Peirce's Theory Of Sign Theory

978 Words4 Pages
. A signifier is described to be an apparent shape which the sign holds and the signifier is the notion which it refers to. In his theory of signs, he states that the relation of an object and its given label are not a connection of a linguistic sign, but the tie is between a notion which is the signified and its sound sequence; signifier. For better understanding, a signifier is the psychological mark that the sound leaves and the impression it has on our senses. It is how we think of something in our heads. It makes up the whole sign together with the signified which is the sound that refers to the concept. If the signifier is how we think about a thing, then the signified is what we think of when we think (Semiotics for Beginners, n.d.)…show more content…
On the contrary to Saussure 's dyadic theory, he postulated a triadic model. Pierce’s model introduces three parts of the model. These are; the ‘Representamen’ being how the word occupies a structure, an ‘Interpretant’ which is the sense derived from that word, and an ‘Object’ defined as the thing that the word alludes to. These do not feature directly in Saussure’s model. Pierce states that our species appears to be driven by the yearning to make meaning. This same meaning is derived by the fact that we create our own signs to interpret. As Pierce states, ‘We think only in signs’. We find such signs in the form of auditory and visual images, words, smells and tastes and also actions, although they have no natural meaning and are only signs when one interprets them as a sign. We understand objects as signs involuntary through correlations. Concerning Peirce 's triadic model, it sometimes arises a historical reposition throughout Pierce’s modes. Despite him being more focused on the signs which are non-linguistic unlike Saussure himself, Pierce also highlighted some of the importance at symbolic signs (Semiotics for beginners,…show more content…
If we take a ‘tree’ as an example, it takes form of the signified notion which is illustrated with the signifier, the word ‘tree’. A culture decides to name this a ‘tree’, thus the culture creates this term that they can collectively allude to. However, since the world is a place of various languages, the concept can always be communicated by using different methods. For example, the word ‘tree’ in German is ‘baum’ and is ‘arbor’ in Latin. Thus, the interconnection between ‘a tree’ and ‘the word tree’ is not what transmits meaning, although, language sometimes can rely on this bond between thoughts and sounds. We know that the definition of ‘tree’ is; a green plant that lives in a forest. We can find out what it is referring to from the sentence’s context. If we write, "A balloon is a green plant that lives in a jungle" we can mistake the term ‘balloon’ as the notion of a ‘tree’. Thus, the word meaning isn’t settled upon with the word itself or the connection of word with notion. More so, the meaning of a word is fixed between itself and other terms. The word ‘tree’ can be separated from its context because it is different from other words or signifiers. Now, everything leads to this point: In language, one can find solely differences. We understand ‘tree’ from its relation to other words in that context. Words are written or spoken linearly in any context, i.e one after another.

More about Peirce's Theory Of Sign Theory

Open Document