ray scupin (scupin@LC.LINDENWOOD.EDU)
Wed, 5 Oct 1994 12:27:33 -0500

Dear Colleagues:

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