Meaning making from life to language:The Semiotic Hierarchy and phenomenology

• Published in: Cognitive semiotics Vol. 11; no. 1; pp. 50 - 67
• Main Author: Zlatev, Jordan
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin De Gruyter 30.05.2018; Walter de Gruyter GmbH
• Subjects: body schema; Empathy; Etymology; Filosofi; Filosofi, etik och religion; Fundierung; Grammatical subject; habits; Humaniora och konst; Humanities; Humanities and the Arts; Intentionality; intersubjectivity; language; Meaning; Merleau-Ponty; Merleau-Ponty, Maurice (1908-1961); normativity; Phenomenology; Philosophy; Philosophy, Ethics and Religion; Research subjects; sedimentation; Semiotics; sign function; Subjectivity
• ISSN: 1662-1425; 2235-2066; 2235-2066
• DOI: 10.1515/cogsem-2018-0001

The paper rethinks a proposal for a unified cognitive semiotic framework, in explicitly phenomenological terms, following above all the work of Merleau-Ponty. The main changes to the earlier formulation of the theory are the following. First, the claim that a general concept of meaning can be understood as the value-based relationship between the subject and the world is shown to correspond to the most fundamental concept of phenomenology: , understood as “openness to the world.” Second, the rather strict nature of the original hierarchy of meaning levels made the model rather static and one-directional, thus resembling an old-fashioned . Reformulating the relationship between the levels in terms of the dynamical notion of avoids this pitfall. Third, the phenomenological analysis allows, somewhat paradoxically, both a greater number of levels ( ) and less discrete borders between these. Fourth, there is an intimate relation between (levels and kinds of) intentionality and normativity, making the normativity of language a special case. Fifth, to each level of meaning corresponds a dialectics of spontaneity and sedimentation, with corresponding normative structures (e.g., habits, emotions, conventions, signs and grammar) both emerging from and constraining, but not determining, subject-world interactions. Sixth and finally, the analysis follows the basic phenomenological principle to examine the phenomena without theoretical preconceptions, and without premature explanations. This implies a focus on human experience, even when dealing with the “biological” level of meaning, with the possibility of extending the analysis to non-human subjects through empathy. The intention is that this phenomenologically interpreted version of the Semiotic Hierarchy may serve as a useful tool against any kind of meaning reductionism, whether biological, mental, social or linguistic.