La iconicidad en un marco ecológico

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Abstract in Spanish
Resumen: Interpretar a Peirce no constituyo más que el primer momento de una investigación seria de la iconicidad. También hay que tener en cuenta las aportaciones de la fenomenología de Husserl, de la psicología de percepción y de las ciencias cognoscitivas. Sobre todo, las antinomias interiores a la teoría semiótica y los argumentos críticos formulados entorno a la iconicidad nos obliga a desarrollar una ecología de la semiótica que rinde cuenta de la posibilidad de signos icónicos. A su vez, la ecología semiótica nos enseña la necesidad de hacer una distinción entre las iconicidad es primarias y secundarias.

Summary: The interpretation of “what Peirce really meant” can only be the first step towards a theory of iconicity. At present, it is not only important to take into account more recent contributions stemming from Husserlean phenomenology, as well as from the psychology of perception and the different cognitive sciences. Most of all, the antinomies which are internal to the very theory of Peirce must be resolved, and the arguments addressed to the very idea of iconicity has to be countered. This can only be done by means of developing a semiotic ecology which accounts for the possibility of there being such things as iconic signs. Semiotic ecology itself forces us to introduce a division of iconicity as being of the primary or the secondary kind, the second one itself being subdivided into two species.

Details

Authors
Organisations
Research areas and keywords

Subject classification (UKÄ) – MANDATORY

  • Languages and Literature

Keywords

  • secondary iconicity, Peirce, ecological psychology, semiotics, iconicity, sign, primary iconicity
Original languageSpanish
Pages (from-to)45-60
JournalDe Signis
Volume4
Issue numberJulio 2003
Publication statusPublished - 2003
Publication categoryResearch
Peer-reviewedYes