Scholarly record
THE ROLE OF A SIGN IN THE SEMIOTIC ANALYSIS OF POSTMODERN DISCOURSE
Abstract
Background: symbolic representation is a specific, uniquely human form of objectification of the real world, a powerful means of communication activity of its reflectivity. Understanding of the phenomenon of sign representation, its modeling and the definition of the sign and its meaning depends on the sign language system and aspects of the language to be interpreted – dynamic or statistical, functional or structural aspects are taken as a basis. This article is an attempt to review the main components of the sign of the postmodern discourse. Methods: it should be noted that in modern science there is a tendency to revise the linguistic nature of the sign. Among all areas of linguistics there is a domination of the theoretical reflection, according to which all phenomena are regarded as the implementation of language text, discourse, narrative. Therefore, the full range of human culture is the sum of texts of the intertextuality. Consciousness also appears in the form of text that can be read by the relevant rules of grammar, or, by using the decryption of codes. Foreign linguists developed a new direction in science: the main emphasis is placed on the special role of the interpretation procedures and the importance of reading both cognitive and communicative signs, because any schematization of reality is a sign. The analysis of postmodern texts suggests that thought can not be just interpreted, but also disinterpreted in postmodern discourse. In these texts, the notion of the sign takes on a different, broader meaning than that of word mark. One of the important issues of semiotic analysis of postmodern discourse is to examine and identify the codes that exist to decipher all kinds of signs. Conclusions: thus, in the context of our research the quite relevant question is to define the temporal signs (linguistic or non-linguistic) to be expressed in the postmodern discourse. As is known, the category of ‘time’ appears as a symbol of life / death, meaning as a cultural reality, and so forth. In modern linguistics it is assumed that postmodern text is regulated by a set of codes: the linguistic code of natural language, the literary code that defines the connectivity of the text, the genre code, and meta-language of a writer. In our view, the essence of postmodern discourse is a combination of mosaic codes, which include the following types of: linguistic, cultural, semiological, interactive, and metatextual codes.
Publication Impact Profile
Publication details
References15
Bakhtin M.M. Freudianism. A formal method in literary criticism. Marxism and the philosophy of language. Articles, Russia, 2000, pp. 349-487.
de Saussure F. Course in General Linguistics, the United States, 1998, 236 p.
Lacan J. Écrits: A Selection, the United States, 1977, p. 65.
Ilyin I.P. Postmodernism. Glossary, Russia, 2001, 384 p.
Tradition and Innovation in Contemporary Literature, Hungary, 1966, pp. 85-94.
Grebennikova N.S. Foreign literature. XX Century, Russia, 1999, pp. 93-103.
Rzhanskaya L.P. Intertextuality: the emergence of the concept. On the history of the theory of matter, Artistic guidance of foreign literature of XX century, Russia, 2002, pp. 539-555.
Barthes R. The semiotic challenge, the United States, 1994.
Artistic guidance of foreign literature of XX century, Russia, 2002, pp. 525-541.
Lotman Yu.M. Articles on semiotics and cultural typology, Estonia, 1992, 248 p.
Ricoeur P. The conflict of interpretations: essays in hermeneutics, the United States, 1974, pp. 17-32.
Hoopes J. Peirce on Signs: Writings on Semiotic by Charles Sanders Peirce, the United States, 1991, 284 p.
Fowles J. Wormholes: Essays and Occasional Writings, the United States, 1988, 432 p.
Tötösy de Zepetnek. Comparative Literature. Theory, Method, Application, the Kingdom of the Netherlands – the United States, 1998, 297 p.
Hakobyan K.B. Theatrical imagination of the British and American postmodern play, The current models in the teaching of foreign languages and cultures in the context of quality management education, Collection of materials, Russia, Volume 2, pp. 34-37, 2008.
View or Download full articleAccess options
SWS access login
Login as SWS Scientific CommitteeLogin as SWS Scientific PartnerLogin as SWS AuthorAuthors and approved SWS contributors will read and export their own linked papers after identity matching by SWS profile, email and SGEM GlobalID.
For librarian assistance: [email protected]
Purchase Instant Access
- Article can be downloaded after successful payment.
- Article may be used according to SWS library access terms.
- Article cannot be redistributed.
