Chemical formalisms: toward a semiotic typology

Author:

Yu Zhigang1ORCID,Doran Yaegan2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Beijing Institute of Technology , Beijing , China

2. Australian Catholic University , Strathfield , Australia

Abstract

Abstract Chemistry is a highly technical field that relies heavily on a range of symbolic and imagic formalisms. These formalisms conceptualize specific chemical knowledge into semiotic resources that are rarely used elsewhere in most other academic fields or contexts. To develop an understanding of semiosis in highly technical fields such as chemistry, key questions include what this range of formalisms do and why they occur. These are key questions not only for our understanding of semiosis, but also if we wish to develop integrated literacy programs that can support students to marshal the multimodal discourse of chemistry. This paper explores these questions by examining how three key chemical formalisms organize their meaning: symbolic formalisms known as chemical formulas and chemical equations, and an imagic formalism known as structural formulas. Drawing on Systemic Functional Linguistics and using a corpus of formalisms from secondary school chemistry, these formalisms are explored in terms of their overarching grammatical organization and the content meanings they realize through the concept of “field.” This is used to compare and contrast each formalism in terms of a semiotic typology so as to understand how they work and what meanings they realize. By exploring chemical formalisms in this way, this paper establishes a means of seeing the similarities and differences in meaning-making across formalisms and explaining why different formalisms occur. This then begins to provide a base upon which applied programs can interpret the literacy needs of chemistry.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Reference54 articles.

1. Arasasingham, Ramesh, Mare Taagepera, Frank Potter & Stacy Lonjers. 2004. Using knowledge space theory to assess student understanding of stoichiometry. Journal of Chemical Education 81(10). 1517–1523. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed081p1517.

2. Berzelius, Jacob. 1814. Essay on the cause of chemical proportions, and on some circumstances relating to them: Together with a short and easy method of expressing them. Annals of Philosophy 3(13). 51–62.

3. Brock, William Hodson. 1993. The Norton history of chemistry. New York: Norton.

4. Brown, Theodore Lawrence, Eugene Harold LeMay, Bruce Edward Bursten, Catherine Jones Murphy & Patrick Malcolm Woodward. 2012. Chemistry: The central science, 12th edn. New York: Prentice Hall.

5. Chan, Drew, Chris Commons, Richard Hecker, Kathryn Hillier, Bob Hogendoorn, Louise Lennard, Mick Moylan, Pat O’Shea, Maria Porter, Patrick Sanders, Jim Sturgiss & Paul, Waldron. 2018. Pearson chemistry 11: New South Wales student book. Melbourne: Pearson Australia.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3