Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …


Journal of the International Association for Semiotic Studies / Revue de l'Association Internationale de Sémiotique

Editor-in-Chief: Danesi, Marcel

IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 0.183
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.283

CiteScore 2017: 0.23

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.228
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.634

Agenzia Nazionale di Valutazione del Sistema Universitario e della Ricerca: Classe A

See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 2016, Issue 213


Interrelations of codes in human semiotic systems

Georgij Yu. Somov
  • Corresponding author
  • Urban Design Institute (Moscow), Fadeeva Street, dom 6, kv. 248, Moscow 125047, Russian Federation
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2016-09-10 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2015-0138


Codes can be viewed as mechanisms that enable relations of signs and their components, i.e., semiosis is actualized. The combinations of these relations produce new relations as new codes are building over other codes. Structures appear in the mechanisms of codes. Hence, codes can be described as transformations of structures from some material systems into others. Structures belong to different carriers, but exist in codes in their “pure” form. Building of codes over other codes fosters their regulation. There are several ways to add codes: by types of transformation of structures involved in codes; by dimensions of pragmatics, semantics, and syntactics; through “abstract universals versus precise forms” relations; and by regulation levels in the “organism – environment” relations. More complicated codes are formed based on the interrelations of codes built over. These interrelations are presented as a conceptual chart, which reflects the way typical semiotic formations emerge in mind based on the interrelations of various codes. It also presents the related sociocultural semiotic systemities: motives, needs, aspirations, moral values, purposes, language-like systemities, fundamental frames, patterns of culture, etc.

Keywords: nonverbal codes; intentional codes; needs; patterns; heterogeneities; structures


  • Allport, Gordon W. 1968. The person in psychology: Selected essays. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar

  • Ashby, Ross William.1956. Introduction to cybernetics. London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar

  • Ashby, Ross William. 1960. Design for a brain. London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar

  • Baranov, Alexander N. 2008. Preface. In George Lakoff & Mark Johnson (eds.), Metaphors we live by, A. Baranov & A. Morozova (trans.), 7–21. Moscow: LKI.Google Scholar

  • Barbyshev, Eugenij N. & Georgij Yu Somov. 1972. Struktura i informaciya kak osnovnoe zveno avtomatizacii arhitekturnogo proektirovaniya [Structure and information as basic stage of automatization of architectural design]. In Elgen P. Grigoryev (ed.), Teoriya proektirovaniya i problemy avtomatizacii proektnoy deyatel’nosti [Design theory and problems of automation design activity], 96–113. Moscow: Institut avtomatizirovannih sistem v stroitel’stve [Collection of Articles of the Institute of Automatized Systems in Building], OTRD.Google Scholar

  • Barbyshev, Eugenij N. & Georgij Yu Somov. 1976. Problemy teorii formoobrazovaniya arhitektury [Problems of theory of architecture form-making]. Arkhitektura SSSR 8. 8–10.Google Scholar

  • Barbyshev, Eugenij N. & Georgij Yu Somov. 1990. Formoobrazuyushie struktury I arkhitekturnaya forma [The form-making structures and the architectural form]. Architecture of USSA 2. 8–14.Google Scholar

  • Barthes, Roland. 1968. Elements of semiology. New York: Hill & Wang.Google Scholar

  • Barthes, Roland. 1983. Empire of signs, Richard Howard (trans.). New York: Hill & Wang.Google Scholar

  • Bateson, Gregory. 1972. Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Chandler.Google Scholar

  • Bense, M. 1971. Zeichen und Design: semiotische Asthetik. Baden-Baden: AgisVerlag.Google Scholar

  • Bense, Max. 1982 [1965]. Aesthetica. Baden-Baden: Agis.Google Scholar

  • Biederman, Irving. 1987. Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review 94(2). 115–147.Google Scholar

  • Bignell, Jonathan. 1997. Media semiotics: An introduction. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar

  • Brandt, Per Aage. 2006. Form and meaning in art. In Mark Turner (ed.), The artful mind: Cognitive science and the riddle of human creativity, 171–178. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Broadbent, Geoffrey A. 1977. A plain man’s guide to the theory of signs in architecture. Architectural Design 47(7–8). 474–482.Google Scholar

  • Chandler, Daniel. 2007. Semiotics: The basics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Chernigovskaya, Tatyana. 1999. Neurosemiotic approach to cognitive functions. Semiotica 127(1/4). 227–237.Google Scholar

  • Danesi, Marcel. 1994. Messages and meanings: An introduction to semiotics. Toronto: Canadian Scholars’ Press.Google Scholar

  • Deely, John. 2014. Semiotic entanglement concept of environment. Semiotica 199(1/4). 7–48.Google Scholar

  • Deregowski, Jan B. 1980. Illusions, patterns, and pictures: A cross-cultural perspective. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

  • Eco, Umberto. 1968. La struttura assente [The absent structure]. Milan: Bompiani.Google Scholar

  • Eco, Umberto. 1976. A theory of semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar

  • Emmeche, Claus & Jesper Hoffmeyer. 1991. From language to nature: The semiotic metaphor in biology. Semiotica 84(1/2). 1–42.Google Scholar

  • Fayermark, David S. 1974. Zadacha prishka s kartini [The problem came from a picture]. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar

  • Fiske, John. 1982. Introduction to communication studies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Fiske, John. 1989. Codes. In Erik Barnow (ed.), International encyclopedia of communications, vol. 1, 312–316. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Fromm, Erich. 1976. To have or to be. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers.Google Scholar

  • Hall, Edward T. 1974. Handbook for proxemic research. Washington: Society for the Anthropology of Visual Communication.Google Scholar

  • Hall, Edward T. 1977. Beyond culture. New York: Anchor.Google Scholar

  • Hall, Stuart. 1980 [1973]. Encoding/decoding. In Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (ed.), Culture, media, language:Working Papers in Cultural Studies, 1972–1979, 128–138. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar

  • Hjelmslev, Louis. 1961. Prolegomena to a theory of language. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar

  • Hoffmeyer, Jesper. 1996. Signs of meaning in the universe: The natural history of signification. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar

  • Hoffmeyer, Jesper & Claus Emmeche. 1991. Code-duality and the semiotics of nature. In Myrdene Anderson & Floyd Merrel (eds.), Semiotic Modeling, 117–166. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

  • Hoffmann, Michael. 2001. The 1903 classification of triadic sign-relations. In J. Queiroz & R. Gudwin (eds.), Digital encyclopedia of Charles S. Peirce. http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/hoffmann/p-sighof.htm (accessed 5 August 2015).

  • Il’in, V. V. 1972. Ontologicheskie i gnoseologicheskie funktsii kategorii kachestva i kolichestva [Ontological and Gnoseological Functions of Categories of Quality and Quantity]. Moscow: Vysshaya shkola.Google Scholar

  • Ivanov, Vyacheslav V. 1972. Binarnie strukturi v semioticheskih sistemah [Binary structures in semiotic systems]. In Eric G. Yudin & Igor V. Blauberg (eds.), Systems research (Yearbook in Russian), 237–238. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar

  • Ivanov, Vyacheslav V. 2008. Dualnye strukturi v antropologii: kurs lektsii, April-May 2005 [Double-natured structures in anthropology: Course of lectures, April-May 2005]. Moscow: Russian State University for the Humanities.Google Scholar

  • Jakobson, Roman, Gunnar Fant & Morris Halle. 1967. Preliminaries to speech analysis: The distinctive features and their correlates. Acoustics laboratory, Massachusetts Inst. Of Technology, Technical report N13. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar

  • Jesberg, Peter. 1972. Informationsastetische Grundlagen zur Theorie von Architektur und Stadtebau. Deutsche Bauzeitschrift 7. 17–21.Google Scholar

  • Krampen, Martin. 1979. Meaning in the urban environment. London: Construction Press.Google Scholar

  • Krase, Jerome. 2012. Seeing cities change: Local culture and class. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar

  • Krase, Jerome & Timothy Shortell. 2009. Visualizing globalisation: Semiotic of ethnic and class defferences in global cities. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Sociological Society. Baltimore, MD, March 19–22.

  • Kristeva, Julia. 1969. Semeiotike: Recherches pour une semanalyse. Paris: Editions du Seuil.Google Scholar

  • Kristeva, Julia. 1984. The revolution of poetic language. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

  • Kubryakova Elena, S. & Gennadij P. Mel’nikov. 1972. Traktovka ponyatiy “sistema” i “struktura” v sovremennoy nauke [Interpretation of the concept of “system” and “structure” in modern science]. In Boris A. Serebryannikov (ed.), Obshee yazikoznanie. Vnutrennaya struktura yazika [General linguistics. Internal structure of language], 14–24. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar

  • Kucherov, Ivan D. 1972. Funktsii razlichii v prakticheskom poznanii [Functions of Differences in Practical Cognition]. Minsk: Nauka i tekhnika.Google Scholar

  • Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 2003. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

  • Lang, Alfred. 1993. Non-Cartesian artifacts in dwelling activities: Steps towards a semiotic ecology. Schweizerische Zeitschrift fu¨r Psychologie 52(2). 138–147.Google Scholar

  • Lefebvre, V. A. 1973 [1967]. Konfliktuyushchie Struktury [Conflicting Structures]. Moscow: Radio.Google Scholar

  • Leontyev, Alexey N. 2009. Needs, motives, emotions. In Yuliya B. Gippenreyter & Maria V. Falikman (eds.), The psychology of motivation and emotions, 47–65. Moscow: Astrel.Google Scholar

  • Lynch, Kevin. 1960. The image of the city. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Lynch, Kevin. 1981. A theory of good city form. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Marcuse, Peter. 2002. Afterword. In Peter Marcuse & Ronald van Kempen (eds.), Of states and cities: The partitioning of urban space, 301–312. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Markov, Alexander V. 2015. The evolution of man, vol. 2, Monkeys, neurons and the soul. Moscow: CORPUS.Google Scholar

  • Martinet, Andre. 1962. A functional view of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Maslow, Abraham H. 1987 [1954]. Motivation and personality, 3rd edn. London: Longman.Google Scholar

  • Moles, Abraham A. 1966. Teoriya informacii i esteticheskoe vospriyatie [The theory of information and the aesthetics perception]. Moscow: Mir.Google Scholar

  • Morris, Charles W. 1971 [1939]. Esthetics and the theory of signs. In Morris C.W. (ed.), Writings on the general theory of signs, 415–433. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

  • Nöth, Winfried. 1998. Handbook of semiotics, Thomas A. Sebeok (ed.). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar

  • Obukhovskii, K. 1972. Psikhologiya viechenii cheloveka [Psychology of Human Intentions]. Moscow: Progress.Google Scholar

  • Piaget, Jean. 1979. Theore du langage. Theorie de l’apprentissage. In Massimo Piatelli (ed.), Le debat entre Jean Piaget et Noam Chomsky, 53–64. Paris: Parmarim.Google Scholar

  • Penrose, Roger. 1999. The emperor’s new mind: Concerning computers, minds and the laws of physics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Ponzio, Augusto. 1993. Signs, dialogue, and ideology. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Pribram, Karl. 1971. Languages of the brain: Experimental paradoxes and principles in neuropsychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar

  • Prieto, Luis. 1964. Principes de Noologie. Fondements de la Theorie Fonctionnelle du Signifie. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

  • Quastler, Henry. 1964. The emergence of biological organization. New Haven & London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

  • Sapir, Edward. 1930. Totality. Language Monographs 6. 6–28.Google Scholar

  • Sarbo, Janos J. & Jozef I. Farkas. 2013. Towards meaningful information processing: A unifying representation for Peirce’s sign types. Signs 7. 1–44.Google Scholar

  • Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1959. Course in general linguistics. New York: Philosophical library.Google Scholar

  • Scruton, Roger. 2013 [1979]. The aesthetics of architecture. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

  • Sebeok, Thomas A. 1999. The sign science and the life science. Appied Semiotics / Semiotique Appliquée 6–7. 1–8.

  • Sharov, Alexey A. 1999. The origin and evolution of signs. Semiotica 127. 521–535.Google Scholar

  • Simonov, Pavel V. 1981. Emotsional’nyi mozg [Emotional Brain]. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar

  • Somjen, George. 1972. Sensory coding in the mammalian nervous system. NewYork: Meredith.Google Scholar

  • Somov, Georgij Yu. 1986a. Priroda razlichiy i tozhdestv v arkchitekturnoy kompozitsii [Nature of distinctions and identities in architectural composition]. In Ludmila I. Kirillova (ed.), Teoriya kompozitcii v sovetskoy arkhitekture [The theory of composition in the soviet architecture], 32–41. Moscow: Stroiizdat.Google Scholar

  • Somov, Georgij Yu. 1986b. Plastika arkhitekturnoi formy v massovom stroitel’stve [Plastics of architectural form in mass design]. Moscow: Stroiizdat.Google Scholar

  • Somov, Georgij Yu. 1990. Problemy teorii arkhitekturnoy formy [Problems of the theory of architectural form]. In Alexander G. Rappaport & Georgij Yu. Somov (eds.), Forma v arkhitekture [Form in architecture], 164–334. Moscow: Stroiizdat.Google Scholar

  • Somov, Georgij Yu. 2005. Semiotic systems of works of visual art: Signs, connotations, signals. Semiotica 157(1/4). 1–34.Google Scholar

  • Somov, Georgij Yu. 2006. Connotations in semiotic systems of visual art (by the example of works by M. A. Vrubel). Semiotica 158(1/4). 147–212.Google Scholar

  • Somov, Georgij Yu. 2008. The role of structures in semiotic systems (analysis of some ideas of Leonardo da Vinci and the portrait Lady with an Ermine). Semiotica 172(1/4). 351–417.Google Scholar

  • Somov, Georgij Yu. 2009. Metonymy and its manifestation in visual art works: Case study of late paintings by Bruegel the Elder. Semiotica 174(1/4). 309–366.Google Scholar

  • Somov, Georgij Yu. 2010a. Organizing connotations in works of visual art (through the example of works by Giovanni Bellini). Semiotica 180(1/4). 165–202.Google Scholar

  • Somov, Georgij Yu. 2010b. Concepts and senses in visual art: Through the example of analysis of some works by Bruegel the Elder. Semiotica 182(1/4). 475–506.Google Scholar

  • Somov, Georgij Yu. 2012. Codes, heterogeneities, and structures: Visual information and visual art. Semiotica 192(1/4). 219–233.Google Scholar

  • Somov, Georgij Yu. 2014. The types of codes and their combinations: Visual perception and visual art. Semiotica 202(1/4). 481–509.Google Scholar

  • Stepanov, Yuri S. 1971. Semiotika. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar

  • Stepanov, Yuri S. 1975. Osnovi obshego yazikoznaniya [Basics of general linguistics]. Moscow: Prosveshenie.Google Scholar

  • Stjernfelt, Frederik. 2013. The generality of signs: The actual relevance of anti-psycholosism, Semiotica 194(1/4). 77–110.Google Scholar

  • Tchertov, Leonid F. 1996. The language of subject forms and spatial relations. Saint Petersburg State University dissertation.Google Scholar

  • Toda, Masanao & Emir H. Shuford Jr. 1965. Logic of systems: Introduction to a formal theory of structure. General Systems 10. 3–27.Google Scholar

  • Trubetzkoy, Nikolai S. 1969 [1939]. Principles of phonology, Christiane A. M. Baltaxe (trans.). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

  • Turner, Frederick & Ernst Pöppel. 1988. Poetry, brain, and time. In J. Rentschler, B. Herzberger, & D. Epstein (eds.), Beauty and the Brain, 74–96. Basel: Birkhauser.Google Scholar

  • Tyukhtin, Victor S. 1977. Otrazhenie, sistemy, kibernetika [Reflections, systems, and cybernetics]. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar

  • Ursul, Arkadij D. 1971. Informatsiya [Information]. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar

  • Voronin, Leonid G., Anatolij V. Napalkov & Nina V. Tselkova. 1982. Algoritmicheskiy analiz raboty mozga [Algorithmic analysis of brain work]. Moscow: Moscow State University.Google Scholar

  • Watson, O. Michael 1974. Proxemics. In Thomas Sebeok (ed.), Current trends in linguistics, vol. 12, 311–344. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2016-09-10

Published in Print: 2016-11-01

Citation Information: Semiotica, Volume 2016, Issue 213, Pages 557–599, ISSN (Online) 1613-3692, ISSN (Print) 0037-1998, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2015-0138.

Export Citation

©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in