Semiosis is any form of activity, conduct, or process that involves signs, including the production of meaning. The term was introduced by Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–1914) to describe a process that interprets signs as referring to their objects, as described in his theory of sign relations, or semiotics. Other theories of sign processes are sometimes carried out under the heading of semiology, following on the work of Ferdinand de Saussure (1857–1913).
Semiosis is the performance element involving signs. Although a human can communicate many things unintentionally, individuals usually speak or write to elicit some kind of response. Yet there is little real explanation of how semiosis produces its effects which is odd given that the word "sign" is in everyday use and most people would understand what it means. But semiotics has not offered clear technical definitions, nor is there agreement about how signs should be classified. So what, if anything, can be said with certainty?
As an insect or animal, human or otherwise, moves through its environment (sometimes termed the Umwelt), all the senses collect data which are made available to the brain. However, to prevent sensory overload, only salient data will receive the full attention of the cognitive elements of the mind. This indicates that a part of the process must be controlled by a model of the real world capable of ranking data elements in terms of their significance and filtering out the data irrelevant to survival. A sign cannot function until the audience distinguishes it from the background noise. It then triggers cognitive activity to interpret the data input and so convert it into meaningful information. This would suggest that, in the semiosphere, the process of semiosis goes through the following cycle:
the plant, insect or animal with the need to communicate will know what needs to be said and assess the best means of saying it;
this information will then be encoded and relevant muscle groups will effect transmission — although to some extent intentional in the human, the actual movements of the body are autonomic, i.e. the individual is not aware of moving individual muscles, but achieves the desired result by an act of will (see H. L. A. Hart on the nature of an action);
the audience filters ambient data and perceives the uttered code as a grouping of signs;
the audience then interprets the signs (sometimes termed decoding) to attribute meaning. This involves matching the signs received against existing patterns and their meanings held in memory (i.e. it is learned and understood within the community). In plants, insects and animals, the results of a successful interpretation will be an observable response to the stimuli perceived.
In biology, scout bees and ants will return home to tell the others where food is to be found, the fact of fertility must be announced to prospective mates from the same species, and the presence of danger must be passed as a warning to others in the group. Such transmission may be chemical, auditory, visual, or tactile whether singly or in combination. There is a new field of research activity termed biosemiotics, and Jesper Hoffmeyer claims that endosymbiosis, self-reference, code duality, the availability of receptors, autopoiesis, and others are the general properties of all living systems. Thomas Sebeok suggests that a similar list of properties for life may coincide with the definition of semiosis, i.e. that the test of whether something is alive, is a test to determine whether and how it communicates meaning to another of its kind.
For humans, semiosis is an aspect of the wider systems of social interaction in which information is exchanged. It can result in particular types of social encounter, but the process itself can be constrained by social conventions such as propriety, privacy, and disclosure. So this means that no social encounter is reducible to semiosis alone, and that semiosis can only be understood by identifying and exploring all the conditions that make the transmission and reception of signs possible and effective. When two individuals meet, the ways in which they think, the specific identities they assume, the emotional responses they make, and the beliefs, motives, and purposes they have, will frame the situation as it develops dynamically and potentially test the legitimacy of the outcomes. All these elements are, to a greater or lesser extent, semiotic in nature in that prevailing codes and values are being applied. Consequently, where the line is drawn between semiosis and semiotics will always be somewhat arbitrary.
2007-08-28 06:39:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Without giving you the entire definition as jon jon c has copied off wikipedia, let me say that Semiosis if any form of activity or action that involves signs. A pet can use semiosis by its actions of picking up its food bowl and bringing it to you. This is a "sign" that the pet is hungry.
2007-08-29 06:09:19
·
answer #2
·
answered by loufedalis 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Semiosis, semiology, or semiotics is the "science of signs." It's a relatively recent word dating from about 1880, from Gk. semeiotikos "observant of signs." The adjective form of semeiosis "indication," is from semeioun "to signal," from sema "sign."
This is Merriam Webster's definition:
a general philosophical theory of signs and symbols that deals especially with their function in both artificially constructed and natural languages and comprises syntactics, semantics, and pragmatics
Formal definitions become too complex. I prefer symbol to sign, because my first thought of the word sign is a painted bulletin board, street sign or for sale sign.
Here's a psychological definition: The mental or symbolic process in which something (e.g., word, symbol, nonverbal cue) functions as a symbol to convey meaning. The dog carrying the bowl (mentioned by the 2nd answerer) is a great example. Once you start looking for more complete definitions, they get convoluted, and the meaning becomes too complex to follow, especially since different scientific disciplines seem to have their own branch of semiotic theory.
Still, it's really pretty interesting-I've left some links to follow.
2007-09-01 03:31:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by maî 6
·
0⤊
0⤋