SIGNS IN SOCIETY - STIBA Malang

z8 I Foundations of Peircean Semiotics
Peirce's Concept of Semiotic Mediation I 2Q
representamen.
interprétant,
représentâmes
itself, making it the object of another thought-sign. Thereupon, we can repeat
the operation of hypostatic abstraction, and from these second intentions derive
third intentions. (CP 4.549, 1906; cf. MS 283.146, 1905)
object,
objectj
("ground")
Figure 2.1. Hypostatic abstraction
interpretant 2
It is this third symbolic 3
mode of relation between representamen and object
that causes the asymmetry between determination and representation, since the
first vector passes through the representamen to the interprétant at the same level
of semiosis, while the second vector introduces a metasemiotic level at which the
interprétant represents its object only by virtue of having formed a conception
of the relation between the initial representation and the object. Because the interprétant
is determined not just to represent the same object that the representamen
represents but also to represent that object in the "same respect" and with
the "same meaning" (although more highly determined), it must first form a representation
of "second intention" in order to form a representation of first intention.
4
("Second intention" [intentio secunda] is a term used by medieval philosophers
to refer to knowledge involving not the thing itself but the mental or
linguistic act of knowing the thing.) Figure 2.1 suggests an approximation of this
essential asymmetry and is to be interpreted as follows: all the vectors of determination
and representation that existed in Figure 1.1 are assumed to be in place
linking the three elements labeled with subscript 1. The second level of semiosis
occurs when the interprétant] functions as a représentâmes by representing the
relation between representamen] and object] as a new semiotic entity, namely,
object2. The solid and broken arrows depict, respectively, the vectors of determination
and representation at this second level of semiosis.
Peirce has a technical term for what is labeled here object2, namely, the
"ground" of the relation between representamen and object. The ground is some
respect, character, reason, or quality that brings the sign into connection with its
object (CP 5.283, 1868; cf. CP 2.228, C.1897; MS 732, sec.6). The power of
the interprétant to create this new entity is called by Peirce "hypostatic abstraction,"
since it involves taking a quality or predicate as an abstract subject. And
this power is the key to the interpretant's capacity to fulfill its original charge of
representing the same object with the same meaning that the first representamen
does.
That wonderful operation of hypostatic abstraction by which we seem to create
entia rationis [mental entities] that are, nevertheless, sometimes real, furnishes
us with the means of turning predicates from being signs that we think or think
through, into being subjects thought of. We thus think of the thought-sign
In shifting levels from red as a possible predicate or quality shared by representamen
and object to redness conceived of as the ground of character of the sign
relation between representamen and object, the interprétant exercises a synthetic
function at the level of second intention. But, more important, in the special case
described previously in which the sole relation connecting representamen and object
is the relation of being represented by an interprétant, the ground of this
relation is necessarily triadic, involving as it does the third element, the interprétant
itself.
And so here we have finally arrived at the derivation of semiosis at the symbolic
level as triadic in the genuine sense: the interprétant must form a conception
of the semiotic process itself that is not reducible to any dyadic relations existing
independently of semiosis. And this triadic structure is the result of fully symbolic
representation, since the function of creating a ground at the second level of semiosis,
which becomes the basis for the connection of object and representamen,
opens up Peirce's system to a universe of semiotic entities (Thirds) whose character
of being differs vastly from that of both qualities (Firsts) and existing objects
(Seconds).
Semiotic Mediation and the Correlates of the Sign
Peirce's comments on the nature of semiotic mediation can be located in his
manuscripts, published articles, and reviews stretching from the early attempts
to construct the categories of Firstness, Secondness, and Thirdness through his
late writings on Pragmaticism. Historical examination of these references shows
that Peirce shifted the emphasis on mediation between two general poles. The
first pole focuses on the synthetic role of the interprétant in forming a represent,
tation of the relation between the object and the representamen so that these two
elements become linked in a semiotic web they would not be in by themselves;
thus, the interprétant is said to be the "mediate representation" of the object of
the sign relation taken as a whole. The second pole focuses on the idea of mediation
by the representamen as the vehicle or medium of linkage between objects
and further mental representation by interprétants. Thus, the sign itself, that is,
the perceptible form, is said to mediate between object and interprétant, and the
interprétant is mediately determined by the representation standing in place of
the object. These two poles correspond to Peirce's twin concerns with, on the
one hand, the level of semiosis and mediate representation and, on the other
hand, chains of semiosis and mediate determination. Toward the end of his life
Peirce gradually moved away from the doctrine of mediate representation and