralist one, namely that of the Russian philosopher of the dialogic speech and literary scholar Mikhail Bakhtin in the 1920s. The concept of the dialogical word has had a major influence in cultural semiotics, literary – and film studies and existential psychotherapy. A second purpose of this essay is to briefly show in what way the ethics of the dialogical word is important in the latter, in existential psychotherapeutic work. Translations from Swedish and French are mine.","PeriodicalId":52385,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Semiotics","volume":"49 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140961550","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-20DOI: 10.1515/cogsem-2024-2010
Jamin Pelkey
Alteroception is the virtual experience of another person’s bodily movement centered in the perspective of the other person. In face-to-face interactions, human beings tend to assume a special mode of alteroception by mutually but tacitly recognizing that ‘your right is on my left and your left is on my right’. Researchers of neonatal cognition and early childhood development describe this mode of alteroception as “reverse” or “inverted”. Inverse alteroception goes beyond mirror-image mimesis to chiastic (crisscrossing) mimesis in acts of intersubjective sense-making; but the cognitive and cultural affordances of this inverse reciprocal ability are largely untreated in the literature. I argue that this unique aspect of human phenomenology deserves closer attention since it enables a broader palette of diagrammatic contrasts that extend far beyond face-to-face interaction. In this paper, I apply insights from Peircean and Greimasian semiotics to argue that salient features of the human lifeworld originate from imaginative mappings of inverse alteroception onto other domains. From diagrams of gesture space and contemporary visual design to the structures of the Proscenium stage, from historic heraldry to Aristotle’s logical square of oppositions and beyond, many visual/spatial designs and their reciprocal interaction with human experience are linked to this ability – an ability that owes its origins, in turn, to the evolution of upright posture.
{"title":"The semiotic phenomenology of inverse alteroception","authors":"Jamin Pelkey","doi":"10.1515/cogsem-2024-2010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2024-2010","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Alteroception is the virtual experience of another person’s bodily movement centered in the perspective of the other person. In face-to-face interactions, human beings tend to assume a special mode of alteroception by mutually but tacitly recognizing that ‘your right is on my left and your left is on my right’. Researchers of neonatal cognition and early childhood development describe this mode of alteroception as “reverse” or “inverted”. Inverse alteroception goes beyond mirror-image mimesis to chiastic (crisscrossing) mimesis in acts of intersubjective sense-making; but the cognitive and cultural affordances of this inverse reciprocal ability are largely untreated in the literature. I argue that this unique aspect of human phenomenology deserves closer attention since it enables a broader palette of diagrammatic contrasts that extend far beyond face-to-face interaction. In this paper, I apply insights from Peircean and Greimasian semiotics to argue that salient features of the human lifeworld originate from imaginative mappings of inverse alteroception onto other domains. From diagrams of gesture space and contemporary visual design to the structures of the Proscenium stage, from historic heraldry to Aristotle’s logical square of oppositions and beyond, many visual/spatial designs and their reciprocal interaction with human experience are linked to this ability – an ability that owes its origins, in turn, to the evolution of upright posture.","PeriodicalId":52385,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Semiotics","volume":"54 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140961668","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-01DOI: 10.1515/cogsem-2024-2001
Donna E. West
This inquiry demonstrates Scotus’ and Peirce’s shift from representing haecceities as momentary objects in Secondness (depending heavily upon sensation), to the recognition that haecceities force their way into the awareness as mental objects. As such, both conclude that mental objects to be haecceities. Nonetheless, it is Peirce who more clearly determines that haecceities materialize as apparitions (cognitions) – incorporating physically absent places, objects, and moments. Peirce’s continuum, and his commitment to realism are responsible for considering apparitions to be haecceities. Both Peirce and Scotus contend that although haecceities are individual, they, nevertheless should be folded into the continuum. In line with the Scholastic record, Peirce defines haecceity as “thisness,” which encompasses the riveting effect of Objects (including places) – proximate to observers (inward and outward) space and/or time. Haecceities allow for intrusion of present objects and places upon interpreters’ consciousness – noticing properties of objects with some degree of awareness. This beckoning effect of objects in single, intense experiences accounts for selection of certain objects over others in the attentional stream. As such, context illuminates the core meaning within the sign (synchronic, diachronic) – demonstrating the need for Peirce’s continuum. But, Peirce’s continuum does not stop at present objects (mental, physical); it proposes the need for “concretion,” rather than Scotus’ adherence to “contraction.” In other words, the “all cannot be in the one” (as Scotus claims) if possible objects are not incorporated into the continuum. In short, Peirce’s “concretion” supplies a fuller account of object meaning, given that it integrates future objects and future meanings (would-bes).
{"title":"Facing objects of haecceity: advantages of Peirce’s categories","authors":"Donna E. West","doi":"10.1515/cogsem-2024-2001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2024-2001","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This inquiry demonstrates Scotus’ and Peirce’s shift from representing haecceities as momentary objects in Secondness (depending heavily upon sensation), to the recognition that haecceities force their way into the awareness as mental objects. As such, both conclude that mental objects to be haecceities. Nonetheless, it is Peirce who more clearly determines that haecceities materialize as apparitions (cognitions) – incorporating physically absent places, objects, and moments. Peirce’s continuum, and his commitment to realism are responsible for considering apparitions to be haecceities. Both Peirce and Scotus contend that although haecceities are individual, they, nevertheless should be folded into the continuum. In line with the Scholastic record, Peirce defines haecceity as “thisness,” which encompasses the riveting effect of Objects (including places) – proximate to observers (inward and outward) space and/or time. Haecceities allow for intrusion of present objects and places upon interpreters’ consciousness – noticing properties of objects with some degree of awareness. This beckoning effect of objects in single, intense experiences accounts for selection of certain objects over others in the attentional stream. As such, context illuminates the core meaning within the sign (synchronic, diachronic) – demonstrating the need for Peirce’s continuum. But, Peirce’s continuum does not stop at present objects (mental, physical); it proposes the need for “concretion,” rather than Scotus’ adherence to “contraction.” In other words, the “all cannot be in the one” (as Scotus claims) if possible objects are not incorporated into the continuum. In short, Peirce’s “concretion” supplies a fuller account of object meaning, given that it integrates future objects and future meanings (would-bes).","PeriodicalId":52385,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Semiotics","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141033631","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-05DOI: 10.1515/cogsem-2023-2009
Ian Verstegen
Abstract The publication of Wolfgang Wildgen’s Morphogenesis of Symbolic Forms: Meaning in Music, Art, Religion and Language is an opportune moment to reflect on the author’s extensive contributions to a dynamic semiotics, founded on catastrophe theory. Bringing together a number of investigations on a number of Cassirer-like “symbolic forms” like music, visual art, myth/religion and language, Wildgen provides an overarching system to weigh the semiotic resources of each of these bodies of knowledge as they contribute to the semiogenesis of the species. By comparing sensorial capacities, Wildgen helps us understand how and when a symbolic form can grow at all. Chapters devoted to each form explore their unique way of organizing knowledge. Using catastrophe primitives, Wildgen both bonds symbolic forms together while at the same time preserving Cassirer’s Enlightenment interest in evolution and the way in which new semiotic capacities grow and others can be discarded. The review ends with a consideration of the humanist’s misunderstanding of mathematical and natural science insights like Wildgen’s and explains how its rich results are to be utilized.
{"title":"Morphogenesis of symbolic forms: a synthesizing formulation","authors":"Ian Verstegen","doi":"10.1515/cogsem-2023-2009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2023-2009","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The publication of Wolfgang Wildgen’s Morphogenesis of Symbolic Forms: Meaning in Music, Art, Religion and Language is an opportune moment to reflect on the author’s extensive contributions to a dynamic semiotics, founded on catastrophe theory. Bringing together a number of investigations on a number of Cassirer-like “symbolic forms” like music, visual art, myth/religion and language, Wildgen provides an overarching system to weigh the semiotic resources of each of these bodies of knowledge as they contribute to the semiogenesis of the species. By comparing sensorial capacities, Wildgen helps us understand how and when a symbolic form can grow at all. Chapters devoted to each form explore their unique way of organizing knowledge. Using catastrophe primitives, Wildgen both bonds symbolic forms together while at the same time preserving Cassirer’s Enlightenment interest in evolution and the way in which new semiotic capacities grow and others can be discarded. The review ends with a consideration of the humanist’s misunderstanding of mathematical and natural science insights like Wildgen’s and explains how its rich results are to be utilized.","PeriodicalId":52385,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Semiotics","volume":"16 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138601290","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-01DOI: 10.1515/cogsem-2023-2008
Henrique T. D. Perissinotto, João Queiroz
Abstract Metacognition relies on representations, which are commonly viewed as internal knowledge structures. We explore the idea that external embodied diagrams, rather than monomodal symbolic-based entities, can provide an accurate description of metacognition in choreographic dance. When marking, dancers use their bodies to represent properties, dynamics, or structures of dance phrases. Marking-for-self occurs when a dancer marks the dance in their own unique manner, potentially allowing for real-time reflection through the manipulation of external signs. These manipulations can be considered diagrammatic semiosis, as diagrams signify shared relational parts analogous to the parts of their objects. Based on Peirce’s semiotics, we argue that semiosis is crucial for metacognition. This paper is structured to first review marking and marking-for-self, followed by an overview of metacognition. We then define marking-for-self as a metacognitive phenomenon and introduce Peirce’s concept of semiosis and diagrams. Finally, we describe marking as a diagrammatic sign and explain how marking-for-self is an embodied metacognitive process achieved through the manipulation of diagrammatic structures.
{"title":"Metacognition and diagrams in marking-for-self","authors":"Henrique T. D. Perissinotto, João Queiroz","doi":"10.1515/cogsem-2023-2008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2023-2008","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Metacognition relies on representations, which are commonly viewed as internal knowledge structures. We explore the idea that external embodied diagrams, rather than monomodal symbolic-based entities, can provide an accurate description of metacognition in choreographic dance. When marking, dancers use their bodies to represent properties, dynamics, or structures of dance phrases. Marking-for-self occurs when a dancer marks the dance in their own unique manner, potentially allowing for real-time reflection through the manipulation of external signs. These manipulations can be considered diagrammatic semiosis, as diagrams signify shared relational parts analogous to the parts of their objects. Based on Peirce’s semiotics, we argue that semiosis is crucial for metacognition. This paper is structured to first review marking and marking-for-self, followed by an overview of metacognition. We then define marking-for-self as a metacognitive phenomenon and introduce Peirce’s concept of semiosis and diagrams. Finally, we describe marking as a diagrammatic sign and explain how marking-for-self is an embodied metacognitive process achieved through the manipulation of diagrammatic structures.","PeriodicalId":52385,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Semiotics","volume":"63 1","pages":"145 - 168"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139302092","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-01DOI: 10.1515/cogsem-2023-2007
F. Stjernfelt, Markus Pantsar
Abstract In this paper, we connect two research directions concerning numeral symbol systems and their epistemological significance. The first direction concerns the cognitive processes involved in acquiring and applying different numeral symbols, e.g. the Indo-Arabic or Roman numeral systems. The second direction is a semiotic one, with focus on Charles Peirce’s Philosophy of Notation. Peirce’s work on logical formalism is well known, but he also wrote extensively on numeral systems. Here we take Peirce’s considerations on central notions like iconicity and simplicity and examine their relevance for comparing different numeral symbol systems. We argue that simplicity and iconicity, for example, cannot be understood as single notions. Instead, they should be connected to different aims of numeral symbols that different systems fulfill to different degrees. Consequently, we focus on the kind of trade-offs that different symbol systems imply in acquiring and applying numeral symbol systems.
{"title":"Peirce’s philosophy of notations and the trade-offs in comparing numeral symbol systems","authors":"F. Stjernfelt, Markus Pantsar","doi":"10.1515/cogsem-2023-2007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2023-2007","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this paper, we connect two research directions concerning numeral symbol systems and their epistemological significance. The first direction concerns the cognitive processes involved in acquiring and applying different numeral symbols, e.g. the Indo-Arabic or Roman numeral systems. The second direction is a semiotic one, with focus on Charles Peirce’s Philosophy of Notation. Peirce’s work on logical formalism is well known, but he also wrote extensively on numeral systems. Here we take Peirce’s considerations on central notions like iconicity and simplicity and examine their relevance for comparing different numeral symbol systems. We argue that simplicity and iconicity, for example, cannot be understood as single notions. Instead, they should be connected to different aims of numeral symbols that different systems fulfill to different degrees. Consequently, we focus on the kind of trade-offs that different symbol systems imply in acquiring and applying numeral symbol systems.","PeriodicalId":52385,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Semiotics","volume":"38 1","pages":"121 - 144"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139296186","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：