Home Linguistics & Semiotics Semiotics as a metalanguage for the sciences
Chapter
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Semiotics as a metalanguage for the sciences

  • Marcel Danesi
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill
Volume 1
This chapter is in the book Volume 1

Abstract

Semiotics has been applied to innumerable domains of human intellectual, symbolic, and expressive activities. It has also been developed broadly in terms of its epistemology and theoretical ramifications by many semioticians over the years. However, rarely has it been considered to be a metalanguage for mathematics and the physical sciences, even though these use semiotic resources unconsciously, including annotation in mathematics, equation formulation of phenomena in physics, and so on. The purpose of this paper is to consider semiotics in terms of its value as a metalanguage for the sciences since it allows the scientist and mathematician to reflect consciously on the nature of the symbolic resources used in carrying out representation within their disciplines. For example, set theory logic in mathematics, as Peirce clearly understood, was an attempt by mathematicians to develop a metalanguage of their own for the study of mathematics. As it turns out, and as Peirce persuasively showed, set theory is itself a manifestation of semiotic principles that define its metalinguistic structure. The modern concept of metalanguage can be traced to Russell and Whitehead’s (1913) construction of a set of principles that were free of logical circularity and inconsistency for mathematics, logic, and thus the sciences. As it turned out, that set contained a “flaw” - a proposition that could not be shown to be true or false - leading to the notion of indeterminacy in logic (Godel 1931). A semiotic metalanguage, on the other hand, would show the structural and signifying characteristics of such constructions, not present them as monolithic frameworks.

Abstract

Semiotics has been applied to innumerable domains of human intellectual, symbolic, and expressive activities. It has also been developed broadly in terms of its epistemology and theoretical ramifications by many semioticians over the years. However, rarely has it been considered to be a metalanguage for mathematics and the physical sciences, even though these use semiotic resources unconsciously, including annotation in mathematics, equation formulation of phenomena in physics, and so on. The purpose of this paper is to consider semiotics in terms of its value as a metalanguage for the sciences since it allows the scientist and mathematician to reflect consciously on the nature of the symbolic resources used in carrying out representation within their disciplines. For example, set theory logic in mathematics, as Peirce clearly understood, was an attempt by mathematicians to develop a metalanguage of their own for the study of mathematics. As it turns out, and as Peirce persuasively showed, set theory is itself a manifestation of semiotic principles that define its metalinguistic structure. The modern concept of metalanguage can be traced to Russell and Whitehead’s (1913) construction of a set of principles that were free of logical circularity and inconsistency for mathematics, logic, and thus the sciences. As it turned out, that set contained a “flaw” - a proposition that could not be shown to be true or false - leading to the notion of indeterminacy in logic (Godel 1931). A semiotic metalanguage, on the other hand, would show the structural and signifying characteristics of such constructions, not present them as monolithic frameworks.

Chapters in this book

  1. Frontmatter i
  2. Table of contents v
  3. Preface ix
  4. Section 1: Semiotics in the world and academia
  5. What the humanities are for – a semiotic perspective 3
  6. Semioethics as a vocation of semiotics. In the wake of Welby, Morris, Sebeok, Rossi- Landi 25
  7. “General semiotics” as the all-round interdisciplinary organizer – general semiotics (GS) vs. philosophical fundamentalism 45
  8. Section 2: Semiotics, experimental science and maths
  9. Semiotics as a metalanguage for the sciences 61
  10. Mastering phenomenological semiotics with Husserl and Peirce 83
  11. Section 3: Society, text and social semiotics
  12. Farewell to representation: text and society 105
  13. Social semiotics: Towards a sociologically grounded semiotics 121
  14. Section 4: Semiotics and media
  15. What relationship to time do the media promise us? 149
  16. Semiotics and interstitial mediatizations 169
  17. Section 5: Semiotics for moral questions
  18. Spaces of memory and trauma: a cultural semiotic perspective 185
  19. Media coverage of the voices of Colombia’s victims of dispossession 205
  20. Section 6: Questioning the logic of semiotics
  21. Sense beyond communication 225
  22. Semiotic paradoxes: Antinomies and ironies in a transmodern world 239
  23. Section 7: Manifestoes for semiotics
  24. Semiosis and human understanding 257
  25. Culture and transcendence – the concept of transcendence through the ages 293
  26. Section 8: Masters on past masters
  27. From Peirce’s pragmatic maxim to Wittgenstein’s language-games 327
  28. Semiotics as a critical discourse: Roland Barthes’ Mythologies 353
  29. Ricoeur, a disciple of Greimas? A case of paradoxical maïeutic 363
  30. Index 377
Downloaded on 14.11.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781501503825-004/html
Scroll to top button