Affiliation:
1. Department of Semiotics , University of Tartu , Tartu , Estonia
Abstract
Abstract
We briefly sketch some characteristics of Thomas A. Sebeok’s program to develop semiotics and relate them to the approaches in the Tartu circle. It is not a historical, but effectively a paradigmatic insight into research in contemporary Tartu semiotics, where we can see the inevitability of cooperation between the large branches of semiotics such as bio-, socio-, and cultural semiotics that were, consciously or not, preceded by Sebeok. We take a closer look into Sebeok’s arguments in between the times when he re-introduced semiotics to contemporary audiences and when he seemingly departed from the conceptual realm of the Tartu–Moscow School of semiotics. Likewise, we aim to show how his practical engagement in “radwaste” is already acute today and demands realization of the connection between the biological and the cultural as mediated by the social.
Subject
Communication,Language and Linguistics
Reference32 articles.
1. Anderson, Myrdene, John Deely, Martin Krampen, Joseph Ransdell, Thomas A. Sebeok & Thure von Uexküll. 1984. A semiotic perspective on the sciences: Steps toward a new paradigm. Semiotica 52. 7–47.
2. Cobley, Paul. 2011. Sebeok’s panopticon. In Cobley Paul, John Deely, Kalevi Kull & Susan Petrilli (eds.), Semiotics continues to astonish: Thomas A. Sebeok and the Doctrine of Signs (Semiotics, Communication and Cognition 7), 85–113. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
3. Deely, John (ed.). 1995. Thomas A. Sebeok: Bibliography, 1942–1995. Bloomington: Eurolingua.
4. Deely, John. 2012. The Tartu synthesis in semiotics today viewed from America. Chinese Semiotic Studies 8. 214–226. https://doi.org/10.1515/css-2012-0040.
5. Kotov, Kaie & Kalevi Kull. 2011. Semiosphere is the relational biosphere. In Claus Emmeche & Kalevi Kull (eds.), Towards a semiotic biology: Life is the action of signs, 179–194. London: Imperial College Press.