皮尔斯对图像的两种方法:低象似性和半象性

T. Jappy
{"title":"皮尔斯对图像的两种方法:低象似性和半象性","authors":"T. Jappy","doi":"10.21789/24223158.1433","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over a period of roughly forty years Peirce’s conception of signs underwent profound modifications. He defined a single division or trichotomy of signs from 1867 to, approximately, mid-1903, a three-division sign-system late in 1903, and in 1908 a pair of six- and ten-division typologies. Of these, the 1903 system with its universally-known icon-index-symbol division is the one most employed in the analysis of verbal and pictorial signs. Within this division, the icon constitutes the sign’s mode of representation, which Peirce, on the basis of the phenomenological framework within which signhood was based in 1903, further analyzed the icon into three distinct modes of representation, the hypoicons. However, in 1908 his conception of sign-action developed into a completely different universe-based, six-stage processual system—semiosis—from which the icon-index-symbol division was absent. The paper therefore seeks to illustrate, through an analysis of examples of metaphor and allegory, the interest for the discussion of certain types of pictorial representations, of the theory of iconicity. Since this theory has no means of tracing the sign to it origin, or source, namely the intention which determined it to existence, the paper also seeks to illustrate the later, processual conception of signs, since this, too, has bearing on the interpretation of pictorial representation. This will, of necessity, require a relatively lengthy review of the stages in the development of the later theory.","PeriodicalId":33170,"journal":{"name":"La Tadeo DeArte","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dos aproximaciones peirceanas a la imagen: hipoiconicidad y semiosis\",\"authors\":\"T. Jappy\",\"doi\":\"10.21789/24223158.1433\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Over a period of roughly forty years Peirce’s conception of signs underwent profound modifications. He defined a single division or trichotomy of signs from 1867 to, approximately, mid-1903, a three-division sign-system late in 1903, and in 1908 a pair of six- and ten-division typologies. Of these, the 1903 system with its universally-known icon-index-symbol division is the one most employed in the analysis of verbal and pictorial signs. Within this division, the icon constitutes the sign’s mode of representation, which Peirce, on the basis of the phenomenological framework within which signhood was based in 1903, further analyzed the icon into three distinct modes of representation, the hypoicons. However, in 1908 his conception of sign-action developed into a completely different universe-based, six-stage processual system—semiosis—from which the icon-index-symbol division was absent. The paper therefore seeks to illustrate, through an analysis of examples of metaphor and allegory, the interest for the discussion of certain types of pictorial representations, of the theory of iconicity. Since this theory has no means of tracing the sign to it origin, or source, namely the intention which determined it to existence, the paper also seeks to illustrate the later, processual conception of signs, since this, too, has bearing on the interpretation of pictorial representation. This will, of necessity, require a relatively lengthy review of the stages in the development of the later theory.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33170,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"La Tadeo DeArte\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-11-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"La Tadeo DeArte\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21789/24223158.1433\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"La Tadeo DeArte","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21789/24223158.1433","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在大约四十年的时间里,皮尔斯对符号的概念发生了深刻的变化。从1867年到大约2003年年中,他定义了符号的单分法或三分法,1903年末定义了三分法符号系统,1908年定义了一对六分法和十分法符号类型。其中,1903年的系统及其众所周知的图标索引符号划分是最常用于语言和图形符号分析的系统。在这种划分中,图标构成了符号的表现模式,皮尔斯在1903年符号形成的现象学框架的基础上,进一步将图标分析为三种不同的表现模式——次图标。然而,在1908年,他的符号动作概念发展成了一个完全不同的基于宇宙的六阶段过程系统——符号系统——从中没有图标索引符号划分。因此,本文试图通过分析隐喻和寓言的例子来说明象似性理论对某些类型的图像表征的讨论的兴趣。由于这一理论无法追溯符号的起源或来源,即决定其存在的意图,因此本文还试图说明符号的后期过程概念,因为这也与图像表征的解释有关。这必然需要对后期理论的发展阶段进行相对漫长的回顾。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Dos aproximaciones peirceanas a la imagen: hipoiconicidad y semiosis
Over a period of roughly forty years Peirce’s conception of signs underwent profound modifications. He defined a single division or trichotomy of signs from 1867 to, approximately, mid-1903, a three-division sign-system late in 1903, and in 1908 a pair of six- and ten-division typologies. Of these, the 1903 system with its universally-known icon-index-symbol division is the one most employed in the analysis of verbal and pictorial signs. Within this division, the icon constitutes the sign’s mode of representation, which Peirce, on the basis of the phenomenological framework within which signhood was based in 1903, further analyzed the icon into three distinct modes of representation, the hypoicons. However, in 1908 his conception of sign-action developed into a completely different universe-based, six-stage processual system—semiosis—from which the icon-index-symbol division was absent. The paper therefore seeks to illustrate, through an analysis of examples of metaphor and allegory, the interest for the discussion of certain types of pictorial representations, of the theory of iconicity. Since this theory has no means of tracing the sign to it origin, or source, namely the intention which determined it to existence, the paper also seeks to illustrate the later, processual conception of signs, since this, too, has bearing on the interpretation of pictorial representation. This will, of necessity, require a relatively lengthy review of the stages in the development of the later theory.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
El tamaño de las operaciones de diseño en arquitectura y pintura Obsolescencia y arte: el lienzo y el TRC Diseño-arte-ciencia: perspectivas transdisciplinares en ámbitos de la formación doctoral Calidad de vida en barrios urbanos en Jeddah, Arabia Saudita La conservación de la Llaqta Inca de Pisaq (Cusco, Perú), desde la geotecnia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1