|
|
Sign/Symbolray scupin (scupin@LC.LINDENWOOD.EDU)Wed, 5 Oct 1994 12:27:33 -0500
I need some clarification from the semioticians out there. Over the years I have drawn on the distinction between a symbol and a sign that was endorsed by Leslie White for teaching purposes. (I believe that he drew upon Pierce's work for this distinction). Is that distinction still made today within the semiotic field? I don't believe that Saussure made that distinction, nor does, to my knowledge, Levi-Strauss in his structuralism. The symbolic anthropologists that I have read including Geertz don't make much of the matter and appear to draw on G.H. Mead for much of their work. In my reading of the poststructuralists the term "sign" seems to be all inclusive, and the distinction is not made. Can anyone suggest something to read that either undermines the Whitean distinction, or reinforces it? Thanks in advance, Ray Scupin Sociology/Anthropology Dept. Lindenwood College 209 S. Kingshighway St. Charles, MO 63301 314-949-4730 (Office) 314-949-9244 (Home) 314-949-4910 (Fax) Not chaos-like, together crushed and bruised, But, as the world harmoniously confused: Where order in variety we see, And where, though all things differ, all agree Alexander Pope "Windsor-Forest."
|