Professional Documents
Culture Documents
to Syntax
http://kybele.psych.cornell.edu/~edelman/CogSt−531/
F. de Saussure: semiology
Saussure on the nature of signs
C. S. Peirce: semiotics
Peirce on the nature of signs
the three modes of signification according to Peirce
the three modes
of signification:
an example
iconic aspect:
50 stars = 50 states,
13 stripes = 13 original states
indexical aspect:
flag on a boat signifying
country of registration
symbolic aspect:
flag lowered at a funeral
articulation / structure
language has at least two levels of articulation
structured communication at the cellular level?
The molecules that form signaling circuits in cells are often modular − built
from components that carry out distinct tasks. This discovery emerged in part
from studies of molecules known as receptor tyrosine kinases (pogo−stick
shape in first panel). When a hormone docks with those molecules at the
surface of a cell (second panel), the receptors pair up and add phosphates to
tyrosine, an amino acid, on each other’s cytoplasmic tails. Then so−called
SH2 modules in certain proteins hook onto the altered tyrosines (last panel).
This linkage enables "talkative," enzymatic modules in the proteins to pick up
the messenger’s order and pass it along.
Adapter molecules, which consist entirely
of linker modules such as SH2 and SH3,
turn out to be important players in many
signaling pathways. They enable cells to
make use of proteins that would
otherwise be unable to hook into a given
communication circuit. Here, for instance,
the adapter protein Grb2 (red) draws an
enzymatic protein − Sos − into a pathway
headed by a receptor that itself has no
means of interlocking with Sos.
Scaffolding proteins, which hold onto
several other proteins, can ensure that
multiple signaling molecules act almost
simultaneously. One, InaD, operates in
cells of the fruit−fly eye and participates
in sending visual messages to the brain.
Three of the scaffold’s five "PDZ" linker
domains separately grasp an ion channel,
an enzyme that opens the channel when
light hits a nearby light receptor and an
enzyme that closes the channel promptly
thereafter. Two more PDZ domains help
to relay information by holding other
signaling molecules in place.
biosemiotics
Cells like organisms are historical entities carrying in their cytoskeleton and
in their DNA traces of their pasts going back more than three billion years.
They perpetually measure present situations against this background, and
make choices based on such interpretations. Thus, one might well claim that
the sign rather than the molecule is the basic unit for studying life
(Hoffmeyer, 1996).
"We must understand our world in such a way that it shall not be absurd
to claim that this world has itself produced us"
(Prigogine and Stenger 1984).
biosemiotics and a new "new synthesis"
"...the ‘old synthesis’ failed to integrate the communicative or semiotic
behaviour of animals into its explanatory schemes. The reification of
communication to ’nothing but’ transmission of signals (e.g. genes)
favoured quantitative genetics but at the cost of a grave underestimation
of the interpretative or semiotic competence of living systems."
"The point is that organisms not only belong to ecological niches, they are
always also bound to a semiotic niche, i.e. they will have to master a set of
signs of visual, acoustic, olfactory, tactile and chemical origin in order to
survive."
J. Hoffmeyer
the (motor hypothesis of the) origins of language
What would count as the origin of language? To answer this question we must
assume that we can recognise language and distinguish it from other forms of
communication. Let us further assume that language is a complex system with
many aspects: the articulatory, the serially−organised the lexically−structured,
the expressive, the conceptual and so on. Do we conceive of language as
having sprung into existence full−blown or as the result of the accretion of
elements gradually coming to constitute some thing recognisable as
language? What, after all, counts as the origin of any thing? Darwin’s answer
on the origin of species was in essence that there was no origin and there were
no species.
Robin Allott
the (motor hypothesis of the) origins of language
The dogma that there is no primitive language rests on the assumption that
syntactic simplicity is the proper criterion of primitiveness. The essence of
language development is lexical development (in size, in range of reference,
in discrimination and in interconnectedness) linked to the possession of the
concepts to which the words in the lexicon refer.
Theories of the evolution of language have tended to focus on the major
features of human anatomy and neuroanatomy e.g. laterality. It may be more
profitable initially to see how many of the aspects of language we share with
animals and then decide what it is we do not share with them.
If one approaches the question from the standpoint of more traditional theory,
a number of features should be considered together: Bipedalism, Manipulative
skill, Good sound discrimination, Ability to imitate and respond to differing
sound patterns, Ability to form concepts, Ability to generalise and solve
practical problems, Better than usual vertebrate sight, Bodily agility, Close
group bonding, &c &c.
the
big
I took shaggy for a walk
dog
k y
ns
Mi
M.
Some aspects of linguistic structure may indeed plausibly be derived from
nonlinguistic, representational, structure. These include some (but not all)
aspects of hierarchical organization in syntax.
* symbol grounding
* veridical perception/representation