Visual communication is so usual and familiar to us that we hardly ever question its rules. Indeed, our conception of visual language is hardly ever established on deep theoretical or concrete reflection. While we have usually been guided through the analysis of the structure and meaning of language, the significances of visual images seems so obvious that we do not even call them into question. However, the decoding and interpretation of visual signs, icons, and symbols, namely semiotics, is in no way simpler or easier than the analysis of written texts. This article discusses the concept of ‘semiotics’ and focuses on crucial terms such as ‘sign’, ‘icon’, ‘symbol’, and ‘index’.
A.A. Berger (2010) introduces semiotics as the ‘science of signs’. Semiotics studies how signs have come to have meaning in our society. Ultimately, modern semiotics started with the work of two influential authors: the French linguist Ferdinand Saussure (1857-1913) and the American philosopher, logicians and scientist Charles S. Peirce (1839-1914) (Branston, G. & Stafford, R. 2003). Saussure is considered as the precursor of the science of semiotics. He called his theory “semiology” and he defined it as a science that studies the signs, codes, and structures within society. He held that semiology would analyze what sets up signs and by which principles they are governed. As a linguist, Saussure particularly focused on the linguistic aspect of that science. Alternatively, Peirce called his approach “semiotics”. Pierce considerably helped to distinguish between different sorts of signs, namely: symbolic, indexical, arbitrary, and iconic. Ultimately, he also introduced the concept of ‘referent’ to Saussure’s notion of the sign. Besides, the literary theorist Roland Barthes, with his application of semiotics to the field of cultural and media forms, is also held to have majorly influenced our modern understanding of semiotics (Berger, 2010).
Saussure Pierce Barthes
The essential idea of semiotics is the notion of ‘sign’. Berger (2010) defines a sign “as something that stands for something else, and, more technically, as a spoken or written word, a drawn figure, or a material object unified in the mind with a particular cultural concept” (p.6). Saussure considers signs as having two parts: a ‘sound-image’ or signifier and a ‘concept’ or signified (Berger, 2010; Branston, G., & Stafford, R. 2003). The example of the tree depicted in the image below exemplifies Saussure’s theory. The written word ‘TREE’ is considered as the ‘signifier’ of the object tree while the actual concept of a tree is considered as the ‘signified’. It is important to understand that there is no natural relation between the signifier and the signified The word ‘tree’ could as well have stood for the actual concept of a tree, but also for any other one, if decided beforehand. Any pronounceable arrangement of letters could have been chosen. It is an arbitrary agreement. Besides, because the relation between signifier and signified is arbitrary, it follows that the meaning of signs may change over time (Berger, 2010; Branston, G., & Stafford, R. 2003).
Pierce has a rather different approach to signs than Saussure’s and his signifier/signified’s dichotomy. Indeed, he divides up the concept of signs into three subcategories: ‘icons’, ‘symbols’, and ‘indexes’ (Berger, 2010). Let us take the example of the signs illustrating the difference between men and women (see image below) to define these three terms. Firstly, the icon is a kind of sign that suggests by resemblance. Icons are signs that partake the originalities of the objects. They physically resemble the objects that they stand for (Berger, 2010). The icons representing a man and a woman are thus the actual physical silhouettes of a man and a woman. There is no way to misunderstand them. Secondly, indexes are signs that suggest by causal connections; they are individually connected with objects. They relate to, and thus point to the objects (Branston, G., & Stafford, R. 2003). Taking the example of the woman/men dichotomy, heels can be considered as the icon of women, and flat shoes as the icon of men. Those features unequivocally point to the characteristics of men and women. Thirdly, symbols are signs that suggest by convention. Contrarily to icons or indexes that are easily recognizable, symbols are not natural and intuitive; they need to be learned (Berger, 2010). The symbols of men and women, for example, do not in any way refer to characteristic gender features; they are mere conventions. If you had not been told the dichotomy, you would not be able to recognize these signs; they are in no way related to the characteristics of men and women.
Ultimately, semiotics may be defined as a concept, but also as a research method. Barthes, among others, analyzed the French consumer culture by using semiotics. In Mythologies, he combined semiotics and the Marxist theory in order to illustrate the hidden ideologies of French commercial and media culture. He analyzed products such as soap, detergents, or toys by using the science of semiology. In that way, by analyzing the signs of our current society, semiotics may be used as a solid research method. It may help to explain how people find meaning in their ordinary lives, in the media they use, and it may explain the deep significance of the messages people get from advertising in our modern commercial society (Berger, 2010, Branston and Stafford, 2003).
References:
Berger, A.A. (2010). The Sciences of signs. The objects of affection: semiotics and consumer culture, pp. 3-31. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Branston, G., & Stafford, R. (2003). Semiotic Approaches. The media student’s book, pp. 11-17. London/New York: Psychology Press.
Recent Comments