12,080
edits
Changes
MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Sunday July 07, 2024
Jump to navigationJump to searchDirectory:Jon Awbrey/Papers/Inquiry Driven Systems : Part 5 (view source)
Revision as of 00:16, 1 August 2011
, 00:16, 1 August 2011→5.1.2.3. The Endeavor to Communicate: + raw text
=====5.1.2.3. The Endeavor to Communicate=====
=====5.1.2.3. The Endeavor to Communicate=====
<pre>
When o'er the hill the eastern star
Tells bughtin time is near, my jo,
And owsen frae the furrow'd field
Return sae dowf and weary, O,
Down by the burn, where scented birks
Wi dew are hangin clear, my jo,
I'll meet thee on the lea rig,
My ain kind dearie, O!
Robert Burns, The Lea Rig, [CPW, 474]
An agent involved in an "effort to communicate" (ETC), no matter how various the signs and the media that make its conveyance conceivable, and no matter how articulately the character of its endeavor is styled, whether it is pointed and straightforward, or allusive and recursive, whether it is elliptic, hyperbolic, parabolic, or otherwise conically sectioned, or whether it is much less smoothly sliced into its initial approximations and final truncations, there are only so many ways that a "finitely informed creature" (FIC) can find to figure out what meaning the world has and to formulate what sense a life's work can add to it.
The present situation, as far as it goes, is a suitable subject for being investigated along the lines of the pragmatic theory of sign relations.
Since "x" is a sign, it has the potential to denote an object x, if and when there is determined to be a signified object, and one with a power to impress itself on the mind of the operative interpreter of that sign. Likewise, since "y0 = y.y" is a sign, it has the potential to denote an object, one that syntactic compunctions stop me from saying is y0 = y.y, that is, if I want to avoid a definite risk of failing to be understood. But what is this object, if it exists? At any rate, what sort of object is the receiver of the sign thereby entitled to expect it to be, whether or not the object that it foreshadows ever does come to be actualized?
In order to have a variety of more convenient names for referring to the object potentially denoted by the sign "y0 = y.y", I refer to the expression "y0 = y.y" as "The Initial Equation", or as "TIE", for short. Although it is not strictly necessary for such a small piece of text as "y0 = y.y", I here obey the rule that the titles of texts are italicized. Furthermore, the object, situation, or state that satisfies TIE, to the effect that y0 = y.y, and is therefore potentially denoted by TIE, can also be referred to as "the intended state", or as "TIS", for short.
At midnight hour in mirkest glen,
I'd rove, and ne'er be eerie, O,
If thro that glen I gaed to thee,
My ain kind dearie, O!
Altho, the night were ne'er sae wild,
And I were ne'er sae weary, O,
I'll meet thee on the lea rig,
My ain kind dearie, O!
Robert Burns, The Lea Rig, [CPW, 474]
For the sake of shortening future references to the chief object of the present inquiry and the initial sign of its potential existence, let the acronym "TIS" be equiferent to the phrase "the intended state", and let the italic tag "TIE" be equiferent to the title "The Initial Equation". Further, let the connotations be so arranged that "TIS" is semiotically equivalent to "the intended state" and "TIE" is semiotically equivalent to "The Initial Equation". It is important to note that a set of signs can be equiferent among themselves in the wholly vacuous sense that all of them have no objective reference, and, strictly speaking of what they denote, that all of them refer to nothing at all, whereas a set of signs that are equivalent in the properly semiotic sense still have each other as their connotations.
There is a feature of this style of abbreviation that is useful to call attention to. Rather than letting the acronym "TIS" strictly denote the phrase "the intended state" and instead of letting the tag "TIE" strictly denote the title "The Initial Equation", I am merely asking the reader to arrange in behalf of the interpretation a "semiotic partition" (SEP), along with its corresponding "semiotic equivalence relation" (SER), in which a particular pair of "semiotic equivalence classes" (SEC's) serve to stake out a couple of parts, that is, to represent mutually exclusive classes of signs that denote their respective objects in parallel. This situation is depicted in Table 26.
Table 26. Semiotic Partition Implied by the ACE of Q
Object SEC
the intended state {"the intended state", "TIS"}
The Initial Equation {"The Initial Equation", "TIE"}
In each case, the abbreviated form and its expansion are set to connote each other all within a single level of signs, while both signs are set to denote their common object in a parallel fashion. This strategy for annexing compressed references to a sign relation can be referred to as an "acronymically connotative extension" (ACE) of that sign relation.
The hunter lo'es the morning sun,
To rouse the mountain deer, my jo,
At noon the fisher takes the glen
Adown the burn to steer, my jo:
Gie me the hour o gloamin grey
It maks my heart sae cheery, O,
To meet thee on the lea rig,
My ain kind dearie, O!
Robert Burns, The Lea Rig, [CPW, 474]
</pre>
=====5.1.2.4. The Medium of Communication=====
=====5.1.2.4. The Medium of Communication=====
