I have a hard time putting abstract concepts such as "temperature" in the semiotic triangle. What would be the referent? Is it the thermometer? The air/water where the temperature is measured? Or is it the piece of paper where I write down "10°C"?
4
-
The semiotic triangle is pretty much dead. I would not give it too much thought.– user14511Commented Nov 25, 2022 at 10:02
-
The concept of temperature.– Mauro ALLEGRANZACommented Nov 25, 2022 at 10:31
-
Obviously not the paper...– Mauro ALLEGRANZACommented Nov 25, 2022 at 11:22
-
But also a piece of paper can instantiate an abstract concept: see money.– Mauro ALLEGRANZACommented Nov 25, 2022 at 11:23
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
Maybe this version of the triangle makes it clearer.
The referent would be a set of external phenomena. There might be a visible colour, & there will be a radiation spectrum. Affects on mercury or dyed alcohol in a thermometer, brought into equilibrium, will happen.
Symbols are abstractions from that. A reading. A smith might take a category, 'cherry red'. A cook might say 'low boil', or 'soft ball' when caramelising sugar. A physicist might work out average kinetic energy.
The idea, the internal representation, is the bundle of experiences that give internal personal context to the symbol, and to the observations. If the referent is what is pointed at, the symbol is a pointing finger, the idea is what happens when you recognise what is being pointed at (set within a context of the language game of pointing, say).
The symbol relates to the referent through things like calibration methods, scales. The internal representation relates to the symbol, for instance 'safe to eat'. The internal representation relates to the referent, as direct sensory experience eg 'delicious' that can be pointed at but not truly communicated.
So experience is mediated by representation, representation is mediated by experience. And the relation between ideas and symbols allows inferences.
Is this model 'dead'? I would say it's too simple to say that about. It's just a framework to begin looking at sign-use. It can be traced back to Aristotle, related to Wittgenstein's Picture Theory. Specific models of semiotics, and stances on realism vs nominalism in regard to universals, must come after laying out a framework of sign-use.
answered Nov 25, 2022 at 11:49
