Signs and objects in op-ed articles on loneliness in the US and Singapore newspapers: a semiotic interpretation

Abstract

Semiotics uncovers signs and objects in narrative accounts and vivid descriptions in the larger body of texts through the power of an interpretant. A sign is an idea that stands for something bigger while an object is a possible interpretation or meaning of that idea. An interpretant is best thought of as the understanding that we have of the sign-object relation. In this study, we attempted to answer two research questions: (1) What signs do descriptive accounts of loneliness signify, and what objects do these significations suggest? (2) How do these sign-object relations accomplish awareness and understanding of loneliness as a deep human emotion? By thematically analysing 30 opinion articles on loneliness published in the US and Singapore newspapers, we were able to decipher the signs that op-ed articles on loneliness suggest, and we seemed to have unravelled the meanings of these signs. We seemed to have found two signs in our interpretation and meaning making: (1) In the US, loneliness exists due to the rapid deterioration of deep and meaningful human connections, and (2) In Singapore, loneliness that is made overt is a sign of human weakness. What object does the first sign suggest? We surmise that our material body has enormous power to connect with other human beings in the physical world in which we live. Fundamentally realizing the power of our lived body and our lived mind can allow us to sustain meaningful human connections that matter to our mental health. For the second sign, we argue that Singaporeans in general tend to create a binary self of which they are ensnared into a double identity that somehow explains who they are. However, this rise of embodying a binary self or a double identity in the Asian context seems to conceal difficult, heavy, and pervasive emotions such as loneliness bringing a debilitating impact on mental health. Theoretical and cultural implications invite Singaporeans to embrace vulnerability and human frailty as a way of dealing with loneliness as a dangerous emotion. Practical implications also draw into the power of embracing vulnerability and human frailty so that individuals can manage and overcome difficult emotions such as loneliness that has bearing on the kind of life they want to live.

Full text

Nimrod L. Delante*, Esther Soo Wansing and Audrey Toh Lin Lin
Signs and objects in op-ed articles on
loneliness in the US and Singapore
newspapers: a semiotic interpretation
https://doi.org/10.1515/lass-2024-0061
Received November 12, 2024; accepted January 22, 2025
Abstract: Semiotics uncovers signs and objects in narrative accounts and vivid
descriptions in the larger body of texts through the power of an interpretant. A sign is
an idea that stands for something bigger while an object is a possible interpretation
or meaning of that idea. An interpretant is best thought of as the understanding that
we have of the sign-object relation. In this study, we attempted to answer two
research questions: (1) What signs do descriptive accounts of loneliness signify, and
what objects do these significations suggest? (2) How do these sign-object relations
accomplish awareness and understanding of loneliness as a deep human emotion?
By thematically analysing 30 opinion articles on loneliness published in the US and
Singapore newspapers, we were able to decipher the signs that op-ed articles on
loneliness suggest, and we seemed to have unravelled the meanings of these signs.
We seemed to have found two signs in our interpretation and meaning making: (1) In
the US, loneliness exists due to the rapid deterioration of deep and meaningful
human connections, and (2) In Singapore, loneliness that is made overt is a sign of
human weakness. What object does the first sign suggest? We surmise that our
material body has enormous power to connect with other human beings in the
physical world in which we live. Fundamentally realizing the power of our lived
body and our lived mind can allow us to sustain meaningful human connections that
matter to our mental health. For the second sign, we argue that Singaporeans in
general tend to create a binary self of which they are ensnared into a double identity
that somehow explains who they are. However, this rise of embodying a binary self
or a double identity in the Asian context seems to conceal difficult, heavy, and
pervasive emotions such as loneliness bringing a debilitating impact on mental
health. Theoretical and cultural implications invite Singaporeans to embrace
vulnerability and human frailty as a way of dealing with loneliness as a dangerous
*Corresponding author: Nimrod L. Delante, School of Humanities, Nanyang Technological University,
50 Nanyang Avenue, 226001, Singapore, Singapore, E-mail: nimrod.delante@ntu.edu.sg. https://orcid.
org/0000-0002-5288-9388
Esther Soo Wansing and Audrey Toh Lin Lin, School of Humanities, Nanyang Technological University,
50 Nanyang Avenue, 226001, Singapore, Singapore
Lang. Semiot. Stud. 2025; 11(1): 95–124
Open Access. © 2025 the author(s), published by De Gruyter on behalf of Soochow University. This
work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

emotion. Practical implications also draw into the power of embracing vulnerability
and human frailty so that individuals can manage and overcome difficult emotions
such as loneliness that has bearing on the kind of life they want to live.
Keywords: loneliness; signs; objects; Peircean semiotics; thematic analysis
1 Introduction
Loneliness is a deep, complex, and multifaceted emotion that knows no age, gender,
ethnicity, social status, religious beliefs, or geographical boundaries. Loneliness
transcends time, distance, and space. The American Psychological Association (APA
2018) defines loneliness as “affective and cognitive discomfort or uneasiness from
being or perceiving oneself to be alone or feeling as though you are alone or
otherwise solitary”. It is a state of distress or emotional discomfort that results when
one feels a gap between one’s desire for social connection and actual experiences of it
(APA 2018). It is a feeling of isolation that can be subjective, existential, or social, and
it seems prevalent in one’s personhood, etched in one’s being, and cast in one’s
psyche. The emotional experience of loneliness has been characterized as “a sad or
aching sense of isolation; that is, of being alone, cut off, or distanced from others”
(MacEvoy et al. 2011) which happens either to young people or the ageing population.
From the sociocultural perspective, we may lose a sense of purpose as we age and
shed the many roles taken up during our lives; therefore, loneliness becomes more
apparent within us as we age in time because of fear of becoming completely
dependent on others such as family and friends (Lin and Ng 2023).
Loneliness is different from solitude. Loneliness is a negative, penetrating,
melancholic feeling, while solitude is a conscious desire to be alone due to social
fatigue; thus, being alone in solitude could be a relief (Birditt et al. 2019; Tse et al.
2022). It can be difficult to spot loneliness in the faces, mannerisms, and body lan-
guage of people, although some researchers claim we can do this if we try hard
enough (Cheeta et al. 2021; Gastonguay 1972; Lodder et al. 2016; Redmond 2024; Saito
et al. 2020). Nonetheless, this perceived difficulty in spotting loneliness arises from
the fact that, as human beings, we can master the art of concealing our emotions, e.g.,
disguising sadness and grief through smiling, chuckling, or laughing,for which people
around us could be clueless about the suffering and sorrow growing immensely inside
us. At times, manifested by outward anger or indignation, we may not have a hint that
unmanaged anger and hostility could be symptoms of profound and unregulated
loneliness (Theeke et al. 2019; Yount 2000).
However, when we try hard enough and pay close attention to people’s public
behaviour, we might just spot loneliness in them (Cheeta et al. 2021; Gastonguay 1972;
96 Delante et al.

Lodder et al. 2016; Redmond 2024; Saito et al. 2020). For instance, someone’s drooped
corners of the face, slumped shoulders, and dull and distant eyes can suggest a
feeling of deep loneliness brought by different reasons we can only imagine. Simi-
larly, someone’s sleepy face, frowning mouth, numb lips, and frosty, hollow look in
the eyes suggest the same. In one public garden, you can see a big family boisterously
laughing while sharing food, cracking jokes, and telling stories; in another corner,
you will see a man all by himself looking at a far distance, shying away from the
prying eyes of the crowd. Being self-absorbed, preoccupied, and not attentive to the
environment seem to be manifestations of lonely people. The apparent perceptibility
of these physical characteristics could be connected to their personal strivings, which
we can infer from their facial expressions and self-absorption putting so much
weight on their sense of being.
In this study, we do not claim that we are lonely people although we cannot be
certain that we were not at all lonely at some point in our lives. Who knows we could
have been lonely at some point in time; we just did not pay attention to it, or we just
ignored it perhaps due to the discomfort it brings to our spirit. Who knows we could
have been living a solitary life but not lonely; we just enjoyed it with the passage of
time. Who knows we could be living a happy and fulfilled life with family and friends;
we are just brazenly interested in exploring what it is and how it is to be lonely.
However, the truth behind this interest in exploring loneliness, particularly with
a focus on exploring the semiotics of loneliness (intersubjective mediation by signs)
had been uncovered through a lunch conversation in which we shared, debated, and
problematized a common observation in two settings; (1) about people’s behaviour
on public transport such as the MRT or buses, and other public places in Singapore
such as public parks, and (2) about students’perceived behaviour on campus.
In public transport and public parks, some of the people we observed inten-
tionally ignored the chaos of a fast-paced world by wearing their headsets, watching
videos, playing video games, walking leisurely oblivious of other people, or were just
literally bored and unmindful of the clamant chaos of the outside world. However,
our eyes noticed a few individuals who tend to squeeze themselves into a corner,
eyes dull and expressionless, with a slouched posture, drooped shoulders, and
looking afar with their minds drifting away from the glass windows of the train or
the bus or gazing at a far horizon where the earth and the skies meet. The same can
be said with some students on campus. With the majority of them operating in their
own bubbles with their headsets on or putting on their poker facades in a crowd but
engaging in conversations among their in-groups, we would sometimes catch sight of
a few students sitting alone on a bench, walking alone sluggishly on the pavements,
squeezing oneself at a corner table in a hall, or squatting on a grass lawn away from
the persistent chaos of the crowd. Their faces look heavy with slumped cheeks; their
Signs and objects in op-ed articles 97

sentience is evident; their frosty aura is palpable, and their forlorn, melancholic eyes
speak volumes.
We wonder whether they are living a lonely life in the cosmopolitan and rapidly
growing city-state of Singapore; however, we do not have the courage to ask one
person, let alone conduct a random interview because we respect each other’s desire
to protect silence and privacy, that, at times, become more perceptible and mean-
ingful when we remain tranquil within our own bubbles on campus, as well as in a
speedy train or rumbling bus on the way to work and back perhaps because this is the
only chance we could enjoy and protect each other’s solitude.
With such heightened interest driven by our vivid observations and personal
musings, we persisted in our pursuit of exploring and analysing loneliness in a
different but much easier yet subtle way in terms of approach apropos to our work as
humanities scholars: reading opinion articles on loneliness at our disposal with our
belief in the power of the written word aided by thematic analysis. Perhaps, there is
something in the written texts we have not discovered. Perhaps there are some
insights there waiting for us to decipher.
We decided to select opinion articles on loneliness published in the US news-
papers and Singapore newspapers, and we were able to capture key themes that
emerged from thematic analysis of textual data, while mindful of the principles of
semiotics as the study of signs and objects in texts (Peirce 1955) and the possibility of
comparing how Western and Asian cultures view loneliness. The choice of the US
newspapers and Singapore newspapers was motivated by the fact that it is in these
newspapers that loneliness articles abound and are readily accessible on the
internet. Other researchers can explore articles on loneliness published in their local
newspapers or magazines.
2 Semiotics as theoretical framework
This study is framed within the semiotic tradition of communication theory, which
views communication (e.g., accounts and descriptions of events, phenomena, ideas,
or concepts such as loneliness in op-ed articles) as the intersubjective mediation by
signs (Craig 1999). Communication theorized this way explains the use of language
(written, spoken, or nonverbal), symbols, icons, images, portrayals, metaphors,
analogies, and other sign systems to mediate between different perspectives (Craig
1999). Intersubjectivity refers to the common-sense meanings constructed in
interactions; in this case, how those articles about loneliness are perceived and
written by different authors, what is the language and tone of writing, what are the
authors’perspectives, values, and beliefs about loneliness, in what ways are those
articles in conversation with each other, what patterns emerge from the writing,
98 Delante et al.

what insights are shared, and what reactions you and I have as readers gleaning over
these articles right now or at some point in the future. Intersubjectivity is used as a
resource to interpret deeper meanings that permeate our social, cultural, political,
and personal lives. Semiotics posits that signs construct their users or subject posi-
tions, that meanings are public and indeterminate, that understanding is a practical
gesture, and that codes and media of communication are not merely neutral struc-
tures or channels for the transmission of meanings (Craig 1999), but possess sign-like
properties of their own, i.e., the code shapes the content and the medium itself
becomes a message, or the message (McLuhan 1994).
Semiotics takes advantage of the power of narrative and descriptive accounts
about an idea, concept, event, or phenomenon. These accounts can emanate from
written texts such as articles that describe people’s views and lived experiences on
loneliness. Barthes (2004) pointed out that:
…a narrative begins with the history of mankind; …no nation is without narratives: all social
classes, all human groups have their own narratives, and very often they bring equal enjoyment
to people of different cultures. Narrative doesn’t want to know what good and bad literature is;
it is international, trans-historical, and transcultural. It is in the world, lifelike (as cited in Allen
2003).
In Barthes’s (2004) words, the hermeneutic code implicit in narratives offers a
somber yet palpable and scathing enigma for the readers making them react through
questions and deeper interpretations of the topic (Felluga 2015). The vibrant life-
world of narratives suspends or delays surprise, prolongs the offering of answers,
and acknowledges insolubility. Therefore, discourse must be open to arrest and
sustain the puzzle that narratives possess. Semiotics, according to Barthes, bodes
well with narratives because it allows interpretants to seize deeper structural
principles that help organize and categorize ideas or meanings by way of inter-
subjective mediation by signs (Craig 1999) which can emerge in the forms of words or
speech utterances, antithetical terms, or a mixture and conciliation of such terms,
codes and other sign systems for deeper meanings to come to the fore (Felluga 2015).
In a broader sense, narratives are deeply immersed in our way of life, and they
are a semiotic representation of a series of events semantically related in a temporal,
causal, historical, cultural, personal, symbolic, and meaningful way. Stories, accounts,
descriptions, images, portrayals, and anecdotes about loneliness can be constructed
using a wide range of semiotic environments in narratives: the written and spoken
word in narration, visual images or illustrations, specific and nuanced vocabulary,
gestures and actions, symbolic representations and subtleties in text, or a combi-
nation of these, bringing with them the puzzle that semiotic interpretants (e.g., we,
as researchers and readers of texts on loneliness) continuously engage ourselves
and others to problematize loneliness as a deep emotional state. Any semiotic
Signs and objects in op-ed articles 99

construct, anything made of characters or narrators, captured in written forms can
be called a text. Consequently, texts can be linguistic, non-verbal, theatrical, pictorial,
graphic, or filmed (Allen 2003), that is, all texts that we experience have a story of
their own; all texts that we experience create semiotic representations or sign-object
connections. Examples of these texts are those published online articles that share
compelling views, descriptions, explanations, and discussions about why people are
lonely, and how semiotics can explain this disturbing phenomenon.
3 Peircean semiotics
In uncovering the signs and symbols in narrative accounts in the larger body of texts,
Peirce (1955) suggested a simple strategy: to determine the sign (signifier), the object
(the signified), and the interpretant, although Peirce (1955) argued that such process
gets complicated and challenging as the semiotic researcher goes deeper in their
exploration of signs and symbols and is profoundly immersed in these signs and
symbols. In one of his many definitions of a sign, Peirce (1955) shared a fundamental
view: “Idefine a sign as anything which is so determined by something else, called its
object, and so determines an effect upon a person, which effect I call its interpretant,
that the latter is thereby mediately determined by the former”(Atkin 2010). Peirce
claimed that signs consist of three interrelated parts: a sign, an object, and an
interpretant. We view the sign as the signifier, for example, a written word or an
utterance, such that a smoke is a sign that there is fire (Atkin 2010).
In studies such as this study on loneliness as a deep, perplexing emotion, one
might argue that loneliness in America is a clinical condition and that the healthcare
industry of America believes that they can put a stop to it, which is through medical,
scientific, and practical interventions. Therefore, an emerging sign could be that
“loneliness is a clinical condition”for which the human brain and modern medicine
have a huge and entangled role to play. But what does it mean? What object does it
signify? Thinking deeply, we mused how America seems to have the highest regard
for science as a way of explaining social conditions and curing the sick. They excel in
science and technology. They tend to define and understand phenomena through
science, less myths, folklore, or indigenous beliefs. With this, what does the sign
“loneliness is a clinical condition”mean? Our interpretation led us to argue that
science and medicine can cure not only physical illnesses but also psychological or
mental conditions. That loneliness seems to be a largely scientific condition that can
be cured scientifically, rather than using other means such as through primordial or
traditional ways of healing a mental health condition, e.g., spiritism or shamanism.
The object is best thought of as what is signified, e.g., the object to which the written
100 Delante et al.

or uttered word attaches, such that loneliness as a clinical condition (sign) suggests a
practical gesture, i.e., it warrants medical attention, not hearsay (object).
The interpretant, the most innovative and distinctive feature of Peirce’s semi-
otics, is best thought of as the understanding that we have of the sign-object relation
(Atkin 2010). The importance of the interpretant is their stance that signification is
not a simple dyadic relationship between a sign and an object: a sign signifies only in
being interpreted. This makes the interpretant central to the content of the sign, in
that the meaning of a sign is manifest in the hermeneutic interpretation that it
generates in sign users (Pharies 1985). In this study, the interpretant is this union of
readers who are making sense of the articles they are reading, and the emergent
understanding they make of their interaction with the text. In reading and inter-
preting op-ed articles on loneliness, we, as researchers and interpreters, became one
with the texts, and our collective understanding as three individuals reacting to the
written texts on loneliness constituting our role as interpretants emerged helpful in
arriving at a sincere and truthful interpretation –one that is subjective yet illus-
trating honesty, fidelity, and trustworthiness among ourselves and our ways of
understanding the texts and the world around us.
These elements, the sign, the object, and the final interpretant in semiotic
interpretation, and mindfulness of these elements in the act of interpreting, emerged
helpful in our thematic analysis of 30 op-ed articles describing, explaining, and
analysing loneliness as a growing epidemic not only in the US and in Singapore, but
in many parts of the world.
4 Literature review
The increasing decline of human connection can lead to social isolation and loneli-
ness and pose a threat to the human condition. Loneliness can be torturous (Rokach
2013) as it wreaks havoc on an individual’s physical, mental, and cognitive health
(Hawkley and Kocherginsky 2018). Loneliness and social isolation are twice as
harmful to physical and mental health as obesity (Holt-Lunstad et al. 2015). It
increases the risk of premature death as it raises levels of stress, impedes better
sleep, which in turn harms the human body (Valtorta et al. 2016). Loneliness crushes
the soul, but it does far more damage than that. It is linked to strokes, heart disease,
dementia, inflammation, and suicide (Kristoff2023). It can also augment anxiety and
depression (Valtorta et al. 2016) with a debilitating impact on the human immune
system and affective and cognitive functioning. Hard-wired to connect, our bodies go
into a state of high alert when we are lonely –stress hormones course through our
veins, and our heart rate and blood pressure go up (Hertz 2021) leading to high
mortality. Loneliness is detrimental to our health as smoking 15 cigarettes a day
Signs and objects in op-ed articles 101

(Hertz 2021). Loneliness is indeed a paradoxical puzzle, an entirely subjective
experience of distress at one’s perceived lack of social connection. This is true
whether we are alone most of the time or at the centre of a dance floor (Cummins and
Zaleski 2023) because one can be lonely in a crowd (Chan et al. 2023).
Social connection or social connectedness can help people suffering from
loneliness thrive, manage, and survive hostile environments, both physical and
mental (Hawkley and Cacioppo 2010). Being socially connected is highly rewarding as
it allows us to make amends with ourselves and find meaning in our relationships
with other people and in the things that we do. Being socially connected is what it
means to be human (Murthy 2023; Warren 2022). If we are more connected to others,
we can deal with and manage anxiety, stress, and depression because we develop
empathy for others and ourselves, and we become trusting and cooperative in
building deep, meaningful, and authentic human relationships (Sepalla 2014). If we
find like-minded individuals who share our interests and passion and engage them in
meaningful conversations, then we can build and sustain deep human connections
which is a great way to find our purpose in life and combat loneliness. It seems that
there is something to be said for friends who are living, breathing human beings
(Kristof 2023) yet most people hunker down and hide themselves in their own
bubbles such that reaching out to a friend becomes difficult. Social connection is “a
natural medicine hiding in plain sight”but it is puzzling and alarming that people do
not seem to take advantage of it (Cummins and Zaleski 2023). Social isolation is a rare
malady whose cure is hiding in plain sight, known to be effective, and costs relatively
little, yet such a cure seems elusive to many. Community institutions have frayed. We
seem to be on our own, the reason why so many of us are dying alone (Kristof 2023).
Physical or bodily activities prove helpful in sustaining deep, meaningful human
connection as a way to combat loneliness. We cannot neglect our actual bodiliness in
our material existence with the world (Merleau-Ponty 1968) because this is the
starting point of a reflective mind or lived consciousness, and how we make sense of
our place and position in the world. Through physical activities, we can arrest
moments that unfold in front of us and live these moments. It is in these fleeting
moments that we can smell each other, feel each other’s breath, touch each other’s
skin, experience the warmth of our blood through our skin, and look each other in
the eye –the senses that make us human, at times make us feel vulnerable but allow
us to fathom how genuine experience can be enjoyed in the simplicity and physicality
of our bodily existence with the material world (Warren 2022). The physicality and
materiality of our experience, the sensual joy of sounds, smells, touch, and sight, has
always been profoundly humanizing, and we are made for these. We are made to
notice and smell the petrichor of the rain, hear the sounds of crickets, and appreciate
the beauty and vastness of the sky (Warren 2022). We are creatures made to
102 Delante et al.

encounter beauty and goodness in the material world, and our bodies are made for
these (Johnson 2017; Merleau-Ponty 1968; Warren 2022).
We should not marginalise the human body as “a mere abode of the mind but, on
the contrary, the higher functions, including thought itself, should still be regarded
as bodily functions referring not only to the human brain or the mind but to the
whole body in its relational being-in-the-world”(Merleau-Ponty 1968) (italics ours for
emphasis). To ignore the fundamental function of the human body in a fast-paced,
capitalist, neoliberal, chaotic society, and how our bodies have an inherent and pro-
found link to our deeper consciousness shaping our minds and our moral decisions
(Johnson 2017), is to succumb to the rising incidence of isolation, detachment, and
loneliness with dangerously startling consequences on physical and mental health. It
might just be possible that a lonely mind might be healed with help from the human
body (Cummins and Zaleski 2023). Thus, as human beings, we need to fight for the
tangible world, for enduring ways of interacting with others, for holism. We need to
reconnect with material things: nature, soil, the earth, our bodies, and the people we
hold dear in real life. This doesn’t necessarily have to be big and dramatic, and we
don’t have to hurl our computers into the sea en masse (Warren 2022).
In exploring loneliness, Asians seem to be facing more harmful consequences of
their struggles because not only are they pushing themselves to social isolation, but
many have also become masters in terms of concealing loneliness by deceiving
others with a stoical façade because to declare loneliness out in the open seems to be
a sign of human weakness, a life unfulfilled, or a failed existence with the world (Ko
2021). This seems to draw a seemingly palpable cultural trait of Asian cultures,
i.e., saving face from perceived shame and stigma (Bedford and Hwang 2003; Ho 1976;
Hu 1944; Qi 2011, 2017; Wong and Tsai 2007). There is a stigma that surrounds lone-
liness, and most Asians are embarrassed to declare that they are lonely and are slow
to seek help (Chan et al. 2023). In Singapore, negative thoughts may discourage young
and old from acknowledging or talking about these feelings of loneliness and sadness
(Tan 2018). They might portray a happy front on the surface yet feel isolated and
alone deep down inside (Tan 2018), and to them, it is just how things used to be (Kuek
2023). From an interpersonal perspective, Asian men, in general, may be socialized to
be less expressive, choosing to shoulder burdens in life silently. They may be less
willing to seek help from others, opting instead to face their challenges alone (Kuek
2023), a pervasive cultural trait in Asia regarding men. Coming forward to seek help
seems to be an interdiction (Ko 2021).
To declare loneliness to others is a human frailty worthy of shame. For many
older Singaporeans, declaring feelings of loneliness may imply personal failings or
poor relationships with family members or spouses. Airing one’s dirty laundry is
frowned upon, so loneliness lurks in the shadows of larger public health concerns
(Chan et al. 2023) because most individuals keep it within them for as long as they can.
Signs and objects in op-ed articles 103

Therefore, among Asians, we maintain an image of strength, self-reliance, self-
regulation, and independence despite how challenging and depressing things can
become. We are being trapped like a bird in a cage (Chan et al. 2023) and for most
Singaporeans, there seems to be no easy way out. We seem to create a double con-
sciousness (Du Bois 1908), a self of binary opposites –one showing make-believe joy as
a façade while another concealing deep sadness and melancholy within our psyche.
Due to a deeply rooted cultural trait of “saving and maintaining face”as a nuanced
amalgam of our identity, dignity, pride, and honour (Qi 2011, 2017; Wong and Tsai 2007),
we become masters of disguise and deception whereby a seemingly happy face and a
strong personality deliberately obscure our vulnerability, volatility, and human
weakness, which is dangerously alarming as it poses serious risks to physical and
mental health. When one’s bubble is full and heavy, it surely is going to burst.
5 Methodology
We performed a thematic analysis of 30 op-ed articles from the US and Singapore (15
from the US newspapers, and 15 from Singapore newspapers). The US newspapers
comprised The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and The Washington Post.
Singapore newspapers, on the other hand, consisted of The Straits Times, Channel
News Asia, MediaCorp, and Today. These articles appeared in the opinion columns of
these online newspapers published between 2010 and 2024. Thematic analysis
propelled us to capture the key insights of these articles which proved helpful in
arriving at honest, sincere, and profoundly illuminating interpretations guided by
the fundamental principles of semiotics (sign-object identifications by Peirce) as a
hermeneutic empiricist approach to qualitative data analysis (Anderson 2014;
Lindlof and Taylor 2011). We consulted each other in interpreting these signs and
their possible meanings by asking each other questions more freely, going back to the
qualitative data as and when necessary, and being honest with how we thought and
felt about the textual data as we interpreted them in our own intellectual capacity
grounded in lived experience.
5.1 Thematic analysis
Our sensemaking of textual data, i.e., descriptions about loneliness, was guided by
the principles of thematic analysis. As a grounded theory methodology (Glaser and
Strauss 1999), thematic analysis requires qualitative researchers to code, a process of
assigning value to a foundational text of words, an interaction, description, speech,
narration, or conversation (Anderson 2014). Coding invokes researchers to engage in a
104 Delante et al.

tedious process of reading, rereading, and explicating narrative texts so that con-
cepts, patterns, themes, and even anomalies will come to the fore. Such concepts and
themes can be broken down into subthemes, or these can be brought to a higher level
of categorizing by coalescing them and creating overarching thematic concerns or
splitting them up to see how subthemes can emerge. Anderson (2014) and Lindlof and
Taylor (2011) called this process axial coding, in which researchers dig deep into
textual data, make further categorizations of subthemes emerging from the narra-
tive data, build connections, break down core themes into more specific and inter-
connected categories, find revealing patterns of thought, capture illuminating
insights, and decide which major themes warrant a space in the analysis. For
example, after listing down significant details, codes, or themes, one can pick three or
four of these themes that are most interesting, related, or revealing so that a pattern
can be noticed, or an overarching thematic concern can emerge. For instance, if we
put together the themes “loneliness is a state of mind”,“loneliness is a deeply per-
sonal emotion occupying the human psyche”, and “loneliness is how one perceives it
to be”, we can make a contention that loneliness resides in the mind (sign), and if
individuals choose to be lonely, they can also choose not to be lonely (Cacioppo and
Cacioppo 2018) and this is a deliberate choice they can always make (object). In short,
loneliness resides in the mind (sign) which can grow immensely or diminish
significantly depending on how the individual wants it to be (object), albeit depen-
dent on the mental capacity of each individual to deal with this condition entangled
with the freedom and will in making a choice, e.g., the choice of maintaining a
positive mindset.
5.2 Hermeneutic interpretivism
Using thematic analysis and being constantly mindful of the fundamental elements
of semiotic interpretation, the themes and patterns emerging from descriptions
regarding loneliness helped us capture signs and symbols of loneliness (ideas that
stand for something bigger), and the objects that they signify (their possible in-
terpretations), with the three of us, the readers, researchers, and writers of this study,
acting as interpretants of these sign-object relations (Peirce 1955). We are different
individuals, but we were one with the texts in this interpretive journey. Despite our
differences, we shared a common understanding. Despite our divergent ideas and
beliefs about the topic in question (loneliness) and the world around us, we became
the collective and holistic understanding that we have of this sign-object relation,
and this understanding is captured both in our minds and the reader of this text right
now interacting with us (insofar as understanding is happening within the cognitive
capacity of the readers and their awareness of topic and context).
Signs and objects in op-ed articles 105

This method of sensemaking is hugely influenced by hermeneutic interpretivism
or hermeneutic empiricism (Anderson 2014). Concerning the meaning of interpre-
tation, hermeneutic interpretivism places value, validity, and bearing on the im-
plications for symbolic human existence (Anderson 2014), and it treats interpretation
in the context of fundamental philosophical questions about being and knowing,
lived experience, symbols and their social meanings, and practical life (George 2020).
As researchers of this study actively engaged in hermeneutic interpretation, our
different selves, personalities, and idiosyncrasies gradually faded in the process, and
our shared understanding of loneliness as a concept as depicted in written texts,
along with our aesthetic yet grounded experience about the world in which we live
and our interaction with others, came to the fore. As Ricoeur (1974) posited, herme-
neutic interpretation makes apparent the plurality of meanings in a speech act or
written text. It warrants deciphering the hidden meanings in the apparent meanings,
in unpacking layers of meanings implied in the literal meanings so that a common
understanding will come to the fore. Thus, through hermeneutic interpretivism,
some meanings that are viewed as common, repressed, biased, or distorted can
surface, and these sanction interpretivist researchers to pursue a more nuanced
interpretation (George 2020) with a focus on the act of interpretation as their per-
sonalities dwindle. We achieved this through undertaking the role of an interpretant
with focused attention on the signs and symbols evident in the descriptions of
loneliness (captured in newspaper articles) as the subject of our hermeneutic
interpretation allowing us to craft a horizon, a viewpoint, a nuanced understanding,
a shared meaning and a new relationship in the lifeworld in juxtaposition to the
authors’descriptions on loneliness as a deep, melancholic human emotion.
5.3 Research questions
In this study, we attempted to answer the following research questions:
(1) What signs do descriptive accounts about loneliness signify, and what objects
do these significations suggest?
(2) How do these sign-object relations accomplish awareness and understanding of
loneliness as a deep and complex human emotion?
6 Results and discussion
Our sensemaking (intersubjective mediation and interpretation by signs) as a her-
meneutic interpretivist approach aided by thematic analysis and constant interro-
gation of our interpretations has led to illuminating themes about loneliness. Two
106 Delante et al.

main themes emerged as signs (ideas that stand for something bigger) with their
corresponding objects (possible interpretations). These signs include the following:
(1) loneliness is the outcome of a rapid decline (or absence) of deep, meaningful
human connection, and (2) loneliness made overt is a sign of human weakness.
6.1 Loneliness is the absence of deep, meaningful human
connection: the case of America
The rapid decline of deep, meaningful human connection is alarming. “…I made a
critical mistake: I had largely neglected my friendships during my tenure, convincing
myself that I had to focus on work,”told US Surgeon General Vivek Murthy (The New
York Times 2023). “Even when I was physically with the people I loved, I wasn’t
present –I was often checking the news and responding to messages in my inbox…I
felt ashamed to reach out to friends I had ignored. I found myself increasingly lonely
and isolated, and it felt as if I was the only one who felt that way”added Murthy
(2023), who, upon retirement, launched practical programs in the US to help Amer-
icans deal with this invisible and insidious emotion.
“…As the digital world captures more of our imagination and time, the material
world recedes and becomes less real to us…We are made to enjoy the physical
presence of other human beings. We are made to enjoy rainstorms or sunshine or
walks in the woods. We are made to enjoy touchable things. We cannot escape or
overcome this need through technology as it goes against the grain of our deepest
human needs and longings”added Tish Harrison Warren (The New York Times 2022).
She argued that technology has deprived us of the immense beauty and joy of
spending time with our loved ones witnessing and feeling the rain, cracking jokes
with friends, or enjoying a meal together with our families with all our senses fully
activated –touch, smell, taste, hearing, and sight. We spend less time noticing and
interacting with this “touchable, smellable, feelable world”(Warren 2022). We seem
to have lost sight of how it is to be human (Murthy 2023; Warren 2022).
Ward (2022) commented that the habit of Americans of choosing to be alone is
dangerously startling and a striking departure from the past, in which technology,
hectic lifestyle, and the persistent political divide have insidious roles to play.
Americans rate activities as more meaningful and joyful with friends who are
physically present because bodily interactions build deeper social connections
producing memories that last a lifetime. However, he warned that “the sharp decline
of our social lives is a worrisome development. Spending less time with friends is not
a best practice by most standards, and it might contribute to other troubling social
trends –isolation, worsening mental health (particularly among adolescents), rising
aggressive behaviour, and violent crime”(The Washington Post 2022). A rising trend
Signs and objects in op-ed articles 107

of isolationism in America worries medical and psychology experts because of its
heavy mental toll on its people.
The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and The Washington Post seem to have
shared this subtle, yet penetrating characteristic of loneliness gleaned from Amer-
icans, i.e., the menacing decline of deep, meaningful human connections between
people –from their own families to the workplace, and other people around their
networks such as their friends. Silence, detachment, and alienation are palpable. The
consistent habit of isolating oneself is pervasive. Distancing oneself from the crowd is
perceptible. However, despite being surrounded by a crowd of family, friends, and
workmates, one might still feel lonely, isolated, and detached perhaps because no
authentic and deep connection unravels in the relationship, and one can be left alone
and lonesome in a big crowd. Almost everything seems to be a facade or make-
believe. Relationships are superficial, and the social bond illusory.
“I am lonely”is the first sentence in Steven Petrow’s (2021) opinion article in The
Washington Post (2021). “I have felt extremely lonely when I was not alone at all.
There’s probably no more crushing loneliness than that experienced in a faltering
relationship, which I realized during the end of my marriage”he added. Therefore,
someone may be lonely but not isolated or they may be isolated but not lonely. One
can definitely be lonely in a crowd (Chan et al. 2023). Loneliness, indeed, is a complex
human emotion that can manifest itself in complex ways. Americans have become
hugely atomized and polarized, addicted and distressed, and are a lonely crowd.
They seem to need one another yet many decide to be isolated and be lonely (Kristof
2023). An “I”-focused world is inevitably a lonelier one (Hertz 2021), yet it seems that
little is done in America to change this deleterious habit.
Reading and rereading the descriptions of the authors and the narratives of the
characters in these descriptions in these American newspapers, we contend that
seeking deep, meaningful human connections is a sign that awaits to be deci-
phered as it is a way for Americans to acknowledge and address loneliness becoming
a threatening epidemic. Beyond the call for America’s health system to employ
medical, clinical, or pharmaceutical interventions to cure the loneliness epidemic
lies a simple but profound and fundamental tenet of being human: to seek, build, and
maintain deep, authentic, and meaningful human connections possible through face-
to-face, bodily conversations despite how mundane these conversations can be.
Loneliness grows like a mammoth deep within Americans because of a plethora of
reasons including the internet and advanced technology that disrupts human
communication, increases work stress and societal expectations, and expands po-
litical polarisation, along with the rising capitalist and neoliberalist world that
speeds up the pace of life and heightens the frustration and disappointment of
American people. Therefore, loneliness, the outcome of diminishing human con-
nections, emerged as a dominant sign in American newspapers warranting
108 Delante et al.

interpretation. “What does it mean? What object does this signify?”were the ques-
tions that were constantly etched in our minds.
Although we recognise the possibility that loneliness and being alone could also
be a choice that can be an instrument for American people to cope with it driven by
such desire to isolate themselves from a chaotic world, our persistent questioning led
us to arrest a fundamental concept, that is, our material body has enormous power
to connect with other human beings in its most authentic way in this material
world in which we live. Our bodily existence allows us to see, feel, hear, smell, and
notice the present moments, the now and the embodied self, as they unfold in our
physical, material existence with others around us and the world, the reality in
which we perceive and live (e.g., sharing a boisterous laugh with friends and family
over jokes we used to hear over dinner). Our awareness of the power of the present
as we enact our sense of self about the material world, along with how we become
more cognizant of our senses and sensibilities, offers the tremendous possibility of
making things happen as moments unfold in the present material world in which our
consciousness of our bodily existence with this world becomes more vivid, palpable,
and bears so much weight regardless of the joy or longing this may bring. These
moments of now allow us to arrest serendipity and spontaneity, and nothing beats
the power of our materiality or bodily existence with each other in the lifeworld to
enjoy this spontaneity and serendipity of life.
Our bodily existence makes us more au courant with our reality and gives us
strength to resist this penchant for something that is not there (e.g., mystery, fantasy,
longing, or other forms of abstraction such as thinking about unreasonable expec-
tations, desiring what is absent in the material world, or expecting the impossible to
happen). This means that to deal with loneliness is to seek inner peace and calm with
the self in the material world and to appreciate that our bodily existence with the
physical world has the power to build, nurture, and sustain authentic human con-
nections and worthwhile relationships (e.g., conversations with friends, dinner with
family, hanging out over coffee with your partner or spouse, walking your dog in a
park or the woods, playing chess with your workmate, having a drink after work, or
bathing in the river or the rain). Simple yet real and human. To Hertz (2021), this also
means “rushing less and stopping to talk more, whether to a neighbour, a postal
carrier, or someone who appears to be lonely. It means breaking out of our self-
suffocating digital privacy bubbles and engaging with those around us, even when
our default is to scroll on our phones. It means showing more gratitude to those who
care for others in society and saying thank you more to our partners, our friends, our
colleagues”.
It also means that to deal with loneliness is for us to realize that meaning, joy,
and fulfilment can be achieved through these physical activities for which our bodies
and our senses are in sync with the pleasures, beauty, and suffering of life –smelling
Signs and objects in op-ed articles 109

the petrichor of the coming rain, tasting a freshly baked local bread, touching the
woods and rocks in the mountains, watching children play, and hearing the sounds of
hummingbirds with the cold breeze from the mountains rippling through our skin,
imploring us to tread down the distant past that enlivens past suffering, longing, and
pain deposited in memories. We can achieve meaning and fight loneliness by
understanding that our material existence with the world offers us enormous
opportunities to do simple things that matter with people we care about which have a
significant impact on our mind and bodily existence. As human beings, we tend to
develop a habit of ignoring what is there, what can be seen, felt, touched, smelled,
and tasted –the senses that make us human (Merleau-Ponty 1968; Murthy 2023;
Warren 2022). We tend to desire something else, something that is beyond our reach,
or something that is viewed as possible only in our wildest imagination. This object,
the power of our material body to build intimate, deeper human connections in the
real and material world, is a wake-up call to start rebuilding bridges and breaking
fences that continually divide us. It is our way, a simple way, to rebuild deep human
connections that we somehow take for granted, a medicine hiding in plain sight
(Cummins and Zaleski 2023) requiring no or relatively little costs (Kristof 2023).
In this world in which we live, our material, temporal body is the most obvious
perceived thing or object; however, this constant perception might lead to automa-
ticity of perception. As a result, our very familiar, visible body tends to disappear in
our very act of perception, or what is a commonly perceived body or object vanishes
in plain sight (Shlokovsky 1917; on defamiliarization). We tend to take for granted our
materiality; thus, we need to remind ourselves that our body is a powerful mecha-
nism because of its inherent connection to our mind, our consciousness, or our soul.
We become mindful of the space that our body occupies because we are conscious
about it (In Descartes’s words, the fusion of material and mental substance, the
blending of the res extensa or body, and the res cogitans or thinking). Perhaps,
Americans are losing their deep, authentic human connections because of a growing
disjuncture between their material body and their consciousness of the self and the
social world, a despondent outcome of an increasingly capitalist, chaotic, and divi-
sive world. Recalibrating back to paying close attention to our bodily existence
exemplified by our breath, flesh, and the warmth of our blood, along with how our
emotions are situated within our bodies connected to our psyche, we can argue that
our bodily being-in-the-world has so much bearing with the socially constructed
reality that we are confronted with. One of these realities is how feelings of loneliness
and isolation can grow immensely inside us, within which our bodily existence with
the world has a huge role to play.
We cannot neglect our actual bodiliness (Merleau-Ponty 1968) because this is the
starting point of a reflective mind or lived consciousness. We should not marginalise
the human body as “a mere abode of the mind but, on the contrary, the higher
110 Delante et al.

functions, including thought itself, should still be regarded as bodily functions
referring not only to the human brain or the mind but to the whole body in its
relational being-in-the-world”(Merleau-Ponty 1968) (italics ours for emphasis). To
ignore the fundamental function of the human body in a fast-paced, capitalist,
chaotic, and polarised society, and how our bodies have an inherent and profound
link to our deeper consciousness and our moral decisions, is to succumb to the rising
incidence of isolation, detachment, and loneliness that we are facing. Asthis continues,
loneliness will become a widespread epidemic with unbearable fatal consequences to
the human condition.
6.2 Loneliness made overt is a sign of human weakness: the
case of Singapore
In Asian cultures, it seems difficult to openly talk about loneliness. In a culture that
puts enormous efforts into celebrations, family gatherings, close-knit relations,
rituals, and collectivism, some might portray a happy front on the surface, yet feel
isolated, alone, and lonely deep inside (Tan 2018). In Singapore, young adults and the
elderly might find it generally more acceptable to verbalize physical pains and
illnesses, but it seems a taboo to confess some sense of sadness or loneliness deep
inside them because this can be perceived as a moral failing, a lack of resilience, or
not being able to live a fulfilling life (Ko 2021). In particular, elderly men in Singapore
may feel the need topresent a strong, stoical front, disengage fromsocial interactions,
express fewer emotions, and avoid seeking emotional or psychological help even if
help is more than necessary (Ko 2021). This dangerous shift in emotions is evident yet
remains hugely concealed leading to a development of a heightened sense of fear of
their bleak and lonely future. They see themselves as a burden to their family which
often escalates to existential concerns in which they question the meaning and
purpose of continuing to live (Ko 2021).
From an interpersonal perspective, men may be socialized to be less expressive,
choosing to shoulder burdens in life silently. They may be less willing to seek help
from others, opting instead to face their challenges alone (Kuek 2023), a cultural trait
that is palpable among Asian men as it seems to be ingrained since childhood. This
could be because of the highly entrenched value of “face”that Asians espouse. Asians
would tend to give “face”. Prestige, honour, status, dignity, and authority are all
attributes to give to others, and also to be given by others (Yabuuchi 2004). Thus, they
would also want to “save face”, which is to keep, at least the façade of it, the honour,
status, dignity and authority that have been given to them. Thus, they try all means to
save themselves from embarrassment or humiliation from a loss of “face’”, by not
revealing anything about themselves that could be perceived as a weakness or flaw
Signs and objects in op-ed articles 111

by others. Seeking help from others would be considered as a “loss of face”, and thus
avoided at all costs.
“…Admitting that one is lonely can be uncomfortable for many people,”said
Chan et al. (2023). “I’ve always cared about my family. Why is it that when I am older,
no one seems to care about my matters? No one seems to ask if I’m okay, but I keep it
within me [italics ours for emphasis],”Madam Khadija shared (as cited in Chan et al.
2023). She only dared to ask this question in front of Chan and her colleagues during a
closed-door interview in 2023, but not once did she ask her son and grandson such a
penetrating and disturbing question. All she showed was silence, albeit her facial
expressions would manifest sadness and sorrow that, at most times, her family
would ignore. “Even though we are physically present, we are not connecting with
each other. If I talk to them, they will ignore me,”added Madam Lau, another
research participant (as cited in Chan et al. 2023).
In most Asian societies, a heightened emphasis is placed on being self-reliant,
self-sufficient, morally strong, and independent, making it difficult for individuals to
acknowledge and show their vulnerability more openly such as feelings of loneliness,
and reach out for support. Many Singaporeans are distressed due to ageing, unem-
ployment, and lack of social and family support but are not coming forward to seek
help. They appear to hunker down because of the stigma and stereotypes associated
with loneliness such as being weak, a burden to one’s family, or not being able to live
a fulfilled life. To them, it is better to be silent about this disturbing loneliness than
to be viewed as weak such that interpersonal, social, governmental, and medical
interventions need to be implemented to rescue a life albeit keeping mum about
one’s disturbing emotions such as feeling lonely could also be viewed as a strength
considering that one has to endure such feelings of loneliness deep within, away
from the prying eyes of the crowd.
While loneliness is often characterised as an issue among the elderly, recent
research increasingly demonstrated that young people in Singapore are not immune
to it either (Lau 2024). In a report by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS 2024), young
Singaporeans are more likely to divulge higher levels of isolation, detachment, and
loneliness perhaps due to the rise of social media, the internet, and smartphones.
However, IPS (2024) warned that more than half of young Singaporeans aged 21–34
would feel anxious about talking to other people in person about this seemingly
perceptible isolationist behaviour, and the way forward is to communicate it online
anonymously perhaps due to the fear of being identified; therefore, to be anonymous
is a face-saving mechanism allowing them to avoid shame. To make loneliness and
sorrow apparent in their action, facial expressions, and speech seems to create a
perception that they are feeble; therefore, young people consciously develop the
habit of concealing loneliness in many ways such as being silent, not giving attention
and time to talk about it in the open, or segueing the focus only on the good things.
112 Delante et al.

“We just let it pass,”said one participant in Chan et al.’s interview (2023). “I often find
myself only choosing to reveal the brighter and more positive sides of my life, while
hiding the darker and more troubling issues, believing that I needed to work through
them myself as it was just how things are”, added Jonathan Kuek (2023). “It is just the
way things are”seems to be a worrying phenomenon that young Singaporeans seem
to accept as their reality.
Shifting priorities of the modern world have brought a huge impact on the way
young people view life and the world which cripple their social and interpersonal
connections. As Chew said, “When you talk to the youths, they almost have check-
boxes these days before they can consider marriage and parenthood. And these
checkboxes are nearly all material in nature –they want a comfortable life, they
want a good job, they want the ability to have a home –and then marriage comes
next”(as cited in Lau 2024). The result is dangerously alarming –these young people
would rather live in isolation which breeds anxiety and loneliness due to their
materialist priorities that significantly diminish deeper, meaningful human con-
nections. Feelings are suppressed as they are perceived to be hindrances to attaining
goals that lead to tangible, material rewards.
To attempt to talk to someone about one’s struggles such as feelings of loneliness
or deeper, melancholic sadness is still shrouded in taboo, and disclosing it may
convey weakness and invite judgment, which at times, is a biased and ungrounded
judgment. “For a lot of older Singaporeans, doing so may imply personal failings or
poor relationships with family members or spouses. Further, airing one’s dirty
laundry is frowned upon…”(Chan et al. 2023). Sustaining such heavy and disturbing
emotion deep inside is being “trapped like a bird in a cage”yet seeking help seems to
be a taboo to many (Chan et al. 2023). The elderly in Singapore may not be as familiar
with mental health issues such as loneliness as younger folks, and to them, keeping
their emotional suffering to themselves is a normal part of ageing. However, their
main concern is not wanting to feel like a burden to their family and friends;
therefore, they would rather keep their feelings of sadness within them as long as
they can. Despite the insurmountable emotional pain, they remain quiet because to
explicitly declare that they are lonely is to succumb to weakness, vulnerability, and
human frailty.
Both the elderly and young Singaporeans somehow share this inherent cultural
attitude: to not declare one’ssuffering, to keep it as long as they can contain it, and
just carry on with life because it is just the way things are. This seems to be a mantra
that they share, and that is to quietly endure grieving circumstances and suffering
despite how heavy its toll is on mental health. Therefore, confiding loneliness to
others is a symbol of human weakness, and this emerges as a sign that warrants
scrutiny. Why do Singaporeans, old and young, feel and think that it is human frailty
and utter feebleness to tell others that they are lonely, sad, or desolate? Why is it
Signs and objects in op-ed articles 113

difficult on their part to disclose their feeling of loneliness to others? Why is it hard to
liberally show their volatility and vulnerability to others? If this were a sign, what
meaning does it suggest?
In our collective ruminations, one concept came to the fore: in Asian cultures
such as Singapore, we have been conditioned by our family and society at large to be
strong, to man up, to be self-reliant, self-sufficient, and independent. In our sad and
weak moments, we should not lose vigour. In our suffering, we should not falter. In
our sorrow, grief, and pain, we should not break down. However, going deeper into
this phenomenon allowed us to salvage a more frightening idea, an object that is
worth practical deliberation among Asian cultures. We contend that this sign of
confiding loneliness to others illustrating human weakness signifies something more
sinister, that is, living a life of facade, living a life of disguise and deception to
save one’s face, or living a life of pretence such that, as Asians, we project an image
of strength although deep inside we are broken. We project an image of happiness
(e.g., smiling faces, laughter, giggles) although deep within us lurk melancholy,
desolation, and suffering that consume our very humanity. What, then, do these all
suggest? What object do these all signify? Further interpretation led us to draw into
the role of binary oppositions in living one’s life in an Asian culture, yet also
simultaneously embroiled in an inner force that is double consciousness.
Reading and rereading those opinion articles allowed us to arrest a possible
interpretation as to why many Singaporeans do not divulge loneliness which has
bearing on who they are as a people and a community, that is, they tend to create a
binary self (Elbow 1993), to frame their lives in terms of binary structures, of which
they are ensnared into dichotomies that help explain who and what they are;
however, they seem to only show the positive side of these dichotomies and hide
those negative aspects on the opposite side of the pole. There is seemingly growing
evidence that Singaporeans or Asians, in general, tend to portray a happy and con-
tent life by way of choosing what to project on social media or during interpersonal
interactions, although deep within us are human beings that are volatile, disturbed,
broken, sad, and lonely. As Asians, we tend to pursue trains of thought that constitute
suffering, pain, and loneliness through dialogue with our inner self as audience. We
find good reason to cultivate private, desert-island discourse on our loneliness, and
become innovative in concealing this emotion from social exposure to avoid outright
critique from the public. We tend to be less social for bringing more of our own
mental amalgam to the colloquy (Elbow 1993) only for our own consumption with our
inner self as the listener protected against public scrutiny.
It is difficult for human reason to grasp this phenomenon of our binary self, yet
this is the closest we can arrive at deeper knowledge: to hold in mind this binary self
(Elbow 1993) of concealing loneliness yet revealing make-believe happiness that is
irreconcilable but one that explains our reality, context, and truth. As excruciatingly
114 Delante et al.

paradoxical as it is, this seems to be the closest explanation we can provide for both
the elderly and young people of Singapore. Perhaps this is what they have in mind;
they could not just put it into words. Perhaps our explanations of loneliness on these
pages derive an understanding that both old and young Singaporeans can resonate
with. Perhaps all these lead us back to the concept of “face”.
Saving “face”from perceived shame and stigma seems to draw a seemingly
palpable and deeply ingrained cultural trait of Asian cultures (Bedford and Hwang
2003; Ho 1976; Hu 1944; Qi 2011, 2017; Wong and Tsai 2007). A stigma surrounds
loneliness, and most Singaporeans are embarrassed to declare that they are lonely
and are resistant to seeking help (Chan et al. 2023). Negative thoughts may discourage
young and old from acknowledging or talking about these feelings of loneliness and
sadness and doing so makes them tough (Tan 2018). They would rather portray a
happy front on the surface yet feel isolated and alone deep down inside (Tan 2018),
and to them, it is just how things used to be (Kuek 2023). This deeply rooted cultural
trait of “saving and maintaining face”as a nuanced amalgam of their identity,
dignity, pride, and honour (Qi 2011, 2017; Wong and Tsai 2007) has made them
masters of disguise and deception whereby a seemingly happy face and a strong
personality deliberately obscure their vulnerability, volatility, and human frailty.
Digging deeper, this binary self of living one’s life in an Asian culture that tends
to conceal negative emotions (e.g., loneliness) and reveal positive emotions (e.g.,
happiness) driven by the concept of “face”can further be explained through the
concept of double consciousness within which the binary self is simultaneously
entangled. In the early 1900s, W. E. B. Du Bois defined double consciousness as the
struggle faced by African Americans to remain true to black culture while at the same
time adjusting and adapting to the dominant American society. Du Bois (1908) writes,
“It is a peculiar sensation, this double consciousness…one ever feels his two-ness, an
American, a Negro; two souls, two thoughts, two un-reconciled strivings; two warring
ideals in one dark body”. This concept of double consciousness enables black Ameri-
cans to see their double identities, in this case, the African self and the American self,
culminating in a cohesive whole in an American society of widespread racism,
oppression, and marginalization.
However, double consciousness is no longer limited to the lives of black Amer-
icans. Drastic changes in the past century have led scholars to question and expand
the meaning of double consciousness as gleaned from peoples of different races,
cultures, and traditions with unique circumstances and struggles. For instance,
many ethnic Americans experience this rupture in consciousness while attempting
to merge their specific traditions and beliefs with the values of the dominant White
society and other societies within which they are immersing themselves. Double
consciousness has evolved into a sensation and a space where other people of colour
can feel, see, or view who they are and the reasons for their existence in the world.
Signs and objects in op-ed articles 115

Double consciousness has transcended race, gender, time, space, and cultural under-
standing such that it can enable us to recreate its meaningunique to our circumstances
yet echo the same principles of logic and thinking in terms of viewing who we are in
relation to others.
Singapore, as an increasingly intercultural, multicultural, multinational, and
multireligious country has ushered in unity and harmony in diversity, but at the
same time, this melting pot of races, ethnicities, and cultures somehow fostered the
increasing divide between foreign cultures and uniquely Singaporean traditions that
are pitting with each other and forces its people to hunker down, to not air their dirty
laundry out in the open, to hide its gaping hole, and to disguise loneliness and longing
by masking it with a cheerful facade. Singapore’s economic prosperity and apparent
affluence may project an assumption that the people are successful and are doing
well, a seemingly masculine view of success. Masculine cultures perpetuate such
narrow definitions of success where money, materialistic items, and socioeconomic
dominance are prioritized (Hofstede 1980). Thus, while people may seem to own
success, they may be excruciatingly lonely, yet the problem of loneliness is over-
looked because they seem to look good on the exterior.
The Singaporeans’habit of establishing a façade of happiness despite their
sorrow, of concealing sadness and loneliness by deceiving others around them, is not
only an apt illustration of maintaining “face”and crafting a binary self, but more
importantly, it advances a new but complex and contested meaning of double
consciousness (Du Bois 1908): being Singaporean and being Asian; a stronger identity
on the surface, but a weaker, more vulnerable persona deep within; or a stoic per-
sonality to the front, but a soft, feeble, and broken self deep inside. This creates a fluid
sense of in-betweenness of two souls, two thoughts, two un-reconciled struggles in
one human body willing to be heard, to be felt, and to be free.
Singapore society continues to intensify its resolve for its citizens to place more
emphasis on being resilient and successful to increase financial security and
maintain the status quo such as achieving the 5 Cs: cash, credit card, condo, car, and
career –a testament to how Singaporeans continue to yearn to achieve this societal
validation as a measure of a fulfilled, content, happy life. However, this brings an
alarming reality because it becomes a strong impediment for both young and old
Singaporeans to let a weaker, more vulnerable, and broken self out in the open. Why?
Perhaps because Singapore society favours the bold, the ambitious, the resilient, and
the audacious self. Singaporeans would rather show a make-believe self of strength,
success, and power to deceive others around them than expose feelings of loneliness,
suffering, detachment, and isolation. The former seems to be the norm, the latter a
prohibition. Singaporeans not disclosing feelings of loneliness and vulnerability
represents an unfortunate paradox of life and galvanizes the binary existence of the
116 Delante et al.

self. Singaporeans not disclosing feelings of loneliness and vulnerability encapsu-
lates the phenomenon of double consciousness that presents a disturbingly unfor-
tunate irony: Singaporeans must ignore loneliness in order to thrive, to live, and to
carry on with life, but with dangerously alarming and lethal consequences partic-
ularly to mental health.
7 Theoretical implications
To decipher the signs of loneliness and the objects they signify is no easy feat. It is
even more difficult when this signification and meaning making is conducted by
totally different researchers who bring with them their own personalities, biases,
and volition in the process of interpretation. Nonetheless, with hermeneutics, the
researchers’personalities and preponderances faded into the shadow while honest
and collective interpretation came to the fore along with their grounded experience.
One theoretical implication that can be drawn from this study constitutes how
culture shapes our thinking about loneliness, and how semiotics, in the context of
this study, allowed us to understand how loneliness is perceived in two different
cultures. Semiotics reveals how American culture affords readers a simple yet
fundamental way of dealing with loneliness: through sustaining deep, meaningful
human connections with our families and friends and those people we hold dear.
American culture places importance on daily activities within which people are
engaged in bodily contact in which they can feel each other’s warmth of breath, touch
each other’s skin, share meaningful conversations, and look each other in the eye.
The interplay of the lived body and the lived mind (Merleau-Ponty 1968) has so much
bearing on how we can build and sustain deep, meaningful connections and fight
loneliness.
On the other hand, Singapore culture summons a wake-up call for people to
embrace vulnerability, confront their weaknesses head-on, and let them out in the
open with their close friends and families rather than conceal them because of the
danger they pose to their mental health. A person whose inner bubble is full can
burst at any time posing a threat to their mental well-being. Singaporeans, or Asians
as a whole, must strive to change the culture of hiding volatile and difficult emotions
that are debilitating to mental health. Semiotics thereby illustrates how Singaporeans
can overcome their embodied binary self (Elbow 1993) or double identity (Du Bois 1908)
by navigating a third space of their cultural identity, a space that forces them to
overcome the stigma or shame of disclosing their vulnerability or human frailty so
that they can make amends to the duality of their identities and acknowledge that
they can exist in this space of in-betweenness. Such is a third space that allows them
to be free of the dichotomy of the self by accepting the fluidity of the self, of who they
Signs and objects in op-ed articles 117

are and what they want to be. This acceptance warrants that Singaporeans cultivate a
culture of kindness and understanding of the self and the human condition, not
critical judgment. This acceptance also summons Singaporeans to value slowing
down with life, revisit priorities, and remind themselves about what really matters.
Perhaps, what matters are physical activities that allow them to feel each other’s
breath, and touch each other’s skin while having fun with nature (the rain, parks,
and hills) as a way of balancing a manic lifestyle.
Why does it matter that young and old Singaporeans embrace their weakness in
the human spirit to deal with loneliness and other mental health problems? Why
does it matter that they recognize loneliness as human frailty and discuss it with no
holds barred with people around them? Why does it matter that they acknowledge
and embrace this vulnerability in a modern, capitalist, and chaotic world? We
believe the answer is fundamentally inherent in human consciousness and material
existence with the world: to be honest with oneself, which is one step forward in
embracing one’s imperfections. Doing this allows them to unload the emotional
burden they have been carrying for a long time. There is nothing wrong with
embracing vulnerability and volatility because it allows individuals to be fully hu-
man instead of being compartmentalized and fragmented. What is dangerously
alarming is when Singaporeans are succumbing to self-harm or suicide because of
heavy emotional and psychological baggage they can no longer bear.
8 Practical implications
In Singapore’s public places and spaces such as public parks or public transport, we
do not seem to cross each other’s boundaries, and in return, an expectation emerges
for others to do the same. No one attempts to start a conversation with you on the
train, on the bus, or in public parks. Similarly, in universities, no student would
attempt to start a small talk with another student in a hall or the bus stop simply
because they are both strangers to each other. No one attempts to bother each other
in a cafe, canteen, library, or public areas around the university unless students are
friends or classmates, and if they are, they would usually congregate as an in-group.
University spaces and public parks are cleverly designed by its management and the
Singapore government as communal spaces for people to interact, know each other,
bond, and build relationships yet what is palpable in these spaces is a pretense of a
community, sharing nothing beyond their immediate façade, not allowing anyone to
invade their private spaces (Zheng Guanheng, personal communication, November
2024). On the train or the bus, you cannot seem to start a conversation with a fellow
passenger despite close bodily contact. In public parks, the mantra is “Mind your own
business”. It seems that we have perfected the art of attending to our own business
118 Delante et al.

and ignoring others around us until it has become no more than a reflex, until it has
become a status quo until it has become a norm that renders itself difficult to bend.
Everyone seems to be operating in their little bubble, and no one seems to invade that
little bubble of solitude. Everyone seems to ignore the rest of the world. Everyone
seems to have perfected the habit of nonchalance.
What if this community of silence keeps growing? What if in this inflated silence
lies loneliness that is swelling within people –in our neighbours, our friends, our
families, and these people we see in parks, tussling for seats on the train and bus, or
scrimmaging for spaces in the school library? What if the binary self keeps fore-
grounding the self of pretence and facade and keeps concealing loneliness deep
within? Why do we choose to actively isolate ourselves despite the enormous
opportunity to socialize? Is it a mere social construct or are there motivations more
intrinsic to our solitude and isolationist goals? Isolation and solitude are a conscious
choice we undertake, and so, too, social interaction. However, striving for a solitary
life, we have somehow perfected the habit of silence. This inner desire to isolate
ourselves grows even bigger in which we are dissecting the public into our private
spaces that only we can access and have control (Zheng Guanheng, personal
communication, November 2024). What if we become addicted to it? What if it is
pushing us into the abyss of melancholy and loneliness and going back to the social
world seems to be arduous? What if in our constant desire for solitude and silence,
any hope for deep, meaningful social interaction becomes futile, and nonchalance
persists over care and concern for others who may be struggling with loneliness and
other pressing mental health issues?
In a society that seems to worship solitude and isolation, is it a shame to go out
and find a stranger to talk to in the park? Is it a shame to attempt to talk to a stranger
on a train? Is it a shame to bother to help a homeless and lonely person drenched in
the heavy rain? We would fail as a society in case this situation of “dissecting-the-
public-into-our-private-spaces-only-ourselves-can-access”inflates into an addiction.
Thus, does it pain you to start a conversation with a stranger on the train and turn
that into a real friendship? Does it pain you to cultivate deep social connections with
other people in this increasingly capitalistic modern society? Does it make us less of a
person if we do so? Perhaps the main enemy is not this increasingly capitalistic,
neoliberalist, and divisive world in which we live. Perhaps the real enemy resides
deep within us.
9 Conclusions
Semiotics, the intersubjective mediation by signs, propels us to decipher the signs
and objects of loneliness gleaned from op-ed articles about loneliness published in the
Signs and objects in op-ed articles 119

US and Singapore newspapers. Two signs emerged from our interpretation and
meaning making: (1) in the US, loneliness exists due to the rapid deterioration of deep
and meaningful human connections, and (2) in Singapore, loneliness that is made
overt is a sign of human weakness. To make sense of the first sign, we surmise that
our material body has enormous power to connect with other human beings in the
physical world in which we live. Fundamentally realizing the power of our lived
body and our lived mind (Merleau-Ponty 1968) can allow us to sustain meaningful
human connections that matter to our mental health, our sense of self, and our sense
of purpose. To interpret the second sign, we argue that Singaporeans in general tend
to create a binary self (Elbow 1993) of which they are ensnared into a double identity
(Du Bois 1908) that somehow explains who they are. However, this rise of embodying
a double identity or a binary self in the Asian context seems to conceal difficult,
heavy, and pervasive emotions such as loneliness bringing a debilitating impact on
mental health. Embracing one’s weaknesses and vulnerability is the way to go for
Singaporeans to be able to manage and overcome loneliness and other serious
mental health issues. To be honest with one’s emotions is to emancipate the mind and
the human spirit.
References
Allen, Graham. 2003. Roland Barthes. London: Routledge.
American Psychological Association. 2018. Loneliness. In APA dictionary of psychology. https://dictionary.
apa.org/loneliness (accessed 7 November 2024).
Anderson, James Arthur. 2014. Thinking qualitatively: Hermeneutics in science. In Don W. Stacks &
Michael B. Salwen (eds.), An integrated approach to communication theory and research,54–72. New
York: Routledge.
Atkin, Albert. 2010. Peirce’s theory of signs. In Edward N. Zalta (ed.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/peirce-semiotics/ (accessed 7 November 2024).
Barthes, Roland. 2004. Introduction to the structural analysis of narratives. In Ralph Cohen (ed.), Narrative
theory: Critical concepts in literary and cultural studies,65–116. Maryland: Johns Hopkins University
Press.
Bedford, Olwen & Kwang-Kuo Hwang. 2003. Guilt and shame in Chinese culture: A cross-cultural
framework from the perspective of morality and identity. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour
33(2). 127–144.
Birditt, Kira S., Jasmine A. Manalel, Heidi Sommers, Gloria Luong & Karen L. Fingerman. 2019. Better off
alone: Daily solitude is associated with lower negative affect in more conflictual social networks. The
Gerontologist 59(6). 1152–1161.
Cacioppo, John T. & Stephanie Cacioppo. 2018. The growing problem of loneliness. The Lancet 391(10119).
426.
Chan, Angelique, Rahul Malhotra & Ad Maulod. 2023, July 11. Commentary: Loneliness is an overlooked
public health challenge in ageing Singapore. Channel News Asia. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/
120 Delante et al.

commentary/senior-loneliness-mortality-risk-ageing-public-health-crisis-3615171 (accessed 12
August 2024).
Cheeta, Survjit, Joseph Beevers, Sophie Chambers, Andre Szameitat & Chris Chandler. 2021. Seeing
sadness: Comorbid effects of loneliness and depression on emotional face processing. Brain and
Behavior 11(7). e02189.
Craig, Robert T. 1999. Communication theory as a field. Communication Theory 9(2). 119–161.
Cummins, Eleanor & Andrew Zaleski. 2023, July 14. If loneliness is an epidemic, how do we treat it? The New
York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/14/opinion/treating-loneliness.html (accessed 4 May
2024).
Du Bois, William Edward Burghardt. 1908. The souls of black folk. New York: A. C. McClurg & Co.
Elbow, Peter. 1993. The uses of binary thinking. Journal of Advanced Composition 13(1). 51–78. https://www.
jstor.org/stable/20865892.
Felluga, Dino. 2015. Critical theory: The key concepts. London: Routledge.
Gastonguay, Paul R. 1972. Loneliness. In the crowd. The American Biology Teacher 34(8). 456–458.
George, Theodore. 2020. The responsibility to understand: Hermeneutical contours of ethical life. Edinburgh
University Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctv136c4mc (accessed 9 May 2024).
Glaser, Barney & Anselm Strauss. 1999. Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New
York: Routledge.
Hawkley, Louise C. & John T. Cacioppo. 2010. Loneliness matters: A theoretical and empirical review of
consequences and mechanisms. Annals of Behavioural Medicine 40(2). 218–227.
Hawkley, Louise C. & Masha Kocherginsky. 2018. Transitions in loneliness among older adults: A 5-year
follow-up in the national social life, health, and aging project. Research on Aging 40(4). 365–387.
Hertz, Noreena. 2021, July 11. Op-ed: We’re in the midst of a global loneliness crisis: Here’s how we can end
it. Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-07-11/lonely-century-global-
crisis-loneliness (accessed 14 May 2024).
Ho, David Yau-fai. 1976. On the concept of face. American Journal of Sociology 81(4). 867–884. https://www.
jstor.org/stable/2777600.
Hofstede, Geertz. 1980. Culture and organizations. International Studies of Management & Organization
10(4). 15–41.
Holt-Lunstad, Julianne, Timothy B. Smith, Mark Baker, Tyler Harris & David Stephenson. 2015. Loneliness
and social isolation as risk factors for mortality: A meta-analytic review. Perspectives on Psychological
Science 10(2). 227–237.
Hu, Hsien Chin. 1944. The Chinese concepts of “face”.American Anthropologist 46(1). 45–64.
Johnson, Mark. 2017. Embodied mind, meaning, and reason: How our bodies give rise to understanding.
Illinois: University of Chicago Press.
Ko, Helen. 2021, July 27. Commentary: Heeding cries for help –getting to the heart of elderly suicides
requires more than counselling. Channel News Asia. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/
commentary/elderly-suicide-cries-help-helpline-support-2077891 (accessed 2 November 2024).
Kristof, Nicholas. 2023, September 6. We know the cure for loneliness: So why do we suffer? The New York
Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/06/opinion/loneliness-epidemic-solutions.html
(accessed 15 May 2024).
Kuek, Jonathan. 2023, July 12. Commentary: Is there a ‘male friendship recession’in Singapore? Channel
News Asia. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/commentary/friendships-men-women-mental-
health-wellbeing-3620571 (accessed 22 October 2024).
Lau, Deborah. 2024, January 30. Youths in Singapore more likely to report higher levels of social isolation
and loneliness: IPS poll. Today. https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/youth-social-isolation-
loneliness-ips-survey-2350966 (accessed 23 October 2024).
Signs and objects in op-ed articles 121

Lin, Sng Hock & Valerie Ng. 2023, June 4. Commentary: Preparing ourselves against the phenomenon of
tiredness of life in old age. Channel News Asia. https://cnalifestyle.channelnewsasia.com/
commentary/ageing-tired-life-mental-health-prepare-purpose-403141.
Lindlof, Thomas R. & Bryan C. Taylor. 2011. Qualitative communication research methods, 3rd edn. California:
Sage.
Lodder, Gerine M., Ron H. Scholte, Luc Goossens, Rutger C. Engels & Maaike Verhagen. 2016. Loneliness
and the social monitoring system: Emotion recognition and eye gaze in a real-life conversation.
British Journal of Psychology 107(1). 135–153.
MacEvoy, Julie Paquette, Molly Stroud Weeks & Steven R. Asher. 2011. Loneliness. In Bradford Brown &
Mitchell Prinstein (ed.), Encyclopedia of adolescence. Massachusetts: Academic Press.
McLuhan, Marshall. 1994. Understanding media: The extensions of man. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1968. The visible and the invisible: Followed by working notes. Illinois: Northwestern
University Press.
Murthy, Vivek H. 2023, April 30. Surgeon General: We have become a lonely nation. It’s time to fix that. The
New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/30/opinion/loneliness-epidemic-america.html
(accessed 23 May 2024).
Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1955. Philosophical writings of Peirce. New York: Dover Publications.
Petrow, Steven. 2021, December 4. I’m not alone in feeling lonely. There are ways to fight loneliness. The
Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/how-to-cope-with-loneliness/2021/12/
03/e9fc6a24-3ce7-11ec-8ee9-4f14a26749d1_story.html (accessed 24 May 2024).
Pharies, David A. 1985. Charles S. Peirce and the linguistic sign. Philadelphia: J. Benjamins.
Qi, Xiaoying. 2017. Reconstructing the concept of face in cultural sociology: In Goffman’s footsteps,
following the Chinese case. Journal of Chinese Sociology 4(19). 19.
Qi, Xiaoying. 2011. Face: A Chinese concept in a global sociology. Journal of Sociology 47(3). 279–295.
Redmond, Sean. 2024. Lonely realities: Documenting loneliness. In The loneliness room,97–122.
Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Ricoeur, Paul. 1974. The conflict of interpretations: Essays in hermeneutics. Illinois: Northwestern University
Press.
Rokach, Ami. 2013. Loneliness updated: Recent research on loneliness and how it affects our lives. London:
Routledge.
Saito, Toshiki, Kosuke Motoki, Rui Nouchi, Ryuta Kawashima & Motoaki Sugiura. 2020. Loneliness
modulates automatic attention to warm and competent faces: Preliminary evidence from an eye-
tracking study. Frontiers in Psychology 10(2020). 29–67.
Sepalla, Emma. 2014, May 8. Connectedness and health: The science of social connection. Stanford
Medicine. https://ccare.stanford.edu/uncategorized/connectedness-health-the-science-of-social-
connection-infographic/ (accessed 1 June 2024).
Shlokovsky, Viktor. 1917. Art as technique. https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/english/currentstudents/
undergraduate/modules/fulllist/first/en122/lecturelist-2015-16-2/shklovsky.pdf (accessed 12
October 2024).
Tan, Tina. 2018, February 7. Commentary: Chinese New Year brings stress, loneliness, and sorrow to some
seniors. Channel News Asia. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/commentary/chinese-new-year-
seniors-elderly-stress-loneliness-sorrow-family-2046211 (accessed 22 October 2024).
Theeke, Laurie, Roger D. Carpenter, Jennifer Mallow & Elliott Theeke. 2019. Gender differences in
loneliness, anger, depression, self-management ability and biomarkers of chronic illness in
chronically ill mid-life adults in Appalachia. Applied Nursing Research 45(2019). 55–62.
122 Delante et al.

Tse, Dwight C. K., Jennifer C. Lay & Jeanne Nakamura. 2022. Autonomy matters: Experiential and individual
differences in chosen and unchosen solitary activities from three experience sampling studies. Social
Psychological and Personality Science 13(5). 946–956.
Valtorta, Nicole K., Mona Kanaan, Simon Gilbody & Barbara Hanratty. 2016. Loneliness and social isolation
as risk factors for coronary heart disease and stroke: Systematic review and meta-analysis of
longitudinal observational studies. Heart 102(13). 1009–1016.
Ward, Bryce. 2022, November 3. Opinion: Americans are choosing to be alone: Here’s why we should
reverse that. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/11/23/
americans-alone-thanksgiving-friends/ (accessed 2 June 2024).
Warren, Tish Harrison. 2022, May 1. We’re in a loneliness crisis: Another reason to get offour phones. The
New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/01/opinion/loneliness-connectedness-
technology.html (accessed 18 May 2024).
Wong, Ying & Jeanne Tsai. 2007. Cultural models of shame and guilt. In Jessica L. Tracy, Richard W. Robins
& June Price Tangney (eds.), The self-conscious emotions: Theory and research, 209–223. New York:
Guildford Press.
Yabuuchi, Akio. 2004. Face in Chinese, Japanese, and US American cultures. Journal of Asian Pacific
Communication 14(2). 261–297.
Yount, Michelle A. 2000. Loneliness, lack of perceived social supportand the development of anger in adolescents
(Publication No. 1400167) [Master’s thesis, California State University, Fullerton]. ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Global. (230784101). https://www.proquest.com/docview/230784101?pq-
origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true&sourcetype=Dissertations%20&%20Theses (accessed 28
May 2024).
Bionotes
Nimrod L. Delante
School of Humanities, Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Avenue, 226001, Singapore,
Singapore
nimrod.delante@ntu.edu.sg
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5288-9388
Nimrod L. Delante, PhD is a Lecturer at the Language and Communication Centre, School of Humanities,
Nanyang Technological University Singapore. His research interests include semiotics, rhetoric,
phenomenology, and human behaviour. Nimrod is a deeply reflective teacher and writer.
Esther Soo Wansing
School of Humanities, Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Avenue, 226001, Singapore,
Singapore
Esther Soo Wansing is a Lecturer at the Language and Communication Centre, Nanyang Technological
University, Singapore. She teaches undergraduate courses such as interdisciplinary inquiry and writing, as
well as engineering communication. Her current research interests include semiotics, presentation skills,
critical thinking skills, and pedagogical approaches in the classroom using generative AI.
Signs and objects in op-ed articles 123

Audrey Toh Lin Lin
School of Humanities, Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Avenue, 226001, Singapore,
Singapore
Audrey Toh Lin Lin is a Lecturer at the Language and Communication Centre, Nanyang Technological
University Singapore. She has taught business communication and academic writing in Singapore’s
polytechnics and universities. Her current research interests include critical discourse analysis –systemic
functional grammar, semiotics, the scholarship of teaching and learning about writing, students’research
questions, critical thinking, and the use of generative AI in teaching and learning.
124 Delante et al.