Im ersten Teil stelle ich den Niedergang der Metapher von der "Sprache der Natur" im Anschluss an die Untersuchungen von Hans Blumenberg dar. Blumenberg meint, dass der Sprachverlust der Natur bis heute anhält. Im zweiten Teil prüfe ich die Konzeption Charles Taylors, die im Verhältnis zu Blumenbergs Thesen als alternative Beschreibung angesehen werden kann. Während sich Blumenberg vor allem mit der äußeren Natur befasst, richtet sich Taylors Interesse auf die innere Natur. Zu den "Quellen des Selbst" rechnet er die "Stimme (...) der Natur", die bis in die Gegenwart wirke und in den Ökologiebewegungen zum Ausdruck komme. Der Aufmerksamkeit für die Naturzerstörung liege ein spezifisches Vermögen der modernen Identitätsbildung zugrunde. Taylors Rekurs auf die Natur ist nicht überzeugend und kann nicht als Einwand gegen Blumenbergs Auffassung gelten. Man muss das ökologische Bewusstsein nicht, wie Taylor es versucht, auf die neuzeitliche Philosophie zurückführen: Es könnte auch neueren Ursprungs sein, indem es sich erst in Auseinandersetzung mit der Umweltkrise entwickelte. Im dritten Teil frage ich, ob in der Umweltproblematik, wie sie etwa beim Klimawandel oder bei der Erschöpfung der natürlichen Ressourcen vorliegt, wieder eine Sprache der Natur vernehmbar wird. (shrink)

Leibniz’s philosophical and philological interests overlapped at many points, and some of his fundamental philosophical notions shaped his views on language, particularly his thinking about language history, in decisive ways. Although he is better known for his work on universal language, his writings on natural language and language history are worth consideration both for their subtlety and for the insight they give into the complex history of thought on this topic. The principles of sufficient reason, praedicatum inest subjecto, and his (...) doctrine of marks and traces are echoed in his work on natural languages and in his account of their histories. He attempted to reconcile philosophical investigations of the natural languages with the Biblical accounts of the confusion of languages at Babel, and in his approach to etymology he participated in a long tradition of thinking about language and its essence as hidden or secret, the truth of which remains scattered in signs and which etymology alone may occasionally reveal. (shrink)

This paper argues that Wittgenstein, both early and late, rejects the idea that the logically simpler and more fundamental case is that of “the mere sign” and that what a meaningful symbol is can be explained through the elaboration of an appropriately supplemented conception of the sign: the sign plus something (say, an interpretation or an assignment of meaning). Rather the sign, in the logically fundamental case of its mode of occurrence, is an internal aspect of (...) the symbol. The Tractatus puts this point as follows: “The sign is that in the symbol which is perceptible by the senses.” Conversely, this means that it is essential to a symbol – to what a symbol is – that it have an essentially perceptible aspect. For Wittgenstein there is no privileged direction of explanatory priority between symbol and sign here: without signs there are no symbols (hence without language there is no thought) and without some sort of relation to symbols there are no signs (hence the philosopher’s concept of the supposedly “merely linguistic” presupposes an internal relation to symbols). (shrink)

This article explores the basic assumptions of Generative Lexicon Theory (GL) and the implications for the general theory of the linguistic sign that arise from the generative mechanisms “selective binding,” “co-composition,” and “type coercion.” The article focuses on the assumption underlying GL that interpretation and polysemy are part of lexical structure. It is shown that encoded lexical meaning and inferred non-lexical knowledge cannot be clearly distinguished in GL. In order to be consistent, GL must also be supplemented by (...) a theory of “normal language use” and be able to account for semantic underspecification in a semiotically coherent way. (shrink)

What does it mean to drive a Cadillac? What does 'cuckoo' suggest about the bird? -- two examples explored in this investigation of the history of language signs and of what philosophers, linguists, and others have had to say about them. Rudi Keller shows how signs emerge, function, and develop in the permanent process of language change. He recombines thoughts and ideas from Plato to the present day to create a new theory of the meaning and evolution of icons and (...) symbols. By assuming no prior knowledge and by developing his argument from first principles, Rudi Keller has written a basic text which includes all the necessary features: easy style, good organization, original scholarship, and historical depth. This is a non-technical book which will interest linguists, philosophers, students of communications and cultural studies, semioticians/semanticists, sociologists, and anthropologists. (shrink)

From the late seventeenth century to the middle of the eighteenth, an important shift occurred in attitudes to the arbitrariness of the first human words. While authors such as Locke and Pufendorf emphasized linguistic arbitrariness and human liberty, mid-eighteenth-century thinkers highlighted the natural aspects of language and the limited scope of freedom and reason. This change is linked to the contemporary view of the cultural world as a natural artifice, strongly molded by social and environmental factors. The article highlights (...) hitherto neglected similarities between Leibniz’s ideas on language and mid-eighteenth-century theories, by contrast to the usual focus on Locke. (shrink)

MARXISM AND THE PHILOSOPHY, OF LANGUAGE By V.N. Volo?inov translated by Ladislav Matejka & I.R. Titunik Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1986. 205 pp., $9.95 The contributions of Volo?inov's theories of language are assessed and are contrasted to traditional Marxist philosophy, Saussurean linguistics and more recent developments in transformational grammar and sociolinguistics. Studying connections between language and politics in the 1920s, Volosinov explored the ways social reality enters verbal signs and their usage, anticipating many of the debates within modem linguistics.

To Aristotle, spoken words are symbols, not of objects in the world, but of our mental experiences related to these objects. Presently there are two major strands of interpretation of Aristotle’s concept of the linguistic sign. First, there is the structuralist account offered by Coseriu (Geschichte der Sprachphilosophie. Von den Anfängen bis Rousseau, 2003 [1969], pp. 65–108) whose interpretation is reminiscent of the Saussurean sign concept. A second interpretation, offered by Lieb (in: Geckeler (Ed.) Logos Semantikos: Studia (...) Linguistica in Honorem Eugenio Coseriu 1921–1981, 1981) and Weidemann (in: Schmitter (Ed.) Geschichte der Sprachtheorie 2. Sprachtheorien der abendländischen Antike, 1991), says that Aristotle’s concept of the linguistic sign is similar to the one presented in Ogden and Richard’s (The meaning of meaning: A study of the influence of language upon thought and of the science of symbolism, 1970 [1923]) semiotic triangle. This paper starts off with an introductory outline of the so-called phýsei-thései discussion which started during presocratic times and culminated in Plato’s Cratylus. Aristotle’s concept of the linguistic sign is to be regarded as a solution to the stalemate position reached in the Cratylus. Next, a discussion is offered of both Coseriu’s and Lieb’s analysis. We submit that Aristotle’s concept of the linguistic sign shows features of both Saussure’s and Ogden and Richards’s sign concept but that it does not exclusively predict one of the two. We argue that Aristotle’s concept of the linguistic sign is based on three different relations which together evince his teleological as well empiricist point of view: one internal (symbolic) relation and two external relations, i.e. a likeness relation and a relation katà synthéken. (shrink)

To Aristotle, spoken words are symbols, not of objects in the world, but of our mental experiences related to these objects. Presently there are two major strands of interpretation of Aristotle’s concept of the linguistic sign. First, there is the structuralist account offered by Coseriu (Geschichte der Sprachphilosophie. Von den Anfängen bis Rousseau, 2003 [1969], pp. 65–108) whose interpretation is reminiscent of the Saussurean sign concept. A second interpretation, offered by Lieb (in: Geckeler (Ed.) Logos Semantikos: Studia (...) Linguistica in Honorem Eugenio Coseriu 1921–1981, 1981) and Weidemann (in: Schmitter (Ed.) Geschichte der Sprachtheorie 2. Sprachtheorien der abendländischen Antike, 1991), says that Aristotle’s concept of the linguistic sign is similar to the one presented in Ogden and Richard’s (The meaning of meaning: A study of the influence of language upon thought and of the science of symbolism, 1970 [1923]) semiotic triangle. This paper starts off with an introductory outline of the so-called phýsei-thései discussion which started during presocratic times and culminated in Plato’s Cratylus. Aristotle’s concept of the linguistic sign is to be regarded as a solution to the stalemate position reached in the Cratylus. Next, a discussion is offered of both Coseriu’s and Lieb’s analysis. We submit that Aristotle’s concept of the linguistic sign shows features of both Saussure’s and Ogden and Richards’s sign concept but that it does not exclusively predict one of the two. We argue that Aristotle’s concept of the linguistic sign is based on three different relations which together evince his teleological as well empiricist point of view: one internal (symbolic) relation and two external relations, i.e. a likeness relation and a relation katà synthéken. (shrink)

Taboo terms offer a playground for linguistic creativity in language after language, and sign languages form no exception. The present paper offers the first investigation of taboo terms in sign languages from a cognitive linguistic perspective. We analyze the linguistic mechanisms that introduce offense, focusing on the combined effects of cognitive metonymy and iconicity. Using the Think Aloud Protocol, we elicited offensive or crass signs and dysphemisms from nine signers. We find that German Sign (...) Language uses a variety of linguistic means to introduce and enhance offense, many of which rely on iconic properties of the taboo sign. In conjunction with cross-linguistically common metonymic word-formation strategies, the degree of visual explicitness of a sign increases its potential to offend. Semantically similar taboo signs based on the same metonymic anchor but differing in their degree of iconicity also differ in offensiveness. This allows for creating dysphemisms and euphemisms via phonological changes to a sign. We further show that embodiment creates modality-enhanced ‘vicarious embarrassment’ in the viewer that results in the respective signs being judged obscene or offensive. Further, lexical blending and non-manual enhancement play a role in the creation of dysphemisms in DGS. Lastly, we propose that iconicity as a cognitive structuring principle of linguistic expressions constrains the possible semantic extensions of iconic taboo terms. (shrink)

In contrast to scholars and signers in the nineteenth century, William Stokoe conceived of American Sign Language (ASL) as a unique linguistic tradition with roots in nineteenth-centurylangue des signes française, a conception that is apparent in his earliest scholarship on ASL. Stokoe thus contributed to the theoretical foundations upon which the field of sign language historical linguistics would later develop. This review focuses on the development of sign language historical linguistics since Stokoe, including the field's significant (...) progress and the theoretical and methodological problems that it still faces. The review examines the field's development through the lens of two related problems pertaining to how we understand sign language relationships and to our understanding of cognacy, as the term pertains to signs. It is suggested that the theoretical notions underlying these terms do not straightforwardly map onto the historical development of many sign languages. Recent approaches in sign language historical linguistics are highlighted and future directions for research are suggested to address the problems discussed in this review. (shrink)

Bestial banter -- Homo risus : making light of animal language -- Warming savage hearts and heating eloquent tongues -- From savage orators to savage languages -- French levity -- English energy.

Evidence from adult studies of deaf signers supports the dissociation between neural systems involved in processing visual linguistic and non-linguistic body actions. The question of how and when this specialization arises is poorly understood. Visual attention to these forms is likely to change with age and be affected by prior language experience. The present study used eye-tracking methodology with infants and children as they freely viewed alternating video sequences of lexical American sign language (ASL) signs and non- (...) class='Hi'>linguistic body actions (self-directed grooming action and object-directed pantomime). In Experiment 1, we quantified fixation patterns using an area of interest (AOI) approach and calculated face preference index (FPI) values to assess the developmental differences between 6 and 11-month-old hearing infants. Both groups were from monolingual English-speaking homes with no prior exposure to sign language. Six-month-olds attended the signer’s face for grooming; but for mimes and signs, they were drawn to attend to the “articulatory space” where the hands and arms primarily fall. Eleven-month-olds, on the other hand, showed a similar attention to the face for all body action types. We interpret this to reflect an early visual language sensitivity that diminishes with age, just before the child’s first birthday. In Experiment 2, we contrasted 18 hearing monolingual English-speaking children (mean age of 4.8 years) vs. 13 hearing children of deaf adults (CODAs; mean age of 5.7 years) whose primary language at home was ASL. Native signing children had a significantly greater face attentional bias than non-signing children for ASL signs, but not for grooming and mimes. The differences in the visual attention patterns that are contingent on age (in infants) and language experience (in children) may be related to both linguistic specialization over time and the emerging awareness of communicative gestural acts. (shrink)

The article deals with diversity of language signs in legal terminology. The aim of the article is to show the influence of both linguistic and extra-linguistic factors on the specificity of various linguistic units in the legal terminology. Though all terminological systems possess some similar features, there may be certain traits characteristic only for some of them. As specific systems of signs, legal terminologies show some peculiarities that are discussed in the article from the point of view (...) of oppositions to highlight the semiotic specifics of language units used by lawyers and also the organization of the terminological system under consideration. The oppositions under consideration emerge due to both linguistic and extra-linguistic factors. Extra-linguistic factors determine such oppositions as terminology of law: terminology of jurisprudence, modern terminology: historical terminology, terms: nomenclature signs. Linguistic factors stipulate the opposition of primary and derived terms. A combination of linguistic and extra-linguistic factors determines the following oppositions: native terms: borrowed terms, terms of the basic terminological system: terms attracted from other spheres of knowledge. Within these types of oppositions a number of more specific ones were elicited. The interaction of synchronic and diachronic approaches the article is based on allowed the authors to focus on the permanent semantic properties of the language signs pertaining to tribal customary and modern law, and on those emerging in the course of the evolution of law. (shrink)

Several interesting and significant philosophical, political and other possibilities abound in Derrida’s linguistic materialism, but the objectives of my paper are to describe the general tenets of Derridean linguistic materialism, and to deploy it in the context of Khasi oral tradition in order to lay bare the sensory origin of the sign. I therefore argue, firstly, that Derrida’s oeuvre espouses a nuanced case of linguistic materialism of the sensible-physical trace, which in its materiality is constantly in (...) the process of standing for or representing another sign/signs through the basic process of mediation that he calls écriture—‘writing’ in a more originary sense. Meaning is inscribed in the materiality of the sensible world, is manifested in the material trace of signifiers and is not mediated through the transcendental signified or metaphysical idea. By implication, Derrida’s linguistic materialism is also a theory of the material and empirical origin of the sign. However, the material nature of the thing, which itself is a sign, is not fixed, but is multifaceted, split and polysemic, making meaning contingent and differential. I argue, secondly, that such an understanding of language and meaning must direct us to language in its most original and primordial forms as found in original oral cultures, where the materiality of the sign is most unhidden and discernible. I, thus, give an account of the sensory, original and material character of linguistic meaning with reference to the case of the oral culture of the Khasi community of India. Khasi words, metaphors and imageries can be demonstrated more plainly in their sensory derivations. Query. (shrink)

Zwischen der Veröffentlichung der "Phänomenologie der Wahrnehmung" im Jahr 1945 und dem Tod Merleau-Pontys im Jahr 1961 liegen gerade einmal 16 Jahre. In dieser Zeitspanne nimmt Merleau-Ponty das Projekt einer Ausweitung und Grundlegung seiner Überlegungen auf, indem er zum einen das Phänomen der Expressivität in den unterschiedlichsten kulturellen Dimensionen erkundet, um vom Ausdrucksverhalten her eine Kulturphilosophie eigenen Typs zu entwickeln, und um zum anderen ein ontologisches Fundament der ästhetischen Stellung des Menschen in der Welt freizulegen. Diese Projekte konnte Merleau-Ponty aufgrund (...) seines frühen Todes nicht vollständig verwirklichen und zusammenführen. Seine letzte große Veröffentlichung, die unter dem Titel "Zeichen (Signes)" die wichtigsten Beiträge aus jener Zeit versammelt und die nun erstmals vollständig in deutscher Übersetzung vorliegt, läßt den Rahmen dieses Unterfangens erkennen und skizziert die Konturen der Überlegungen Merleau-Pontys in den 50er Jahren. Aufgenommen wurden von ihm Aufsätze und Essays, die der Sprachphilosophie, der Ästhetik, der Wissenschaftstheorie der Sozialwissenschaften sowie der Phänomenologie und Philosophiegeschichte gewidmet sind. Zusätzlich fügt er politische Artikel und Stellungnahmen zur kulturellen Situation Frankreichs sowie Interviews hinzu, die belegen, in welche Zeit hinein und aus welcher Situation heraus sich sein Denken realisiert. (shrink)

Kann ein nicht-sprachliches Zeichen aus einer Menge nicht-sprachlicher Zeichen folgen? Lassen sich Beweise fuhren, deren Schritte nicht-sprachliche Reprasentationen sind? Konnen nicht-sprachliche Logiksysteme entwickelt werden, die den Sicherheitsanforderungen genugen, welche ublicherweise an sprachliche Systeme gestellt werden? Und wenn ja: Sind sie ebenso gut geeignet, um logische Probleme zu losen? In der Logik werden meist Propositionen oder Satze als Relata der logischen Folgerungsbeziehung behandelt. Diagramme, Bilder und andere nicht-sprachliche Zeichen spielen bisher nur eine untergeordnete Rolle. In dieser Einfuhrung (...) werden einige grundlegende Fragen zum logischen Status nicht-sprachlicher Zeichen motiviert, erlautert und untersucht. Logikkenntnisse werden nicht vorausgesetzt.". (shrink)

T. 1. Beim jungen Augustinus.--T. 2. Die antimanichäische Epoche.

T. 1. Beim jungen Augustinus.--T. 2. Die antimanichäische Epoche.

Vergewisserungsprozesse, auch die des christlichen Glaubens, sind Zeicheninterpretationsprozesse. Diese These entwickelt Gesche Linde, indem sie die theoretische Inanspruchnahme des Zeichenbegriffs für das Gewißheitsproblem von der Antike bis hin zu Luther nachzeichnet. Schließlich rekonstruiert sie das zehntrichomische Zeichenklassifikationssystem des späten Peirce, das es erlaubt, alle Bewußtseinsprozesse, vom Fühlen über das Handeln bis hin zum Denken bzw. Sprachverstehen, als grundsätzlich identisch strukturierte Prozesse der Interpretation von Zeichen aufzufassen, ohne daß die Einsicht in diese seine eigene Strukturbedingung den christlichen Glauben zur Relativierung (...) seines Wahrheitsanspruches nötigen oder ihn seines Gewißheitscharakters berauben würde. (shrink)

We argue that formal linguistic theory, properly extended, can provide a unifying framework for diverse phenomena beyond traditional linguistic objects. We display applications to pictorial meanings, visual narratives, music, dance, animal communication, and, more abstractly, to logical and non-logical concepts in the ‘language of thought’ and reasoning. In many of these cases, a careful analysis reveals that classic linguistic notions are pervasive across these domains, such as for instance the constituency (or grouping) core principle of syntax, the (...) use of logical variables (for object tracking), or the variety of inference types investigated in semantics/pragmatics. The aim of this overview is to show how the application of formal linguistic concepts and methodology to non-linguistic objects yields non-trivial insights, thus opening the possibility of a general, precise theory of signs. (An appendix, found in the online supplements to this article, surveys applications of Super Linguistics to animal communication.). (shrink)

Der vorliegende Aufsatz diagnosiziert im Sinne Nietzsche eine Krise des traditionellen Wahrheitsbegriffs, in dem Wahrheit als metaphysische Wahrheit verstanden wurde, die den Wahrheitsbegriffs, in dem Wahrheit als metaphysische Warheit verstanden wurde, die den Wahrheitsträgern zeitlos, zeichenunvermittelt und interperationsunabhängig zukommt. Die Kritik an diesem Verständnis bedient sich sowohl der Unterscheidung zwischen einem engen und einem weiten Sinn als auch der Gegenüberstellung einer alten und einer neuen Rede von Wahrheit. Letztere wird mit Hilfe eines drei-stufigen Modells der Zeichen- und Interpretationsverhältnisse entfaltet. (...) Dadurch gelingt es, Wahrheit als Funktion von Zeichen- und Interpretationsprozessen zu konzipieren und in ihrer Rolle zur Geltung zu bringen. Dieses neue Modell der Wahrheit erlaubt darüber hinaus einerseits eine Reformulierung älterer Aspekte der Wahrheitsfrage, andererseits aber auch die Neubestimmung der Wahrheit als zeichen- und interpretationsprozessual, historische, genealogisch und gradierbar.The article startes from a Nietzschean inspired diagnosis of the crisis of the traditional concept of truth, understood as timeless metaphysical truth, unmediated by signs and independent of interpretations. The critique of this notion makes use of a distinction between a narrow and a wide concept of truth as well as contrasting two construals of truth: an old and a new one. the latter is elaborated by means of a three-leveled model of signo-interpretational relations. This enables us to bring to the fore a notion of truth as a function of signo-interpretational processes. In addition, this new model of truth makes it possible to reformulate some of the old aspects of truth, while at the same time allowing for a new conception of truth as signo-interpretational, historical, genealogical, and gradable in character. (shrink)

The main subject of this article is the linguistic norm and its variants with regard to evaluation of lingual expressions. The article tries to show various German and Polish conceptions of linguistic norms and to point to their reference to lingual errors/mistakes and interference. Functional norm, usus, feel for language and their importance for language standardization are also discussed in the article, together with the relativity of linguistic norm.

In diesem Buch wird vor Augen geführt, auf welche Weise Platon bildhafte und vorgeformte Sprachmittel wie Metaphern, Vergleiche verschiedenster Ausprägung, Sprichwörter, Redensarten und Zitate einsetzt und welche Wirkungen er damit erzielt. Dabei handelt es sich um Aspekte in der Gesprächsführung seiner Dialogfiguren, die zur Aussage und Deutung der platonischen Dialoge nicht nur Wesentliches beitragen, sondern aufgrund ihrer Thematik auch die Philosophie Platons und deren Abgrenzung erhellen. Erstmals wird die prinzipielle Zusammengehörigkeit der genannten sprachlichen Erscheinungen in Betracht gezogen und mittels einer (...) Terminologie, die altgriechische Kategorien in Begriffen aus der modernen Metaphorologie und Parömiologie erfasst, systematisch untersucht. Auf der Basis von 15 vollständig ausgewerteten platonischen Dialogen, von denen vier detailliert analysiert werden, kristallisieren sich Ergebnisse heraus, die als exemplarisch gelten können. This book demonstrates how Plato employs figurative and pre-formed linguistic devices such as metaphors, a wide variety of comparisons, proverbs, idioms and quotations, and the intended effects of these. The focus is on aspects of the language used by the speakers in his dialogues, and not only forms a significant contribution to the conclusions and interpretation of the platonic dialogues, but also shed new light on Plato’s philosophy and its limits. For the first time the principal relationships between the linguistic phenomena described are given consideration and systematically studied using a terminology that maps Ancient Greek categories onto the concepts of modern metaphorology and paremiology. On the basis of 15 fully evaluated platonic dialogues, four of which are analysed in detail, findings emerge which can be seen as exemplary. (shrink)