In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

P A R T T W O Semeiotic as Semiotics Logic, in its general sense, is, [ . . . ] only another name for semiotic (shmeivtik}), the quasi-necessary, or formal, doctrine of signs. —Peirce (2.227) Know that from the day when at the age of 12 or 13 I took up, in my elder brother’s room a copy of Whately’s Logic, [ . . . ] it has never been in my power to study anything,— mathematics, ethics, metaphysics, gravitation, thermo-dynamics , optics, chemistry, comparative anatomy, astronomy, psychology, phonetics, economic, the history of science, whist, men and women, wine, metrology, except as a study of semeiotic. —Peirce (Letter to Lady Welby, 1908, Dec. 23 in Hardwick 1977: 85–86) The present part will be devoted to Peirce’s theory of signs. In the ¤rst chapter (ch. 4), I shall describe semeiotic as semiotic, that is to say as a method for analyzing anything which appears as a “sign” and, in the second chapter (ch. 5), I shall approach the question of interpreting Peirce or the way of understanding or translating Peirce in another language, yours or mine, English, French, or in any other context: linguistic, private, or ideological. ...

Share