Pierce’s Triadic System

First of all I must say that I really was surprised at my marks (17!). I was expecting (and was mentally prepared for) something between 5 and 10!!!

Anyways… Semiotics seemed to make more sense to me then the previous topics. It is the study of the signs and I totally agree that it can be (and should be and is) used for studying cultures because most cultures do have a lot of concepts and beliefs summed up through different signs/symbols. I also agree that a sign stands for something other than itself. It actually carries (and sometimes hides with in it) some further concept than just itself.

Saussure’s belief also makes sense to me. According to him, signs are purely psychological. I agree to this and would use the colour red as an example. In a happy mood, a person may take the red colour to be exciting and it will give a kind of a playful perception. In a romantic mood, the colour red will create a picture of the red rose or a “lady in red”. In a wedding scenario, red colour (in our culture) would directly take the person’s mind to the bride. In some kind of a dangerous situation, red would exhibit a kind of a “be ware!” sign or might even take the person’s thought towards blood.

Signs also make sense in a formal abstract system. Whether I understood this correctly or not will be answered by the following example. In the “eastern” system, white cloth is kind of used in a spiritual sense. For example, the dead is buried in white, many people prefer to wear white on sacred days etc… But in the “western” system, hardly any bride would wear something else except white (and she is not being buried!).

Also we do come to know the world through language! Because when you want to communicate something to another person, you give him a sign. But the first time, the receiver has to be told (communicated in a language that he/she understands) as to what the sign means!

What I got from the Pierce’s triadic system was that a sign requires and the interpretant to explain what object does the sign represents. Please do tell me if I got the concept wrong.

It is written on Pakistani currency that “Hamil haza ko mutalbay par ada karay ga”. As far as I know, this means that the issuer of the note will give the holder of the note the asset that is backing the note when the holder asks for it. And mostly currencies were backed by gold. So for example if the rupee is backed by gold, then, if you claim from the state bank of Pakistan, they will be required to give you twenty rupees worth of gold (in case you have a twenty rupee note)

Don’t know how much of the things are right but sure hope that my concepts get clear soon!