[Index] [Prev] [Next]

Comments to Semios-L

Esa Pikkarainen :
Re: towards a unified terminology;
Mon, 10 Jun 1996 16:01:04 GMT+0300

I greet with pleasure your suggestion, Katya. But I am also a little
bit pessimistic. I have thought a lot of this problem. I started to
study semiotics quite recently and I have been very upset with the
terminology. I have found out that it is surely not only a question
about different terminology, but different theories too. In science
they are construction concepts about what they are studying - if you
want to be a scientist you must try to study same things than
others. Semiotics is not so scientific - it is more like art. But
still it is a science of concept constructing: we are constructing
concepts about constructing consepts about constructing concepts and
so on... There are too many possibilities to decide differently what
you are studying. So semiotics is full of competing systems of
concepts. And when we suggest a simple unified terminology, we are
actually suggesting just one more competing party. But that is just
what have to do.

Working in distance via maillist can be both promising and
disencouraging. It is good to compare and make ideas, but bad with
systematic theorybuilding. I am willing to try and join your
initiative, but I will have my summer vacation first. After about a
month I will try to tell my opinions on semiotic terminology.
(I am absolutely non-Spanish speaking - enough problems with English
and German; next in my language study list is French in future.)

with best regards
Esa Pikkarainen
_______________________________________________________________
 Esa Pikkarainen            Tel:358-81-5531011*   Fax: -5533600
 Faculty of Education   E-mail: (WPegasus) epikkara@ktk.oulu.fi
 University of Oulu                or   esa.pikkarainen@oulu.fi
 P.O. Box 222, SF-90571 Oulu
 (Linnanmaa, Snelmania, room KTK338)                        :-)

[Index] [Prev] [Next]

Comments to Semios-L