Abstract: This article demonstrates the broad applicability of the concept of symbol in human communication, beyond but including verbal language. The starting point is Charles Sanders Peirce’s understanding of symbolicity as signi-fication grounded on habits. The goal is to be able to conceptualize mediality in general and media interrelations, particularly in relation to symbolicity. Informed by a multimodal view on media, the author provides a systematic overview of symbolicity within the context of communication among human minds structured around two crossing parameters: symbols being limited or widespread among people and symbols not being part of or being part of systems – languages. Based on this overview, I clarify the role of culture in language notions and conceptualize language in relation to mediality. I also suggest a way of more precisely describing similarities and differences between languages and media types, without either conflating or totally separating the two concepts. Finally, I investigate how the dependence of language and media type conceptions on culture affects the idea of intermediality. Together, these investigations and conceptualizations promote a more comprehensive understanding of symbolicity in general and a deeper knowledge of the role of symbolicity in human communication, including verbal language, and intermedial relations involving all kinds of different media types.
Keywords: Charles Sanders Peirce; intermediality; language; media types; multi-modality; semiotics; sign systems; symbol.
For citation: Elleström, Lars. Symbolicity, Language, and Mediality. Current Issues in Philology and Pedagogical Linguistics. 2023, no 1, pp. 18–31. https://doi.org/10.29025/2079-6021-2023-1-18-31 (In Russ.).
Bionote:
Lars Elleström
Linnaeus University, Växjö, 35195, Sweden;
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-8664-1970;
e-mail: lars.ellestrom@lnu.se
References:
1. Peirce Charles S. The collected papers of Charles S. Peirce, Vols. I-VIII. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1958. Available at: https://colorysemiotica.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/peirce-collectedpapers.pdf. Accessed in February 12, 2023.
2. Ellestrom Lars. Bridging the gap between image and metaphor through cross-modal iconicity: An interdisciplinary model. Dimensions of iconicity: Iconicity in language and literature. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins; 2017;15:167-190. Available at: https://benjamins.com/catalog/ill.15. Accessed in February 12, 2023.
3. Ellestrom Lars. Coherence and truthfulness in communication: Intracommunicational and extracommunicational indexicality. Semiotica 225(1/4). 2018:423-446. Available at: https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/sem-2017-0001/html. Accessed in February 12, 2023.
4. Ellestrom Lars. Material and mental representation: Peirce adapted to the study of media and arts. The American Journal of Semiotics. 2014;30:83-138. Available at: https://www.pdcnet.org/ajs/content/ajs_2014_0030_41641_0083_0138. Accessed in February 12, 2023.
5. Fernandez Eliseo. Peircean habits and the life of symbols. Chinese Semiotic Studies. 2012;7: 203-215. Available at: https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/css-2012-0014/html. Accessed in February 12, 2023.
6. Pharies David A, Charles S. Peirce and the linguistic sign. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins;1985. Available at: https://benjamins.com/catalog/fos.9. Accessed in February 12, 2023.
7. Saussure Ferdinand de. Course in general linguistics, Perry Meisel & Haun Saussy (eds.), Wade Baskin (trans.). New York: Columbia University Press; 2011(1916). Available at: http://cup.columbia.edu/book/course-in-general-linguistics/9780231157261. Accessed in February 12, 2023.
8. Noth Winfried. The criterion of habit in Peirce’s definitions of the symbol source. Transactions of the Charles S Peirce Society. 2010;46(1):82-93. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236811344_The_Criterion_of_Habit_in_Peirce%27s_Definitions_.... Accessed in February 12, 2023.
9. Abdel-Raheem Ahmed. Do political cartoons and illustrations have their own specialized forms for warnings, threats, and the like? Speech acts in the nonverbal mode. Social Semiotics. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2020.1777641.
10. Ellestrom Lars. The modalities of media II: An expanded model for understanding intermedial relations. Beyond media borders: Intermedial relations among multimodal media. 2020; 1:3-91. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Available at: https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/id/bd6d3db0-1b75-4215-84bf-c637319be605/2021_Book_BeyondMediaBor.... Accessed in February 02, 2023.
11. Ding Ersu. Ubiquitous but arbitrary iconicity. Semiotica 200. 2014;1(4): 119-135.
12. Hu Zhuanglin. The image iconicity in the Chinese language. Chinese Semiotic Studies 3. 2010:40-55.
13. Ellestrom Lars. A medium-centered model of communication. Semiotica. 2018;224(1/4):269-293. Available at: https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/css-2010-0106/html. Accessed in February 02, 2023.
14. Lotherington Heather. Language in digital motion: From ABCs to intermediality and why this matters for language learning. Beyond media borders: Intermedial relations among multimodal media. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2020;1: 217-238. Available at: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-49679-1_7. Accessed in February 02, 2023.
We recommend authors to read carefully the scope of our journal, the submission guidelines and malpractice statement. Original papers and studies developing new theoretical and applied issues are preferred. Such works are always cited, and citing your works reflects your status as a researcher.