SEMIOTICS 1

The History and Study of Semiotics

Alex Kollar

Wheaton College
SEMIOTICS 2

Look around the world you live in: what do you see? A single question, yet endless

possible answers. The twenty-first century is an image-dominated world where we are constantly

stimulated by countless visual triggers. A flashing billboard, a joggers neon tracksuit, a childs

balloon, or even an ice cream cone in the hand of someone on the other side of the street; all of

these, no matter how insignificant they seem, convey messages. Even the natural world is filled

with signs that evoke emotions and responses. A rose is not just a pretty flower; it is a symbol

of love and intimacy, so much so that every February millions of roses are bought as gifts to

show how much the buyer cares about his/her partner.

This relationship between an object and its given meaning is the basis of semiotics, or,

the study and interpretation of verbal and nonverbal signs. In his textbook, A First Look at

Communication Theory, Em Griffin explains this theory through the interpretation of Roland

Barthes. Barthes was a leading mind in the world of communication theory, known especially for

his study of semiotics. Although his findings and conclusions have greatly influenced the modern

world of communication, Barthes was not the first theorist to study signs. To understand the vast

world of semiotics, we must first understand the theorys origins, starting with Ferdinand de

Saussure.

Ferdinand de Saussure

Ferdinand de Saussure was a very influential, Swiss linguist who is credited with

developing the entire foundation of twentieth-century linguistics. He is regarded as one of the

most important figures in modern intellectual history, not only for his advancements in the

systematic study of language, but also for his contributions to philosophy and social sciences.

During his career he worked with sociologist, Emile Durkheim and psychologist, Sigmund Freud

studying human behavior. According to Jonathon Culler, the three experts concluded that the
SEMIOTICS 3

study of human behavior must focus on the functions events have within a general social

framework (1986, p. 16) and look for an underlying system rather than individual causes

(1986, p. 16). This made it possible to understand and study the human experience on a much

broader scale.

Semiology

One of Saussures theoretical advancements was also in the field of semiotics and is

considered the beginning of the theorys origin. Saussure describes language as a system of

signs that express ideas We can therefore imagine a science which would study that life of

signs within society We call it semiology (Culler, 1986, p. 105). Saussure continued to

expand this new theory of signs using his linguistics background as the foundation. He

developed a two-part model defining a sign as being composed of both a signifier and a signified.

Since Saussure focused mainly on the language of a sign, he explained the signifier/signified

relationship by saying, a linguistic sign is not a link between a thing and a name, but between a

concept [signifier] and a sound pattern [signified] (Chandler, 2002, p. 18). He goes on to

explain that the sound pattern is not the audible sound; it is actually what the hearers mind

interprets the sound pattern to be.

To explain Saussures model, I will use the example of a rabbit. Within this particular

sign, the signifier is the concept of a rabbit while the signified is the sound pattern of the word

rabbit. Alone, rabbit does not actually mean anything; it is in our uniting the concept of a

small furry creature to the sound pattern, that meaning is produced. It is important to remember,

when dealing with Saussures original semiotic model, his defining ideology: words and images

do not have innate meaning until we assign meaning.

SEMIOTICS 4

Charles Sanders Peirce

During the same time Saussure was developing his semiotic model, across the Atlantic in

Boston, logician Charles Sanders Peirce was also formulating his understanding of signs. Peirce

was a young genius who graduated from Harvard College in 1859 when he was only nineteen

years old. Four years later, he received his Bachelor of Science in Chemistry. Although Peirce

earned the titles of philosopher and scientist during his career, according to Vincent G. Potter,

Peirce was practically exiled form the academic and scholarly community. Only in the modern

philosophic community has he been recognized as perhaps Americas most original philosopher

and her greatest logician (Potter, 1996, p. 1).

Peircean Model

While Saussure based his theory on linguistics, Peirce draws his findings from a more

scientific and logical background. In contrast to Saussures two-part model, Peirce offered a

three-part model consisting of: the representamen (the form which the sign takes), an object (to

which the sign refers), and an interpretant (the sense made of the sign). To understand the

relationships of Peirces model, we will follow Daniel Chandlers traffic light example. Within

the model, the traffic light sign for stop would consist of: a red light facing traffic at an

intersection, which is the representamen, or the form of the sign, the act of cars halting is the

object, and the idea that a red light indicates that vehicles must stop [is the interpretant] (2002,

p. 33).

The Classification of Signs

Beyond developing a model to understand signs, Peirce classified signs into three

categories: icons, indices, and symbols. According to Thomas A. Goudge, an icon is a literal

image or facsimile (1950, p. 142), or as Peirce explains, a sign which refers to the Object that
SEMIOTICS 5

it denotes merely by virtue of characteristics of its own (1950, p. 142). Icons can be anything

from photographs, diagrams, algebraic formulas, and even ideographic sign employed in the

writing of primitive cultures (Goudge, 1950, p. 142). The best example of this definition is

implemented in images of Jesus Christ, or rather; icons because they visually represent

physical features that the artist believed He had.

An index, the second kind of sign, bears no significant resemblance to its object [but

rather] directs attention to its object by blind compulsion (Goudge, 1950, p. 144). This can be

explained by smoke and fire. Smoke does not share the physical appearance or characteristics of

fire; however, the existence of smoke indicates the existence of fire.

The final kind of sign that Peirce categorizes is a symbol which refers to the Object that

it denotes by virtue of law (Goudge, 1950, p. 146). Relating very closely to Saussures ideology,

our written and spoken languages are made up of symbols that, on their own, have no meaning

until we assign the value. An important characteristic of a symbol is that since it needs to be

assigned meaning, understanding of that meaning must be learned. For example, when a child

sees the symbol 1 to him/her it has no meaning or purpose. Only when the childs parents

explain that 1 is phonetically pronounced whun, alphabetically represented as o n e, and is

defined as the first and lowest whole number, does the child associate meaning to 1.

Roland Barthes

Once Saussure and Peirce pioneered the field of semiotics, succeeding theorists continued

expanding the study. It was not until the late 1960s that semiotics began to become a major

approach to cultural studies (Chandler, 2002, p. 7) thanks to French philosopher, Roland

Barthes. Roland Barthes was a successful scholar who spent years teaching classical letters,

grammar, and philosophy at several different institutions. In 1952, Barthes joined the Centre
SEMIOTICS 6

National de Recherche Scientifique where he began his research in semiotics. According to

George R. Wasserman, Barthes first work relating to the field was [a] sequence of entertaining

analyses or demystifications of contemporary myths (1981, p. 17) that were published in the

French literary magazine, Les Lettres Nouvelles. These papers exploring the languages of mass

culture began Barthes semiotic career.

Sign Systems

During the development of his semiotic model, Barthes studied Saussures two-part

model. In Barthes analysis, he found that Saussures model works not with two, but three

terms (Wasserman, 1981, p. 29): the signifier, signified, and resulting sign. Although we do not

distinguish between a signifier and a sign in our everyday experiences, Barthes argues that there

is a difference: the sign has meaning; the signifier is merely a sound-image (Wasserman, 1981,

p. 29). Barthes defined a sign as a combination of a signifier (the physical form of the sign) and

the signified (the meaning we associate the sign). When a big wrestler walks into a ring with a

torn shirt and an angry look on his face, his physique is the signifier. The wrestlers physique

expresses the concept of baseness, which is the signified. Combined, they create the sign: the

villainous body (Griffin, Ledbetter, Sparks, 2015, p. 333).

This relationship of the signifier, signified, and sign, is what Barthes referred to as a first-

order semiological system, or, the denotative system. According to Barthes theory, over time

there is a shift in meaning associated with a sign. This is where the second-order semiological

system, or the connotative system, comes into play. In the connotative system the signs are still

created by combining signifiers and signifieds, however, its uniqueness is that its signifier is an

already existing sign (Wasserman, 1981, p. 30) that has shifted in meaning.
SEMIOTICS 7

The Myth of Peace

To follow this thinking we will analyze the peace sign (the symbol, not the hand gesture)

using Barthes model. The signifier is the physical image of the design, while the signified is the

desire of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, and other like-minded youths, to end the war

in Vietnam and production of nuclear weapons around the world. So, the sign peace is a

rallying symbol to completely revolutionize American politics and culture. What happens next is

the lateral shift where the current usage takes over the sign of denotative system [the sign of

peace] and makes it the signifier of the secondary (connotative) system (Griffin, Ledbetter,

Sparks, 2015, p. 332). The newly signified is now a superficial representation of the hippie

culture of the 60s (free love, tie-dye, alternative lifestyle, etc.) and the new peace sign, although

is esthetically the same, no longer has the political power behind it. The new sign, seen in our

modern era, is a symbol of retro fashion and exemplification of the ideal hippie culture.

The peace sign, as Barthes would argue, is just one out of the countless images that have

fallen victim to a connotative sign system; it has become a myth. A myth, as Barthes argued, is a

sign that has been appropriated by popular culture and repackaged as having a new meaning

completely. It is also what has been accepted by society as normal and reinforce[s] the dominant

values of their culture (Griffin, Ledbetter, Sparks, 2015, p. 333). The peace sign used to be a

sign of radical political change, but now, in the twenty-first century, it no longer stands for a

social movement but a symbol for young, colorful, free spirits.

Conclusion

Roland Barthes, and the theorists that came before him, set out to discover a deeper

understanding of signs and their meaning in society. Today, semiotics is still an important field of

study. As Daniel Chandler explains, studying semiotics can assist us to become more aware of
SEMIOTICS 8

the mediating role of signs and of the roles played by ourselves and others in constructing social

realties (2002, p. 14). Although many modern theorists accept the importance of the field, there

is rarely any agreement among them as to the scope and methodology of semiotics (Chandler,

2002, p. 207). Though there is no consensus in that regard, there is an agreement to classify

semiotics as a tool of analysis rather than its own field of scientific study. Through the lens of

semiotics, theorists are able to question and denaturalize theoretical assumptions (Chandler,

2002, p. 207) in order to further critically analyze what society accepts as normal. Through

these analyses, we are able to cut through the veil of myths of our culture and understand the

power of signs.
SEMIOTICS 9

References

Chandler, D. (2002). Semiotics: The Basics. New York: Routledge.

Culler, J. (1986). Ferdinand de Saussure. New York: Cornell University Press.

Goudge, T. A. (1950). The Thought of C.S. Peirce. New York: Dover Publications.

Griffin, E., Ledbetter, A., & Sparks, G. (2015). A First Look at Communication Theory. New

York: McGraw-Hill Education.

Potter, V. G. (1996). Peirces Philosophical Perspectives. New York: Fordham University Press.

Wasserman, G. R. (1981). Roland Barthes. Boston: Twayne Publishers.