Bibliography
Semiotics; The Basics
Daniel Chandler
Routledge 2002
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiotics 2/4/2009
http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/S4B/index.html 2/4/2009
www.youtube.com 24/05/2009
www.google.co.uk 2/4/2009
Ludography
Little Big Planet played 7/4/2009
Tuesday 26 May 2009
Evaluation
During this project I feel I have successfully gained knowledge into semiotics and some of the main theories surrounding it. I have been able to include specific details about theories from Saussure and Peirce, and compare these to today’s modern theories. I also think I have managed to look in detail at other areas of semiotics such as modality and codes which branch away from my original research. I feel I have a good understanding of the material that I have written about and have also been able to apply that knowledge when looking at my chosen game.
Having invested time properly researching Little Big Planet I have been able to identify some of the obvious and less obvious signs in the game. I feel I have been able to analyse a variety of areas in the game including characters, signs and objects used in game.
Throughout the blog the layout is neat and professional and with the aid of pictures I have been able to make the blog aesthetically pleasing as well as informative. I have successfully taken advantage of the interactivity of the blog, which is shown with the use of a video.
I would have liked to have had more time to look into further areas of semiotics and apply that knowledge to Little Big Planet also. I feel that I would like to look more into the objects used in game and some of the scenery including how the dangerous objects in game are represented. I would also enjoy being able to study the NPC’s more looking at how they fit into their surroundings and the way that even the ‘good’ ones seem to be unattractive, which, in media is usually a negative sign.
To progress further I will increase my knowledge of semiotics, looking at some of the modern theories and also into areas such as textural interactions. I would also like to learn more about codes as I feel I didn’t get to read into this subject as much as I wanted to.
Having invested time properly researching Little Big Planet I have been able to identify some of the obvious and less obvious signs in the game. I feel I have been able to analyse a variety of areas in the game including characters, signs and objects used in game.
Throughout the blog the layout is neat and professional and with the aid of pictures I have been able to make the blog aesthetically pleasing as well as informative. I have successfully taken advantage of the interactivity of the blog, which is shown with the use of a video.
I would have liked to have had more time to look into further areas of semiotics and apply that knowledge to Little Big Planet also. I feel that I would like to look more into the objects used in game and some of the scenery including how the dangerous objects in game are represented. I would also enjoy being able to study the NPC’s more looking at how they fit into their surroundings and the way that even the ‘good’ ones seem to be unattractive, which, in media is usually a negative sign.
To progress further I will increase my knowledge of semiotics, looking at some of the modern theories and also into areas such as textural interactions. I would also like to learn more about codes as I feel I didn’t get to read into this subject as much as I wanted to.
Monday 25 May 2009
The Colour Red in Little Big Planet
As I have been looking at the game Little Big Planet I have started to notice that the colour red features heavily through the game. It is used in a couple of ways which I have decided I want to look into more closely.
The first is that it is used to draw the player’s attention to it. As shown in one of the previous images directional arrows are marked in red, a very bold bright colour which is clear to see. Little Big Planet has very little red scenery, so when the colour does appear, it draws the players eye to what it is showing.
Red also marks danger in the game. In real life red is often shown to demonstrate danger or something to be aware of. There are items in little big planet that explode, killing the player if they come into contact with an explosion. Bombs on Little Big Planet are marked with a red X that covers the whole face of the bomb. Other explosives in the game have a timer on them, which is demonstrated with two arrows. One arrow on the explosive spins around until the tip of it comes into contact with the tip of a second arrow that remains stationary on the explosive. Both of these arrows are clearly marked in red drawing the player’s eye, and also demonstrating the danger of these explosives.
The other obvious use of the colour red in the game is on buttons. These buttons often trigger something and without pressing them, a player may not be able to progress through the game, therefore it is important that these buttons are made obvious.
Red is used in many ways in Little Big Planet and for a variety of purposes including some that share a meaning with those demonstrated in the real world.
The first is that it is used to draw the player’s attention to it. As shown in one of the previous images directional arrows are marked in red, a very bold bright colour which is clear to see. Little Big Planet has very little red scenery, so when the colour does appear, it draws the players eye to what it is showing.
Red also marks danger in the game. In real life red is often shown to demonstrate danger or something to be aware of. There are items in little big planet that explode, killing the player if they come into contact with an explosion. Bombs on Little Big Planet are marked with a red X that covers the whole face of the bomb. Other explosives in the game have a timer on them, which is demonstrated with two arrows. One arrow on the explosive spins around until the tip of it comes into contact with the tip of a second arrow that remains stationary on the explosive. Both of these arrows are clearly marked in red drawing the player’s eye, and also demonstrating the danger of these explosives.
The other obvious use of the colour red in the game is on buttons. These buttons often trigger something and without pressing them, a player may not be able to progress through the game, therefore it is important that these buttons are made obvious.
Red is used in many ways in Little Big Planet and for a variety of purposes including some that share a meaning with those demonstrated in the real world.
Directions For Play
To many outsiders, Little Big Planet may seem like a confusing game. I have witnessed firsthand how someone who has never played the game may find it difficult to understand some of the actions required to complete levels. Little Big planet does have tutorial levels at the beginning to show players some of these actions, and the rest are learned through progression of the levels. So how clear are the subtle instructions in the game, do you need to be a hard-core gamer to progress, or is the game as clear as it can be without stating the obvious and taking away some of the fun?
This is an example of one of the earlier levels in the game. By examining the picture there seems to be an obvious sign showing which way to go. Arrows universally are known as a sign showing a direction. Arrows feature on traffic signs to directions to a toilet. They are seen as being a clear and well established symbol to show direction. Putting an arrow here seems to be giving the player a very easy instruction and most, if not all people would understand the meaning of it. The arrow is also red on a white background, making it stand out in the game. Looking at this from a Saussureian view, it would be said that the arrow is the signifier and the direction is the signified. Meaning the arrow is the signifier, which which represents the meaning and the signified would be the direction that was the intended way for the player to travel. This second picture shows one of the more difficult instructions of Little Big Planet. Here we can
see there is a skateboard, but there are no instructions as to what the players are meant to do with it. If we think about what a skateboard would be used for in real life, we make the connection that a skateboard is usually ridden and so this is probably the desired action for the players to take. For someone who had not played the tutorial levels, this may seem rather confusing. During the tutorial the player is shown that they have to grab objects and push or pull them to get them to move, so the correct course of action that should be taken with the skateboard is more obvious to one of the players. In the scenario shown in this picture, it is in multiplayer mode. In order to unlock later levels the tutorial must be completed. This means that the owner of the game would be able to instruct the other players what to do in this situation as they would have completed the tutorial. 
The glowing circle in this picture represents a well know feature is games; a checkpoint. When a player’s Sack Boy dies, it reappears at the last checkpoint to be activated. Checkpoints are activated when a player runs past them, this causes the circle to light up and glow, catching the player’s attention and also signalling that the check point has been activated. Another signal that is given by the check point is the number of times you can resurrect to it, which is demonstrated by how much of the circle glows each time. Some checkpoints have fewer resurrections then others, and this is shown by larger quantities of the lights disappearing when a player reappears. Another feature of the checkpoint is that the light turns red to signal it only has one resurrection left. To someone who is familiar with checkpoints in games, this may seem obvious and they may become aware of the check point early on in the game. Someone who is unfamiliar with games may simply ignore the checkpoint as they do not understand what it represents. This is known as deferred meaning. When a sign is not correctly understood a receiver (in this case the player) may attach an incorrect meaning to it, or simply defer it to later on when the correct meaning can be assigned. Little Big Planet may be a slightly confusing game for someone who has little experience with games or who hasn’t completed the tutorial. Some of the signs are clear and others aren’t even obvious they are a sign. It will always be able to be played by all as in game tutorial give a good explanation of many of the features of the game, while those more experienced with the game can assist others during multiplayer sessions.
Sack Boy
To start my analysis of Little Big Planet I will look at the main character of the game, Sack Boy. This is the character that the player(s) control during the game. From the start of the game you are able to edit Sack Boy’s appearance, gaining more items to do this during game play, or through downloads from the Playstation shop. Sack Boy can also be referred to as ‘Sack Girl’ depending on the gender the player dresses the character in.
Sack Boy’s initial appearance is friendly and welcoming. In this picture we can see he is smiling, which gives the player a good feeling towards this character. The mouth is large in proportion to the rest of the body, so it draws your eye towards it. This may signify that the creators of the game want you to like sack boy as you will be controlling him.
Sack Boy’s posture is also very neutral. Here we can see him standing in a very open position; his hips are tilted slightly which gives the effect that he is relaxed. Sack Boy is made out of what appears to be a woollen material. The material itself is reminiscent of a time when I was made to wear knitted clothes by my Nan when I was young. It reminds me of a positive loving feeling, which incorporates well with the positive feelings towards Sack Boy.
Sack Boy is in comparison to the rest of the game, very plain. The levels are brightly lit and detailed, but Sack boy himself is quite dull and plain. I suspect there may be two reasons behind this. The first and most likely may be that the creators of the game are trying to encourage you to edit Sack Boy’s appearance so that you may benefit from all areas of the game, and also get into the spirit of Little Big Planet who’s tagline is ‘Play, Create, Share’. The second reason may be that with all the detail in the background of the levels, having an over detailed character may affect his ability to stand out from the scenery. Some parts of the game move very quickly, and without a clear view of the character, they may become difficult to complete.
The zip that features on the body of Sack Boy is probably just an extra bit of detailing to make the character look complete. It has been made oversized in comparison to add to the cute effect that Sack Boy has.
I think that Sack Boy is a fun friendly character that is designed just to be a starting point for the players themselves. The game creators want players to like and engage with Sack Boy. This has been demonstrated by a relatively simple character design and a very open and friendly personality given off by Sack Boy himself.
Sunday 24 May 2009
What is Little Big Planet?
For the benifit of those unfamiliar with Little Big Planet, I have added a trailor of the game. This will hopefully enable you to understand my analysis I will give and give you a general idea of what the game is about.
Codes
The ‘Code’ is highly important to structuralist semiotics. As mentioned by Saussure, signs are meaningless if isolated and need to be interpreted together. Roman Jackson; a linguistic structuralist also said the creation and understanding of texts depends on the existence of codes or conventions for interpretation (Jakobson 1960 and 1971 c). Signs would be meaningless without their frameworks of codes which enable them to be understood. A code will organise a sign into a meaningful system which correlate signifiers and signified through the structuralist form of syntagms and paradigms (Chandler 2002).
In order to correctly interpret a code, we need to be familiar with the correct set of conventions. A convention is the correct meaning attributed by users to something through one particular medium, but known in a broad cultural framework. As Stuart Hall once wrote ‘there is no intelligible discourse without the operation of a code (Hall 1973, 131). When investigating cultural practice, a sign is treated as anything that may be attributed a meaning by the cultural group, who are trying to understand what is behind the sign in order to understand rules or meanings within that culture. To understand the codes is to be a part of the culture.
“All various non- verbal dimensions of culture, such as styles in cooking, village lay-out, architecture, furniture, food, cooking, music, physical gesture, postural attitudes and so on are organised in patterned sets so as to incorporate coded information in a manner of analogous to the sounds and words of sentences of a natural language...It is just as meaningful to talk about the grammatical rules which govern the wearing of clothes as it is to talk about the grammatical rules which govern speech utterances.” (Leach 1976 10)
Semioticians try to identify what makes up a code, and to do this, they have created groups for the codes. Individual theorists chose what makes up a code and how to categorize it. An example of splitting a code is separating it into verbal and non- verbal categories. Some may say this is a division into sub- codes, but it is usually down to an individual to decide.
Here is an example of a framework by Daniel Chandler
Social codes
· Verbal language (phonological, syntactical, lexical, prosodic and paralinguistic subcodes.)
· Bodily codes (bodily contact, proximity, physical orientation, appearance, facial expression, gaze, head nods, gestures and posture.)
· Commodity codes (fashion, clothing, cars.)
· Behavioural codes (protocols, rituals, role-playing, games.)
Textural Codes
· Scientific codes, including mathematics.
· Aesthetic Codes within the various expressive arts (poetry, drama, painting, sculpture, music etc.) including classicism, romanticism, realism.
· Genre, rhetorical and stylistic codes: exposition argument, description and narration and so on.
· Mass media codes including photographic, televisual, filmic, radio, newspaper, and magazine codes, both technical and conventional (including format).
Interpretive codes
· Perceptual codes: e.g. of visual perception (Hall 1973, 132; Nichols 1981, 11ff.; Eco 1982) (note that this code does not assume international communication).
· Ideological codes: more broadly, those including codes for encoding and decoding texts- dominant (or ‘hegemonic’), negotiated or oppositional (Hall 1980; Morley 1980). More specifically we may list the ‘-isms’, such as individualism, liberalism, feminism, racism, materialism, capitalism, progressivism, conservationism, socialism, objectivism and popularism; (note, however, that all codes can be seen as ideological).
In order to use these types of codes, a certain level of knowledge may be required
· Knowledge of the world.
· Knowledge of the genre or medium.
· A modality judgement between the world and the genre or medium.
Codes vary in the ‘credibility’ they may have. Some may say that a code from a painting may have less viability compared to something as computer code, where there are fewer possible meanings. It is even argued by some theorists that the more ambiguous systems may be codes at all (e.g. Guiraud 1975, 24, 41, 43-4, 65.
Resources Used: Semiotics, The Basics by Daniel Chandler
In order to correctly interpret a code, we need to be familiar with the correct set of conventions. A convention is the correct meaning attributed by users to something through one particular medium, but known in a broad cultural framework. As Stuart Hall once wrote ‘there is no intelligible discourse without the operation of a code (Hall 1973, 131). When investigating cultural practice, a sign is treated as anything that may be attributed a meaning by the cultural group, who are trying to understand what is behind the sign in order to understand rules or meanings within that culture. To understand the codes is to be a part of the culture.
“All various non- verbal dimensions of culture, such as styles in cooking, village lay-out, architecture, furniture, food, cooking, music, physical gesture, postural attitudes and so on are organised in patterned sets so as to incorporate coded information in a manner of analogous to the sounds and words of sentences of a natural language...It is just as meaningful to talk about the grammatical rules which govern the wearing of clothes as it is to talk about the grammatical rules which govern speech utterances.” (Leach 1976 10)
Semioticians try to identify what makes up a code, and to do this, they have created groups for the codes. Individual theorists chose what makes up a code and how to categorize it. An example of splitting a code is separating it into verbal and non- verbal categories. Some may say this is a division into sub- codes, but it is usually down to an individual to decide.
Here is an example of a framework by Daniel Chandler
Social codes
· Verbal language (phonological, syntactical, lexical, prosodic and paralinguistic subcodes.)
· Bodily codes (bodily contact, proximity, physical orientation, appearance, facial expression, gaze, head nods, gestures and posture.)
· Commodity codes (fashion, clothing, cars.)
· Behavioural codes (protocols, rituals, role-playing, games.)
Textural Codes
· Scientific codes, including mathematics.
· Aesthetic Codes within the various expressive arts (poetry, drama, painting, sculpture, music etc.) including classicism, romanticism, realism.
· Genre, rhetorical and stylistic codes: exposition argument, description and narration and so on.
· Mass media codes including photographic, televisual, filmic, radio, newspaper, and magazine codes, both technical and conventional (including format).
Interpretive codes
· Perceptual codes: e.g. of visual perception (Hall 1973, 132; Nichols 1981, 11ff.; Eco 1982) (note that this code does not assume international communication).
· Ideological codes: more broadly, those including codes for encoding and decoding texts- dominant (or ‘hegemonic’), negotiated or oppositional (Hall 1980; Morley 1980). More specifically we may list the ‘-isms’, such as individualism, liberalism, feminism, racism, materialism, capitalism, progressivism, conservationism, socialism, objectivism and popularism; (note, however, that all codes can be seen as ideological).
In order to use these types of codes, a certain level of knowledge may be required
· Knowledge of the world.
· Knowledge of the genre or medium.
· A modality judgement between the world and the genre or medium.
Codes vary in the ‘credibility’ they may have. Some may say that a code from a painting may have less viability compared to something as computer code, where there are fewer possible meanings. It is even argued by some theorists that the more ambiguous systems may be codes at all (e.g. Guiraud 1975, 24, 41, 43-4, 65.
Resources Used: Semiotics, The Basics by Daniel Chandler
Tuesday 12 May 2009
Communicating Signs
By representing nouns simply as symbols, we lose some of the specifics of that which we are trying to convey.
Swift gives a satirical account of fictional academicians of Lagade outlined a proposal to carry around objects for use in communication, and to abolish language all together. This highlights a problem in communication by using signs as direct substitutes for physical objects. Language is sometimes said to be nomenclature (item by item naming), which Saussure said was a “superficial view taken by the general public”. As most words are lexical, reducing communication to simply using signs means it would be hard to make representations for nouns like friendship and History.
The way we look at language is based around categorisation, when using a sign; we lose the ability to donate meaning to a specific object, but instead a group. An example of this would be an image of a book. It would be hard to explain that you wanted that specific book, rather than just any book.
If we were to look at Peirce’s model of the sign, it helps to explain a way to denote specific meaning. A sign can feature a ‘referent’ which is something that the sign implies, rather than a direct meaning of the image displayed. Signs may also be interpretant, which implies a meaning of an ‘infinite series’ of signs.
John Kennedy showed children a picture of a group of children sat in a circle, he then asked them to fill in the gap with their own drawing. Many of the children tried to hold their pencil in the same way as an image in the top right-hand corner of the page. This shows that being absorbed in a task could lead to ‘suspension of disbelief’ and not distinguishing between representation and reality.
When we read a sign it is important to know how to interpret it, this is generally learned throughout life by coming into contact with the relevant cultural codes. Knowing the appropriate level of abstraction allows us to understand the relevant cultural code in a text.
It is important that nouns are represented correctly in signs, and that it is easy for the receiver to interpret them.
Resources Used: Semiotics, The Basics by Daniel Chandler
Swift gives a satirical account of fictional academicians of Lagade outlined a proposal to carry around objects for use in communication, and to abolish language all together. This highlights a problem in communication by using signs as direct substitutes for physical objects. Language is sometimes said to be nomenclature (item by item naming), which Saussure said was a “superficial view taken by the general public”. As most words are lexical, reducing communication to simply using signs means it would be hard to make representations for nouns like friendship and History.
The way we look at language is based around categorisation, when using a sign; we lose the ability to donate meaning to a specific object, but instead a group. An example of this would be an image of a book. It would be hard to explain that you wanted that specific book, rather than just any book.
If we were to look at Peirce’s model of the sign, it helps to explain a way to denote specific meaning. A sign can feature a ‘referent’ which is something that the sign implies, rather than a direct meaning of the image displayed. Signs may also be interpretant, which implies a meaning of an ‘infinite series’ of signs.
John Kennedy showed children a picture of a group of children sat in a circle, he then asked them to fill in the gap with their own drawing. Many of the children tried to hold their pencil in the same way as an image in the top right-hand corner of the page. This shows that being absorbed in a task could lead to ‘suspension of disbelief’ and not distinguishing between representation and reality.
When we read a sign it is important to know how to interpret it, this is generally learned throughout life by coming into contact with the relevant cultural codes. Knowing the appropriate level of abstraction allows us to understand the relevant cultural code in a text.
It is important that nouns are represented correctly in signs, and that it is easy for the receiver to interpret them.
Resources Used: Semiotics, The Basics by Daniel Chandler
Monday 11 May 2009
Modality
Modality makers are what we use to judge how realistic a text is. They are individual to everybody and can be affected by a number of things.
Modality makers are our understanding of how plausible, reliable, credible, truthful, accurate or factual a text is. If we were to view an image of a flying cat, we would use our modality makers to judge whether this image was real. As modality makers are unique to each individual, they are subjective; some people may believe some texts are more true to life than others. Children often believe more in a text then adults; this is because we build our modality makers from real life experiences. Adults have learned what is plausible and real, where as children are more likely to believe the unreal.
Written texts often have a lower modality then an image. This is because we are allowed to create an image in our own heads of what we interpret the text to be saying, where as with an image, as it is a set concept, it is easier for it to conflict with our own ideas. Studies have shown that photographs are more realistic then cartoons, though a cartoon often better represents the concept (Ryan and Schwartz 1956).
Umberto Eco argues that an iconic signifier can achieve primacy over the signified. An example of this would be an image of a cartoon heart. This symbol has grown to represent love instead of the heart as an organ of the body. The more a person becomes acquainted with a sign, the more it may seem realistic compared to a real life experience. A person, who is a fan of car racing games, may start to feel that real life driving is slow in comparison to the high speeds reached in game. Sometimes we allow texts to go against out modality makers as we are used to their content. Soap operas are often filled with drama that the average person would very rarely encounter in day to day life, yet most will contentedly watch them without a second thought to the plausibility.
Modality makers are unique to each individual, and are open to subjectivity. We build our modality makers through our life experiences as we age. When we become accustomed to a text, we may start to believe it more than real life, or we may simply allow the text to continue on in an unrealistic way.
Resources Used: Semiotics, The Basics by Daniel Chandler
Modality makers are our understanding of how plausible, reliable, credible, truthful, accurate or factual a text is. If we were to view an image of a flying cat, we would use our modality makers to judge whether this image was real. As modality makers are unique to each individual, they are subjective; some people may believe some texts are more true to life than others. Children often believe more in a text then adults; this is because we build our modality makers from real life experiences. Adults have learned what is plausible and real, where as children are more likely to believe the unreal.
Written texts often have a lower modality then an image. This is because we are allowed to create an image in our own heads of what we interpret the text to be saying, where as with an image, as it is a set concept, it is easier for it to conflict with our own ideas. Studies have shown that photographs are more realistic then cartoons, though a cartoon often better represents the concept (Ryan and Schwartz 1956).Umberto Eco argues that an iconic signifier can achieve primacy over the signified. An example of this would be an image of a cartoon heart. This symbol has grown to represent love instead of the heart as an organ of the body. The more a person becomes acquainted with a sign, the more it may seem realistic compared to a real life experience. A person, who is a fan of car racing games, may start to feel that real life driving is slow in comparison to the high speeds reached in game. Sometimes we allow texts to go against out modality makers as we are used to their content. Soap operas are often filled with drama that the average person would very rarely encounter in day to day life, yet most will contentedly watch them without a second thought to the plausibility.
Modality makers are unique to each individual, and are open to subjectivity. We build our modality makers through our life experiences as we age. When we become accustomed to a text, we may start to believe it more than real life, or we may simply allow the text to continue on in an unrealistic way.
Resources Used: Semiotics, The Basics by Daniel Chandler
Wednesday 6 May 2009
Signs in Semiotics
Semiotics is a very large and sometimes complicated subject. There are vast areas which do not apply to my chosen topic; a semiotic analysis of Little Big Planet. In order to establish what it is I have to look at when making the analysis, I have researched into some of the key areas of semiotics and will be writing explanatory articles before proceeding to analyse the game. I have chosen to start by looking at signs as these are the basis for many semiotic analyses. Firstly, what is a sign? A sign can be anything from words or an image, to an odour or act. There are two main theories which semiotics today is based around.
The first is Saussure’s model which states a ‘signifier’ and a ‘signified’ are used together to create a sign. The signifier is the representation of form, and the signified is the concept. Saussure believed that both of these were necessary to construct the sign. It is important to know that Saussure looked at semiotics from a linguistic point of view, putting a strong emphasis on the sign and the real world thing it donates. Of course, one of the main problems with Saussure’s theory is that a world has no natural connection with that which it is representing. Relative motivation is also an issue as the linguistic meaning of a signifier also constrains it to one meaning.
The second model belongs to Charles Sanders Peirce, a philosopher who distinguished between ‘sign’ and ‘word’ to create ‘understanding’. Peirce stated that there was no stable relationship between the sign and the signifier and that signs were decoded in three ways; the sign that denotes the object, the object and the interpretant. It is a frequent misunderstanding that the ‘object’ that is spoken about can be anything, infact, the object is anything that can be represented. The way we interpret a sign is also broken down into three parts, our immediate understanding of the sign, the meaning produced by the sign and the true meaning of the sign itself.
Modern theories have tried to make these more applicable to real life. It is generally recognised that if a receiver is not familiar with a sign, they will not be able to respond. A second observation is that signs should be looked at as whole, not just individual parts as this can obscure a signs true meaning. As with any analysis it is important to remember subjectivity, people will often interpret signs based on their own life experiences. The final point is that not everyone will be able to interpret the sign and an incorrect meaning may be attributed or the sign may simply be deferred and no meaning understood.
Resources Used: Semiotics, The Basics by Daniel Chandler
The first is Saussure’s model which states a ‘signifier’ and a ‘signified’ are used together to create a sign. The signifier is the representation of form, and the signified is the concept. Saussure believed that both of these were necessary to construct the sign. It is important to know that Saussure looked at semiotics from a linguistic point of view, putting a strong emphasis on the sign and the real world thing it donates. Of course, one of the main problems with Saussure’s theory is that a world has no natural connection with that which it is representing. Relative motivation is also an issue as the linguistic meaning of a signifier also constrains it to one meaning.
The second model belongs to Charles Sanders Peirce, a philosopher who distinguished between ‘sign’ and ‘word’ to create ‘understanding’. Peirce stated that there was no stable relationship between the sign and the signifier and that signs were decoded in three ways; the sign that denotes the object, the object and the interpretant. It is a frequent misunderstanding that the ‘object’ that is spoken about can be anything, infact, the object is anything that can be represented. The way we interpret a sign is also broken down into three parts, our immediate understanding of the sign, the meaning produced by the sign and the true meaning of the sign itself.
Modern theories have tried to make these more applicable to real life. It is generally recognised that if a receiver is not familiar with a sign, they will not be able to respond. A second observation is that signs should be looked at as whole, not just individual parts as this can obscure a signs true meaning. As with any analysis it is important to remember subjectivity, people will often interpret signs based on their own life experiences. The final point is that not everyone will be able to interpret the sign and an incorrect meaning may be attributed or the sign may simply be deferred and no meaning understood.
Resources Used: Semiotics, The Basics by Daniel Chandler
Thursday 26 March 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)