Sign Systems Studies

Due to Jakob von Uexküll’s umwelt theory, the Institute for Umwelt Research at the University of Hamburg, that was founded in 1928, was a unique institution worldwide for holistic research into animal behaviour and perception. However, Uexküll’s vitalistic-teleological approach and his uncompromising anti-Darwinian stance increasingly isolated him. When the closure of his institute was imminent as part of his statutory retirement in 1935, Uexküll ingratiated himself with the National Socialists in a letter to the Reich Minister for Science, Education, and Culture, which serves as a starting point for the article’s detailed discussion of his relationship to National Socialism. Since umwelt theory could be used for the training of guide dogs and other animals useful for military purposes, the institute survived. Still, finding a suitable successor to Uexküll proved difficult because hardly anyone among the German zoologists believed Friedrich Brock, Uexküll’s preferred candidate, would live up to Uexküll’s originality. The most important opponent to Brock’s appointment was Berthold Klatt, professor of zoology at the University of Hamburg, who did not expect any significant progress in zoology from Uexküll’s umwelt theory. After Brock’s death in 1958, the sworn circle of supporters of Uexküll’s umwelt theory tried in vain to push through a successor from their ranks. At the instigation of Curt Kosswig, Klatt’s successor in the Chair of Zoology, Franz Sauer succeeded Brock in 1959. However, a polemical article written by Gosta von Uexküll provoked a scandal, in the wake of which Sauer resigned. In 1960 the Institute for Umwelt Research became a department of the Zoological Institute, existing in the lecture timetables until 1966. Thus, the fate of Uexküll’s research institution depended mainly on external and personal factors or, to speak in Uexküllian terms, on the umwelten of the protagonists and antagonists.

The principal object of this study is constituted by two epistemologically distinct models of Ferdinand de Saussure’s depictions of the linguistic sign. The first model pertains to a bilateral conception of the sign as an inseparable unity of two sides that evoke each other in the mind of individuals during their speaking and understanding activities. The second model, termed here as ‘unilateral conception’, has been deduced from Saussure’s understanding of parole, where an idea establishes itself in a sound and a sound becomes the sign for an idea. A survey of related terminological distinctions derived from logic and philosophy as well as linguistic semiotics seems indispensable for presenting the positions of these bilateral and unilateral sign concepts in a typological matrix which could embrace all sign models originating in the sciences of language. The additional purpose of this study is to put forward the idea of epistemological equivalence to be achieved in translational practice. This supplementary focus of interest in particular concentrates around the question of how the translations of sign-related terms, selected from Cours de linguistique generale, reflect the epistemological awareness of their English-speaking translators.

A careful study of the writings of Algirdas Julien Greimas refutes many of Paul de Man’s influential criticisms of semiotics. Greimassian narratology neither reduces rhetoric to grammar nor simply conflates grammar with logic. Instead of forming “a closed totality”, the Greimas square is an open-ended analytical device; it is not the semiotic equivalent of the Schillerian chiasmus. Despite de Man’s claims for the disruptive agency of rhetoric, the elementary structure of signification organizes the possibilities of de Man’s own rhetoric. His essay “The rhetoric of temporality” is a narrative whose four major actants are symbol, allegory, irony, and mimesis. Though the discoursive level of de Man’s essay represses mimesis, it is active in what Greimas would call the argument’s surface grammar, which constrains, without completely determining, the narrative transformations the argument undergoes. While de Man’s analysis regards symbol as epistemologically inferior to allegory and irony, the persistence of symbol helps make “The rhetoric of temporality” a fascinating literary text in its own right.

The paper addresses the concept of artistic communication as a type of semiotic interaction in the discourses of art. Semiotic methodologies for modelling the sign and the communicative act, developed in the works of Gottlob Frege, Gustav Shpet, Jan Mukařovský, Roman Jakobson, Juri Lotman, Umberto Eco, Suren Zolyan, and some other semioticians, are discussed with a focus on the models of aesthetic sign and the corresponding models of semiosis in relation to artistic systems. The study focuses on the discourses of verbal art in its various manifestations (poetry, prose, drama, performance, spoken word, etc.) as material for a linguistic analysis of artistic communication. The paper specifically discusses the linguistic representations of artistic discourse within a model of aesthetic semiosis. The resulting model of artistic communication in verbal art is presented as a synthesis of Jakobson’s scheme of communicative act and its important specification in Lotman’s model of “literary communication”. Based on the existing models of sign, semiosis, and communication (taking Jakobson’s scheme as the main framework), a synthetic, linguo-aesthetic model of artistic communication is outlined, considering together the linguistic, semiotic, and aesthetic parameters of the artistic act.

This article addresses an issue in multimodal cultural studies – the inconsistent use of the notions ‘mode’ and ‘modality’. As these notions are frequently employed interchangeably, making a clear distinction between them and positioning them in a coherent system will be helpful. To outline such a system, I envisage a two-layer framework where modes and modalities support each other. The central branch of multimodal semiotics (developing from Gunther Kress’ sociosemiotics towards John Bateman’s comprehensive approach) recognizes ‘mode’ as a pivotal research concept. While ‘mode’ as a semiotic resource is dependent on its materiality, culturally shaped practices and discourse semantics, the neurocognitive characteristics of sensory modalities are often seen as secondary to meaning-making. This article suggests that discussion of the semiotic potential of sensory modalities is complementary to the semiotic theory of multimodality. In order to illustrate this, I will construct an experimental typology of modality relations, which also takes modes into account. This typology distinguishes between supporting, modifying, conflicting, substituting and cross-activating relations.

Simple symbols occupy a unique position within the semiosphere, constituting the symbolic core of culture with their ability to condense cultural memory into nimble, economic forms. This simplicity facilitates persistence, allowing these elementary symbols to recur diachronically, penetrating multiple layers of cultural strata to emerge and flourish in new contexts and variations. A novel example of a symbol which illustrates these attributes is Znak Polski Walczącej – the Fighting Poland symbol. Created in 1942 by the Polish Underground State as a propaganda tool, this straightforward monogram, consisting of interconnected letters P and W, became the official hallmark of Polish resistance and is now a controversial de facto national symbol. This article employs the symbol as a case study to explore two Lotmanian symbolic concepts: the vast semantic capacity of simple symbols, and their dual nature as invariable/variable entities. Born out of a utilitarian need for simplicity in Nazi-occupied Warsaw, the efficient form of the Fighting Poland symbol was a pragmatic matter of life or death. However, further examination of its simple design also reveals an underlying archaic depth. This article argues that the Fighting Poland symbol, metonymically known as the kotwica (‘anchor’) owing to its distinct shape, can also be viewed as an “emissary” from earlier cultural epochs, namely ante-Nicene Christianity, which made use of anchor symbology during an era of persecution and upheaval. Ultimately, this article provides a new semiotic perspective on a historically active yet understudied symbol with past and present relevance.

This study explores the art historian Alois Riegl’s heuristic terms ‘Kunstwollen’ and ‘Stimmung’ in the contexts of cognitive and evolutionary aesthetics. To begin with, the author draws on notions of instinct theorized by George Romanes, Charles Darwin and Charles Peirce. They are shown to have embraced instinct and associated it with states of mindfulness, good reasoning and intelligence of survival. Another art historian, August Schmarsow, is also shown to have favoured instinctive attitudes and mental trials and errors as the sophisticated approach to art. These rigorous theorizations of instinct serve to expand Riegl’s idea that Kunstwollen suggests a relatively strong human will and desire for art. Further, to verify how viewers may attain states of Kunstwollen and Stimmung, the author draws on two landscapes (Landscape with Roman Ruins, 1536; The Heart of the Andes, 1859) to broaden viewers’ horizons. Viewers are advised to take full advantage of the medium made up by light, air and space so as to work out perspectives that favour their mental wellbeing and the reception of artworks. Finally, the author integrates Riegl’s theories into current research and emphasizes the necessity of unifying biological and cultural factors for the attainment of knowledge or original thinking in inquiries. In brief, Riegl’s theories appear fairly biosemiotic when we consider the rich evolutionary, psychological and semiological contexts surrounding the birth of his insights.

We provide a list of semiotic journals in the world anno 2023. Our article is an expanded follow-up on Kalevi Kull and Timo Maran’s list of semiotic journals from 2013. The article finds that in 2023 there are 66 active semiotic journals in the world; hence, 11 new journals have been launched since 2013. Furthermore, there are 19 semiotic journals currently registered in the SCImago Journal Ranking database (2021 data). The article traces the development of the registration during 1999–2021 and finds that there has been a positive development in the period concerning the total number of citable documents and documents cited at least once, when we look at the semiotic journals as a whole. This is seen as an indication not only of the growth in the scientific output of the semiotic journals but also of an increase in their quality. Finally, in the period from 1964 to 2023 only nine semiotic journals (or 12 percent out of 75 journals) ceased publication. The article optimistically concludes that the development of the journals of semiotics in the world that has taken place during the last ten years points toward how the journals continue to be a stable platform for the future development of the semiotic field.

The article explores the question whether the way in which Juri Lotman uses the categories of semiotic explosion and unpredictability enables and necessitates the need to give space not only to different descriptions, but also to various self-descriptions (auto-communications) of religion in culture. In other words, the question is posed whether his concept of the semiosphere aids in making sense of the synchronic and diachronic contradictions and controversies in religion – both within what is perceived as a religion and between what are understood to be religions. The focus lies especially on whether Lotman’s semiotic theory of culture has a potential of advancing mutual recognition and supportive respect, that is – solidaristic tolerance between different religious and non-religious ways of being human. The claim is made that this is indeed the case as he models the human situation so that the ‘outside of the system’ is not understood only as a continuation of reality, but visualizes and includes within the system a space for a radical intrusion of possibility – for the truly unpredictable – on the level of culture, humanity, as well as the individual. Therefore, Lotman’s theory of culture could be developed further, in the direction of a translation device between different cultures (of religion), opening up new perspectives for dealing with the challenging semiotic situation in which we all find ourselves living in today.

While addressing the decolonial critique of Eurocentric modernity and the call for alternative cosmo-visions, this article retraces Juri Lotman’s culturological exploration towards the concept of ternarity [тернарность]: the scrutiny of the so-called binarism is what connects – without overlapping – the two perspectives. This long-distance dialogue will be built starting with the key notion of binary opposition, which will be analysed as a decolonial problem (Part I) and as a culturological problem (Part II). The analysis will focus on two central issues that stem from the either-or logic: the “othering mindset”, and the culture–nature dualism.

The representation of the Holy Virgin has long constituted one of the most important thematic lines in Italian poetry, both sacred and profane. In terms of the representation of space, the Blessed Mary was traditionally placed in faraway, celestial hierarchies. In more recent periods, this figure is often placed in the space of earthly life, with which the lyrical subject (the enunciator) is more familiar. Juri Lotman’s perspective on the space of the typological description of culture shows that divinities belong mainly to the exterior (E) space of culture. Building on these considerations, the purpose of this article is to analyse recent Marian representations – both poetic and theological – in Italian culture. I will demonstrate that, during the 20th century in Italy, Marian sacrum was moved closer to or even inside interior space (I), as the Blessed Virgin started to appear mostly in scenes of daily life and her divine traits gradually lost importance. This kind of spatiality is also found in the ecumenical dialogue. The Second Vatican Council normalized both Marian theology and the faithful’s practices, which influenced textual production and brought about further changes in the spatial placement of Mary. While the general social trend towards secularization has been increasing the distance between the human and the divine, Mary’s sanctity was transferred to the interior space (I) of everyday life – and this could be one of the factors that relaunched Marian poetry.

This paper examines the Great Kanon (also Great Canon; in the original Greek, Ὁ Μέγας Κανών) of St Andrew of Crete (ca. 660–740) as a case study in how religious ritual texts deploy autocommunicative processes. To study this complex liturgical hymn that occupies a key role in the ritual practice of Eastern Orthodox and Byzantine Catholic Christians we employ a theoretical framework rooted primarily in Juri Lotman’s theory of autocommunication, as complemented by more recent developments in social and cognitive semiotics, particularly ideas of multimodality and viewpoint. We find that the Great Kanon performs a variety of autocommunicative functions, primarily through its provision of a rhetorical metalanguage for the interpretation of the Old and New Testaments. This is a metalanguage which is multimodally enacted in ritual performance. The process makes the believer’s experience of reading the Bible an open and unfolding dialogue, in which the viewpoints of biblical characters become models for (re)interpreting one’s life experiences and reshaping one’s sense of self. The paper ultimately highlights that analyses of ritual texts, which deploy methods from cultural and cognitive semiotics, can deepen our understanding of autocommunication.

Taking its cue from Juri Lotman’s essay “Pravo na biografiyu”, this paper re-formulates the categories proposed by Lotman in relation to the two models of the saint and the modern intellectual, the former exemplifying the perfect realization of the norm and the latter the rejection of the norm in the name of an individual rule. These two models are considered with reference to two case studies from contemporary culture, respectively provided by the Catholic saints and by intellectuals – especially semioticians. The argument in the former case, which also takes into consideration other fundamental essays by Lotman, shows that contemporary Catholic culture challenges the identification of sanctity with the ideal of perfect adhesion to the norm. This notion is apparently applicable only to hagiographies seen as part of a mechanism of stabilization by which the dominating religious culture tames the explosive potential of the saintly figure. In the latter case, reflection on the theoretical and autobiographical production of several authors related to the field of semiotics shows that a third model can be added to the two identified by Lotman. This third model consists in acquiring the right to biography and carrying out autobiography not in contrast with the norm, as the modern writers studied by Lotman did, nor by dissolving oneself into the norm, but rather by dissolving oneself into the Other, that is, by opening one’s mind so as to allow the Other to become an integral part of oneself. This model is exemplified by the work by Julia Kristeva, in particular Teresa, My Love (2008), in that it overcomes the distinction between biography and autobiography and describes an intellectual and a saint who become “roommates”.

Both ancient and modern apocrypha have already been widely discussed in various fields of academic research, for example in religious, biblical or literary studies. Although such analyses say much about the historical and religious background of apocryphal writings and enable us to discover the depth of the symbolic resources used in such texts, they do not fully reveal the cultural impact of the canon. That is why a broader cultural analysis of both the canon and the apocrypha should be based on different methods of research, such as those that are offered by cultural semiotics. From the standpoint of Lotmanian semiotics modern apocrypha may be viewed as examples of the working of culture. They can be regarded as e.g. creative translation of the canon, tools of cultural autocommunication, memory devices, and meaning-generating mechanisms which dynamize the semiosphere. Semiotic analysis underlines the cultural impact of the canon not only as a set of sacred writings but also as a kind of a “cultural code”. The canon as a paradigmatic cultural text (in Aleida Assmann’s sense) is a powerful meaning-generating mechanism in which a huge number of texts intertextually relate to one another. In such relations hypertexts point out the symbolic (often archaic) nucleus of culture (thus they illustrate the statics of the semiosphere), at the same time describing and/or provoking some cultural changes (due to which they correspond with the dynamic nature of the semiosphere).

In this contribution I apply the semiotic method of Juri Lotman to a specific physical location – a significant Bulgarian religious monastery, in order to elucidate the Bulgarian metahistorical tradition. Any process of communication with a religious text involves a complex relationship with the reader. A readership image hidden in the Bulgarian religious text has played a central role for many generations; therefore, in addition to analysing a physical location, the method of communication in the area of “cultural centrality” has also been examined. The discussion focuses on a specific metahistorical text, the Testament of John of Rila, and the ways in which it interacts with important geographical and cultural areas and their hidden dimensions of “semiotic spheres”. The Testament is a part of Bulgarian cultural legacy and its role in the area of the “extra-cultural” and “cultural periphery” is remarkable.

Starting from the third century, many songs, prayers, and icons testify to the way the Virgin Mary – Mother of God – has been attributed the role of protecting the community. Examples include the Akhathist hymn traditionally dated to the siege of Constantinople (626), the Polish anthem “Bogurodzica”, associated with the battle of Grunwald (1410), the icon of Częstochowa that protected Poland from the Swedish invasion (1655), and numerous others. The role of menace is embodied by different enemies: infidels, heretics, or atheists. The Virgin watches over the frontier between two cultural spaces: the inside and the outside of the semiosphere. A case study will provide insight into the function played by the Madonna at the border: the Madonna of the Rocciamelone, the highest sanctuary in Europe, founded by the crusader knight Rotharius (1358). A bronze statue of the Virgin was placed in the sanctuary in 1899. A small corpus of pastoral letters written by blessed Edoardo Rosaz, bishop of Susa (Piedmont), expresses the hope that the Virgin will protect Catholics from liberal heresy. Plastic oppositions such as top/bottom, resulting from the relationship between the Virgin and the landscape, are used to manifest abstract oppositions such as reason/passion, order/disorder, and Church/revolution. This homologation helps us understand how the Virgin, placed in upper space, embodies knowledge and cognition: she becomes a lookout, allowing a transfer of values from the semantic field of war to the religious one. The Virgin guards the border of the semiosphere, the border dividing the self from the other. Her function is the semiotization of incoming materials, transforming external non-communication into information and meaning. This article thus considers the Virgin as a semantic operator inverting the values of liberal discourse into information stored in Catholic cultural space. A mathematical model of the function played by the Virgin will be presented in the terms of quantum computing.

Can the divide between science and religion be bridged? The current article will present the case for semiotics – and specifically the process of theosemiosis – as that platform of connection. In order to present this argument a key issue that must be tackled is whether there is one underlying function within the category of religion that can be extracted and held accountable in its knowledge claims: what has generally been termed the perennial philosophy. This extracted principle must then be capable of conforming to a broader model of consilience that can contain the knowledge captured in both science and religion. A model that can equally explain the work of Aristotle, Bacon, Galilee, and Einstein as it does Moses, Buddha, Jesus and Krishna, both in an ontological and epistemological sense; and thus a modification and extension of Enlightenment principles in such a way that they can capture the western and eastern notions of that light. In this regard, seeing truly is ‘knowing’.

This article explicates how different approaches to teaching history can enforce diverse strategies for dealing with uncertainty. Descriptions of three types of historical pedagogy are analysed as three kinds of modelling systems derived from Juri Lotman’s theory of semiotics of culture: myth-type modelling, scientific modelling, and play-type modelling. The paper argues that the connection between pedagogical approaches and uncertainty, as an experience that occurs at the limits of knowledge, can be modelled as the relation between a semiotic system and its boundary. The nature of this relation can differ depending on how the division between the internal and external space of the semiotic entity is perceived. Different types of modelling systems establish distinct patterns in order to deal with the indeterminacy of the borderland area. In the process of learning, these patterns can be viewed as semiotic strategies that various pedagogical approaches enforce when arriving at the limits of knowledge and facing the situation of indeterminacy that can cause students to experience uncertainty. Three different strategies are discussed in the context of history education: avoiding uncertainty in the case of the collective memory approach, addressing uncertainty in the case of the disciplinary approach, and accepting uncertainty in the case of the post-modern approach to teaching history.