Science topic
Social Semiotics - Science topic
Explore the latest questions and answers in Social Semiotics, and find Social Semiotics experts.
Questions related to Social Semiotics
I want to test credibility of this important phenomenon:
"Women's handcrafts played a pivotal role in the development of cuneiform signs, serving as the content of the writing system. This is underscored by the significance of the EMESAL dialect, associated with women's speech, in Sumerian religion, where it was believed that the Anunnaki gods coordinated this process. In contrast, the accounting system, invented by men, provided the practical context for the use of cuneiform."
For this OPENAI CHAT GPT 4 has recommended the these resources:
Stephanie Dalley:
Books: "Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh, and Others" – while this doesn't focus specifically on the role of women's handcraft, Dalley's work on Mesopotamian myths provides valuable context.
Articles: Look for her articles on the role of women in Sumerian society and religious practices.
Article: Ancient Assyrian Textiles and the Origins of Carpet Design
Zainap Bahrani:
Book: "Women of Babylon: Gender and Representation in Mesopotamia" – This book explores the roles and representations of women in ancient Mesopotamia, which can provide insights into their contributions to cultural and artistic developments, including writing systems.
Articles: Bahrani's scholarly articles on gender and art in Mesopotamia.
Joan Goodnick Westenholz:
Book: "Goddesses in Context: On Divine Powers, Roles, Relationships and Gender in Mesopotamian Textual and Visual Sources" – This book explores the religious roles of women and how these may have influenced cultural practices, including writing.
Articles: Westenholz's articles on Sumerian religion and women's roles.
Piotr Michalowski:
Book: "The Correspondence of the Kings of Ur: An Epistolary History of an Ancient Mesopotamian Kingdom" – While this focuses on the administrative side, Michalowski's work often touches on the broader cultural implications of writing and administration.
Articles: His work on Sumerian literature and administration can provide context for the role of men in developing accounting systems.
Jean Bottéro:
Book: "Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning, and the Gods" – Bottéro discusses the origins of writing and its cultural significance, including religious aspects that might relate to women's roles.
Articles: Bottéro’s articles on cuneiform writing and its development.
Denise Schmandt-Besserat (I am critical of her approach)
Books: "Before Writing" and "How Writing Came About" – Schmandt-Besserat’s research focuses on the origins of writing and includes discussions on the role of tokens, which can be tied to both accounting and artistic practices.
Articles: Her numerous articles on the evolution of writing from token systems.
I think this is a very good book:
Fischer, S. R. (2020). History of Writing. Reaktion Books. https://www.perlego.com/book/2854459
''Before complete writing, humankind made use of a wealth of graphic symbols and mnemonics (memory tools) of various kinds in order to store information. Rock art has always possessed a repertoire of universal symbols: anthropomorphs (human-like figures), flora, fauna, the Sun, stars, comets and many more, including untold geometric designs. For the most part, these were graphic reproductions of the commonest phenomena of the physical world. At the same time, mnemonics were used in linguistic contexts, too, with knot records (Are not Carpets knot records as well?) , pictographs, notched bones or staffs, message sticks or boards, string games for chanting, coloured pebbles and so forth linking physical objects with speech. Over many thousands of years, graphic art and such mnemonics grew ever closer in specific social contexts''
''Assyrian Carpets in Stone'' by P AULINE ALBENDA
''One category of Assyrian stone reliefs to which little attention has been given is the'decorated stone blocks placed originally in select entrances of royal residences. These slabs are carved with floral and geometric designs set in patterns suitable for rugs and, indeed, they may be stone ver- sions of woven floor coverings manufactured to enhance the palace chambers. In the absence of extant fabric remains, the threshold blocks provide invaluable information concerning the kinds of decorated elements and compositions employed to satisfy Assyrian tastes.1 While a number
of decorated threshold slabs are preserved in various museums, still others are known only from drawings and photographs made at the time of their discovery. In order to trace the development of their decoration, all the known slabs are assembled in this paper according to the reigns of the Assyrian kings, from the 8th through 7th centuries B.C.
As attested in 8th century B.C. administrative texts from Nimrud, among the several categories of textile workers in the service of the king included the kamidu, identified as the carpet maker.2 The production of his craft required the use of a vertical loom or possibly a ground loom} Whether the Assyrian carpets were tapestry woven (kilim) or knotted remains uncertain. We may speculate, however, that the sudden interest in displaying stone versions of rugs and carpets at important entrances after the middle of the 8th century was spurred by the development of pile carpets. A similar conclusion has been made for the apparent invention of the art of floor mosaic- making in Phrygia, which occurred at about the same time.4 The origin for such an innovative
technique of carpet production is unknown, although pictorial evidence suggests that one area of manufacture is to be sought in some region west of Assyria, whence the method was transmitted east to the royal workshops. Three separate art works dated to the reign of Shalmaneser III (858-824 B.C.) illustrate among processions of tribute-bearers carpets of substantial size and weight, rolled and hung over poles carried by two attendants. [n each instance the fabrics are presented by the inhabitants of some locality to the west of Assyria. In the first example, on the so-called Black Obelisk, the carpets which form part of the tribute sent by Marduk-apal-usur of Suhi (a district on the middle Euphrates) possess carefully delineated fringes (fig. 1).5 In contrast, less attention is given to this detail on those carpets borne by the tribute-bearers from the coastal
cities of Tyre and Sidon, depicted on the bronze bands from Balawat, and those transported by attendants from the land of Ungi (the Amuq plain in North Syria), carved on the throne dais excavated in NimrudJ Interestingly, the Balawat gate inscription mentions only that Shalmaneser received "the tribute of the ships of the men of Tyre and Sidon,,,8 while the inscriptions on the Black Obelisk and throne dais give the description "bright-colored (woolen) garments and (linen) garments."Y From this one may suppose that the Assyrian scribe, when listing items of tribute, made no distinction between types of textiles and their uses, preferring the general term "garment." Woven floor coverings do appear in several second millennium B.C. art works, but such examples are rare. It seems to occur on a ca. 14th century B.C. ortho stat from Alaca Hoyuk in Anatolia which depicts a rectangular fabric, one end possessing fringes grouped into three curved clusters, placed on the ground beneath the throne of the deity. And indeed, textual evidence indicates that thrones were set upon a carpet. A second illustration showing a floor covering comes from a Late Kingdom painting. A large red carpet with rows of yellow and blue diamonds in its field is spread under the feet of the pharaoh Ikhnaton and his family''
Would you recommend any other resource?
We used to have some project that discussed these interesting topics. I hope some of you will start this discussion going from your own perspective. How does art connect with science? My husband works in science and I am definitely one of those "mind wanderers" who get so easily distracted because in art we think associatively.
I almost daily have to think why I don't mind how my mind works. What are your thoughts in these two very different styles of cognitive activity?
Starting from Zhuangzi´s text:
魚罾之乎者也，莫之以其魚；
Yú zēng zhī hū zhě yě, mò zhī yǐ qí yú;
麗兔之乎者也，莫之以其兔；
Lì tù zhī hū zhě yě, mò zhī yǐ qí tù;
白燕之乎者也，莫之以其燕。
Bái yàn zhī hū zhě yě, mò zhī yǐ qí yàn.
言之隨也，莫之以其義；
Yán zhī suí yě, mò zhī yǐ qí yì;
故曰，失之者，可勿捨乎？
Gù yuē, shī zhī zhě, kě wù shě hū?
Which roughly translates to:
"When it comes to those skilled in fishing traps, no fish can escape them. When it comes to those who pursue beautiful hares, no hare can elude them. When it comes to those who seek white swallows, no swallow can avoid them. In speech, it is the same: no meaning can elude those who follow words. Therefore, one may ask, those who lose something, can they not let it go?"
- Could this passage from Zhuangzi refer to how we SENSE the meanings on the tip of our tongue and yet can´t recall the actual word?
- Could this passage be read via Derrida´s DECONSTRUCTION?
- Could this passage be read via Heidegger´s ONTOLOGY of TECHNOLOGY?
- Could this passage be read via Foucault´s TECHNOLOGY of the SELF?
- But wait, what if the translation is wrong/ lacks nuances?
Wait, here´s Google Translation:
"If you are looking for a fish, don't use it as a fish; if you are looking for a beautiful rabbit, don't use it as a hare; if you are looking for a white swallow, don't use it as a swallow. If you say it, don't use it for its meaning. Therefore, it is said that if you lose it, you can. Don’t you want to give up?"
And then here´s another Interpretation:
"When it comes to skilled fishers using nets, there is no fish that they cannot catch. When it comes to those pursuing beautiful hares, there is no hare that can escape them. When it comes to those seeking white swallows, there is no swallow that can avoid them. In terms of verbal expression, it is the same: those who follow words can capture their essence. Therefore, one may inquire, can those who have lost something not let it go?"
Challenges in Interpreting Classical Chinese
The challenge of interpreting Zhuang is multi-fold. I´ll go by how I was taught to read Classical Chinese, that is character by character. However, it's crucial to approach interpretations of classical philosophical texts with care, as these texts often allow for multiple readings and perspectives. Different scholars may offer varying interpretations of the same passages, and the understanding of classical Chinese philosophy can be complex and nuanced.
魚罾之乎者也，莫之以其魚；Yú zēng zhī hū zhě yě, mò zhī yǐ qí yú;
Fish trap's one, also, not it with its fish.
麗兔之乎者也，莫之以其兔；Lì tù zhī hū zhě yě, mò zhī yǐ qí tù;
Beautiful hare's one, also, not it with its hare.
白燕之乎者也，莫之以其燕。Bái yàn zhī hū zhě yě, mò zhī yǐ qí yàn.
White swallow's one, also, not it with its swallow.
言之隨也，莫之以其義；Yán zhī suí yě, mò zhī yǐ qí yì;
Words' following, also, not it with its meaning.
故曰，失之者，可勿捨乎？Gù yuē, shī zhī zhě, kě wù shě hū?
Therefore, it is said: One who loses it, can one not abandon it?
魚 (yú) - fish
罾 (zēng) - trap
之 (zhī) - possessive particle, of, it
乎 (hū) - interrogative particle, used in classical Chinese
者 (zhě) - one who
也 (yě) - also, too
莫 (mò) - not, none
之 (zhī) - possessive particle, of, it
以 (yǐ) - with, by
其 (qí) - his, her, its
魚 (yú) - fish
麗 (lì) - beautiful
兔 (tù) - hare, rabbit
之 (zhī) - possessive particle, of, it
乎 (hū) - interrogative particle, used in classical Chinese
者 (zhě) - one who
也 (yě) - also, too
莫 (mò) - not, none
之 (zhī) - possessive particle, of, it
以 (yǐ) - with, by
其 (qí) - his, her, its
兔 (tù) - hare, rabbit
白 (bái) - white
燕 (yàn) - swallow (bird)
之 (zhī) - possessive particle, of, it
乎 (hū) - interrogative particle, used in classical Chinese
者 (zhě) - one who
也 (yě) - also, too
莫 (mò) - not, none
之 (zhī) - possessive particle, of, it
以 (yǐ) - with, by
其 (qí) - his, her, its
燕 (yàn) - swallow (bird)
言 (yán) - words, speech
之 (zhī) - possessive particle, of, it
隨 (suí) - follow
也 (yě) - also, too
莫 (mò) - not, none
之 (zhī) - possessive particle, of, it
以 (yǐ) - with, by
其 (qí) - his, her, its
義 (yì) - meaning, righteousness
故 (gù) - therefore
曰 (yuē) - say
失 (shī) - lose
之 (zhī) - possessive particle, of, it
者 (zhě) - one who
可 (kě) - can, able to
勿 (wù) - do not
捨 (shě) - abandon
乎 (hū) - interrogative particle, used in classical Chinese
In the field of social semiotics, it has been introduced many key terms. Most importantly "Mode" and "Semiotic Resources".
What are the main diffrences between the key terms? and how to distinguish between them?
I would appreciate any suggestions on in-depth discussions on the matter.
how does culture help shape peoples understanding of various signs and symbols in a film? for example in western culture the colour red can be seen as a colour of warning whereas apparently in china it is a colour of luck. how does culture affect this, and how is this applied in films, animations etc?
The idea is taken from the following article but it's a common assumption in lit on consumer culture, identity in post/late modernity, etc.: David Machin and Joanna Thornborrow, 'Lifestyle and the Depoliticisation of Agency: Sex as Power in Women’s Magazines', SOCIAL SEMIOTICS VOLUME 16 NUMBER 1 (APRIL 2006).
Do people generally agree that gender and class (ethnicity, sexuality) no longer form the basis for individuals' identities?
I feel recently the term multimodality has been used as a synonym to multimodal social semiotics, but I am wondering if I can claim that. Also how to understand the relationship between systemic functional linguistics and social semiotics? Can I consider SFL as the grammar of language, while Kress and van Leeuwen's grammar of visual design would be the equivalent in visual texts, both used to (theoretically) deconstruct the meanings of the texts?
I am studying connotative signifiers in relation with age and gender differences. How males are different than females in terms of conveying the connotative meanings of certain signs.The same thing will be applied on the comparison between teenagers and adults. Unfortunately, there are no adequate studies to rely on while testing the previous hypothesis. I am thinking about testing the connotation of signs that signals levels of risk in accordance with two studies that show differences in the perception of risk between females and males, and adolescents and adults. I would be grateful if any of you have suggestions or any kind of help. Thanks!
Many imminent thinkers dissociate themselves from structuralism yet they rely heavily on its precepts (a good example will be Chomsky or Silverstein). The question is the following: Can we do a semiotic analysis without using any structuralist precept? Does interpretive or symbolic semiotics rely heavily on structuralism?If yes-how and if No-why not?
Can you help with gesture analysis? Our research includes McNeill categories, like beat, deitic, iconic and metaphorical.
