On 7/17/2012 10:34 AM, Gary Berg-Cross wrote:
> One small connection I would note to this discussion is that you could
> use Ogden & Richard's triangle to meaning/semantic to relate what
> aspect is changing (01)
I agree that it's important to distinguish which of the three points
of the triangle is changing in any particular case. To use Peirce's
terms: (02)
1. Sign: the observable mark (in computer terms, some string). (03)
2. Interpretant: How that mark is interpreted. This could be
called the concept, but as Peirce emphasized the interpretant
of a sign is always another sign. (04)
3. Referent: What the sign refers to. (05)
By the way, the three vertices of the meaning triangle were noted
by Aristotle and developed in detail by the medieval Scholastics.
They had two sets of terms for the three vertices, which are
still used today: (06)
signum, significatio, suppositio (sign, signification, supposition) (07)
signum, conceptus, objectus (sign, concept, object). (08)
Peirce elaborated this triad in great detail. Ogden & Richards deserve
a citation for actually drawing the triangle, but one of Ogden's mentors
was Lady Victoria Welby, who had carried on a lengthy correspondence
with Peirce. (09)
I'm sure that she was responsible for emphasizing the three points --
especially since O & R included some of Peirce's letters to Lady Welby
in the appendix of their book. (010)
By the way, Wittgenstein didn't have a high regard for O & R's book.
He told Frank Ramsey that the appendix by Peirce was the best part. (011)
John (012)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (013)
|