Rich, (01)
I have to be on the road in a little while,
so let me just post a link to a famous passage
where Peirce explains the relationship between
an agent of a semiotic process, what we usually
call an "interpreter", and the interpretant signs
in a sign relation: (02)
http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey/Papers/Information_%3D_Comprehension_%C3%83%E2%80%94_Extension#Selection_18 (03)
Later, (04)
Jon (05)
Rich Cooper wrote:
> Jon,
>
>
>
> Thanks, so you teach that the "interpretant" (which is a noun) is actually
> naming an "interpreter" agent? That contradicts intuition and seems odd.
>
>
>
> It seems odd specifically to name an active agent, performing the said
> interpretation, as a noun agent instead of as a performer of action verb
> agent, specifically the "interpreter" if said interpretant wishes to
> participate in the said discussion of naming the entire interpretation.
>
>
>
> That confuses me no end if Peirceans can't tie the theory to some commonly
> understood reality for me. Is there a more fruitful description that
> explains the language used and chosen for that representation?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Rich
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Rich Cooper
>
> EnglishLogicKernel.com
>
> Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
>
> 9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2 (06)
-- (07)
inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
mwb: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey
knol: http://knol.google.com/k/-/-/3fkwvf69kridz/1
oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey (08)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (09)
|