Changes

| width="5%"  |   || An never miss't!

| width="5%"  |   || An never miss't!

|-

|-

| colspan="2" align="right" | — Robert Burns, ''Title'', [CPW, 132]

| colspan="2" align="right" | — Robert Burns, ''To a Mouse'', [CPW, 132]

|}

|}

But the question remains whether sign-bearing agents can act, at least, as if they are able to be aware of their bearing as one component of a coherent, competent, and complete code of conduct, even a form of life.  And the question continues how interpreters can acquire their faculties for the conscientious development and the deliberate elaboration of the factors that affect their own interpretive activities, in sum, how they can reflect on the factual contingencies that affect their own sign use, on the facticity of the circumstances that constrain these uses, and on the factors that determine the facility of the conditions that lead up to these uses, and then act on the results of all these reflections to make improvements in all these factors.  In this way of broaching the subject of reflection, I am forced to drop it almost immediately, with the aim of starting afresh at another point and approaching the topic again, the next time from another direction.

But the question remains whether sign-bearing agents can act, at least, as if they are able to be aware of their bearing as one component of a coherent, competent, and complete code of conduct, even a form of life.  And the question continues how interpreters can acquire their faculties for the conscientious development and the deliberate elaboration of the factors that affect their own interpretive activities, in sum, how they can reflect on the factual contingencies that affect their own sign use, on the facticity of the circumstances that constrain these uses, and on the factors that determine the facility of the conditions that lead up to these uses, and then act on the results of all these reflections to make improvements in all these factors.  In this way of broaching the subject of reflection, I am forced to drop it almost immediately, with the aim of starting afresh at another point and approaching the topic again, the next time from another direction.

Thy wee bit housie, too, in ruin!

| colspan="2" | Thy wee bit housie, too, in ruin!

Its silly wa's the win's are strewin!

An naething, now, to big a new ane,

| colspan="2" | Its silly wa's the win's are strewin!

O foggage green!

An bleak December's win's ensuin,

| colspan="2" | An naething, now, to big a new ane,

Baith snell an keen!

Robert Burns, To a Mouse, [CPW, 132]

| width="5%"  |   || O foggage green!

| colspan="2" | An bleak December's win's ensuin,

| width="5%"  |   || Baith snell an keen!

| colspan="2" align="right" | — Robert Burns, ''To a Mouse'', [CPW, 132]

At times one enters a state of mind that seems so rich in possibilities, teems with so many avenues of interesting departures, and unlocks such veins of unsuspected wealth in the world of ideas that one wants to be sure to revisit it again, in order to explore the rest of the thoughts that seem likely to unfold from its locus, its nexus, and its treasury.  But the only way that one can be sure to return to anything like the same state of mind is to put reminders of it all about, at every other point that one later passes through and in the vicinity of every locus the neighborhood of which one is likely to visit.  Now a state that one experiences at a former time is not always possible to experience again, but it may be possible to make nearby passes or to approach arbitrarily close to the essence of the exact experience at a host of future times.  Then consider a manifold of possible states of mind as forming a space that possesses its conceivable extension.  And so one gets these ideas:  (1) of a manifold that is suffused with the idea of a manifold that is suffused just so, (2) of a manifold that is suffused with more or less accurate ideas of itself, and (3) of a manifold that is suffused with its own idea just far enough that it can serve to maintain the orbits of the agents that pass through it in suffusion with the very idea of doing so.

At times one enters a state of mind that seems so rich in possibilities, teems with so many avenues of interesting departures, and unlocks such veins of unsuspected wealth in the world of ideas that one wants to be sure to revisit it again, in order to explore the rest of the thoughts that seem likely to unfold from its locus, its nexus, and its treasury.  But the only way that one can be sure to return to anything like the same state of mind is to put reminders of it all about, at every other point that one later passes through and in the vicinity of every locus the neighborhood of which one is likely to visit.  Now a state that one experiences at a former time is not always possible to experience again, but it may be possible to make nearby passes or to approach arbitrarily close to the essence of the exact experience at a host of future times.  Then consider a manifold of possible states of mind as forming a space that possesses its conceivable extension.  And so one gets these ideas:  (1) of a manifold that is suffused with the idea of a manifold that is suffused just so, (2) of a manifold that is suffused with more or less accurate ideas of itself, and (3) of a manifold that is suffused with its own idea just far enough that it can serve to maintain the orbits of the agents that pass through it in suffusion with the very idea of doing so.

If the writer can din the reader into an awareness that the repetition of a word does not imply the repetition of a thought, that the repetition of a sign does not imply the repetition of any idea, that the repetition of a state does not mean its repetition forever, then this repetition serves its purpose, however close it verges on absurdity.

If the writer can din the reader into an awareness that the repetition of a word does not imply the repetition of a thought, that the repetition of a sign does not imply the repetition of any idea, that the repetition of a state does not mean its repetition forever, then this repetition serves its purpose, however close it verges on absurdity.

The discussion arrives at the question of signs and texts that signify, beyond their ostensible denotations and their obvious connotations, the characters of their authors, the features of their intended readers, and much more besides about the nature of their joint adventures, whatever their levels of participation in them, the processes of communication.

The discussion arrives at the question of signs and texts that signify, beyond their ostensible denotations and their obvious connotations, the characters of their authors, the features of their intended readers, and much more besides about the nature of their joint adventures, whatever their levels of participation in them, the processes of communication.

If the question of the interpreter that is signified by a sign reduces to the question of the interpretation that is signified by that sign, and if this reduces to the question of the interpretant that is signified by the sign, then one arrives at the circumstance of sign that relates to its interpretant along several paths.

If the question of the interpreter that is signified by a sign reduces to the question of the interpretation that is signified by that sign, and if this reduces to the question of the interpretant that is signified by the sign, then one arrives at the circumstance of sign that relates to its interpretant along several paths.

"effective descriptions and finite texts" (EDAFT's)

"effective descriptions and finite texts" (EDAFTs)

Thou saw the fields laid bare an waste,

An weary winter comin fast,

| colspan="2" | Thou saw the fields laid bare an waste,

An cozie here, beneath the blast,

Thou thought to dwell,

| colspan="2" | An weary winter comin fast,

Till crash!  the cruel coulter past

Out thro thy cell.

| colspan="2" | An cozie here, beneath the blast,

Robert Burns, To a Mouse, [CPW, 132]

| width="5%"  |   || Thou thought to dwell,

| colspan="2" | Till crash!  the cruel coulter past

| width="5%"  |   || Out thro thy cell.

| colspan="2" align="right" | — Robert Burns, ''To a Mouse'', [CPW, 132]

At this juncture the discussion comes face to face with a type of text, many of whose signs are subject to different levels of interpretation.  Besides denoting characters and creatures of legend and myth that form at first sight the subjects of the text, describing their features, and depicting their various adventures, they also appear to be amenable to recursive or self referent interpretations or to suggest an extra sense for themselves.  Indeed, they seem designed to serve an added intention of their author, namely, to say something about the aims of the author, the attributes of the audience, whether hoped or feared, and the nature of the whole attempt to communicate.

At this juncture the discussion comes face to face with a type of text, many of whose signs are subject to different levels of interpretation.  Besides denoting characters and creatures of legend and myth that form at first sight the subjects of the text, describing their features, and depicting their various adventures, they also appear to be amenable to recursive or self referent interpretations or to suggest an extra sense for themselves.  Indeed, they seem designed to serve an added intention of their author, namely, to say something about the aims of the author, the attributes of the audience, whether hoped or feared, and the nature of the whole attempt to communicate.

Just to indicate the types of self reference that are being contemplated, it helps to introduce a number of informal definitions.  Let any suitable set of entities {writer, sign, reader} be called a "linkage" of the sign in question, and let any suitable set of entities {writer, text, reader} be called a "linkage" of the text in question.  In either of these uses, let the subset of entities {writer, reader} be called the "link" of that linkage, and let the elements of a link be called its "ends" or "termini".  At present, the situations of interest are those in which all of the signs in a text, at least, those that denote anything at all, are considered to share the very same link, which they all bear in common with their text.  From now on, this condition is taken for granted unless it is otherwise expressly noted.  Given a sign within a text, the union of their linkages is a set of entities {writer, sign, text, reader} that is useful to call a "nocking" of the sign.  Together with the specification of a sign relation that suits a particular condition of interpretation, these constructs go toward defining a "communication situation", an "interpretive setting", or a "pragmatic frame" for the sign or the text in question.

Just to indicate the types of self reference that are being contemplated, it helps to introduce a number of informal definitions.  Let any suitable set of entities {writer, sign, reader} be called a ''linkage'' of the sign in question, and let any suitable set of entities {writer, text, reader} be called a ''linkage'' of the text in question.  In either of these uses, let the subset of entities {writer, reader} be called the ''link'' of that linkage, and let the elements of a link be called its ''ends'' or ''termini''.  At present, the situations of interest are those in which all of the signs in a text, at least, those that denote anything at all, are considered to share the very same link, which they all bear in common with their text.  From now on, this condition is taken for granted unless it is otherwise expressly noted.  Given a sign within a text, the union of their linkages is a set of entities {writer, sign, text, reader} that is useful to call a ''nocking'' of the sign.  Together with the specification of a sign relation that suits a particular condition of interpretation, these constructs go toward defining a ''communication situation'', an ''interpretive setting'', or a ''pragmatic frame'' for the sign or the text in question.

Naturally, these constructions require a lot more information about the details of a given interpretation in a given situation in order to pin them down exactly, but this is enough to rough out their general ideas.  Their main use in the current setting is simply to provide a ready way of talking about the properties of certain kinds of complex texts, as they are become subject to certain kinds of "loopy", "recursive", or "self referent" interpretations.

Naturally, these constructions require a lot more information about the details of a given interpretation in a given situation in order to pin them down exactly, but this is enough to rough out their general ideas.  Their main use in the current setting is simply to provide a ready way of talking about the properties of certain kinds of complex texts, as they are become subject to certain kinds of ''loopy'', ''recursive'', or ''self-referent'' interpretations.

If a sign within a text is interpreted as making any kind of denotative reference to its own nocking, namely, to the appropriate set of entities {writer, sign, text, reader}, its elements, or its properties, then it is useful to consider this sign and this text as being self referent in the broad sense that they refer to accessory or instrumental aspects of the pragmatic frame itself, and thus can be said to have an "internal aim".  This can happen whether or not a sign within a text denotes any object beyond its nocking, and thus can be said to have an "external aim".

If a sign within a text is interpreted as making any kind of denotative reference to its own nocking, namely, to the appropriate set of entities {writer, sign, text, reader}, its elements, or its properties, then it is useful to consider this sign and this text as being self referent in the broad sense that they refer to accessory or instrumental aspects of the pragmatic frame itself, and thus can be said to have an ''internal aim''.  This can happen whether or not a sign within a text denotes any object beyond its nocking, and thus can be said to have an ''external aim''.

That wee bit heap o leaves an stibble,

That wee bit heap o leaves an stibble,

Has cost thee monie a weary nibble!

Has cost thee monie a weary nibble!