Home Imago Dei: Metaphorical conceptualization of pictorial artworks within a participant-based framework
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Imago Dei: Metaphorical conceptualization of pictorial artworks within a participant-based framework

  • Fabio I. M. Poppi ORCID logo EMAIL logo , Marianna Bolognesi and Amitash Ojha
Published/Copyright: October 30, 2020
Semiotica
From the journal Semiotica Volume 2020 Issue 236-237

Abstract

This article presents an exploratory analysis of the metaphoric structure of five artistic paintings within “Think aloud” protocols, in which a group of 14 English speakers with a low self-rated level of expertise in art and history of art expertise were asked to verbalize all their thoughts, ideas and impressions of the artworks. The main findings of this study can be summarized as follows: (1) multiple interpretations for the same artwork are possible, (2) the interpretations of the metaphorical structures described by the participants often diverge from those advanced by the researchers. These findings challenge the methods by which metaphor identification and analysis in pictorials is currently approached. As a matter of fact, most of the research in pictorial metaphors tends to reduce stimuli such as artistic paintings to unique metaphoric interpretations generally produced by a single researcher by means of introspection. By addressing this methodological problem in metaphor research, this article contributes to the development of a theoretical and operational participant-based framework that takes into account the role of metaphoric conceptualization within the domain of art and art cognition.

Keywords: artwork; conceptualization; interpretation; pictorial metaphor; think-aloud protocol
Corresponding author: Fabio I. M. Poppi, University of Łódź, Lodz, Poland; and Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia, E-mail:

Appendix Instructions translated into English

“Hello, this is an experiment in which we will try to understand what meanings some paintings can convey. To understand this, we will be looking at 5 artistic paintings. During this experiment, you will have to look at each painting and verbalize all your feelings, opinions or ideas about the paintings. Each painting will be shown on the screen for 5 min with a countdown in the lower right corner of the screen. Your verbalizations will be recorded with a microphone placed near the laptop. After 5 min, each painting will automatically switch to another.

To start the experiment, you simply need to press the spacebar. You can start whenever you prefer, but you need to verbalise your thoughts during the 5 min. There will be a 30-s break between each two consecutive paintings.

Please remember a couple of things. You will not be disturbed, but you are free to ask for assistance at any time. This test is audio-recorded, so please try to speak as clearly as possible. We don’t want any of your considerations to get lost. And don’t worry, the entire process will be absolutely anonymous and the recordings will not be made available publicly.

Thank you and enjoy these paintings:)”

Copyright issues

The material used in this experiment belongs to its respective owners. Its use, for the purpose of research, was only possible in compliance with applicable regulations.

Consent and ethical approval

The entire experiment does not present any commercial purpose, outside the domain of academic research. No recording or transcript will be used for external purposes. The entire experiment session — audio recordings and transcriptions — will not be shared in different areas other than academia, scholarly publications excluded. The entire experiment session, including transcription, will be recorded in full anonymity.

References

Alfieri, Luca. 2008. Metafora e metonimia: Due strutture concettuali, ma quanti processi mentali? In Artemij Keidan & Luca Alfieri (eds.), Deissi, riferimento, metafora: Questioni classiche di linguistica e filosofia del linguaggio, 1000–1018. Firenze: Firenze University Press.10.36253/978-88-8453-744-7Search in Google Scholar

Barcelona, Antonio. 2011. Reviewing the properties and prototype structure of metonymy. In Defining metonymy in cognitive linguistics: Towards a consensus view, 7–57. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/hcp.28.02barSearch in Google Scholar

Barnden, John. 2010. Metaphor and metonymy: Making their connections more slippery. Cognitive Linguistics 21(1). 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2010.001.Search in Google Scholar

Black, Max. 1955. Metaphor. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Beaty, Roger E. & Paul J. Silvia. 2013. Metaphorically speaking: Cognitive abilities and the production of figurative language. Memory & Cognition 41(2). 255–267. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-012-0258-5.Search in Google Scholar

Bolognesi, Marianna & Roberto Bichisecchi. 2014. Metaphors in dreams: Where cognitive linguistics meets psychoanalysis. Language and Psychoanalysis 3(1). 4–22. https://doi.org/10.7565/landp.2014.001.Search in Google Scholar

Bolognesi, Marianna. 2017. Using semantic features norms to investigate how the visual and verbal modes afford metaphor construction and expression. Language and Cognition 9(3). 525–552. https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2016.27.Search in Google Scholar

Bolognesi, Bolognesi, Benjamin Timmermans & Lora Aroyo. 2019. VisMet and the crowd: What does social tagging reveal about visual metaphors? In Marianna Bolognesi, Mario Brdar & Kristina Strkalj Despot (eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in the digital age: Building repositories of figurative language, 99–121. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/milcc.8.05bolSearch in Google Scholar

Bolognesi, Marianna & Paola Vernillo. 2019. How abstract concepts emerge from metaphorical images: The metonymic way. Language and Communication 69. 26–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2019.05.003.Search in Google Scholar

Bounegru, Liliana & Charles Forceville. 2011. Metaphors in editorial cartoons representing the global financial crisis. Visual Communication 10(2). 209–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357211398446.Search in Google Scholar

Carroll, Noel. 1994. Visual metaphor. In Jaakko Hintikka (ed.), Aspects of metaphor, 189–218. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-015-8315-2_6Search in Google Scholar

Cattuto, Ciro, Alain Barrat, Andrea Baldassarri, Gregory Schehr & Vittorio Loreto. 2009. Collective dynamics of social annotation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106(26). 10511–10515. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0901136106.Search in Google Scholar

Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2004. Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis. Berlin: Springer.10.1057/9780230000612Search in Google Scholar

Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2012. Forensic deliberations on “purposeful metaphor”. Metaphor and the Social World 2(1). 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.2.1.01cha.Search in Google Scholar

Cienki, Alan & Cornelia. Müller. 2008. Metaphor and gesture. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/gs.3Search in Google Scholar

Coëgnarts, Maarten & Peter Kravanja. 2012a. The visual and multimodal representation of time in film, or: How time is metaphorically shaped in space. Image and Narrative 13(3). 85–100.Search in Google Scholar

Coëgnarts, Maarten & Peter Kravanja. 2012b. From thought to modality: A theoretical framework for analysing structural-conceptual metaphors and image metaphors in film. Image & Narrative, 13(1). 96–113.Search in Google Scholar

Coëgnarts, Maarten & Peter Kravanja. 2012c. Embodied visual meaning: Image schemas in film. Projections 6(2). 84–101. https://doi.org/10.3167/proj.2012.060206.Search in Google Scholar

Forceville, Charles. 1996. Pictorial metaphor in advertising. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203272305Search in Google Scholar

Forceville, Charles. 2002. Pictorial metaphor in advertising. Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge.10.4324/9780203064252Search in Google Scholar

Forceville, Charles. 2006. Non-verbal and multimodal metaphor in a cognitivist framework: Agendas for research. Applications of Cognitive Linguistics 1. 379.10.1515/9783110215366.1.19Search in Google Scholar

Forceville, Charles. 2008. Metaphor in pictures and multimodal representations. In Raymond. W. GibbsJr. (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought, 462–482. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511816802.028Search in Google Scholar

Forceville, Charles. 2016. Conceptual metaphor theory, blending theory and other cognitivist perspectives on comics. In Gitte Kristiansen, Michel Achard, René Dirven & Francisco Ruiz de Mendoza Ibàñez (eds.), Cognitive linguistics: Current applications and future perspectives, 379–402. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.5040/9781474283670.ch-004Search in Google Scholar

Forceville, Charles & Eduardo Urios-Aparisi. 2009. Multimodal metaphor. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110215366Search in Google Scholar

Gargett, Andrew, Josef Ruppenhofer & John Barnden. 2014. Dimensions of metaphorical meaning. In Proceedings of the 4th workshop on cognitive aspects of the lexicon (COGALEX), 166–173. Dublin: Association for Computational Linguistics and Dublin City University.10.3115/v1/W14-4721Search in Google Scholar

Goatly, Andrew. 2007. Washing the brain: Metaphor and hidden ideology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/dapsac.23Search in Google Scholar

Hanks, Patrick. 2006. Metaphoricity is gradable. In Anatol Stefanowitsch & Stefan Thomas Gries (eds.), Metaphor and metonymy (Corpora in cognitive linguistics 1), 17–35. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110199895.17Search in Google Scholar

Hausman, Carl R. 1989. Metaphor and art: Interactionism and reference in the verbal and nonverbal arts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Herrero Ruiz, Javier. 2006. The role of metaphor, metonymy, and conceptual blending in understanding advertisements: The case of drug-prevention ads. Revista alicantina de estudios ingleses 19(11). 169–190. https://doi.org/10.14198/raei.2006.19.10.Search in Google Scholar

Indurkhya, Bipin & Amitash Ojha. 2017. Interpreting visual metaphors: Asymmetry and reversibility. Poetics Today 38(1). 93–121. https://doi.org/10.1215/03335372-3716240.Search in Google Scholar

Jakesch, Martina & Helmut Leder. 2009. Finding meaning in art: Preferred levels of ambiguity in art appreciation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 62(11). 2105–2112. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210903038974.Search in Google Scholar

Kennedy, John M. 1982. Metaphor in pictures. Perception 11(5). 589–605. https://doi.org/10.1068/p110589.Search in Google Scholar

Kövecses, Zoltán. 2013. The metaphor–metonymy relationship: Correlation metaphors are based on metonymy. Metaphor and Symbol 28(2). 75–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2013.768498.Search in Google Scholar

Kövecses, Zoltán. 2017. Levels of metaphor. Cognitive Linguistics 28(2). 321–349. https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2016-0052.Search in Google Scholar

Kövecses, Zoltán. 2019. The lexical vs. the corpus-based method in the study of metaphor. In Marianna Bolognesi, Mario Brdar & Kristina Despot (eds.), Fantastic metaphors and where to find them. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins.Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Landau, Mark J., Brian P. Meier & Lucas A. Keefer. 2010. A metaphor-enriched social cognition. Psychological Bulletin 136(6). 1045.10.1037/a0020970Search in Google Scholar

Littlemore, Jeannette & Paula Pérez-Sobrino. 2017. Eyelashes, speedometers or breasts? An experimental cross-cultural approach to multimodal metaphor and metonymy in advertising. Textus 30(1). 197–222.Search in Google Scholar

Meier, Brian P. & Sarah Dionne. 2009. Downright sexy: Verticality, implicit power, and perceived physical attractiveness. Social Cognition 27(6). 883–892. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2009.27.6.883.Search in Google Scholar

Meinhardt, Hans. 2009. The algorithmic beauty of sea shells. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/978-3-540-92142-4Search in Google Scholar

Neuman, Yair, Assaf Dan, YohaiCohen, Last, Mark, Argamon, Shlomo, Howard, Newton & Frieder, Ophir. 2013. Metaphor identification in large texts corpora. PloS One 8(4). e62343. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0062343.Search in Google Scholar

Ojha, Amitash, Elisabetta Gola & Bipin Indurkhya. 2018a. Are hybrid pictorial metaphors perceived more strongly than pictorial similes? Metaphor and Symbol 33(4). 253–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2018.1549837.Search in Google Scholar

Ojha, Amitash, Elisabetta Gola, Noemi Lai & Francesca Ervas. 2018b. When visual metaphors are tough but highly persuasive. In Frontiers psychology conference abstract: XPRAG. it 2018-Second experimental pragmatics in Italy conference, Pavia, Italy, 30 May – 1 Jun, 2018.Search in Google Scholar

Ojha, Amitash, Francesca Ervas, Elisabetta Gola & Bipin Indurkhya. 2019. Similarities and differences between verbal and visual metaphor processing: An EEG study. Multimodal Communication 8(2). https://doi.org/10.1515/mc-2019-0006.Search in Google Scholar

Ortony, Andrew. 1979. Beyond literal similarity. Psychological Review 86(3). 161–180. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.86.3.161.Search in Google Scholar

Pérez-Sobrino, Paula. 2016. Multimodal metaphor and metonymy in advertising: A corpus-based account. Metaphor and Symbol 31(2). 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2016.1150759.Search in Google Scholar

Pérez-Sobrino, Paula. 2013. Metaphor use in advertising: Analysis of the interaction between multimodal metaphor and metonymy in a greenwashing advertisement. In Elisabetta Gola & Francesca Ervas (eds.), Metaphor in focus: Philosophical perspectives on metaphor use, 67–82. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars.Search in Google Scholar

Petrenko, Viktor F. & Evgeniya A. Korotchenko. 2012. Metaphor as a basic mechanism of art (painting). Psychology in Russia: State of the Art 5. 531–567. https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2012.0033.Search in Google Scholar

Phillips, Barbara J. & Edward F. McQuarrie. 2004. Beyond visual metaphor: A new typology of visual rhetoric in advertising. Marketing Theory 4(1–2). 113–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593104044089.Search in Google Scholar

Poppi, Fabio Indìo Massimo. 2018. Machina ex homine, homo ex machina: Metaphor and ideology in Shinya Tsukamoto’s “Tetsuo: The Iron man.” Metaphor and the Social World 8(2). 207–228. https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.17003.pop.Search in Google Scholar

Poppi, Fabio Indìo Massimo & Peter Kravanja. 2017. Annuntiatio Domini: Metaphoric conceptualization and gesture analysis in painted representations of the Annunciation. Public Journal of Semiotics 8(1). 26–45. https://doi.org/10.37693/pjos.2017.8.16989.Search in Google Scholar

Poppi, Fabio Indìo Massimo & Peter. Kravanja. 2019a. Actiones secundum fidei1: Antithesis and metaphoric conceptualization in Banksy’s graffiti art. Metaphor and the Social World 9(1). 83–106. https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.17021.pop.Search in Google Scholar

Poppi, Fabio Indìo Massimo & Peter Kravanja. 2019b. Aurora musis amica: Metaphoric conceptualization of depression in online visual representations. Visual Communication 1470357219852140. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1470357219852140.10.1177/1470357219852140Search in Google Scholar

Poppi, Fabio Indìo Massimo & Peter Kravanja. 2019c. Sic vita est: Visual representation in painting of the conceptual metaphor LIFE IS A JOURNEY. Semiotica 2019(230). 541–566. https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2018-0009.Search in Google Scholar

Poppi, Fabio Indìo Massimo & Eduardo Urios-Aparisi. 2018. De corporibus humanis: Metaphor and ideology in the representation of the human body in cinema. Metaphor and Symbol 33(4). 295–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2018.1549838.Search in Google Scholar

Pragglejaz Group. 2007. Mip: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 22(1). 1–39.10.1080/10926480709336752Search in Google Scholar

Refaie, Elisabeth El. 2003. Understanding visual metaphor: The example of newspaper cartoons. Visual Communication 2(1). 75–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357203002001755.Search in Google Scholar

Reijnierse, W. Gudrun, Christian Burgers, Tina Krennmayr & Gerard J. Steen. 2015. How viruses and beasts affect our opinions (or not): The role of extendedness in metaphorical framing. Metaphor and the Social World 5(2). 245–263. https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.5.2.04rei.Search in Google Scholar

Richards, Ivor Armstrong. 1936. The philosophy of rhetoric. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Schilperoord, Joost. 2018. Ways with pictures: Visual incongruities and metaphor. In G. J. Steen, (ed.), Visual metaphor: Structure and process, 11–46. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/celcr.18.02schSearch in Google Scholar

Schilperoord, Joost & Alfons Maes. 2009. Visual metaphoric conceptualization in editorial cartoons. In Charles Forceville & Eduardo Urios-Aparisi (eds.), Multimodal metaphor, 213–240. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110215366.3.213Search in Google Scholar

Shutova, Ekaterina & Simone Teufel. 2010. Metaphor corpus annotated for source – target domain map- pings. In Proceedings of LREC 2010, 3255–3261. Malta.Search in Google Scholar

Šorm, Ester & Gerard J. Steen. 2013. Processing visual metaphor: A study in thinking out loud. Metaphor and the Social World 3(1). 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.3.1.01sor.Search in Google Scholar

Stampoulidis, Georgios & Marianna Bolognesi. 2019. Bringing metaphors back to the streets: A corpus-based study for the identification and interpretation of rhetorical figures in street art. Visual Communication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357219877538.Search in Google Scholar

Steen, Gerard J. 2008. The paradox of metaphor: Why we need a three- dimensional model of metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol 23(4). 213–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926480802426753.Search in Google Scholar

Steen, Gerard J. 2011. The contemporary theory of metaphor – now new and improved. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 9(1). 26–64. https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.9.1.03ste.Search in Google Scholar

Thibodeau, Paul H. & Lera Boroditsky. 2015. Measuring effects of metaphor in a dynamic opinion landscape. PloS One 10(7). e0133939. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133939.Search in Google Scholar

Turner, Mark & Gilles Fauconnier. 2003. Metaphor, metonymy, and binding. In Antonio Barcelona (ed.), Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads, 133–145. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110894677.133Search in Google Scholar

Tversky, Barbara. 2001. Spatial schemas in depictions. In Meredith Gattis (ed.), Spatial schemas and abstract thought, 79–111. Cambridge: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/6392.003.0006Search in Google Scholar

Van Mulken, Margot, Rob Le Pair & Charles Forceville. 2010. The impact of perceived complexity, deviation, and comprehension on the appreciation of visual metaphor in advertising across three European countries. Journal of Pragmatics 42(12). 3418–3430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.04.030.Search in Google Scholar

Someren, Maarten W. van, Yvonne F. Barnard & Jacobijn A. C. Sandberg. 1994. The think aloud method: A practical guide to modeling cognitive processes. London: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar

Veale, Tony. 2013. Once more, with feeling! Using creative affective metaphors to express information needs. In The Fourth International Conference on Computational Creativity, June 12–14, 16–23. Sydney: Sydney University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Whittock, Trevor. 1990. Metaphor and film. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Wollheim, Richard. 1993. Metaphor and painting. In Knowledge and language, 113–125. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/978-94-011-1844-6_8Search in Google Scholar

Zbikowski, Lawrence. 2008. Metaphor and music. In Raymond W. GibbsJr. (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought, 502–524. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511816802.030Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2020-10-30
Published in Print: 2020-12-16

© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Research Articles
  3. Covenantal trust and semioethics: A reflection on interpersonal and intercultural summoning
  4. The semeiotic self
  5. Peirce’s diagrammatic reasoning and the cinema: Image, diagram, and narrative in The Shape of Water
  6. The three approaches to the semiotics of power
  7. Musical meaning and indexicality in the analysis of ceremonial mbira music
  8. The intersemiotic affordances of photography and poetry
  9. Graphic analogies in the imitation of music in literature
  10. Exploring the politics of visibility: Technology, digital representation, and the mediated workings of power
  11. Smart objects in daily life: Tackling the rise of new life forms in a semiotic perspective*
  12. The dagoba and the gopuram: A semiotic contrastive study of the Sinhalese Buddhist and Tamil Hindu cultures
  13. The Selfish Meme: Dawkins, Peirce, Freud
  14. Towards a semiotic model of interlingual translation
  15. Intermedial references and signification: Perception versus conception
  16. The “material function” in cinema: Resolving the paradox of the glitch
  17. Extending the embodied semiotic square: A cultural-semantic analysis of “Follow your Arrow”
  18. Time embodied as space in graphic narratives: A study in applied Peircean semiotics
  19. The origin of editorial images: Recycling, culture, and cognition
  20. Imago Dei: Metaphorical conceptualization of pictorial artworks within a participant-based framework
  21. On the origins of semiosic translation, the role of semiosis in translation and translating and the nature of sign systems: Response to Jia
  22. Special section: A sociosemiotic exploration of identity and discourse (Le Cheng, Ning Ye and David Machin, guest eds.)
  23. Introduction: A sociosemiotic exploration of identity and discourse
  24. The misleading nature of flow charts and diagrams in organizational communication: The case of performance management of preschools in Sweden
  25. A tentative analysis of legal terminology diachronic changes and the problem of communication effectiveness in legal settings
  26. Re-exploring Language development and identity construction of Hui nationality in China: a sociosemiotic perspective
  27. Evidentiality of court judgments in the People’s Republic of China: A semiotic perspective
https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2018-0077
Keywords for this article
artwork; conceptualization; interpretation; pictorial metaphor; think-aloud protocol

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Research Articles
  3. Covenantal trust and semioethics: A reflection on interpersonal and intercultural summoning
  4. The semeiotic self
  5. Peirce’s diagrammatic reasoning and the cinema: Image, diagram, and narrative in The Shape of Water
  6. The three approaches to the semiotics of power
  7. Musical meaning and indexicality in the analysis of ceremonial mbira music
  8. The intersemiotic affordances of photography and poetry
  9. Graphic analogies in the imitation of music in literature
  10. Exploring the politics of visibility: Technology, digital representation, and the mediated workings of power
  11. Smart objects in daily life: Tackling the rise of new life forms in a semiotic perspective*
  12. The dagoba and the gopuram: A semiotic contrastive study of the Sinhalese Buddhist and Tamil Hindu cultures
  13. The Selfish Meme: Dawkins, Peirce, Freud
  14. Towards a semiotic model of interlingual translation
  15. Intermedial references and signification: Perception versus conception
  16. The “material function” in cinema: Resolving the paradox of the glitch
  17. Extending the embodied semiotic square: A cultural-semantic analysis of “Follow your Arrow”
  18. Time embodied as space in graphic narratives: A study in applied Peircean semiotics
  19. The origin of editorial images: Recycling, culture, and cognition
  20. Imago Dei: Metaphorical conceptualization of pictorial artworks within a participant-based framework
  21. On the origins of semiosic translation, the role of semiosis in translation and translating and the nature of sign systems: Response to Jia
  22. Special section: A sociosemiotic exploration of identity and discourse (Le Cheng, Ning Ye and David Machin, guest eds.)
  23. Introduction: A sociosemiotic exploration of identity and discourse
  24. The misleading nature of flow charts and diagrams in organizational communication: The case of performance management of preschools in Sweden
  25. A tentative analysis of legal terminology diachronic changes and the problem of communication effectiveness in legal settings
  26. Re-exploring Language development and identity construction of Hui nationality in China: a sociosemiotic perspective
  27. Evidentiality of court judgments in the People’s Republic of China: A semiotic perspective
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 23.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/sem-2018-0077/html?lang=en
Scroll to top button