A sign is understood as a discrete unit of meaning in semiotics. It is defined as "something that stands for something, to someone in some capacity"^[1] It includes words, images, gestures, scents, tastes, textures, sounds – essentially all of the ways in which information can be communicated as a message by any sentient, reasoning mind to another.

The nature of signs has long been discussed in philosophy. Initially, within linguistics and later semiotics, there were two general schools of thought: those who proposed that signs are ‘dyadic’ (i.e. having two parts), and those who proposed that signs are interpreted in a recursive pattern of triadic (i.e. three-part) relationships.

Dyadic signs[link]

According to Saussure (1857–1913), a sign is composed of the signifier^[2] (signifiant), and the signified (signifié). These cannot be conceptualized as separate entities but rather as a mapping from significant differences in sound to potential (correct) differential denotation. The Saussurean sign exists only at the level of the synchronic system, in which signs are defined by their relative and hierarchical privileges of co-occurrence. It is thus a common misreading of Saussure to take signifiers to be anything one could speak, and signifieds as things in the world. In fact, the relationship of language to parole (or speech-in-context) is and always has been a theoretical problem for linguistics (cf. Roman Jakobson's famous essay "Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics" et al.).

A famous thesis by Saussure states that the relationship between a sign and the real-world thing it denotes is an arbitrary one. There is not a natural relationship between a word and the object it refers to, nor is there a causal relationship between the inherent properties of the object and the nature of the sign used to denote it. For example, there is nothing about the physical quality of paper that requires denotation by the phonological sequence ‘paper’. There is, however, what Saussure called ‘relative motivation’: the possibilities of signification of a signifier are constrained by the compositionality of elements in the linguistic system (cf. Emile Benveniste's paper on the arbitrariness of the sign in the first volume of his papers on general linguistics). In other words, a word is only available to acquire a new meaning if it is identifiably different from all the other words in the language and it has no existing meaning. Structuralism was later based on this idea that it is only within a given system that one can define the distinction between the levels of system and use, or the semantic "value" of a sign.

Triadic signs[link]

Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–1914) proposed a different theory. Unlike Saussure who approached the conceptual question from a study of linguistics and phonology, Peirce was a somewhat Kantian philosopher who distinguished "sign" from "word" as only a particular kind of sign, and characterized the sign as the means to understanding. He covered not only artificial, linguistic, and symbolic signs, but also all semblances (such as kindred sensible qualities), and all indicators (such as mechanical reactions). He counted as symbols all terms, propositions, and arguments even apart from their expression in particular languages. He held that "all this universe is perfused with signs, if it is not composed exclusively of signs".^[3] The setting of Peirce's study of signs is philosophical logic, which he defined as formal semiotic,^[4] and characterized as a normative field following esthetics and ethics, as more basic than metaphysics,^[5] and as the art of devising methods of research.^[6] He argued that, since all thought takes time, all thought is in signs,^[7] that all thought has the form of inference (even when not conscious and deliberate),^[7] and that, as inference, "logic is rooted in the social principle", since inference depends on a standpoint that, in a sense, is unlimited.^[8] The result is a theory not of language in particular, but rather of the production of meaning, and it rejects the idea of a static relationship between a sign and that which it represents, its object. Peirce believed that signs are meaningful through recursive relationships that arise in sets of three.

Even when a sign represents by a resemblance or factual connection independent of interpretation, the sign is a sign only insofar as it is at least potentially interpretable by a mind and insofar as the sign is a determination of a mind or at least a quasi-mind, that which functions as if it were a mind, for example in crystals and the work of bees^[9]—the focus here is on sign action in general, not on psychology, linguistics, or social studies (fields which Peirce also pursued).

A sign is something which depends on an object in a way that enables (and, in a sense, determines) an interpretation, an interpretant, to depend on the object as the sign depends on the object. The interpretant, then, is a further sign of the object, and thus enables and determines still further interpretations, further interpretant signs. The process, called semiosis, is irreducibly triadic, Peirce held, and is logically structured to perpetuate itself. It is what defines sign, object, and interpretant in general.^[10] As Jean-Jacques Nattiez (1990: 7) put it, "the process of referring effected by the sign is infinite." (Note also that Peirce used the word "determine" in the sense not of strict determinism, but of effectiveness that can vary like an influence.^[11])

Peirce further characterized the three semiotic elements as follows:^[12]

1. Sign (or representamen^[13]): that which represents the denoted object (cf. Saussure's "signifier").
2. Object (or semiotic object): that which the sign represents (or as some put it, encodes). It can be anything thinkable, a law, a fact, or even a possibility (a semiotic object could even be fictional, such as Hamlet); those are partial objects; the total object is the universe of discourse, the totality of objects in that world to which one attributes the partial object. For example, perturbation of Pluto's orbit is a sign about Pluto, but not only about Pluto. The object may be
   1. immediate to the sign, the object as represented in the sign, or
   2. dynamic, the object as it really is, on which the immediate object is founded.
3. Interpretant (or interpretant sign): a sign's meaning or ramification as formed into a further sign by interpreting (or, as some put it, decoding) the sign. The interpretant may be:
   1. immediate to the sign, a kind of possibility, all that the sign is suited to immediately express, for instance a word's usual meaning;
   2. dynamic, that is, the meaning as formed into an actual effect, for example an individual translation or a state of agitation, or
   3. final or normal, that is, the ultimate meaning that inquiry taken far enough would be destined to reach. It is a kind of norm or ideal end, with which an actual interpretant may, at most, coincide.

Peirce explained that signs mediate between their objects and their interpretants in semiosis, the triadic process of determination. In semiosis a first is determined or influenced to be a sign by a second, as its object. The object determines the sign to determine a third as an interpretant. Firstness itself is one of Peirce's three categories of all phenomena, and is quality of feeling. Firstness is associated with a vague state of mind as feeling and a sense of the possibilities, with neither compulsion nor reflection. In semiosis the mind discerns an appearance or phenomenon, a potential sign. Secondness is reaction or resistance, a category associated with moving from possibility to determinate actuality. Here, through experience outside of and collateral to the given sign or sign system, one recalls or discovers the object to which the sign refers, for example when a sign consists in a chance semblance of an absent but remembered object. It is through one's collateral experience^[14] that the object determines the sign to determine an interpretant. Thirdness is representation or mediation, the category associated with signs, generality, rule, continuity, habit-taking, and purpose. Here one forms an interpretant expressing a meaning or ramification of the sign about the object. When a second sign is considered, the initial interpretant may be confirmed, or new possible meanings may be identified. As each new sign is addressed, more interpretants, themselves signs, emerge. It can involve a mind's reading of nature, people, mathematics, anything.

Peirce generalized the communicational idea of utterance and interpretation of a sign, to cover all signs:^[15]

Admitting that connected Signs must have a Quasi-mind, it may further be declared that there can be no isolated sign. Moreover, signs require at least two Quasi-minds; a Quasi-utterer and a Quasi-interpreter; and although these two are at one (i.e., are one mind) in the sign itself, they must nevertheless be distinct. In the Sign they are, so to say, welded. Accordingly, it is not merely a fact of human Psychology, but a necessity of Logic, that every logical evolution of thought should be dialogic.

According to Nattiez, writing with Jean Molino, the tripartite definition of sign, object, and interpretant is based on the "trace" or neutral level, Saussure's "sound-image" (or "signified", thus Peirce's "representamen"). Thus, "a symbolic form...is not some 'intermediary' in a process of 'communication' that transmits the meaning intended by the author to the audience; it is instead the result of a complex process of creation (the poietic process) that has to do with the form as well as the content of the work; it is also the point of departure for a complex process of reception (the esthesic process that reconstructs a 'message'"). (ibid, p. 17)

Molino's and Nattiez's diagram:

Poietic Process			Esthesic Process
"Producer"	→	Trace	←	Receiver

(Nattiez 1990, p. 17)

Peirce's theory of the sign therefore offered a powerful analysis of the signification system, its codes, and its processes of inference and learning, because the focus was often on natural or cultural context rather than linguistics which only analyses usage in slow-time whereas, in the real world, there is an often chaotic blur of language and signal exchange during human semiotic interaction. Nevertheless, the implication that triadic relations are structured to perpetuate themselves leads to a level of complexity not usually experienced in the routine of message creation and interpretation. Hence, different ways of expressing the idea have been developed.

Classes of triadic signs[link]

By 1903^[16] Peirce came to classify signs by three universal trichotomies dependent on his three categories (quality, fact, habit). He classified any sign^[17]:

1. by what stands as the sign — either (qualisign, also called a tone) a quality — or (sinsign, also called token) an individual fact — or (legisign, also called type) a rule, a habit;
2. by how the sign stands for its object — either (icon) by its own quality, such that it resembles the object, regardless of factual connection and of interpretive rule of reference — or (index) by factual connection to its object, regardless of resemblance and of interpretive rule of reference — or (symbol) by rule or habit of interpreted reference to its object, regardless of resemblance and of factual connection; and
3. by how the sign stands for its object to its interpretant — either (rheme, also called seme,^[18] such as a term) as regards quality or possibility, as if the sign were a qualisign, though it can be qualisign, sinsign, or legisign — or (dicisign, also called pheme, such as a proposition) as regards fact, as if the sign were an index, though it can be index or symbol — or (argument, also called delome^[19]) as regards rule or habit. This is the trichotomy of all signs as building blocks in an inference process.

• Any qualisign is an icon. Sinsigns include some icons and some indices. Legisigns include some icons, some indices, and all symbols.
• Any icon is a rheme. Indices (be they sinsigns or legisigns) include some rhemes and some dicisigns. Symbols include some rhemes, some dicisigns, and all arguments.

Lines of joint classification of signs.
Every sign is:^[16]

	1.		2.		3.
I.	Qualisign	or	Sinsign	or	Legisign
and
II.	Icon	or	Index	or	Symbol
and
III.	Rheme	or	Dicisign	or	Argument

Because of those classificatory interdependences, the three trichotomies intersect to form ten (rather than 27) classes of signs. There are also various kinds of meaningful combination. Signs can be attached to one another. A photograph is an index with a meaningfully attached icon. Arguments are composed of dicisigns, and dicisigns are composed of rhemes. In order to be embodied, legisigns (types) need sinsigns (tokens) as their individual replicas or instances. A symbol depends as a sign on how it will be interpreted, regardless of resemblance or factual connection to its object; but the symbol's individual embodiment is an index to your experience of the object. A symbol is instanced by a specialized indexical sinsign. A symbol such as a sentence in a language prescribes qualities of appearance for its instances, and is itself a replica of a symbol such as a proposition apart from expression in a particular language. Peirce covered both semantic and syntactical issues in his theoretical grammar, as he sometimes called it. He regarded formal semiotic, as logic, as furthermore encompassing study of arguments (hypothetical, deductive, and inductive) and inquiry's methods including pragmatism; and as allied to but distinct from logic's pure mathematics.

Peirce sometimes referred to the “ground” of a sign. The ground is the pure abstraction of a quality.^[20] A sign's ground is the respect in which the sign represents its object, e.g. as in literal and figurative language. For example, an icon presents a characteristic or quality attributed to an object, while a symbol imputes to an object a quality either presented by an icon or symbolized so as to evoke a mental icon.

Peirce called an icon apart from a label, legend, or other index attached to it, a "hypoicon", and divided the hypoicon into three classes: (a) the image, which depends on a simple quality; (b) the diagram, whose internal relations, mainly dyadic or so taken, represent by analogy the relations in something; and (c) the metaphor, which represents the representative character of a sign by representing a parallelism in something else.^[21] A diagram can be geometric, or can consist in an array of algebraic expressions, or even in the common form "All __ is ___" which is subjectable, like any diagram, to logical or mathematical transformations. Peirce held that mathematics is done by diagrammatic thinking — observation of, and experimentation on, diagrams. Peirce developed for deductive logic a system of visual existential graphs, which continue to be researched today.

20th century theories[link]

It is now agreed that the effectiveness of the acts that may convert the message into text (including speaking, writing, drawing, music and physical movements) depends upon the knowledge of the sender. If the sender is not familiar with the current language, its codes and its culture, then he or she will not be able to say anything at all, whether as a visitor in a different language area or because of a medical condition such as aphasia (see Roman Jakobson).

Modern theories deny the Saussurian distinction between signifier and signified, and look for meaning not in the individual signs, but in their context and the framework of potential meanings that could be applied. Such theories assert that language is a collective memory or cultural history of all the different ways in which meaning has been communicated, and may to that extent, constitute all life's experiences (see Louis Hjelmslev). Hjelmslev did not considered the sign to be the smallest semiotic unit, as he believed it possible to decompose it further; instead, he considered the "internal structure of language" to be a system of figurae, a concept somewhat related to that of figure of speech, which he considered to be the ultimate semiotic unity.^[22][23][24]

This position implies that speaking is simply one more form of behaviour and changes the focus of attention from the text as language, to the text as a representation of purpose, a functional version of the author's intention. But, once the message has been transmitted, the text exists independently.^{[citation needed]}

Hence, although the writers who co-operated to produce this page exist, they can only be represented by the signs actually selected and presented here. The interpretation process in the receiver's mind may attribute meanings completely different from those intended by the senders. But, why might this happen? Neither the sender nor the receiver of a text has a perfect grasp of all language. Each individual's relatively small stock of knowledge is the product of personal experience and their attitude to learning. When the audience receives the message, there will always be an excess of connotational meanings available to be applied to the particular signs in their context (no matter how relatively complete or incomplete their knowledge, the cognitive process is the same).^{[citation needed]}

The first stage in understanding the message is therefore, to suspend or defer judgement until more information becomes available. At some point, the individual receiver decides which of all the possible meanings represents the best possible "fit". Sometimes, uncertainty may not be resolved, so meaning is indefinitely deferred, or a provisional or approximate meaning is allocated. More often, the receiver's desire for closure (see Gestalt psychology) leads to simple meanings being attributed out of prejudices and without reference to the sender's intentions.^{[citation needed]}

Postmodern theory[link]

Within critical theory, the notion of sign takes various usages. "Many postmodernist theorists postulate a complete disconnection of the signifier and the signified. An 'empty' or 'floating signifier' is variously defined as a signifier with a vague, highly variable, unspecifiable or non-existent signified. Such signifiers mean different things to different people: they may stand for many or even any signifieds; they may mean whatever their interpreters want them to mean."^[25]

See also[link]

• Grapheme
• Semantic
• Semeiotic
• semiotic triangle
• Sign (linguistics)
• Sign relation
• Triadic relation

Notes[link]

1. ^ Marcel Danesi and Paul Perron, Analyzing Cultures.
2. ^ Mardy S. Ireland defines a signifier as:
   A unit of something (i.e., a word, gesture) that can carry ambiguous/multiple meanings (e.g., as U.S. President Bill Clinton once said, "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is', is")
   Ireland, Mardy S. (2003). The Art of the Subject: Between Necessary Illusion and Speakable Desire in the Analytic Encounter. Other Press. 159051033X.  p. 13.
3. ^ Peirce, C. S., Collected Papers, v. 5, paragraph 448 footnote, from "The Basis of Pragmaticism" in 1906.
4. ^ Peirce, C.S., 1902, Application to the Carnegie Institution, Memoir 12, "On the Definition of Logic", Eprint. Note that by "logic" Peirce means a part of philosophy, not the mathematics of logic. (See Classification of the sciences (Peirce).
5. ^ On his classifications, see Peirce, C.S. (1903), Collected Peirce v. 1, paragraphs 180–202 Eprint and (1906) "The Basis of Pragmaticism" in The Essential Peirce v. 2, pp. 372–3. For relevant quotes, see "Philosophy" and "Logic" in the Commens Dictionary of Peirce's Terms.
6. ^ Peirce, C.S., 1882, "Introductory Lecture on the Study of Logic" delivered September 1882, Johns Hopkins University Circulars, v. 2, n. 19, pp. 11–12, November 1892, Google Book Eprint. Reprinted in Collected Papers v. 7, paragraphs 59–76, The Essential Peirce v. 1, pp. 210–14, and Writings of Charles S. Peirce v. 4, pp. 378–82.
7. ^ ^{a b} Peirce, C.S. (1868), "Questions concerning certain Faculties claimed for Man" (Arisbe Eprint), Journal of Speculative Philosophy vol. 2, pp. 103–114. Reprinted in Collected Papers v. 5, paragraphs 213–63.
8. ^ Peirce, C. S. (1878) "The Doctrine of Chances", Popular Science Monthly, v. 12, pp. 604–15, 1878, reprinted in Collected Papers, v. 2, paragraphs 645–68, Writings of Charles S. Peirce v. 3, pp. 276–90, and The Essential Peirce v. 1, pp. 142–54. "...death makes the number of our risks, the number of our inferences, finite, and so makes their mean result uncertain. The very idea of probability and of reasoning rests on the assumption that this number is indefinitely great. .... ...logicality inexorably requires that our interests shall not be limited. .... Logic is rooted in the social principle."
9. ^ See under "Quasi-mind" in the Commens Dictionary of Peirce's Terms.
10. ^ For Peirce's definitions of sign and semiosis, see under "Sign" and "Semiosis, semeiosy" in the Commens Dictionary of Peirce's Terms; and "76 definitions of sign by C. S. Peirce" collected by Robert Marty. Peirce's "What Is a Sign" (MS 404 of 1894, Essential Peirce v. 2, pp. 4–10) provides intuitive help.
11. ^ For example, Peirce said "determined (i.e., specialized, bestimmt)" in a letter to William James, dated 1909, see p. 492 in The Essential Peirce v. 2.
12. ^ For Peirce's definitions of immediate object and the rest, see the Commens Dictionary of Peirce's Terms.
13. ^ Pronounced with the “a” long and stressed: /rɛprɨzɛn.ˈteɪmən/. See wiktionary:representamen.
14. ^ In that context Peirce speaks of collateral experience, collateral observation, collateral acquaintance, all in much the same terms. See pp. 404–9 in "Pragmatism" in The Essential Peirce v. 2. Ten quotes on collateral experience from Peirce provided by Joseph Ransdell can be viewed here at peirce-l's Lyris archive.
15. ^ Peirce (1906), "Prolegomena To an Apology For Pragmaticism", The Monist, v. XVI, n. 4, pp. 492–546, see pp. 523–4, Google Books Eprint. Reprinted in Collected Papers v. 4, paragraphs 530–72, see 551.
16. ^ ^{a b} Peirce (1903 MS), "Nomenclature and Divisions of Triadic Relations, as Far as They Are Determined", under other titles in Collected Papers (CP) v. 2, paragraphs 233–72, and reprinted under the original title in Essential Peirce (EP) v. 2, pp. 289–99. Also see image of MS 339 (August 7, 1904) supplied to peirce-l by Bernard Morand of the Institut Universitaire de Technologie (France), Département Informatique.
17. ^ For more as to the defininitions, terminology, and development of the classifications, see the Commens Dictionary of Peirce's Terms
18. ^ In 1902 Peirce used the word "seme" instead for an index, especially an indexical sinsign. See Collected Papers v. 2, paragraph 283.
19. ^ Peirce said, "pronounce deeloam, from δήλωμα", Peirce (1906), "Prolegomena to an Apology for Pragmaticism", The Monist, v. 16, n. 4, pp. 492–546, see 507. Reprinted in Collected Papers v. 4, paragraphs 530–572, see 538. Eprint.
20. ^ Peirce, C.S. (1867), "On a New List of Categories", Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, v. 7 (1868), pp. 287–98. (Delivered orally by Peirce in 1867 and distributed by him in 1867 as part of an extract).
21. ^ Peirce, Collected Papers v. 2, paragraphs 276–7, written circa 1902. See under "Diagram" in the Commens Dictionary of Peirce's Terms.
22. ^ Hjelmslev [1943] Prolegomena to a Theory of Language, pp.47, 65, 67, and cf. 6.26, 30
23. ^ Robert de Beaugrande (1991) [Linguistic Theory: The Discourse of Fundamental Works], section on Louis Hjelmslev.
24. ^ Nöth, Winfried (1990) Handbook of semiotics, pp.66, 70-1 section 3
25. ^ Daniel Chansler, Semiotics: the basics, Rutledge 2007, page 78

References[link]

This article includes a list of references, related reading or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (April 2009)

• Granger, G. G. (1968). Essai d'une philosophie du style. Paris: Colin.
• Jakobson, Roman. (1971). "Aphasia as a Linguistic Topic" in Selected Writings, Vol. 2: Word and Language. The Hague & Paris: Mouton.
• Jakobson, Roman & Halle, Morris. (1956). "Two Aspects of Language and Two Types of Aphasic Disturbances" in Fundamentals of Language. The Hague & Paris: Mouton.
• Nattiez, Jean-Jacques (1987), trans. Carolyn Abbate (1990). Music and Discourse: Toward a Semiology of Music. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Peirce, Charles Sanders. (1960). Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Volumes I and II. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Ferdinand de Saussure (1922). Cours de linguistique générale. Actually written by Bally and Séchehaye, compiled from notebooks of Saussure's students 1907-1911.

External links[link]

• "Semiotics For Beginners" full text online, Daniel Chandler

Associations and journals

• American Journal of Semiotics, Joseph Brent, Editor, & John Deely, Managing Editor — from the Semiotic Society of America.
• Applied Semiotics / Sémiotique appliquée (AS/SA), Peter G. Marteinson & Pascal G. Michelucci, Editors.
• Approaches to Semiotics (1969–97 book series), Thomas A. Sebeok, Alain Rey, Roland Posner, et al., Editors.
• Approaches to Applied Semiotics (2000–2009 book series), Thomas Sebeok et al., Editors.
• Biosemiotics, Marcello Barbieri, Editor-in-Chief — from the International Society for Biosemiotic Studies.
• Center for Semiotics, Aarhus University, Denmark.
• Cognitive Semiotics, Per Aage Brandt & Todd Oakley, Editors-in-Chief.
• Cybernetics and Human Knowing, Søren Brier, Chief Editor.
• International Journal of Signs and Semiotic Systems (IJSSS), Angelo Loula & João Queiroz, Editors.
• Open Semiotics Resource Center. Journals, lecture courses, etc.
• S.E.E.D. Journal (Semiotics, Evolution, Energy, and Development) (2001–7), Edwina Taborsky, Editor — from SEE.
• Semiotica, Marcel Danesi, Chief Editor — from the International Association for Semiotic Studies.
• Semiotiche, Gian Paolo Caprettini, Managing Director; Andrea Valle & Miriam Visalli, Editors. Some articles in English. Home site seems gone from Web, old url [1] no longer good, and Wayback Machine cannot retrieve.
• Semiotics, Communication and Cognition (book series), Paul Cobley & Kalevi Kull, Editors.
• SemiotiX New Series: A Global Information Bulletin, Paul Bouissac et al.
• Sign Systems Studies, Kalevi Kull, Kati Lindstrom, Mihhail Lotman, Timo Maran, Silvi Salupere, Peeter Torop, Editors — from the Dept. of Semiotics, U. of Tartu, Estonia.
• Signs - International Journal of Semiotics. Martin Thellefsen, Torkild Thellefsen, & Bent Sørensen, chief eds.
• Tartu Semiotics Library (book series), Peeter Torop, Kalevi Kull, Silvi Salupere, Editors.
• The Public Journal of Semiotics, Paul Bouissac, Editor in Chief; Alan Cienki, Associate Editor; René Jorna, Winfried Nöth.
• The Semiotic Review of Books, Gary Genosko, General Editor; Paul Bouissac, Founding Editor.
• Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, Cornelis de Waal, Chief Editor — from The Charles S. Peirce Society.
• Versus: Quaderni di studi semiotici, founded by Umberto Eco.

This article does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2008)

This biohazard sign is a completely conventional symbol with no inherent relationship to what it represents.

A sign is a representation of an object that implies a connection between itself and its object. A natural sign bears a causal relation to its object—for instance, thunder is a sign of storm. A conventional sign signifies by agreement, as a full stop signifies the end of a sentence. (This is in contrast to a symbol which stands for another thing, as a flag may be a symbol of a nation).

Door sign

The way a sign signifies is called semiosis which is a topic of semiotics and philosophy of language.

How a sign is perceived depends upon what is intended or expressed in the semiotic relationship of:

• Signification
• Significance (i.e. meaning)
• Importance

Thus, for example, people may speak of the significance of events, the signification of characters, the meaning of sentences, or the import of a communication. Different ways of relating signs to their objects are called modes of signification.

Uses of conventional signs are varied. Usually the goal is to elicit a response or simply inform. That can be achieved by marking something, displaying a message (i.e. a notice), drawing attention or presenting evidence of an underlying cause (for instance, medical symptoms signify a disease), performing a bodily gesture, etc.

Nature[link]

Semiotics, epistemology, logic, and philosophy of language are concerned about the nature of signs, what they are and how they signify. The nature of signs and symbols and significations, their definition, elements, and types, is mainly established by Aristotle, Augustine, and Aquinas. According to these classic sources, significance is a relationship between two sorts of things: signs and the kinds of things they signify (intend, express or mean), where one term necessarily causes something else to come to the mind. Distinguishing natural signs and conventional signs, the traditional theory of signs^[who?] sets the following threefold partition of things:

1. There are things that are just things, not any sign at all;
2. There are things that are also signs of other things (as natural signs of the physical world and mental signs of the mind);
3. There are things that are always signs, as languages (natural and artificial) and other cultural nonverbal symbols, as documents, money, ceremonies, and rites.

Pedestrian crossing sign

Thus there are things which may act as signs without any respect to the human agent (the things of the external world, all sorts of indications, evidences, symptoms, and physical signals), there are signs which are always signs (the entities of the mind as ideas and images, thoughts and feelings, constructs and intentions); and there are signs that have to get their signification (as linguistic entities and cultural symbols). So, while natural signs serve as the source of signification, the human mind is the agency through which signs signify naturally occurring things, such as objects, states, qualities, quantities, events, processes, or relationships. Human language and discourse, communication, philosophy, science, logic, mathematics, poetry, theology, and religion are only some of fields of human study and activity where grasping the nature of signs and symbols and patterns of signification may have a decisive value.

Types[link]

A sign can denote any of the following:

The western zodiac signs

A signboard on a beach in Durban in apartheid-era South Africa indicates a racially segregated beach.

• Sign, in astrology: often used to mean the Sun sign
• Sign or signing, in communication: communicating via hand gestures, such as in sign language.
• Gang signal
• Sign, in Tracking (hunting): also known as Spoor (animal); trace evidence left on the ground after passage.
• A signboard.
• A sign, in common use, is an indication that a previously observed event is about to occur again
• Sign, in divination and religion: an omen, an event or occurrence believed to foretell the future
• Sign, in ontology and spirituality: a coincidence; see synchronicity
• Sign (linguistics): a combination of a concept and a sound-image described by Ferdinand de Saussure
• In mathematics, the sign of a number tells whether it is positive or negative. Also, the sign of a permutation tells whether it is the product of an even or odd number of transpositions.
• Signedness, in computing, is the property that a representation of a number has one bit, the sign bit, which denotes whether the number is non-negative or negative. A number is called signed if it contains a sign bit, otherwise unsigned. See also signed number representation
• Sign, in biology: an indication of some living thing's presence
• Medical sign, in medicine: objective evidence of the presence of a disease or disorder, as opposed to a symptom, which is subjective
• Sign (semiotics): the basic unit of meaning
• Information sign: a notice that instructs, advises, informs or warns people
• Traffic sign: a sign that instructs drivers; see also stop sign, speed limit sign, cross walk sign
• Sign, in a writing system: a basic unit. Similar terms which are more specific are character, letter or grapheme
• Commercial signage, including flashing signs, such as on a retail store, factory, or theatre
• Signature, in history: a handwritten depiction observed on a document to show authorship and will

See also[link]

References[link]

Look up sign in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Martha Rosler is an American artist. She was born in Brooklyn, New York, where she now lives. However, she spent a formative dozen years in California, from 1968 to 1980, first in north San Diego county and then in San Francisco. She has also lived and taught in Canada. She graduated from Brooklyn College (1965) and the University of California, San Diego (1974). Rosler works in video, photo-text, installation, and performance, as well as writing about art and culture. Rosler’s work is centered on everyday life and the public sphere, often with an eye to women's experience. Recurrent concerns are the media and war, as well as architecture and the built environment, from housing and homelessness to systems of transport.

Her work and writing have been widely influential. She has lectured extensively nationally and internationally and has taught art at Rutgers University, where she was a professor for thirty years, and at the Städelschule in Frankfurt, Germany.

She serves in an advisory capacity to the departments of education at the Whitney Museum of American Art and the Museum of Modern Art and the Center for Urban Pedagogy (all New York City). She is on the board of the Van Alen Institute, in New York City, and is a former board member of the Buell Center for the Study of American Architecture at Columbia University, New York. She is a regular lecturer at the Whitney Independent Study Program in New York.

Rosler's son is the graphic novelist Josh Neufeld;^[1] they have collaborated on a number of projects.

Art[link]

Among her most widely known works are the pioneering videotapes Semiotics of the Kitchen (1974/75), Vital Statistics of a Citizen, Simply Obtained (1977), Losing: A Conversation with the Parents (1977), and, with Paper Tiger Television, Martha Rosler Reads Vogue (1982) and Born to Be Sold: Martha Rosler Reads the Strange Case of Baby S/M (1988).

Her photo/text work The Bowery in two inadequate descriptive systems (1974/75) is considered a seminal work in conceptual and postmodern photographic practice.

Also widely noted are her series of photomontages, Body Beautiful, or Beauty Knows No Pain (c. 1966–72), addressing the photographic representation of women and domesticity, and Bringing the War Home: House Beautiful, addressing the imagery of the Vietnam War (c. 1967–72; reprised in relation to the War in Iraq in 2004 and 2008).

Many of these works are concerned with the geopolitics of entitlements and dispossession. Her writing and photographic series on roads, the system of air transport, and urban undergrounds (subways or metros) join her other works addressing urban planning and architecture, from housing to homelessness.

Exhibitions[link]

Rosler has had numerous solo exhibitions. A retrospective of her work, “Positions in the Life World” (1998–2000) was shown in five European cities (Birmingham, England; Vienna; Lyon/Villeurbanne; Barcelona; and Rotterdam) and, concurrently, at the International Center of Photography and the New Museum of Contemporary Art (both in New York). She has recently been the subject of an extensive retrospective exhibition at the Galleria Civica d’Arte Moderna e Contemporanea (GAM), in Turin. In 2006 her work was the subject of solo exhibitions at the University of Rennes and in 2007 at the Worcester Museum of Art. Her work has been seen in the Venice Biennale of 2003; the Liverpool Biennial, the Taipei Biennial (both 2004), and the Singapore Biennale (2011); as well as many major international survey shows, including the "documenta" exhibitions in Kassel, Germany, of 1982 and 2007, the SkulpturProjekte Münster 2007, and several Whitney Biennials.

In 1989, in lieu of a solo exhibition at the Dia Art Foundation in New York City, Rosler organized the project "If You Lived Here...", in which over 50 artists, film- and video producers, photographers, architects, planners, homeless people, squatters, activist groups, and schoolchildren addressed contested living situations, architecture, planning, and utopian visions. In 2009, an archive exhibition based on this project, "If You Lived Here Still," opened at e-flux's gallery in New York and then traveled (2010) to Casco Office for Art Design and Theory, in Utrecht, Netherlands, and to La Virreina Centre de la Imatge in Barcelona.

At the Utopia Station show at the Venice Biennale of 2003, she worked with about 30 of her students from Stockholm and Copenhagen, as well as a small, far-flung internet group, 'the Fleas', to produce banners and a mini-pavilion exploring utopian schemes and communities and their political and social ramifications.^[2] She has done two tours of historical sites, one in Hamburg (1993) and one in Liverpool (2004), in conjunction with curated art projects. At the Frieze Art Fair (London) of 2005, she conducted a tour of this temporary site from its siting and construction to all aspects of its customer service, maintenance, and security.

Her solo show, “London Garage Sale,” was held at the Institute of Contemporary Arts in London in June 2005, revisiting a series of exhibitions she has held since 1973 that center on the American garage sale.

E-flux sponsored "The Martha Rosler Library," in which, starting in November 2005, over 7,500 volumes from her private collection were made available as a public resource^[3] in venues in and around art institutions, schools, and libraries.^[4] The collection started at e-flux's New York gallery and then traveled to the Frankfurter Kunstverein in Germany; to Antwerp's MuHKA (Museum of Contemporary Art) in conjunction with NICC, an artist-run space; to United Nations Plaza School in Berlin; to the Institut National de L'Histoire de L'Art in Paris; to Stills in Edinburgh; and to the Gallery at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, before being retired. At the "Martha Rosler Library," visitors could sit and read or make free photocopies. Other projects, such as reading groups, were organized locally in conjunction with the project.

Published works[link]

Martha Rosler's essays have been published widely in catalogues, magazines, such as Artforum, Afterimage, Quaderns, and Grey Room, and edited collections, among them, Women Artists at the Millennium (October Books/MIT, 2006). She has produced numerous other "word works" and photo/text publications; now exploring cookery in a mock dialogue between Julia Child and Craig Claiborne, now analyzing imagery of women in Russia or exploring responses to repression, crisis, and war. Her essay "In, around, and Afterthoughts (on documentary photography)" (1981 but widely cited, republished, and translated) has been credited with a great role in dismantling the myths of photographic disinterestedness and in generating a discussion about the importance of institutional and discursive framing in determining photographic meaning.

Rosler has published sixteen books of photography, art, and writing. Among them are Decoys and Disruptions: Selected Essays 1975-2001 (MIT Press, 2004), the photo books Passionate Signals (Cantz, 2005), In the Place of the Public: Airport Series (Cantz, 1997), and Rights of Passage (NYFA, 1995). If You Lived Here (Free Press, 1991) discusses and supplements her Dia project on housing, homelessness, and urban life. Several books, in English and other languages, were published in 2006, including a 25-year edition of 3 Works (Press of the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design ISBN 0-919616-46-1). The collection Imágenes Públicas, Spanish translations of some essays and video scripts, was published in 2007.

Awards[link]

Rosler was awarded the Spectrum International Prize in Photography for 2005.^[5] The prize was accompanied by a photo and video retrospective, “If Not Now, When?” at the Sprengel Museum in Hanover and NGBK in Berlin. The book Passionate Signals accompanied this exhibition. In 2006 she received the Oskar Kokoschka Prize, Austria's highest fine arts award. She received an Anonymous Was A Woman Award for 2007 and was the USA Artists Nimoy Fellow in 2009. She was awarded a Civitella Ranieri Residency for 2009. In 2010 she received a Lifetime Achievement Award from the Guggenheim Museum. Rosler was awarded a DAAD Berlin fellowship for 2011.

Bibliography (selected)[link]

• Imágenes Públicas (Editorial Gustavo Gili, 2007)
• Passionate Signals (Cantz, 2005)
• Decoys and Disruptions: Selected Essays 1975-2001 (MIT Press, 2004)
• Martha Rosler: Positions in the Life World (MIT Press, 1999)
• In the Place of the Public: Airport Series (Cantz, 1997)
• Rights of Passage (NYFA, 1995)
• If You Lived Here (Free Press, 1991)
• 3 Works (1981; republished Press of the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design, 2006) ISBN 0-919616-46-1

Notes[link]

References[link]

• Richard Meyer, “Feminism Uncovered: On the Wack! Catalogue,” Artforum, Summer 2007. pp. 211–212, 548.
• Heather Diack, “Too Close to Home: Rethinking Representation in Martha Rosler’s Photomontages of War,” Prefix Photo (Toronto), Vol. 7, no. 2 (Nov. 2006). pp. 56–69.
• Jean-Marc Huitorel, “Martha Rosler, Sur/Sous le Pavé.” ArtPress, July/August 2006.
• Beatrice von Bismarck, “Freedom I Have None: Martha Rosler in der Galerie Christian Nagel, Berlin.” Texte zur Kunst, #62, June 2006.
• Raimar Stange, “Martha Rosler: Von der notwendigke it (zitierne) der Kunst/ The Need and Necessity for Quotes and Quoting in Art,” Spike, Winter 2005
• Holland Cotter, ‘If It's Too Bad to Be True, It Could Be Disinformation,” New York Times, Art in Review section, Nov. 11 2005
• Frances Richard, “Martha Rosler,” Artforum, Feb 2005, p. 173
• Jens Hoffmann, “The Familiar Is Not Necessarily the Known,” NU: The Nordic Art Review (Stockholm), Vol. III, No. 2, 2001, pp. 58–63
• Martina Pachmanová, “Umeni bourat myty ve svete kolem nás i v nás.” Aspekt (Bratislava), 12/2000-1/2001, pp. 130–136
• Martina Pachmanova, "Interview with Martha Rosler: Subverting the Myths of Everyday Life," n.paradoxa: international feminist art journal (London), issue 19 online, May 2006 pp. 98-109
• Mary Paterson "Martha Rosler: art activist: Mary Paterson interviews Martha Rosler," n.paradoxa: international feminist art journal (London), vol. 23 print, pp.87-91

External links[link]

• Official website
• Buell Center for the Study of American Architecture
• Martha Rosler in the Video Data Bank
• Martha Rosler, Mediateca Media Art space

This article is an orphan, as few or no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; suggestions may be available. (January 2010)

This biographical article needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful. (March 2011)

Mohamed Said Mahfouz (Arabic: محمد سعيد محفوظ‎ is an Egyptian writer and filmmaker^[1] who has worked for the BBC since 2006. He was the presenter and scriptwriter of the widely popular, daring show 'Maqass El-Raqeeb' (Scissors of Censorship) on Abu Dhabi TV (December 1999 – September 2001), focusing on liberties and human rights in the Arab world. He produced a number of independent documentaries and won several awards, of which the last was from Al Jazeera International Documentary festival in April 2009. He has been in the UK since March 2006 where he obtained his Masters of Art in Documentary from Royal Holloway University. Currently, he is pursuing his PhD at the same university in New Media and Filmmaking.

References[link]