|
|
|
|
______________________________________________________________________ The "Zeitschrift für
Semiotik": Abstracts ______________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________ Armin Burkhardt Brigitte Nerlich Loaded sign: the symbol and its meaning Armin Burkhardt, University of Magdeburg Summary. Philosophy, semiotics and linguistics of the 20th century have produced quite
heterogenous definitions of the concept of symbol which are partly contradictory to one
another. With the normal understanding of "symbol" as 'physical representation
of an idea' as a starting point, Hegel, Schaff and Eco’s conceptions of symbol are
described. Further analyses show that symbols are based on either spontaneous or
conventional interpretations which constitute a separate sign type and involve metonymic,
synecdochical and metaphorical processes. Literary symbols are a special case. The
potential and scope of the symbol can be characterized by notions such as attachment,
partial analogy (between expression and content), ambiguity/openness, cultural ties,
recollection of stories and history, exposedness. Linguistic depiction as a process: the pragmatism of a concept from Kant to Bühler Brigitte Nerlich, University of Nottingham Summary. This article traces the evolution of the concept of Darstellung
(representation) and its incorporation into increasingly 'pragmatic' theories of language
and meaning from Kant to Bühler. In Kant’s philosophy thoughts can be represented by
signs (characterisms) or, in the case of pure concepts of reason, by symbols (hypotyposes,
Darstellungen). Language is seen as a pure exteriorization of thoughts. In Roth’s
1795 treatise words are considered symbols. Darstellung is an integral part of the
linguistic process of articulation and communication. Bernhardi regards Darstellung as the
central feature of communication and comprehension, insofar it establishes a dialogical
relationship between rational beings. This view is continued by Humboldt. But unlike his
post-Kantian predecessors, he recognizes that not only does language represent thoughts
but that thinking is dependent on language, and here again the processes of dialogical
communication are of central importance. Steinthal concentrates his attention on
understanding, not on communication. However, he makes a basic distinction between
Darstellung, communication and expression. Wegener adds to these functions of language the
function of appeal: language is not merely used to represent thoughts, but to influence
the will and beliefs of others. Finally, Bühler integrates the function of Darstellung
into a genuinely pragmatic theory of language. Expression as message and control: pragmatic criticism of Wundt's human psychological research program Frank Vonk, Velp (Netherlands) Summary. The history of "pragmatics", whether linguistic, philosophical or
psychological, is as old as man’s interest in the impact of speech on social
interaction. While classical rhetoric seems to be one of the main sources of studies in
the social function of speech, the development of empirical and experimental
psychology in the late 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries seems to be another,
not less important source of studies on the relation between speech and human behavior in
the context of the utterance. The author maintains that fundamental methodological
research in the domain of linguistic pragmatics cannot be successful without considering
the psychological and sociological dimensions of language use. The historical outline
given in the following contribution can be read as a description of necessary
methodological premises of linguistic pragmatics. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 1999-2001, Webmaster Research Center for Semiotics, Institute for Linguistics, Fac. 1, Technical University Berlin, Berlin, Germany |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
