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

Semiotica

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

Editor-in-Chief: Danesi, Marcel


IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 0.509

CiteScore 2018: 0.23

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.232
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.478

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

Online
ISSN
1613-3692
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 2018, Issue 222

Issues

A Peircean epistemology of metaphor

Yicun Jiang
Published Online: 2018-04-25 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2015-0154

Abstract

This paper aims to elaborate an epistemology of metaphor in the Peircean semiotic tradition. As a logician, Peirce sees metaphor as a result of logical processes that create new meaning. His exposition on iconicity and iconic reasoning has laid a solid foundation upon which may be erected a fresh epistemology of metaphor fit for the contemporary study of language and mind. Broadly speaking, metaphor in Peirce can be examined from two perspectives: macroscopically it is an icon as opposed to index and symbol, whereas microscopically it is a subdivided hypoicon on the third level as opposed to image and diagram. Semioticians after Peirce have further developed his theory of metaphor. Through his concept of “arbitrary iconicity,” Ersu Ding stresses the subjective nature of metaphorization and tries to draw our attention to the specific cultural contexts in which metaphors occur. He also emphasizes the diversity and multivalency of metaphorical vehicles. Umberto Eco sees the interpretation of signs as an open-ended process that involves knowledge of all kinds. Encyclopedic knowledge thus serves as an unlimited source for metaphorical association. For Eco, the meaning of a metaphor should be interpreted in the cultural framework based on a specific cultural community. These ideas are in line with Peirce’s theoretical framework where the meaning of a metaphor depends on an interpreter in a particular socio-historical context. Based on the above theories, the present article proposes a cultural space where innumerable semantic features of objects or life situations are rhizomaticly linked on the basis of encyclopedic knowledge shared by members of a particular culture.

Keywords: Peircean epistemology; metaphor; icon; index; symbol; arbitrary iconicity

References

  • Anderson, Douglas. 1984. Peirce on metaphor. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 20(4). 453–468.Google Scholar

  • Danesi, Marcel. 2004. Poetic logic: The role of metaphor in thought, language, and culture. Madison, WI: Atwood.Google Scholar

  • Ding, Ersu. 2008. What is “meta-” for? Foreign language and literature studies 97(3). 145–152.Google Scholar

  • Ding, Ersu. 2010. Parallels, interactions, and illuminations: Traversing Chinese and Western theories of the sign. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar

  • Ding, Ersu. 2014. Ubiquitous but arbitrary iconicity. Semiotica 200(1/4). 119–135.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Ding, Ersu. 2015. Interpretive methods and classification of signs. Journal of Sichuan University (Social science edition) 201(6). 19–23.Google Scholar

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

  • Eco, Umberto. 1984. Semiotics and the philosophy of language. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar

  • Fisch, Max. 1978. Peirce’s general theory of signs. In Thomas Sebeok (ed.), Sight, sound and sense, 31–70. Bloomington & London: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar

  • Gorlee, Dinda. 1987. Firstness, secondness, thirdness, and cha(u)nciness. Semiotica 65(1/2). 45–55.Google Scholar

  • Haley, Michael. 1988. The semeiosis of poetic metaphor. Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar

  • Hausman, Carl. 1996. Peirce and the interaction view of metaphor. In Vincent Colapietro & Thomas Olshewsky (eds.), Peirce’s doctrine of signs, 193–205. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

  • Hoopes, James (ed.). 1991. Peirce on signs: Writings on semiotic by Charles Sanders Peirce. Chapel Hill & London: The University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar

  • Johansen, Jørgen. 1993. Dialogic semiosis: An essay on signs and meaning. Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar

  • Keller, Rudi. 1998. A theory of linguistic signs. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Liszka, James. 1996. A general introduction to the semeiotic of Charles Sanders Peirce. Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar

  • Peirce, Charles S. 1931–1966. The collected papers of Charles S. Peirce, 8 vols., C. Hartshorne, P. Weiss & A. W. Burks (eds.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [Reference to Peirce’s papers will be designated CP followed by volume and paragraph number.].Google Scholar

  • Peirce, Charles S. 1967. Manuscripts in the Houghton Library of Harvard University as numbered in Annotated catalogue of the papers of Charles S. Peirce, Richard S. Robin (ed.). Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press. [Reference to Peirce’s manuscripts will be designated MS followed by manuscript and page number.].Google Scholar

  • Peirce, Charles S. 1976. The new elements of mathematics by Charles S. Peirce, 4 vols., Carolyn Eisele (ed.). The Hague: Mouton. [Reference to Peirce’s New Elements will be designated NE followed by volume and page.].Google Scholar

  • Sørensen, Bent, Torkild Thellefsen & Morten Moth. 2007. Metaphor and cognition from a Peircean perspective. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 43(3). 562–574.Google Scholar

  • Vico, Giambattista. 1948. The new science. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2018-04-25

Published in Print: 2018-04-25


Citation Information: Semiotica, Volume 2018, Issue 222, Pages 347–363, ISSN (Online) 1613-3692, ISSN (Print) 0037-1998, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2015-0154.

Export Citation

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in