Difference between revisions of "Annotation:The Development of Language as Purposive Behavior*/C5m9y02ijk"
(Created page with "{{Argument |field_radiobutton=pro }} {{TextAnnotation |AnnotationOf=The_Development_of_Language_as_Purposive_Behavior* |AnnotationComment=Sprache erlaubt uns zu Sprechen, nich...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Argument | {{Argument | ||
|field_radiobutton=pro | |field_radiobutton=pro | ||
| + | }} | ||
| + | {{Thema | ||
| + | |field_text_autocomplete=Sprache | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{TextAnnotation | {{TextAnnotation | ||
|AnnotationOf=The_Development_of_Language_as_Purposive_Behavior* | |AnnotationOf=The_Development_of_Language_as_Purposive_Behavior* | ||
|AnnotationComment=Sprache erlaubt uns zu Sprechen, nich nur über Dinge, die räumlich oder zeitlich entfernt sind, sindern auch über Dinge, nirgendwo sind und nie passieren. | |AnnotationComment=Sprache erlaubt uns zu Sprechen, nich nur über Dinge, die räumlich oder zeitlich entfernt sind, sindern auch über Dinge, nirgendwo sind und nie passieren. | ||
| − | |LastModificationDate=2019-03-11T18:25: | + | |LastModificationDate=2019-03-11T18:25:51.245Z |
|LastModificationUser=User:Sarah Oberbichler | |LastModificationUser=User:Sarah Oberbichler | ||
| − | |AnnotationMetadata=^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"C5m9y02ijk","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ28Ӻ","startOffset":1433,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ28Ӻ","endOffset":2841°Ӻ,"quote":"Language allows us to talk, not only about things that are remote in time and/or space, but also about things that are nowhere and never happen at all. DISPLACEMENT has to become “symbolicity”. To turn into a symbol, the sign’s one-to-one relation to a perceptual “referent” must be severed Ӷ40Ӻ. That is to say, the sign must be semantically tied to a representation that is independent of the perceptual signals available at any time (not only at the time and place of the sign’s use). Thus, the semanticity of a linguistic sign is constituted, not by a tie that links it to a “thing”, but by one that links it to a representation or concept Ӷ35Ӻ. The fact that a sign, be it verbal or non-verbal, has acquired symbolicity, does of course not preclude that it still be used as a perception-bound sign whenever there is a perceptual input that corresponds to the representation it designates; nor does it preclude that it be used by the sender to trigger a conventional active response in the receiver (as in the case of an ‘imperative’). But what gives a sign the status of symbol is that it can be used without such a “stimulus” and without triggering the active response. The sign for tiger, for instance, will be a symbol when it can be used without reference to a present, past, or future perceptual instance of a tiger and without the receiver taking such steps as he would if he did perceive a tiger.","highlights":Ӷ^"jQuery321074044024740980192":^°°,^"jQuery321074044024740980192":^°°,^"jQuery321074044024740980192":^°°,^"jQuery321074044024740980192":^°°Ӻ,"text":"Sprache erlaubt uns zu Sprechen, nich nur über Dinge, die räumlich oder zeitlich entfernt sind, sindern auch über Dinge, nirgendwo sind und nie passieren. | + | |AnnotationMetadata=^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"C5m9y02ijk","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ28Ӻ","startOffset":1433,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ28Ӻ","endOffset":2841°Ӻ,"quote":"Language allows us to talk, not only about things that are remote in time and/or space, but also about things that are nowhere and never happen at all. DISPLACEMENT has to become “symbolicity”. To turn into a symbol, the sign’s one-to-one relation to a perceptual “referent” must be severed Ӷ40Ӻ. That is to say, the sign must be semantically tied to a representation that is independent of the perceptual signals available at any time (not only at the time and place of the sign’s use). Thus, the semanticity of a linguistic sign is constituted, not by a tie that links it to a “thing”, but by one that links it to a representation or concept Ӷ35Ӻ. The fact that a sign, be it verbal or non-verbal, has acquired symbolicity, does of course not preclude that it still be used as a perception-bound sign whenever there is a perceptual input that corresponds to the representation it designates; nor does it preclude that it be used by the sender to trigger a conventional active response in the receiver (as in the case of an ‘imperative’). But what gives a sign the status of symbol is that it can be used without such a “stimulus” and without triggering the active response. The sign for tiger, for instance, will be a symbol when it can be used without reference to a present, past, or future perceptual instance of a tiger and without the receiver taking such steps as he would if he did perceive a tiger.","highlights":Ӷ^"jQuery321074044024740980192":^°°,^"jQuery321074044024740980192":^°°,^"jQuery321074044024740980192":^°°,^"jQuery321074044024740980192":^°°Ӻ,"text":"Sprache erlaubt uns zu Sprechen, nich nur über Dinge, die räumlich oder zeitlich entfernt sind, sindern auch über Dinge, nirgendwo sind und nie passieren. ","category":"Argument","data_creacio":1552325145276° |
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 18:25, 11 March 2019
| Thema | Sprache |
|---|
| Annotation of | The_Development_of_Language_as_Purposive_Behavior* |
|---|---|
| Annotation Comment | Sprache erlaubt uns zu Sprechen, nich nur über Dinge, die räumlich oder zeitlich entfernt sind, sindern auch über Dinge, nirgendwo sind und nie passieren. |
| Last Modification Date | 2019-03-11T18:25:51.245Z |
| Last Modification User | User:Sarah Oberbichler |
| Annotation Metadata | ^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"C5m9y02ijk","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ28Ӻ","startOffset":1433,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ28Ӻ","endOffset":2841°Ӻ,"quote":"Language allows us to talk, not only about things that are remote in time and/or space, but also about things that are nowhere and never happen at all. DISPLACEMENT has to become “symbolicity”. To turn into a symbol, the sign’s one-to-one relation to a perceptual “referent” must be severed Ӷ40Ӻ. That is to say, the sign must be semantically tied to a representation that is independent of the perceptual signals available at any time (not only at the time and place of the sign’s use). Thus, the semanticity of a linguistic sign is constituted, not by a tie that links it to a “thing”, but by one that links it to a representation or concept Ӷ35Ӻ. The fact that a sign, be it verbal or non-verbal, has acquired symbolicity, does of course not preclude that it still be used as a perception-bound sign whenever there is a perceptual input that corresponds to the representation it designates; nor does it preclude that it be used by the sender to trigger a conventional active response in the receiver (as in the case of an ‘imperative’). But what gives a sign the status of symbol is that it can be used without such a “stimulus” and without triggering the active response. The sign for tiger, for instance, will be a symbol when it can be used without reference to a present, past, or future perceptual instance of a tiger and without the receiver taking such steps as he would if he did perceive a tiger.","highlights":Ӷ^"jQuery321074044024740980192":^°°,^"jQuery321074044024740980192":^°°,^"jQuery321074044024740980192":^°°,^"jQuery321074044024740980192":^°°Ӻ,"text":"Sprache erlaubt uns zu Sprechen, nich nur über Dinge, die räumlich oder zeitlich entfernt sind, sindern auch über Dinge, nirgendwo sind und nie passieren. ","category":"Argument","data_creacio":1552325145276°
|
