[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [xmca] Body expression as sign.
- To: <email@example.com>, "'eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity'" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: RE: [xmca] Body expression as sign.
- From: "Vera John-Steiner" <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 21:42:48 -0600
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: <4FBEFB30.email@example.com>
- List-archive: <http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca>
- List-help: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=help>
- List-id: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca.weber.ucsd.edu>
- List-post: <mailto:email@example.com>
- List-subscribe: <http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=unsubscribe>
- References: <D30C1AB9-7FB4-4292-8C9C-AD79D7773F8B@roadrunner.com><CAGaCnpwEL-30zziVZbzm7xK9OCxq9VSZU+NxFecmyBU91wrSFA@mail.gmail.com> <4FBEFB30.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Reply-to: email@example.com, "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: email@example.com
- Thread-index: Ac06Jc4fXxtxI9UEQcmEVJLyq7rmTwAAoAUg
Andy and Larry,
I was just going to write a very similar note to Andy's. I believe that the
Peircian distinctions are very widely accepted,
From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On
Behalf Of Andy Blunden
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 9:23 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: Re: [xmca] Body expression as sign.
Larry are you intending to use these terms as in Peirce's system?
For Peirce "sign" is a global category including a wide array of
relations between sign, interpretant and object.
For Peirce a *symbol* has only a conventional relation to the object for
the interpretant. It is an *icon* which relies on resemblance to the
object, and an *index* on a material connection. But there are other
theories of semiotics I guess.
*Larry Purss wrote:
> Joseph, Jack, Rod and Christine
> I would like to explore the topic of *body expression AS signs* [the topic
> of the thread]
> The term *signs* and how it links to two other terms *gesture* and
> This is not to put in question the focus of this thread to open up and
> explore questions of *energy* *movement* *emotion* and *attunement*. The
> overall general term *expression* and how expression is an *aesthetic
> REACTION* [Vygotsky's term] or an *aesthetic RESPONSE* [Gadamer's term]
> I seems to be central to our understanding bodily expression
> Within this general notion of expression my question is if the following
> statements are equivalent, different, or ambivalent?
> * Body expression AS gesture
> * Body expression AS sign
> * Body expression as symbol
> My understanding of the relation of *signs* to what they signify is that
> the relation is ESSENTIALLY arbitrary. One sign can replace another sign
> and either sign can equally represent the signified.
> Symbols, by contrast have a relation of RESEMBLANCE to the signified. We
> cannot merely transfer one symbol to be replaced by another symbol
> without this change radically changing the meaning.
> Both signs and symbols are implicated in conceptual understanding.
> Body expression as *gesture* moves into the realm of *showing* and
> *perceiving* ACTUAL physical bodily movement. Some traditions assume this
> level of bodily expression is pre-conceptual. However other traditions
> asumme bodily gesture is expressing cultural-historical conventionalized
> My question is: When we are exploring aesthetic REACTION or aesthetic
> RESPONSE to bodily *expression* [as a general term] are we
> this bodily expression at the level of gesture, symbol, or sign
> expressions? Do the adjectives used to modify *expression* change the
> meaning of our understanding of expression as a general term?
> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Joseph Gilbert
>> Let us remember that spoken-word language is composed of sounds made by
>> the body, sounds that issue forth as expressions of emotions and that
>> hearers bodies to assume patterns of motion analogous to those in the
>> generators of the sounds. Thereby motion and emotion are transferred from
>> originators to receivers. It is that sense of emotion, that we experience
>> by our spoken words, that provides us with a sense of meaning. Our own
>> emotion is the bottom line of our sense of meaning. Things have meaning
>> only in as much, and in how, they affect us. And our emotions are the way
>> we experience effects. Our words deal in the currency of meaning - our
>> emotions - , and they refer to things. Because of this dual nature, words
>> the very things that identify things - inform us of the meaning of our
>> world simply by affecting our emotions with their sounds. Since we are
>> normally preoccupied with the referential aspect of words, it is
>> subconsciously that we experience their emotional effects.
>> Joseph Gilbert
>> xmca mailing list
> xmca mailing list
Joint Editor MCA: http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/18/1
Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
xmca mailing list
xmca mailing list