- Dr. Martin Siefkes
Technische Universität Chemnitz
Philosophische Fakultät
Institut für Germanistik und Kommunikation (IfGK)
Professur Germanistische Sprachwissenschaft
Straße der Nationen 62
D-09111 Chemnitz
www.siefkes.de - 0049 371 531-31492
- Visual perception, Multimodality, Visual Literacy, Semiotics, Film and Media Studies, Comics research, and 15 moreMultimodality, Social Semiotics, Architecture, Gesture, Languages and Linguistics, Linguistics, Sociolinguistics, Digital Humanities, Corpus Linguistics, Multimodal Discourse Analysis, Multimodal Interaction, Philosophy, Sociology, Humanities Computing (Digital Humanities), Digital Humanites, and Virtual Realityedit
- I'm a linguist and working as a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Technology Chemnitz. My research areas are discourse, multimodality, semiotics, and digital humanities.edit
Style research has a long and venerable tradition, but its results are highly fragmented. Style exists in language and literature, art and architecture – but every discipline has its own theories. New approaches in empirical aesthetics... more
Style research has a long and venerable tradition, but its results are highly fragmented. Style exists in language and literature, art and architecture – but every discipline has its own theories. New approaches in empirical aesthetics and multimodality call for broader perspectives. This book offers an overview of experimental research on style, and proposes a common theoretical basis.
How do we perceive styles? How do styles change – and why? What is multimodal style? Are style and personality really connected? How is style related to aesthetic experiences? Which cognitive mechanisms are relevant for the creation and perception of styles? Are there neural correlates for style use? The book discusses these and further questions, providing researchers with a valuable source of new ideas.
_____
Martin Siefkes teaches at the University of Technology Chemnitz. His resarch focuses on the theory and applications of multimodal linguistics, and on museum studies in the context of digital humanities. He edits the Zeitschrift für Semiotik. Current projects and publications: www.siefkes.de
_____
Emanuele Arielli teaches aesthetics at the IUAV University in Venice, Italy. His research interests include the connection between aesthetics, communication and media theory, both from a philosophical and a psychological point of view.
How do we perceive styles? How do styles change – and why? What is multimodal style? Are style and personality really connected? How is style related to aesthetic experiences? Which cognitive mechanisms are relevant for the creation and perception of styles? Are there neural correlates for style use? The book discusses these and further questions, providing researchers with a valuable source of new ideas.
_____
Martin Siefkes teaches at the University of Technology Chemnitz. His resarch focuses on the theory and applications of multimodal linguistics, and on museum studies in the context of digital humanities. He edits the Zeitschrift für Semiotik. Current projects and publications: www.siefkes.de
_____
Emanuele Arielli teaches aesthetics at the IUAV University in Venice, Italy. His research interests include the connection between aesthetics, communication and media theory, both from a philosophical and a psychological point of view.
Research Interests:
Style exists in all areas of life. Works of art and texts, architecture and artefacts, reasoning and sports, and even everyday behavior such as driving or walking: In all these areas, the term “style” is used to describe a specific kind... more
Style exists in all areas of life. Works of art and texts, architecture and artefacts, reasoning and sports, and even everyday behavior such as driving or walking: In all these areas, the term “style” is used to describe a specific kind of variation. Style theories, however, usually were created in a specific discipline and therefore confined themselves to specific areas, such as verbal texts, art, or architecture. This study introduces the first truly general and analytically precise theory of style.
The theory models the sign processes that occur when styles are used or perceived, with methods and formalisms of logic and computer science. The assumption is made that behavior, artefacts and texts are based on schemata. It is shown how, by selecting from classes of alternatives that are defined by a schema and context conditions, stylistic features are created. Starting from these features, further inferences can be drawn in a stylistic interpretation. In ch. 2, the theory is presented in its general outlines, without technical details. In the following chapters 4 to 7, the model is presented, with careful explanations of every step ensuring that it can be understood without special background knowledge.
On the basis of this model, a number of important problems can be analyzed: The difference between transmitted and perceived style; the expression of group identities through style; the role of style in the growing individualization of society; and style as a laboratory for new ideas and ways of doing things.
The theory models the sign processes that occur when styles are used or perceived, with methods and formalisms of logic and computer science. The assumption is made that behavior, artefacts and texts are based on schemata. It is shown how, by selecting from classes of alternatives that are defined by a schema and context conditions, stylistic features are created. Starting from these features, further inferences can be drawn in a stylistic interpretation. In ch. 2, the theory is presented in its general outlines, without technical details. In the following chapters 4 to 7, the model is presented, with careful explanations of every step ensuring that it can be understood without special background knowledge.
On the basis of this model, a number of important problems can be analyzed: The difference between transmitted and perceived style; the expression of group identities through style; the role of style in the growing individualization of society; and style as a laboratory for new ideas and ways of doing things.
Research Interests:
From 1905 to 1907, in his role as inspector for the Rhenish Missionary Society, Johannes Spiecker traveled through German South-West Africa. At this time, the Nama-Herero uprising was still ongoing. The missionaries urged the insurgents... more
From 1905 to 1907, in his role as inspector for the Rhenish Missionary Society, Johannes Spiecker traveled through German South-West Africa. At this time, the Nama-Herero uprising was still ongoing. The missionaries urged the insurgents to lay down arms, fully knowing that they would be transported in concentration camps, where many of them died.
Spiecker intervened for a better treatment of the prisoners (with hardly any results) and against the plans of some members of the Schutztruppe who openly spoke about extermination of whole tribes. He proposed Governor Lindequist to abstain from a punishing campaign against the Ovambo. Disregarding directions from headquarters in Barmen, he traveled to Ovamboland where he met Ovambo chief Nechale, whom he pressured to submit to the German colonial government.
Spiecker’s role is ambivalent; his interventions might have influenced some aspects of the war (especially the planned Ovambo campaign). In the present publication, Spiecker’s private 2000-page diary documenting his travels, the colony, and the uprising is evaluated in its historical context; concepts of post-colonial studies and travel writing research are applied for a critical reading. The book offers an inside view on life in the colony, the situation in the war zone, and the involvement of the Rhenish Mission in many aspects of colonization.
Spiecker intervened for a better treatment of the prisoners (with hardly any results) and against the plans of some members of the Schutztruppe who openly spoke about extermination of whole tribes. He proposed Governor Lindequist to abstain from a punishing campaign against the Ovambo. Disregarding directions from headquarters in Barmen, he traveled to Ovamboland where he met Ovambo chief Nechale, whom he pressured to submit to the German colonial government.
Spiecker’s role is ambivalent; his interventions might have influenced some aspects of the war (especially the planned Ovambo campaign). In the present publication, Spiecker’s private 2000-page diary documenting his travels, the colony, and the uprising is evaluated in its historical context; concepts of post-colonial studies and travel writing research are applied for a critical reading. The book offers an inside view on life in the colony, the situation in the war zone, and the involvement of the Rhenish Mission in many aspects of colonization.
Research Interests:
The special exhibition “Gestures – in past, present, and future” will run from 17 November 2017 to 4 March 2018 at the Saxon Museum of Industry. It looks at the connection between gestures as a means of human communication, current... more
The special exhibition “Gestures – in past, present, and future” will run from 17 November 2017 to 4 March 2018 at the Saxon Museum of Industry. It looks at the connection between gestures as a means of human communication, current changes in industrial production, and gesture interfaces that will shape our interaction with machines in the future.
Join us for an exhibition that combines thought-provoking ideas with interactive exhibits and artistic installations!
– Learn about gesture research in linguistics and anthropology. Interactive exhibits specially developed for this exhibition allow you to experiment and play with gestures, and to understand their various functions in human communication.
– Learn about the cultural history of tools and machines, and the changing role of the human hand in production.
– Experience how gesture control works today, and what it will mean in the future for our interaction with machines, both at work and at home.
Join us for an exhibition that combines thought-provoking ideas with interactive exhibits and artistic installations!
– Learn about gesture research in linguistics and anthropology. Interactive exhibits specially developed for this exhibition allow you to experiment and play with gestures, and to understand their various functions in human communication.
– Learn about the cultural history of tools and machines, and the changing role of the human hand in production.
– Experience how gesture control works today, and what it will mean in the future for our interaction with machines, both at work and at home.
Research Interests:
This chapter sketches an approach towards the aesthetics of intermodal relations in film. Focusing at first on intermodal contrast, the chapter proceeds to ask how relations between modes contribute to the overall aesthetic impression. A... more
This chapter sketches an approach towards the aesthetics of intermodal relations in film. Focusing at first on intermodal contrast, the chapter proceeds to ask how relations between modes contribute to the overall aesthetic impression. A further question is whether systematic relations can be found between aesthetic experiences of separate modes, and the overall aesthetic expression.
One example is the film Gattaca (1997), set in a dystopian future in which eugenics is the social norm, and naturally conceived children have become an underclass. In a flashback scene, the parents of the main protagonist are shown happily embracing, while he sadly explains that he cannot understand why they eschewed in-vitro-fertilisation for his conception.
This filmic example illustrates the use of semiotic resources to represent, and comment on, cultural change: soft-focus images, as well as uplifting string music, demonstrate the (seemingly outdated) ideal of conception as an act of love, whereas the commentary accepts and embraces the rule of eugenics. The aesthetic effect can be described as a subtle modal pluralism which focuses the viewers’ attention on the total atmosphere of a scene, and ultimately on their own emotional response.
One example is the film Gattaca (1997), set in a dystopian future in which eugenics is the social norm, and naturally conceived children have become an underclass. In a flashback scene, the parents of the main protagonist are shown happily embracing, while he sadly explains that he cannot understand why they eschewed in-vitro-fertilisation for his conception.
This filmic example illustrates the use of semiotic resources to represent, and comment on, cultural change: soft-focus images, as well as uplifting string music, demonstrate the (seemingly outdated) ideal of conception as an act of love, whereas the commentary accepts and embraces the rule of eugenics. The aesthetic effect can be described as a subtle modal pluralism which focuses the viewers’ attention on the total atmosphere of a scene, and ultimately on their own emotional response.
Research Interests:
This article reports the results of a study that investigated different aspects of the aesthetic perception of literary style. Excerpts from novels belonging to two broadly defined literary style categories, namely modern and postmodern... more
This article reports the results of a study that investigated different aspects of the aesthetic perception of literary style. Excerpts from novels belonging to two broadly defined literary style categories, namely modern and postmodern style, were judged by the participants. Semantic scales corresponding to perceptual qualities of modern and postmodern literature were used. The results indicate that these scales can measure perceptual differences between the selected novels, and that the two novels categorized as modern were experienced differently from those categorized as postmodern. Some of the scales also predicted aesthetic preference for novels. Rating differences on the two scales incoherent—coherent and formal—colloquial predicted the ability to attribute novel excerpts. This finding seems to indicate that the ability to distinguish styles in regard to perceptual qualities helps readers to judge certain similarities of novels.
Research Interests: Aesthetics, Perception, English Literature, Languages and Linguistics, Literature, and 11 moreStylistics, Literary Stylistics, Authorship Attribution, Modernist Literature (Literary Modernism), Postmodernism, English Novel, Linguistics, Modernism, Categorization, Postmodern Literature, and Experimental Aesthetics
[EN] It is hardly surprising that power is closely connected to signs, but usually this connection was thought to be ‘after the fact’: signs representing a power whose origin could be understood in pre-semiotic terms. In this paper, a... more
[EN] It is hardly surprising that power is closely connected to signs, but usually this connection was thought to be ‘after the fact’: signs representing a power whose origin could be understood in pre-semiotic terms. In this paper, a different view is proposed: power is an inherently semiotic phenomenon, which can be analysed on the basis of cultural semiotics. Weber’s classic definition of power is modified in order to gain analytical precision. In a further step, the three areas of culture defined in Roland Posner’s theory of cultural semiotics are presented: social culture, material culture and mental culture. Taking these fundamental categories as their basis, three types of power are described: power of position, power of disposition, and power of interpretation. These main types of power are further differentiated, carefully examined in their semiotic as well as sociological dimensions and delimitated from each other. In this way, the conclusion is reached that the full range of power phenomena can be analysed with the help of basic concepts of cultural semiotics.
[DE] Schon lange ist bekannt, dass Macht eng mit Zeichen zusammenhängt, doch meistens wurde von einer ‚nachträglichen‘ Beziehung ausgegangen, worin Zeichen nur zur Repräsentation einer Macht dienen, deren Ursprung außersemiotisch ist. Dieser Artikel stellt einen anderen Ansatz vor. Er argumentiert, dass Macht an und für sich ein semiotisches Phänomen ist, das auf Grundlage der Kultursemiotik analysiert werden kann. Zunächst wird dazu Webers klassische Machtdefinition zum Zwecke größerer analytischer Genauigkeit modifiziert. Im nächsten Schritt werden die drei Aspekte der Kultur vorgestellt, die in Roland Posners kultursemiotischer Theorie unterschieden werden: soziale Kultur, materiale Kultur und mentale Kultur. Auf diesen Grundkategorien aufbauend werden drei Arten der Macht definiert: Positionsmacht, Verfügungsmacht und Deutungsmacht. Diese Haupttypen der Macht werden in ihren semiotischen und soziologischen Dimensionen untersucht und voneinander abgegrenzt. Dabei zeigt sich, dass mit Hilfe grundlegender Begriffe der Kultursemiotik die ganze Bandbreite der Machtphänomene analysiert werden kann.
[DE] Schon lange ist bekannt, dass Macht eng mit Zeichen zusammenhängt, doch meistens wurde von einer ‚nachträglichen‘ Beziehung ausgegangen, worin Zeichen nur zur Repräsentation einer Macht dienen, deren Ursprung außersemiotisch ist. Dieser Artikel stellt einen anderen Ansatz vor. Er argumentiert, dass Macht an und für sich ein semiotisches Phänomen ist, das auf Grundlage der Kultursemiotik analysiert werden kann. Zunächst wird dazu Webers klassische Machtdefinition zum Zwecke größerer analytischer Genauigkeit modifiziert. Im nächsten Schritt werden die drei Aspekte der Kultur vorgestellt, die in Roland Posners kultursemiotischer Theorie unterschieden werden: soziale Kultur, materiale Kultur und mentale Kultur. Auf diesen Grundkategorien aufbauend werden drei Arten der Macht definiert: Positionsmacht, Verfügungsmacht und Deutungsmacht. Diese Haupttypen der Macht werden in ihren semiotischen und soziologischen Dimensionen untersucht und voneinander abgegrenzt. Dabei zeigt sich, dass mit Hilfe grundlegender Begriffe der Kultursemiotik die ganze Bandbreite der Machtphänomene analysiert werden kann.
Research Interests:
Mit Umberto Eco hat die Semiotik einen der originellsten Zeichentheoretiker und zugleich einen Zeichen-setzenden Intellektuellen verloren. Dies ist mehr als eine Metapher: Ecos Analysen zeitgenössischer Kulturphänomene gingen so weit,... more
Mit Umberto Eco hat die Semiotik einen der originellsten Zeichentheoretiker und zugleich einen Zeichen-setzenden Intellektuellen verloren. Dies ist mehr als eine Metapher: Ecos Analysen zeitgenössischer Kulturphänomene gingen so weit, dass er durch sie die betreffenden Kulturen veränderte. Er nahm als einer der ersten die Popkultur des späten zwanzigsten Jahrhunderts vom Krimi bis zum Comic unter die (semiotische) Lupe und wurde damit schließlich selbst zu einem Teil der Gegenwartskultur. Glaubt man gewissen Rankings, dann war Eco, der verschmitzte Analytiker der Massenkultur, gegen Ende seines Lebens ein weltweiter Popstar der Wissenschaft wie Chomsky oder Dawkins. Der Nachruf auf Umberto Eco stellt – ausgehend von der Erstveröffentlichung einer Karikatur Ecos, die als humoristischer Kommentar zu Kommunikationstheorien gelesen werden kann – wichtige Entwicklungslinien der Semiotik Umberto Ecos vor.
Research Interests:
Die neu eingerichtete Sektion „Digital Humanities“ der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Semiotik (DGS) widmet sich dem weiten Spektrum digitaler Verfahren und Methoden in den Geisteswissenschaften aus dem Blickwinkel der Semiotik. Sie fragt,... more
Die neu eingerichtete Sektion „Digital Humanities“ der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Semiotik (DGS) widmet sich dem weiten Spektrum digitaler Verfahren und Methoden in den Geisteswissenschaften aus dem Blickwinkel der Semiotik. Sie fragt, für welche Aspekte der Erforschung von Zeichensystemen wir neue Denkansätze und Werkzeuge benötigen.
Angesichts des rapiden Wandels der Gesellschaft durch den wachsenden Einfluss des Digitalen in all seinen Facetten, insbesondere das Internet, haben computerbasierte Forschungsmethoden innerhalb der letzten Jahrzehnte begonnen, auch die Geisteswissenschaften nachhaltig zu verändern. Digitalisierte Text-, Manuskript-, Bild- und Filmkorpora, ein breites Spektrum von Online-Editionen, digitalen Repositorien und vielfältige Web-Interfaces sind nur einige der wichtigsten Neuerungen.
Für die Semiotik bieten diese Fortschritte wertvolle Impulse. Als Beispiel sei hier die Erweiterung der Korpusanalyse über die Sprachverarbeitung hinaus in den Bereich der Gestenforschung, der Bild- und Filmanalyse bis hin zu multimodalen Korpora genannt. Dafür werden neue Analysewerkzeuge benötigt, ebenso wie angemessene Techniken der Speicherung, Annotation, Suche und statistischen Auswertung. Von besonderer Bedeutung ist zudem die Entwicklung relevanter Fragestellungen für die qualitative Interpretation der gewonnenen Ergebnisse.
Auf der anderen Seite ermöglicht die Semiotik die theoretische Fundierung und kritische Begleitung der Digital Humanities, die Prüfung ihrer Methoden und Fragestellungen sowie eine angemessene zeichentheoretische Beschreibung dessen, was digitale Arbeitsmittel für die Geisteswissenschaften leisten können.
Die Sektion „Digital Humanities“ unterstützt die Vernetzung von Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern, die sich für den Einsatz von Computertechnologien in den Geisteswissenschaften aus praktischer oder theoretischer Perspektive interessieren. Sie strebt die Akzeptanz digitaler Methoden in der Semiotik an, aber auch eine kritische Evaluierung und Reflexion der einzelnen Technologien und Werkzeuge. Zugleich fördert sie die Bekanntheit semiotischer Fragestellungen innerhalb der Digital Humanities. Nicht zuletzt zielt die Sektion auf eine größere Sichtbarkeit digitalen Arbeitens an zeichentheoretischen Fragestellungen im In- und Ausland.
Angesichts des rapiden Wandels der Gesellschaft durch den wachsenden Einfluss des Digitalen in all seinen Facetten, insbesondere das Internet, haben computerbasierte Forschungsmethoden innerhalb der letzten Jahrzehnte begonnen, auch die Geisteswissenschaften nachhaltig zu verändern. Digitalisierte Text-, Manuskript-, Bild- und Filmkorpora, ein breites Spektrum von Online-Editionen, digitalen Repositorien und vielfältige Web-Interfaces sind nur einige der wichtigsten Neuerungen.
Für die Semiotik bieten diese Fortschritte wertvolle Impulse. Als Beispiel sei hier die Erweiterung der Korpusanalyse über die Sprachverarbeitung hinaus in den Bereich der Gestenforschung, der Bild- und Filmanalyse bis hin zu multimodalen Korpora genannt. Dafür werden neue Analysewerkzeuge benötigt, ebenso wie angemessene Techniken der Speicherung, Annotation, Suche und statistischen Auswertung. Von besonderer Bedeutung ist zudem die Entwicklung relevanter Fragestellungen für die qualitative Interpretation der gewonnenen Ergebnisse.
Auf der anderen Seite ermöglicht die Semiotik die theoretische Fundierung und kritische Begleitung der Digital Humanities, die Prüfung ihrer Methoden und Fragestellungen sowie eine angemessene zeichentheoretische Beschreibung dessen, was digitale Arbeitsmittel für die Geisteswissenschaften leisten können.
Die Sektion „Digital Humanities“ unterstützt die Vernetzung von Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern, die sich für den Einsatz von Computertechnologien in den Geisteswissenschaften aus praktischer oder theoretischer Perspektive interessieren. Sie strebt die Akzeptanz digitaler Methoden in der Semiotik an, aber auch eine kritische Evaluierung und Reflexion der einzelnen Technologien und Werkzeuge. Zugleich fördert sie die Bekanntheit semiotischer Fragestellungen innerhalb der Digital Humanities. Nicht zuletzt zielt die Sektion auf eine größere Sichtbarkeit digitalen Arbeitens an zeichentheoretischen Fragestellungen im In- und Ausland.
Research Interests:
This contribution proposes a semiotic approach to discourse that is based on cultural semiotics. It combines Juri Lotman’s description of cultures as interacting semiospheres with Roland Posner’s semiotic reconstruction of three areas of... more
This contribution proposes a semiotic approach to discourse that is based on cultural semiotics. It combines Juri Lotman’s description of cultures as interacting semiospheres with Roland Posner’s semiotic reconstruction of three areas of culture: material culture which comprises artefacts and texts, mental culture which comprises codes and knowledge, and social culture which comprises sign users (individuals and institutions).
On this basis, a four-level model of discourse is proposed. Discourses are sign practices that encompass patterns on three levels – textual, mental, and social patterns – corresponding to the three areas of culture, as well as causal and semiotic connections between these levels. A fourth level is included to delimitate discourses from each other, using constraints on topic, time, and place.
The semiotic model of discourse allows us to reconstruct taboos and exclusions as semiotic phenomena that can occur in, or have consequences in, all three areas of culture. Importantly, discursive taboos can now be understood in their connection to mental schemata of delimitation and categorization, and to social processes such as inclusion or exclusion of individuals and groups.
On this basis, a four-level model of discourse is proposed. Discourses are sign practices that encompass patterns on three levels – textual, mental, and social patterns – corresponding to the three areas of culture, as well as causal and semiotic connections between these levels. A fourth level is included to delimitate discourses from each other, using constraints on topic, time, and place.
The semiotic model of discourse allows us to reconstruct taboos and exclusions as semiotic phenomena that can occur in, or have consequences in, all three areas of culture. Importantly, discursive taboos can now be understood in their connection to mental schemata of delimitation and categorization, and to social processes such as inclusion or exclusion of individuals and groups.
Research Interests:
In contemporary cultures, texts combining various semiotic modes are the norm, rather than the exception. The fact that language occurs regularly in close integration with these other sign systems is more problematic for traditional... more
In contemporary cultures, texts combining various semiotic modes are the norm, rather than the exception. The fact that language occurs regularly in close integration with these other sign systems is more problematic for traditional linguistics than usually acknowledged. Whereas it is current practice in linguistics to delegate these other modes of daily communication to other disciplines, the results of decades of research in semiotics and multimodality ultimately imply that it is no longer realistic to study language on its own. Since the late 1990s, the new area of multimodality research has developed a range of theoretic approaches and methods for the investigation of texts whose meaning is based on various semiotic modes.
For multimodality research, understanding how semiotic modes work together is of central importance. Apart from mode-specific contributions and holistically produced meanings, intermodal relations play a significant role in the creation of multimodal meaning. An intermodal relation is present when one mode has a definable influence on the formal, semantic, and/or stylistic properties of another mode in a specific text. It is important to understand which types of relations can be assumed, and how they can be integrated into a general model of text/discourse analysis that adequately represents all modes and textual levels present.
This article proposes a model that formalises and represents intermodal relations, and applies it to the analysis of a range of examples. It uses Segmented Discourse Representation Theory (SDRT), a formalised theory that allows the representation of discourse segments and the inference of relations between them. The proposed model for text and discourse representation considers three strata (or levels): (1) the stratum of expression or form; (2) the stratum of semantics (including discourse relations); (3) the stratum of style. Stratum (2) corresponds to the current semantics of SDRT. The resulting expanded format for text and discourse representation allows the representation of discourse in Extended Segmented Discourse Representation Structures (E-SDRSs).
On the basis of this extended discourse representation model, different types of relations between modes can be represented. The approach defines a number of Intermodal Relation Types (IRTs), such as Disambiguation, Typification, and Intermodal Predication, gives axioms for their inference, and shows how they can be included into a formal discourse representation.
An important innovation is the possibility to represent how expression properties (e.g. the adjacency of two pictures or similar or different font sizes of headlines) interact with content properties (e.g. who is depicted on the images or what is mentioned in the headlines), and with stylistic properties (e.g. the use of traditional or contemporary layout).
For multimodality research, understanding how semiotic modes work together is of central importance. Apart from mode-specific contributions and holistically produced meanings, intermodal relations play a significant role in the creation of multimodal meaning. An intermodal relation is present when one mode has a definable influence on the formal, semantic, and/or stylistic properties of another mode in a specific text. It is important to understand which types of relations can be assumed, and how they can be integrated into a general model of text/discourse analysis that adequately represents all modes and textual levels present.
This article proposes a model that formalises and represents intermodal relations, and applies it to the analysis of a range of examples. It uses Segmented Discourse Representation Theory (SDRT), a formalised theory that allows the representation of discourse segments and the inference of relations between them. The proposed model for text and discourse representation considers three strata (or levels): (1) the stratum of expression or form; (2) the stratum of semantics (including discourse relations); (3) the stratum of style. Stratum (2) corresponds to the current semantics of SDRT. The resulting expanded format for text and discourse representation allows the representation of discourse in Extended Segmented Discourse Representation Structures (E-SDRSs).
On the basis of this extended discourse representation model, different types of relations between modes can be represented. The approach defines a number of Intermodal Relation Types (IRTs), such as Disambiguation, Typification, and Intermodal Predication, gives axioms for their inference, and shows how they can be included into a formal discourse representation.
An important innovation is the possibility to represent how expression properties (e.g. the adjacency of two pictures or similar or different font sizes of headlines) interact with content properties (e.g. who is depicted on the images or what is mentioned in the headlines), and with stylistic properties (e.g. the use of traditional or contemporary layout).
Research Interests:
Intermodality (also called intersemiosis or crossmodality) is a growing topic of interest in psychology, linguistics, and aesthetics. Intermodal interactions are of great interest, since a growing percentage of recently produced artefacts... more
Intermodality (also called intersemiosis or crossmodality) is a growing topic of interest in psychology, linguistics, and aesthetics. Intermodal interactions are of great interest, since a growing percentage of recently produced artefacts (multimedia artworks, films, online platforms, presentations etc.) are inherently multimodal, and for an adequate analysis, we have to understand how the modes in such texts and artefacts work together.
In this paper, we report the result of two studies that investigated interactions between perceptual modes and aesthetic judgment of architecture and music. We examined how two musical styles influence the judgment of buildings belonging to the corresponding architectural styles. In the two studies, we found inconclusive results for the influence of background music. However, both studies demonstrated the effect of intermodal congruence or incongruence on the judgment of buildings: when the music was congruent with the architecture (e.g. baroque architecture and baroque music), the observed architectural style was judged as more ‘balanced’, more ‘coherent’, and in one study also as more ‘complete’. We postulate that this result points towards an intermodal congruence effect. Theories of perception assuming the modularity of sensory processing, which have long dominated in psychology, have recently been amended to incorporate multisensory processes, and these should include the intermodal congruence effect as well.
In this paper, we report the result of two studies that investigated interactions between perceptual modes and aesthetic judgment of architecture and music. We examined how two musical styles influence the judgment of buildings belonging to the corresponding architectural styles. In the two studies, we found inconclusive results for the influence of background music. However, both studies demonstrated the effect of intermodal congruence or incongruence on the judgment of buildings: when the music was congruent with the architecture (e.g. baroque architecture and baroque music), the observed architectural style was judged as more ‘balanced’, more ‘coherent’, and in one study also as more ‘complete’. We postulate that this result points towards an intermodal congruence effect. Theories of perception assuming the modularity of sensory processing, which have long dominated in psychology, have recently been amended to incorporate multisensory processes, and these should include the intermodal congruence effect as well.
Research Interests:
In den letzten Jahren hat sich in der Philosophie, Ästhetik, Kunst- und Bildwissenschaft eine Reihe von Denkern zu Wort gemeldet, die die Semiotik grundlegend kritisieren. Es kann mittlerweile von einer antisemiotischen Bewegung... more
In den letzten Jahren hat sich in der Philosophie, Ästhetik, Kunst- und Bildwissenschaft eine Reihe von Denkern zu Wort gemeldet, die die Semiotik grundlegend kritisieren. Es kann mittlerweile von einer antisemiotischen Bewegung gesprochen werden, die sich mit Namen wie Dieter Mersch, Hans Belting, Gernot Böhme, Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht oder Lambert Wiesing verbindet. Dabei wird mit Begriffen wie „Materialität“, „Präsenz“, „Aura“, „Ereignis“ und „hermeneutische Widerständigkeit“ argumentiert, um Aspekte zu benennen, die die Semiotik nicht berücksichtigt habe und die in Zukunft anstelle von Zeichenphänomenen verstärkt beachtet werden sollten. Dieser Beitrag setzt sich mit der Kritik auseinander, zeigt die Leistungsfähigkeit und Grenzen semiotischer Theoriebildung auf und diskutiert Konsequenzen für die Semiotik und die Einzelwissenschaften, in denen die Kritik geäußert wird.
Research Interests:
In his role as inspector for the Rhenish Missionary Society (RMG), Johannes Spiecker (1856–1920) traveled from 1905–1907 through the Cape Colony and through German South-West Africa. During this voyage, he wrote a diary that merits... more
In his role as inspector for the Rhenish Missionary Society (RMG), Johannes Spiecker (1856–1920) traveled from 1905–1907 through the Cape Colony and through German South-West Africa. During this voyage, he wrote a diary that merits attention in regard to Spiecker’s role in the conflict, and to the observations and discussions he reports. This contribution examines the diary with regard to the RMG’s efforts at pacification, Spiecker’s reports from the concentration camps, the question of the sexual exploitation of the prisoners, the political opinions of Governor von Lindequist and other influential colonial personages, and the military strategy of the Schutztruppe.
A specific focus is on new information regarding the genocide question. Spiecker documents two separate incidents where German officers openly speak about the extermination of whole tribes as a possible goal of the German military strategy (in one case the Nama, in the other the Bondelswart). The exact status of these statements, which lies between personal opinion and official military doctrine, remains ambivalent; however, their context indicates that such sentiments were by no means unusual in daily discussions with civilians and missionaries.
This contribution proposes to take the statements of the officers as indicators of what might be called the “discursive normality” of genocide. In a methodological perspective, the presence and content of discourses, in specific historical situations and on specific topics, should be regarded as complementary evidence in questions where factual evidence is scarce. Discourse analysis, as developed in sociology and linguistics, thus becomes a promising method of historical science, if it is used in combination with historical and source-critical methods.
A specific focus is on new information regarding the genocide question. Spiecker documents two separate incidents where German officers openly speak about the extermination of whole tribes as a possible goal of the German military strategy (in one case the Nama, in the other the Bondelswart). The exact status of these statements, which lies between personal opinion and official military doctrine, remains ambivalent; however, their context indicates that such sentiments were by no means unusual in daily discussions with civilians and missionaries.
This contribution proposes to take the statements of the officers as indicators of what might be called the “discursive normality” of genocide. In a methodological perspective, the presence and content of discourses, in specific historical situations and on specific topics, should be regarded as complementary evidence in questions where factual evidence is scarce. Discourse analysis, as developed in sociology and linguistics, thus becomes a promising method of historical science, if it is used in combination with historical and source-critical methods.
Research Interests:
Semiotik ist die Wissenschaft, die Zeichen und Zeichenprozesse in Kultur und Natur untersucht. Sie ist grundlegend für große Teile der Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaften und spielt auch in einigen Naturwissenschaften (etwa der Biologie)... more
Semiotik ist die Wissenschaft, die Zeichen und Zeichenprozesse in Kultur und Natur untersucht. Sie ist grundlegend für große Teile der Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaften und spielt auch in einigen Naturwissenschaften (etwa der Biologie) eine Rolle. Einige Überlegungen zur Semiotik, ihren Stärken und ihrer Zukunft als interdisziplinärer Grundlagenwissenschaft habe ich in 10 Thesen zusammengefasst, die den Ausgangspunkt für eine hoffentlich rege Diskussion bilden sollen!
Research Interests:
The ZS issue „Neue Methoden der Diskursanalyse" (New Methods of Discourse Analysis) presents a number of new approaches to discourse analysis. It combines 10 innovative German-language contributions from leading experts in the field.... more
The ZS issue „Neue Methoden der Diskursanalyse" (New Methods of Discourse Analysis) presents a number of new approaches to discourse analysis. It combines 10 innovative German-language contributions from leading experts in the field. Discourse is currently a hot topic in a number of disciplines, including social sciences, linguistics, philosophy, cultural studies, and gender studies. The new approaches presented in this volume will enable wider applications and more precise analyses in all these fields.
The topics of the issue:
– From linguistics to semiotics of discourse
– Foucaultian DA versus the anglophone tradition
– Multimodal discourse analysis
– Visual discourse analysis
– Annotation and statistical analysis of multimodal corpora
– Methods of discourse analysis based on language corpora
– Formal approaches
– Argument structure and semantic frames in DA
– Examples of discourse analysis from metropolitan studies, (post)colonial studies, and gender studies
This introduction gives an overview of the reasons that have led to the introduction of the term ‘discourse’ into semiotics and linguistics (section 1), sketches the main focus points of this issue, which are connected with recent methodological developments and remaining problems in discourse analysis (section 2), and presents the contributions to this issue (section 3).
The topics of the issue:
– From linguistics to semiotics of discourse
– Foucaultian DA versus the anglophone tradition
– Multimodal discourse analysis
– Visual discourse analysis
– Annotation and statistical analysis of multimodal corpora
– Methods of discourse analysis based on language corpora
– Formal approaches
– Argument structure and semantic frames in DA
– Examples of discourse analysis from metropolitan studies, (post)colonial studies, and gender studies
This introduction gives an overview of the reasons that have led to the introduction of the term ‘discourse’ into semiotics and linguistics (section 1), sketches the main focus points of this issue, which are connected with recent methodological developments and remaining problems in discourse analysis (section 2), and presents the contributions to this issue (section 3).
Research Interests:
How can we understand discourses, as well as discourse analyses, as semiotic practices, generalizing from language-centered theories towards a general semiotic theory of discourse? This contribution proposes to define discourse in the... more
How can we understand discourses, as well as discourse analyses, as semiotic practices, generalizing from language-centered theories towards a general semiotic theory of discourse? This contribution proposes to define discourse in the context of Roland Posner’s theory of cultural semiotics, which distinguishes three areas of culture: material culture (artefacts and texts), mental culture (codes and knowledge), and social culture (individuals and institutions). On this basis, a model is proposed that describes discourses as sign practices that encompass patterns on three levels – textual, mental, and social patterns –, as well as causal and semiotic connections between these levels. A further level is included to delimitate discourses from each other. Introducing the theoretical notion of “discourse patterns”, which correspond to hypotheses about connections between levels, the semiotic 4-level-model of discourse allows us to explicate the assumptions that guide approaches to discourse analysis (e.g. various quantitative and qualitative approaches, CDA, citation and link analysis). It complements existing multi-level approaches (such as DIMEAN) by providing a conclusive semiotic account of inter-level connections.
Research Interests:
Dieser Essay will eine informelle, leicht verständliche Annäherung an ein Thema bieten, mit dem sich der Verfasser in seiner Dissertation „Stil als Zeichenprozess“ ausgehend von semiotischen Grundlagen beschäftigt hat: Der Allgemeinen... more
Dieser Essay will eine informelle, leicht verständliche Annäherung an ein Thema bieten, mit dem sich der Verfasser in seiner Dissertation „Stil als Zeichenprozess“ ausgehend von semiotischen Grundlagen beschäftigt hat: Der Allgemeinen Stilistik. Ausgangspunkt ist die Annahme, dass es in allen Bereichen, in denen wir von „Stil“ sprechen, Gemeinsamkeiten zwischen den damit jeweils bezeichneten Phänomenen gibt.
Im vorliegenden Essay werden einige dieser Gemeinsamkeiten herausgegriffen und unter dem Stichwort „Information“ verhandelt. Dabei wird auf semiotische Fachterminologie weitgehend verzichtet, um den Einstieg zu erleichtern. Die vorliegende Arbeit ist daher als erste Annäherung an das Thema gedacht.
Dabei wird der Nutzen einer Allgemeinen Stilistik begründet und deren Forschungsperspektive eingenommen. Eine Allgemeine Stilistik kann und soll die Aufgaben der Stilforschung in den Einzeldisziplinen, die die jeweils bereichsspezifischen Ausprägungen von Stil (Architekturstil, Sprachstil, musikalischen Stil usw.) mit der dafür angemessenen Terminologie untersucht, nicht übernehmen. Sie kann aber die gemeinsamen Grundlagen klären und damit als Bezugspunkt für übergreifende Fragestellungen dienen. Für die einzelwissenschaftliche Stilforschung (etwa in der Sprach-, Literatur-, Architektur-, Kunst-, Design- und Musikwissenschaft) bietet sie dabei neue theoretische Impulse.
[zuerst 2013 als Forschungsbericht publiziert]
Im vorliegenden Essay werden einige dieser Gemeinsamkeiten herausgegriffen und unter dem Stichwort „Information“ verhandelt. Dabei wird auf semiotische Fachterminologie weitgehend verzichtet, um den Einstieg zu erleichtern. Die vorliegende Arbeit ist daher als erste Annäherung an das Thema gedacht.
Dabei wird der Nutzen einer Allgemeinen Stilistik begründet und deren Forschungsperspektive eingenommen. Eine Allgemeine Stilistik kann und soll die Aufgaben der Stilforschung in den Einzeldisziplinen, die die jeweils bereichsspezifischen Ausprägungen von Stil (Architekturstil, Sprachstil, musikalischen Stil usw.) mit der dafür angemessenen Terminologie untersucht, nicht übernehmen. Sie kann aber die gemeinsamen Grundlagen klären und damit als Bezugspunkt für übergreifende Fragestellungen dienen. Für die einzelwissenschaftliche Stilforschung (etwa in der Sprach-, Literatur-, Architektur-, Kunst-, Design- und Musikwissenschaft) bietet sie dabei neue theoretische Impulse.
[zuerst 2013 als Forschungsbericht publiziert]
Research Interests:
This paper outlines the author’s research focus in Experimental Aesthetics. Based on an analysis of unsolved problems in Experimental Aesthetics, it sketches promising areas of future research. A thorough analysis of Experimental... more
This paper outlines the author’s research focus in Experimental Aesthetics. Based on an analysis of unsolved problems in Experimental Aesthetics, it sketches promising areas of future research.
A thorough analysis of Experimental Aesthetics reveals that some research areas, methods, and types of stimuli have gained much less attention than others. In this paper, a research program for Experimental Aesthetics is outlined that broadens the scope of this relatively young discipline in regard to theoretical problems, and advances the range of available methods.
The paper starts with a short history of Experimental Aesthetics, followed by an analysis of its current strengths and weaknesses. It closes with the proposal of two study series, designed to address methodological problems and gaps, and to focus on (comparatively) neglected areas.
Specifically, for the area of style, there exists a large gap between various long-standing traditions of thorough research with a mostly theoretical focus, and a small and highly dispersed body of empirical and experimental work, which has been rapidly growing over the last years. Whereas the former tradition of stylistics, while theoretically well-founded and with high analytic quality, has paid little attention to empirical verification, the latter (experimental style research, e.g. in cognitive psychology, design research, and marketing) is often not routed in a stable theoretical basis. The proposed research program intends to bridge this gap. All researchers with an interest in empirical and experimental aesthetics are invited to contact me, and discuss further possibilities.
[first published as a research report in 2013]
A thorough analysis of Experimental Aesthetics reveals that some research areas, methods, and types of stimuli have gained much less attention than others. In this paper, a research program for Experimental Aesthetics is outlined that broadens the scope of this relatively young discipline in regard to theoretical problems, and advances the range of available methods.
The paper starts with a short history of Experimental Aesthetics, followed by an analysis of its current strengths and weaknesses. It closes with the proposal of two study series, designed to address methodological problems and gaps, and to focus on (comparatively) neglected areas.
Specifically, for the area of style, there exists a large gap between various long-standing traditions of thorough research with a mostly theoretical focus, and a small and highly dispersed body of empirical and experimental work, which has been rapidly growing over the last years. Whereas the former tradition of stylistics, while theoretically well-founded and with high analytic quality, has paid little attention to empirical verification, the latter (experimental style research, e.g. in cognitive psychology, design research, and marketing) is often not routed in a stable theoretical basis. The proposed research program intends to bridge this gap. All researchers with an interest in empirical and experimental aesthetics are invited to contact me, and discuss further possibilities.
[first published as a research report in 2013]
Research Interests:
Der Artikel gibt einen Überblick über die wichtigsten wissenschaftlichen Theorien und Publikationen des einflussreichen deutschen Semiotikers Roland Posner.
Research Interests:
John Searles Unterscheidung der fünf Sprechakttypen Deklaration, Direktiv, Assertiv, Expressiv und Kommissiv gehört mittlerweile zu den Grundlagen der Kommunikationstheorie. Im vorliegenden Beitrag wird davon ausgegangen, dass es sich... more
John Searles Unterscheidung der fünf Sprechakttypen Deklaration, Direktiv, Assertiv, Expressiv und Kommissiv gehört mittlerweile zu den Grundlagen der Kommunikationstheorie. Im vorliegenden Beitrag wird davon ausgegangen, dass es sich dabei um Beschreibungen regulärer Kommunikationssi-tuationen handelt. In der Praxis täglicher Kommunikation, ebenso wie in literarischen Kontexten, finden sich allerdings viele Beispiele, die von den Bedingungen dieser Sprechakttypen abweichen. Dazu gehören Simulation von Kommunikation, Manipulation, Selbstgespräche und Selbstbelügung.
In dieser Arbeit werden Textstellen aus einem Theaterstück von Botho Strauß zum Anlass genommen, um solche Grenzfälle der Kommunikation zu analysieren. Zugrunde gelegt wird das von Roland Posner entwickelte semiotische Kommunikationsmodell, welches ausgehend von grundlegenden Zeichentypen die fünf Sprechakttypen von Searle formal beschreibt. Durch Abänderungen der dort entwickelten Formeln werden formale Beschreibungen der postulierten Grenzfälle der Kommunikation entwickelt. Gezeigt wird, dass solche Grenzfälle der Kommunikation für das Verständnis des Theaterstücks relevant sind. Die semiotische Kommunikationstheorie bewährt sich damit zugleich als eine Methode der Literaturwissenschaft.
In dieser Arbeit werden Textstellen aus einem Theaterstück von Botho Strauß zum Anlass genommen, um solche Grenzfälle der Kommunikation zu analysieren. Zugrunde gelegt wird das von Roland Posner entwickelte semiotische Kommunikationsmodell, welches ausgehend von grundlegenden Zeichentypen die fünf Sprechakttypen von Searle formal beschreibt. Durch Abänderungen der dort entwickelten Formeln werden formale Beschreibungen der postulierten Grenzfälle der Kommunikation entwickelt. Gezeigt wird, dass solche Grenzfälle der Kommunikation für das Verständnis des Theaterstücks relevant sind. Die semiotische Kommunikationstheorie bewährt sich damit zugleich als eine Methode der Literaturwissenschaft.
Research Interests:
Broadly defined, every result of a human action is an artefact. In a narrower sense, the term is used for material things resulting from human actions; in this sense, all artefacts together form the realm of material culture. Although... more
Broadly defined, every result of a human action is an artefact. In a narrower sense, the term is used for material things resulting from human actions; in this sense, all artefacts together form the realm of material culture. Although meanings play an important role in our daily interaction with artefacts, they have never been treated in a comprehensive and systematic fashion. In design theory, cultural semiotics, anthropology, and archaeology, different approaches to the semantics of artefacts have been taken.
The article draws on these findings to build a generalized approach to artefact semantics that concentrates on the processes in which artefacts are connected with meanings (cf. section 3). In section 4.1, seven principles of semantization are proposed: semantization through (1) frame connection, (2) style, (3) iconicity, (4) individual experiences, (5) cultural allusions, (6) connection to social groups, (7) specific contexts. These principles explain semantization as causal process depending on certain conditions. In section 4.2, a notation system for representing processes of semantization is proposed that combines logical and semiotic notation. For each of the seven principles of semantization, the proposed notation and one example are given.
The article draws on these findings to build a generalized approach to artefact semantics that concentrates on the processes in which artefacts are connected with meanings (cf. section 3). In section 4.1, seven principles of semantization are proposed: semantization through (1) frame connection, (2) style, (3) iconicity, (4) individual experiences, (5) cultural allusions, (6) connection to social groups, (7) specific contexts. These principles explain semantization as causal process depending on certain conditions. In section 4.2, a notation system for representing processes of semantization is proposed that combines logical and semiotic notation. For each of the seven principles of semantization, the proposed notation and one example are given.
Research Interests:
In den Jahren 1905–1907 unternahm Johannes Carl Wilhelm Spiecker (1856–1920), Inspektor für Afrika der Rheinischen Missionsgesellschaft (RMG), eine Inspektionsreise, auf der er die Missionsstationen der Rheinischen Mission in... more
In den Jahren 1905–1907 unternahm Johannes Carl Wilhelm Spiecker (1856–1920), Inspektor für Afrika der Rheinischen Missionsgesellschaft (RMG), eine Inspektionsreise, auf der er die Missionsstationen der Rheinischen Mission in Deutsch-Südwestafrika (dem heutigen Namibia) und in der britisch regierten Kapprovinz besuchte.
Auf dieser Reise verfasste er ein Tagebuch, das verschiedene Aspekte der Mission, des Alltagslebens und der Politik – insbesondere in Deutsch-Südwestafrika – beleuchtet. Das Tagebuch stellt eine bislang weitgehend übersehene Quelle für den Herero-Nama-Aufstand und die Rolle der evangelischen Mission bei dessen Niederschlagung dar. Es wurde 2012 veröffentlicht; diese Einführung greift wichtige Aspekte heraus und stellt sie in den historischen Kontext.
Aus dem Tagebuch ergeben sich unter anderem neue Erkenntnisse für die Diskussion, ob es sich bei der Niederschlagung des Aufstands um einen Genozid (Völkermord) handelte. Spiecker berichtet von mehreren Gesprächen mit Angehörigen der Schutztruppe (der deutschen Kolonialstreitkräfte), in denen diese explizit die Vernichtung ganzer Stämme als mögliches Ziel der deutschen Militärstrategie benennen.
Auf dieser Reise verfasste er ein Tagebuch, das verschiedene Aspekte der Mission, des Alltagslebens und der Politik – insbesondere in Deutsch-Südwestafrika – beleuchtet. Das Tagebuch stellt eine bislang weitgehend übersehene Quelle für den Herero-Nama-Aufstand und die Rolle der evangelischen Mission bei dessen Niederschlagung dar. Es wurde 2012 veröffentlicht; diese Einführung greift wichtige Aspekte heraus und stellt sie in den historischen Kontext.
Aus dem Tagebuch ergeben sich unter anderem neue Erkenntnisse für die Diskussion, ob es sich bei der Niederschlagung des Aufstands um einen Genozid (Völkermord) handelte. Spiecker berichtet von mehreren Gesprächen mit Angehörigen der Schutztruppe (der deutschen Kolonialstreitkräfte), in denen diese explizit die Vernichtung ganzer Stämme als mögliches Ziel der deutschen Militärstrategie benennen.
Research Interests:
Die Experimentelle Ästhetik gehört zu den ältesten Forschungsrichtungen der Psychologie. Sie wurde von zwei Pionieren der experimentellen Psychologie, Gustav Theodor Fechner und Wilhelm Wundt, begründet. Allerdings wurde das Potential der... more
Die Experimentelle Ästhetik gehört zu den ältesten Forschungsrichtungen der Psychologie. Sie wurde von zwei Pionieren der experimentellen Psychologie, Gustav Theodor Fechner und Wilhelm Wundt, begründet. Allerdings wurde das Potential der Experimentellen Ästhetik für die Kunstwissenschaften bislang kaum ausgeschöpft.
Dies hat vor allem zwei Gründe: Zum einen wird die Experimentelle Ästhetik überwiegend von Psychologen betrieben, die ein Interesse für Kunst und ästhetische Wahrnehmung entwickelt haben. Sie hat den „Sprung über die Disziplinengrenze“ in die Kunstwissenschaften bislang nur ausnahmsweise geschafft. Zum anderen hat sich die Experimentelle Ästhetik bislang oft auf die Untersuchung unmittelbarer Reaktionen beschränkt, insbesondere auf ästhetische Gefallensurteile und auf die Anwendung semantischer Differentiale. Komplexe Interpretationen von Kunstwerken, bei denen oft auch Hintergrundwissen einbezogen wird, sind bislang kaum experimentell untersucht worden und stellen eine methodische Herausforderung dar.
Die vorliegende Projektskizze schlägt vor, eine Reihe von Experimenten durchzuführen, die die Interaktion verschiedener Medien, Sinnesmodalitäten und Kunstformen in multimedialen und performativen Künsten untersucht. Sie wurde in der vorliegenden Form nicht realisiert, kann aber Anregungen für andere Forscher*innen bieten, die sich den performativen Künsten empirisch nähern wollen.
Dies hat vor allem zwei Gründe: Zum einen wird die Experimentelle Ästhetik überwiegend von Psychologen betrieben, die ein Interesse für Kunst und ästhetische Wahrnehmung entwickelt haben. Sie hat den „Sprung über die Disziplinengrenze“ in die Kunstwissenschaften bislang nur ausnahmsweise geschafft. Zum anderen hat sich die Experimentelle Ästhetik bislang oft auf die Untersuchung unmittelbarer Reaktionen beschränkt, insbesondere auf ästhetische Gefallensurteile und auf die Anwendung semantischer Differentiale. Komplexe Interpretationen von Kunstwerken, bei denen oft auch Hintergrundwissen einbezogen wird, sind bislang kaum experimentell untersucht worden und stellen eine methodische Herausforderung dar.
Die vorliegende Projektskizze schlägt vor, eine Reihe von Experimenten durchzuführen, die die Interaktion verschiedener Medien, Sinnesmodalitäten und Kunstformen in multimedialen und performativen Künsten untersucht. Sie wurde in der vorliegenden Form nicht realisiert, kann aber Anregungen für andere Forscher*innen bieten, die sich den performativen Künsten empirisch nähern wollen.
Research Interests:
Style is one of the few terms of cultural analysis that can be fruitfully used in completely different cultural areas: Style theories have been developed for texts (most often literary texts), for art, architecture, music, conversation,... more
Style is one of the few terms of cultural analysis that can be fruitfully used in completely different cultural areas: Style theories have been developed for texts (most often literary texts), for art, architecture, music, conversation, thinking, and problem-solving. Less attention was rewarded on styles of athletes, of artisans, of playing a game, and of unremarkable daily activities such as walking or driving.
With the help of semiotics, it is possible to look at styles in a different way: namely, to describe them as a type of sign process with certain properties. In his doctoral thesis, the author proposes a model which describes the stylistic sign process in a general way, thus delimitating stylistic signs from other signs.
The model consists of two main parts, corresponding to two sign processes that interact when a style is produced or when it is received: (1) Style is created when choice on the basis of a schema takes place and when regularities in this choice appear. These regularities can be formulated as feature rules. The first sign process describes the inscription of these rules (by a style producer) into a realisation of a schema, and the readout (by a style receiver) out of the realisation. (2) On the basis of the stylistic features used in the first sign process, a stylistic interpretation can be created by the style receiver and also envisaged and taken into account by the style producer. Both processes interact in creating stylistic information.
With the help of semiotics, it is possible to look at styles in a different way: namely, to describe them as a type of sign process with certain properties. In his doctoral thesis, the author proposes a model which describes the stylistic sign process in a general way, thus delimitating stylistic signs from other signs.
The model consists of two main parts, corresponding to two sign processes that interact when a style is produced or when it is received: (1) Style is created when choice on the basis of a schema takes place and when regularities in this choice appear. These regularities can be formulated as feature rules. The first sign process describes the inscription of these rules (by a style producer) into a realisation of a schema, and the readout (by a style receiver) out of the realisation. (2) On the basis of the stylistic features used in the first sign process, a stylistic interpretation can be created by the style receiver and also envisaged and taken into account by the style producer. Both processes interact in creating stylistic information.
Research Interests:
Cognitive semantics stresses the importance of metaphor for our conceptualizations of the world. The present contributions shows this for the special case of parallelized metaphorical scales such as high and central – low and peripheral.... more
Cognitive semantics stresses the importance of metaphor for our conceptualizations of the world. The present contributions shows this for the special case of parallelized metaphorical scales such as high and central – low and peripheral. To give an example, the “upper class” of society is more likely to be the “in crowd” and in the “inner circle of power” than the “lower class”.
Metaphor complexes consisting of interlinked metaphoric scales structure our cultural knowledge, especially in certain areas such as power and social participation, morality and knowledge, or sexuality and family. This paper discusses three examples separated by nearly 400 years: the dialogue between Brutus and Portia in Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar”, the lyrics of Billy Joel’s song “Uptown girl”, and a successful German advertising slogan from the 1990s.
The results show that parallelized metaphorical systems can ‘flip’ their polar associations when social conditions change. This hints at a direct connection between cognitive conceptualizations and social conditions, and shows that materialist and cognitivist claims about culture can be successfully connected, at least in certain cases.
Metaphor complexes consisting of interlinked metaphoric scales structure our cultural knowledge, especially in certain areas such as power and social participation, morality and knowledge, or sexuality and family. This paper discusses three examples separated by nearly 400 years: the dialogue between Brutus and Portia in Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar”, the lyrics of Billy Joel’s song “Uptown girl”, and a successful German advertising slogan from the 1990s.
The results show that parallelized metaphorical systems can ‘flip’ their polar associations when social conditions change. This hints at a direct connection between cognitive conceptualizations and social conditions, and shows that materialist and cognitivist claims about culture can be successfully connected, at least in certain cases.
Research Interests:
It is a well-known fact that power is closely connected with signs, but usually this connection was thought to be ‘after the fact’: signs representing a power whose origin could be understood in non-semiotic terms. In this paper, a... more
It is a well-known fact that power is closely connected with signs, but usually this connection was thought to be ‘after the fact’: signs representing a power whose origin could be understood in non-semiotic terms. In this paper, a different view is introduced: power is an inherently semiotic phenomenon, which can be analysed with concepts of cultural semiotics. To reach this aim, the three areas of culture defined in Roland Posner’s theory of cultural semiotics are taken as basis for definitions of three types of power: power of position, power of disposition, and power of interpretation. These main types of power are delimitated from each other and carefully examined in their semiotic as well as sociological dimensions.
Research Interests:
Ever wanted to see how a life looks in 68 formulae (not formulas, we don‘t do easy here)? Especially one chock-full of scientific activities such as that of the semiotician Roland Posner? Now don‘t be a wimp – here they come!... more
Ever wanted to see how a life looks in 68 formulae (not formulas, we don‘t do easy here)? Especially one chock-full of scientific activities such as that of the semiotician Roland Posner? Now don‘t be a wimp – here they come! Understandable with only a moderate previous knowledge of predicate calculus, a certain interest in semiotic games, and a serious amount of humour :D
Research Interests:
Die Wiederentdeckung der Semiotik und ihre Neubegründung als moderne interdisziplinäre Grundlagenwissenschaft, an der Peirce entscheidenden Anteil hatte, hat uns eine wichtige Erkenntnis gebracht: Allen Denkprozessen liegen Zeichen... more
Die Wiederentdeckung der Semiotik und ihre Neubegründung als moderne interdisziplinäre Grundlagenwissenschaft, an der Peirce entscheidenden Anteil hatte, hat uns eine wichtige Erkenntnis gebracht: Allen Denkprozessen liegen Zeichen zugrunde. Ohne Zeichengebrauch ist keine Repräsentation der Wirklichkeit im Gehirn denkbar, und ohne diese wäre eine sinnvolle Interaktion von Lebewesen mit der Welt nicht möglich.
Doch wie kann man Gedankenzeichen (die Peirceschen „phanerons“) modellieren? John R. Lucas argumentierte 1961 in seinem Artikel „Minds, Machines and Gödel“ gegen die Auffassung, dass das Gehirn wie ein Computer funktioniert („computationalism“). Seitdem haben die unerwarteten Schwierigkeiten der Artificial Intelligence-Forschung gezeigt, dass formale und computationale Modelle, die auf der mathematischen Logik basieren und daher das Denkens rein symbolisch modellieren, wesentliche Aspekte nicht erfassen können. Unser Gehirn verfügt in seinen Mechanismen, die auf einander stufenlos beeinflussenden Synapsen basieren, über ein Rechensystem mit analogen Eigenschaften
In dieser Arbeit wird davon ausgegangen, dass ausgehend von der graphischen Logik von Peirce, den Existential Graphs (EG), eine nicht-symbolische (analoge) Modellierung von Inferenzprozessen möglich ist. In Verbindung mit dem Peirceschen Zeichendekalog bieten die EG einen Ausgangspunkt für die Klassifikation von Zeichen im Gehirn, der sich nicht auf symbolische Zeichen beschränkt. Der Zeichendekalog stellt trotz einiger Schwächen eine ausreichende Bandbreite von Gedankenzeichen („phanerons“) zur Verfügung. Doch wie kann man sich seine Repräsentation im Gehirn vorstellen?
Hier zeigt es sich, dass Peirce seine Kategorienlehre nicht zufällig als theoretische Grundlage von Logik, Semiotik und Epistemologie formuliert hatte. Mit ihrer Hilfe gelingt es, eine Verbindung zwischen dem Zeichen-Dekalog als Grundlage der Semiotik und der graphischen Logik von Peirce herzustellen.
(Eine stark gekürzte Fassung dieses Artikels ist erschienen als: Siefkes, Martin (2005), „Logik und Freiheit: Ein semiotisches Modell des Denkens im Anschluss an C.S. Peirce“. Kodikas/Code. Ars Semeiotica 28, 3-4: 211-242.)
Doch wie kann man Gedankenzeichen (die Peirceschen „phanerons“) modellieren? John R. Lucas argumentierte 1961 in seinem Artikel „Minds, Machines and Gödel“ gegen die Auffassung, dass das Gehirn wie ein Computer funktioniert („computationalism“). Seitdem haben die unerwarteten Schwierigkeiten der Artificial Intelligence-Forschung gezeigt, dass formale und computationale Modelle, die auf der mathematischen Logik basieren und daher das Denkens rein symbolisch modellieren, wesentliche Aspekte nicht erfassen können. Unser Gehirn verfügt in seinen Mechanismen, die auf einander stufenlos beeinflussenden Synapsen basieren, über ein Rechensystem mit analogen Eigenschaften
In dieser Arbeit wird davon ausgegangen, dass ausgehend von der graphischen Logik von Peirce, den Existential Graphs (EG), eine nicht-symbolische (analoge) Modellierung von Inferenzprozessen möglich ist. In Verbindung mit dem Peirceschen Zeichendekalog bieten die EG einen Ausgangspunkt für die Klassifikation von Zeichen im Gehirn, der sich nicht auf symbolische Zeichen beschränkt. Der Zeichendekalog stellt trotz einiger Schwächen eine ausreichende Bandbreite von Gedankenzeichen („phanerons“) zur Verfügung. Doch wie kann man sich seine Repräsentation im Gehirn vorstellen?
Hier zeigt es sich, dass Peirce seine Kategorienlehre nicht zufällig als theoretische Grundlage von Logik, Semiotik und Epistemologie formuliert hatte. Mit ihrer Hilfe gelingt es, eine Verbindung zwischen dem Zeichen-Dekalog als Grundlage der Semiotik und der graphischen Logik von Peirce herzustellen.
(Eine stark gekürzte Fassung dieses Artikels ist erschienen als: Siefkes, Martin (2005), „Logik und Freiheit: Ein semiotisches Modell des Denkens im Anschluss an C.S. Peirce“. Kodikas/Code. Ars Semeiotica 28, 3-4: 211-242.)
Research Interests:
For some signs, the relation of sign matter and sign vehicle is simple and straightforward: on a page, the blackened areas are directly recognizable as graphetic level of a text. Only unintentionally blackened parts (blots) can disturb... more
For some signs, the relation of sign matter and sign vehicle is simple and straightforward: on a page, the blackened areas are directly recognizable as graphetic level of a text. Only unintentionally blackened parts (blots) can disturb the discrimination between sign matter and sign vehicle. For stylistic signs, on the other hand, the discrimination between sign matter and sign vehicle is one of the most important tasks for the sign receiver.
Stilistic signs appear when a number of varieties exist on the basis of a schema that makes the different possibilities comparable. They can be described as regularities of choice that carry a meaning. The unusual relation between sign matter and sign vehicle is characteristic for these signs: For decoding the sign, alternative possibilities of expression and behavior have to be considered; by comparing them with the given sign matter (i.e. a house, a text or a car drive with a certain style), the regularities of choice can be extracted. These regularities of choice form the sign vehicle. Style theory, therefore, belongs to those parts of cultural theory that have to pay special attention to the material side of the sign.
Stilistic signs appear when a number of varieties exist on the basis of a schema that makes the different possibilities comparable. They can be described as regularities of choice that carry a meaning. The unusual relation between sign matter and sign vehicle is characteristic for these signs: For decoding the sign, alternative possibilities of expression and behavior have to be considered; by comparing them with the given sign matter (i.e. a house, a text or a car drive with a certain style), the regularities of choice can be extracted. These regularities of choice form the sign vehicle. Style theory, therefore, belongs to those parts of cultural theory that have to pay special attention to the material side of the sign.
Research Interests:
W. G. Sebald’s “The Rings of Saturn” resists genre classification: Neither novel nor mere travel literature, it com-bines report with fiction, historical anecdotes with melancholy musings, explanations of economic and political facts with... more
W. G. Sebald’s “The Rings of Saturn” resists genre classification: Neither novel nor mere travel literature, it com-bines report with fiction, historical anecdotes with melancholy musings, explanations of economic and political facts with accounts of personal anxieties. This vast material, however, is joined by a semiotic regard, a way of looking at the world attentive on signs and their use. Hence, some of the far-ranging narratives, observations and reflections, often barely connected by associations of the narrator, can be systematically linked by a semiotic methodology. In this article, semiotic categories like index, icon and symbol, encoding, decoding and recoding, change of meaning and pattern recognition are applied to different levels of the text. The semiotic approach thus integrates the disparate episodes in The Rings of Saturn, revealing them as linked by their interest in signs and signification. Along the way, semiotics proves itself as a method of literary studies.
Research Interests:
Neben den bekannten Formen der Kommunikation, wie sie von John Searle in den fünf Sprechakten Deklaration, Direktiv, Assertiv, Expressiv und Kommissiv klassifiziert wurden, gibt es „kommunikative Randphänomene“ wie mehr oder weniger... more
Neben den bekannten Formen der Kommunikation, wie sie von John Searle in den fünf Sprechakten Deklaration, Direktiv, Assertiv, Expressiv und Kommissiv klassifiziert wurden, gibt es „kommunikative Randphänomene“ wie mehr oder weniger unkooperative Kommunikation, Simulation, Manipulation, ‚Herbeireden‘, Selbstgespräche, Lüge und Selbstbelügung. Da diese Phänomene an der Peripherie des gewöhnlich als „Kommunikation“ Bezeichneten liegen, können sie von den üblichen Beschreibungsmechanismen nicht ohne weiteres erfasst werden. In dieser Arbeit werden Textstellen aus einem Theaterstück von Botho Strauß zum Anlass genommen, um kommunikative Randphänomene zu analysieren. Hierbei wird zum einen die von Emanuele Arielli entwickelte Theorie der Unkooperativität angewendet, zum anderen das von Roland Posner entwickelte semiotische Kommunikationsmodell, welches ausgehend von grundlegenden Zeichentypen die fünf Sprechakte von Searle formal erfasst. Dabei gelingt es einerseits, die Praxistauglichkeit beider Theorien in der Textanalyse zu demonstrieren, wobei einige theoretische Schwierigkeiten geklärt werden. Zum anderen kann exemplarisch die Bedeutung der kommunikativen Randphänomene für den dramatischen Schreibstil von Botho Strauß gezeigt werden. Die semiotische Kommunikationstheorie bewährt sich damit zugleich als eine Methode der Literaturwissenschaft.
Research Interests:
This paper presents a deconstructionist reading of the Maere „Der Pfaffe mit der Schnur (C)“, a late medieval short story which is fairly typical for the genre. Deconstruction can be fun – and very enlightening! The little misogynist... more
This paper presents a deconstructionist reading of the Maere „Der Pfaffe mit der Schnur (C)“, a late medieval short story which is fairly typical for the genre. Deconstruction can be fun – and very enlightening! The little misogynist verse tale reveals its layers one by one, when we look for meaning not were it is supposed to be, but in the fissures and cracks where things don't work out. I wrote this paper as a student, mostly to irritate my German Literature professors. It worked.
Research Interests:
Allen Denkprozessen liegen Zeichen zugrunde, das ist bekannt. Doch wie werden diese Zeichen im Gehirn repräsentiert, in welche Typen gliedern sie sich und wie setzen sie sich zu größeren Bewusstseinsinhalten zusammen? Die Beantwortung... more
Allen Denkprozessen liegen Zeichen zugrunde, das ist bekannt. Doch wie werden diese Zeichen im Gehirn repräsentiert, in welche Typen gliedern sie sich und wie setzen sie sich zu größeren Bewusstseinsinhalten zusammen? Die Beantwortung dieser Fragen setzt ein
semiotisches Modell des Denkens voraus. Lange Zeit wurde für selbstverständlich gehalten, dass die Repräsentation von Zeichen im Gehirn formal-algorithmisch und damit rein symbolisch geschieht; dieses Paradigma ist jedoch in eine Krise geraten.
In dieser Arbeit werden Grundüberlegungen für ein alternatives Modell des Denkens vorgestellt, das nicht nur symbolische, sondern auch ikonische und indexikalische Repräsentationsweisen berücksichtigt. Das Modell basiert zugleich auf der Semiotik und auf der Logik von C.S. Peirce: Es verbindet den Zeichen-Dekalog mit den Existenzgraphen, jenem hochentwickelten und bis heute nicht vollständig erforschten System der graphischen Logik. Damit ist es das erste Modell des Denkens, dem es gelingt, Rationalität (verstanden als logisches Denken) und Kreativität (verstanden als Operation auf „Ähnlichkeit“ oder Ikonizität) in systematischen Bezug zu setzen.
HINWEIS: Dieser Artikel ist 2005 in Kodikas/Code erschienen. Eine längere unpublizierte Version ist auf academia.edu verfügbar unter dem Titel „Die graphische Logik von Charles S. Peirce und die semiotischen Grundlagen des Denkens“.
semiotisches Modell des Denkens voraus. Lange Zeit wurde für selbstverständlich gehalten, dass die Repräsentation von Zeichen im Gehirn formal-algorithmisch und damit rein symbolisch geschieht; dieses Paradigma ist jedoch in eine Krise geraten.
In dieser Arbeit werden Grundüberlegungen für ein alternatives Modell des Denkens vorgestellt, das nicht nur symbolische, sondern auch ikonische und indexikalische Repräsentationsweisen berücksichtigt. Das Modell basiert zugleich auf der Semiotik und auf der Logik von C.S. Peirce: Es verbindet den Zeichen-Dekalog mit den Existenzgraphen, jenem hochentwickelten und bis heute nicht vollständig erforschten System der graphischen Logik. Damit ist es das erste Modell des Denkens, dem es gelingt, Rationalität (verstanden als logisches Denken) und Kreativität (verstanden als Operation auf „Ähnlichkeit“ oder Ikonizität) in systematischen Bezug zu setzen.
HINWEIS: Dieser Artikel ist 2005 in Kodikas/Code erschienen. Eine längere unpublizierte Version ist auf academia.edu verfügbar unter dem Titel „Die graphische Logik von Charles S. Peirce und die semiotischen Grundlagen des Denkens“.
Research Interests:
Christiane Ritter’s classic book ‘A Woman in the Polar Night’ has arguably influenced the images of Svalbard that come to mind in the German-language context. Famed for its vivid descriptions of both the beauty and the risks involved with... more
Christiane Ritter’s classic book ‘A Woman in the Polar Night’ has arguably influenced the images of Svalbard that come to mind in the German-language context. Famed for its vivid descriptions of both the beauty and the risks involved with overwintering in Svalbard, the book deviates from traditional hero narratives connected with hunters and explorers in the North. It foregrounds the influence of the darkness and the unforgiving country on its visitors, whereas other narratives often focus on ‘man’s’ struggle against (and supposed victory over) nature.
This paper will look at museum representations of Ritter’s winter in the Arctic, for example at the Polarmuseet in Tromsø and the virtual tour of the hut available at Spitsbergen-svalbard.com. Through a multimodal close reading of these representations, the paper will ask how exhibitions (both on- and offline) can do justice to Ritter’s unique perspective, and if they can avoid the trap of attributing essentialist gendered stereotypes to her multifaceted narrative. Ritter’s account, with its focus on aesthetics, the ‘otherness’ of the Arctic life and landscape (particularly for central European travelers), and the mentality changes caused by experiencing it, can today be re-evaluated in the light of popular culture’s current fascination with the High North.
This paper will look at museum representations of Ritter’s winter in the Arctic, for example at the Polarmuseet in Tromsø and the virtual tour of the hut available at Spitsbergen-svalbard.com. Through a multimodal close reading of these representations, the paper will ask how exhibitions (both on- and offline) can do justice to Ritter’s unique perspective, and if they can avoid the trap of attributing essentialist gendered stereotypes to her multifaceted narrative. Ritter’s account, with its focus on aesthetics, the ‘otherness’ of the Arctic life and landscape (particularly for central European travelers), and the mentality changes caused by experiencing it, can today be re-evaluated in the light of popular culture’s current fascination with the High North.
Research Interests:
How can multimodality leave the labs, books, and universities and make a difference in and for society? This talk presents the exhibition ‘Gestures – in the past, present, and future’ in Chemnitz (November 2017 – March 2018). It is the... more
How can multimodality leave the labs, books, and universities and make a difference in and for society? This talk presents the exhibition ‘Gestures – in the past, present, and future’ in Chemnitz (November 2017 – March 2018). It is the first ever exhibition that traces human gestures as a means of communication, starting from their relations to traditional crafts to the future of gesture control. The exhibition presents current gesture research in its many facets and practical applications, explains the function of (both symbolic and co-speech) gestures in human communication, and outlines the rapidly growing importance of gesture control (e.g. in smart homes, interaction with self-driving cars, and human-robot interactions). It also discusses risks and fears related to these technological developments, for example of robots replacing humans at work.
The exhibition centres on the scientific perspectives of the MANUACT project, but combines them with artistic installations, and fascinating interactive exhibits (specifically developed for this exhibition by the Ars Electronica Futurelab, a worldwide leader in media art). Difficult and little-known academic research is presented so that it can be (literally) grasped. Forms of presentation have been found that appeal to both children and adults. Artistic research forms an integral part of the exhibition.
The exhibition was a success, with more than 16.000 visitors, 100 media reports, as well as 82 guided tours with more than 1500 participants. However, the numbers do not tell us if it changes ongoing discourses, or people’s understanding of the topics in question. The talk critically re-evaluates how the impact of multimodal research should be understood, stressing the role of individual feedback and the potential for impact when previously separated contexts and worldviews are brought together.
The exhibition centres on the scientific perspectives of the MANUACT project, but combines them with artistic installations, and fascinating interactive exhibits (specifically developed for this exhibition by the Ars Electronica Futurelab, a worldwide leader in media art). Difficult and little-known academic research is presented so that it can be (literally) grasped. Forms of presentation have been found that appeal to both children and adults. Artistic research forms an integral part of the exhibition.
The exhibition was a success, with more than 16.000 visitors, 100 media reports, as well as 82 guided tours with more than 1500 participants. However, the numbers do not tell us if it changes ongoing discourses, or people’s understanding of the topics in question. The talk critically re-evaluates how the impact of multimodal research should be understood, stressing the role of individual feedback and the potential for impact when previously separated contexts and worldviews are brought together.
Research Interests:
An increasing number of exhibitions takes place partly or wholly in the internet (McTavish 2006). This development is spurred on by the rapid digitization of archives and museum collections, whereby high numbers of items become available... more
An increasing number of exhibitions takes place partly or wholly in the internet (McTavish 2006). This development is spurred on by the rapid digitization of archives and museum collections, whereby high numbers of items become available in digital form. Online exhibitions are a multimodal text genre that combines not only images, text, graphics, layout, and navigation elements, but also video, interactive simulations, and virtual tours (cf. Rijksmuseum).
The talk will present a research project at the TU Chemnitz in Germany wherein a corpus of online exhibitions is analysed. It will be shown that online exhibitions are a genre torn between the centuries-old museum tradition and the new trends of digitalisation and internet presentation.
From a methodological perspective, it will be asked how the process of approaching a new genre or area of multimodal artefacts can be systematized. Faced with the high complexity of multimodality, all empirical studies have to massively reduce complexity in the construction of annotation schemata. This becomes even more obvious when interactions between modes (Siefkes 2015) are taken into account.
Currently, multimodal research in a specific disciplinary tradition is often implicitly informed by the specific perspective in that discipline. Therefore, it is not always clear if certain aspects are foregrounded on theoretical grounds, or due to the specific hypotheses of the study. The talk will argue that if these decisions are carefully reflected, multimodality research in different areas will begin to ‘merge’ and may result in a standalone discipline, without giving up on theoretical and methodological pluralism.
Taking online exhibitions as an example for a highly complex area of multimodal artefacts, where a ‘complete’ annotation suitable for answering all possible research questions is out of the question, the talk will discuss the delineation between (1) theory-based and (2) hypotheses-driven decisions. It will be argued that making this distinction explicit will help to form ‘growing areas of commensurable results’ in multimodality research.
References:
McTavish, L. (2006). Visiting the Virtual Museum: Art and Experience Online. In Janet Marstine (Hrsg.), New Museum Theory and Practice (S. 226–246). Boston MA: Blackwell.
Siefkes, M. (2015). „How semiotic modes work together in multimodal texts “. 10plus1 – Living Linguistics 1, 2015: 113–131.
The talk will present a research project at the TU Chemnitz in Germany wherein a corpus of online exhibitions is analysed. It will be shown that online exhibitions are a genre torn between the centuries-old museum tradition and the new trends of digitalisation and internet presentation.
From a methodological perspective, it will be asked how the process of approaching a new genre or area of multimodal artefacts can be systematized. Faced with the high complexity of multimodality, all empirical studies have to massively reduce complexity in the construction of annotation schemata. This becomes even more obvious when interactions between modes (Siefkes 2015) are taken into account.
Currently, multimodal research in a specific disciplinary tradition is often implicitly informed by the specific perspective in that discipline. Therefore, it is not always clear if certain aspects are foregrounded on theoretical grounds, or due to the specific hypotheses of the study. The talk will argue that if these decisions are carefully reflected, multimodality research in different areas will begin to ‘merge’ and may result in a standalone discipline, without giving up on theoretical and methodological pluralism.
Taking online exhibitions as an example for a highly complex area of multimodal artefacts, where a ‘complete’ annotation suitable for answering all possible research questions is out of the question, the talk will discuss the delineation between (1) theory-based and (2) hypotheses-driven decisions. It will be argued that making this distinction explicit will help to form ‘growing areas of commensurable results’ in multimodality research.
References:
McTavish, L. (2006). Visiting the Virtual Museum: Art and Experience Online. In Janet Marstine (Hrsg.), New Museum Theory and Practice (S. 226–246). Boston MA: Blackwell.
Siefkes, M. (2015). „How semiotic modes work together in multimodal texts “. 10plus1 – Living Linguistics 1, 2015: 113–131.
Research Interests:
Der Vortrag wirft einen multimodalen Blick auf Online-Ausstellungen. Die (linguistische) Multimodalitätsforschung steht in der Tradition der Semiotik, sie betrachtet die verschiedenen semiotischen Ressourcen eines multimodalen Texts oder... more
Der Vortrag wirft einen multimodalen Blick auf Online-Ausstellungen. Die (linguistische) Multimodalitätsforschung steht in der Tradition der Semiotik, sie betrachtet die verschiedenen semiotischen Ressourcen eines multimodalen Texts oder Artefakts. Angewandt auf Ausstellungen, geht sie einerseits von den Bildern, Texten, Videos, Typographie usw. als Ressourcen aus und fragt nach deren spezifischer Gestaltung und Zusammenwirken im Ganzen. Andererseits untersucht sie die spezifischen kommunikativen Funktionen, die Online-Ausstellungen als einem „multimodalen Genre“ zukommen. Auf dieser Grundlage können konkrete Aspekte wie Navigation, Räumlichkeit usw. daraufhin untersucht werden, mit welchen Mitteln sie erzeugt werden.
Der Vortrag geht auf eine Reihe von Beispielen ein und thematisiert auch Kriterien für die ästhetische Qualität einer Ausstellung, und die Angemessenheit der Gestaltung je nach Thema und Inhalt. An der TU Chemnitz wird derzeit ein Korpus von Online-Ausstellungen zusammengestellt und annotiert, davon ausgehend erfolgt eine Untersuchung der Entwicklung seit den 1990er Jahren, und der Typologie von Online-Ausstellungen. Mittelfristig sollen diese Ergebnisse mit Rezeptionsstudien verbunden werden.
Der Vortrag geht auf eine Reihe von Beispielen ein und thematisiert auch Kriterien für die ästhetische Qualität einer Ausstellung, und die Angemessenheit der Gestaltung je nach Thema und Inhalt. An der TU Chemnitz wird derzeit ein Korpus von Online-Ausstellungen zusammengestellt und annotiert, davon ausgehend erfolgt eine Untersuchung der Entwicklung seit den 1990er Jahren, und der Typologie von Online-Ausstellungen. Mittelfristig sollen diese Ergebnisse mit Rezeptionsstudien verbunden werden.
Research Interests:
Contemporary museum exhibitions are abundantly multimodal, combining material artefacts with verbal labels, images, sound, haptic experiences and interactive devices. The talk will show how a textual perspective on exhibitions allows us... more
Contemporary museum exhibitions are abundantly multimodal, combining material artefacts with verbal labels, images, sound, haptic experiences and interactive devices. The talk will show how a textual perspective on exhibitions allows us to apply the analytical tools of multimodal linguistics: the curators of an exhibition write a text with multiple semiotic resources, and the museum visitors read, interpret, and interact with it.
The basic textual layer of an exhibition consists of the exhibited artefacts imbued with meaning by their original cultural context. Additional meanings are added through selection of some objects over others, exhibition theme, thematic arrangement, verbal descriptions, museum maps, handheld guides, etc. Importantly, exhibitions are texts that are read communally, with visitors influencing each other through their movements, their attention, and comments.
All of this becomes relevant in the new practice of online exhibitions. Increasingly, museums digitize their collections and exhibit part of them online; an example is the “Digital Belvedere”. For online exhibitions, spatiality, context, presentation, sightlines, path-taking decisions, lighting, and visitor interactions can be partly re-created with different media.
The basic textual layer of an exhibition consists of the exhibited artefacts imbued with meaning by their original cultural context. Additional meanings are added through selection of some objects over others, exhibition theme, thematic arrangement, verbal descriptions, museum maps, handheld guides, etc. Importantly, exhibitions are texts that are read communally, with visitors influencing each other through their movements, their attention, and comments.
All of this becomes relevant in the new practice of online exhibitions. Increasingly, museums digitize their collections and exhibit part of them online; an example is the “Digital Belvedere”. For online exhibitions, spatiality, context, presentation, sightlines, path-taking decisions, lighting, and visitor interactions can be partly re-created with different media.
Research Interests: Semiotics, Cultural Studies, Visual Studies, Art History, Media Studies, and 13 moreDigital Humanities, Museum Studies, Cultural Heritage, Open Access, Digital Media, Museum Education, Heritage Conservation, History of Museums, Digital Media & Learning, Museums and Exhibition Design, Linguistics, Digital Arts, and Multimodality
Der Vortrag stellt Grundlagen der Kultursemiotik vor, mit besonderem Fokus auf dem Kulturmodell von Roland Posner.
Research Interests:
How can we understand discourses as semiotic practices, generalizing from language-centered theories towards a general semiotic theory of discourse? This talk proposes to define discourse in the context of Roland Posner’s theory of... more
How can we understand discourses as semiotic practices, generalizing from language-centered theories towards a general semiotic theory of discourse? This talk proposes to define discourse in the context of Roland Posner’s theory of cultural semiotics, which distinguishes three areas of culture: material culture (artefacts and texts), mental culture (codes and knowledge), and social culture (individuals and institutions).
On this basis, a model is proposed that describes discourses as sign practices that encompass patterns on three levels – textual, mental, and social patterns –, as well as causal and semiotic connections between these levels. A further level is included to delimitate discourses from each other.
Introducing the theoretical notion of “discourse patterns”, which correspond to hypotheses about connections between levels, the semiotic 4-level-model of discourse allows us to explicate the assumptions that guide approaches to discourse analysis (e.g. various quantitative and qualitative approaches, CDA, citation and link analysis). It complements existing multi-level approaches (such as DIMEAN) by providing a conclusive semiotic account of inter-level connections.
The developed theory is routed in precise semiotic terminology and is applicable to the analysis of patterns in sign use in all semiotic modes (in the sense of: sign systems). It is therefore a multimodal theory of discourse that allows the analysis of connections between meaning-making in all areas and sign systems that comprise a culture, and connect them (via indexical sign relations) with social developments and recurring mental (or cognitive) patterns that can be detected in a specific culture.
On this basis, a model is proposed that describes discourses as sign practices that encompass patterns on three levels – textual, mental, and social patterns –, as well as causal and semiotic connections between these levels. A further level is included to delimitate discourses from each other.
Introducing the theoretical notion of “discourse patterns”, which correspond to hypotheses about connections between levels, the semiotic 4-level-model of discourse allows us to explicate the assumptions that guide approaches to discourse analysis (e.g. various quantitative and qualitative approaches, CDA, citation and link analysis). It complements existing multi-level approaches (such as DIMEAN) by providing a conclusive semiotic account of inter-level connections.
The developed theory is routed in precise semiotic terminology and is applicable to the analysis of patterns in sign use in all semiotic modes (in the sense of: sign systems). It is therefore a multimodal theory of discourse that allows the analysis of connections between meaning-making in all areas and sign systems that comprise a culture, and connect them (via indexical sign relations) with social developments and recurring mental (or cognitive) patterns that can be detected in a specific culture.
Research Interests:
In systemic-functional linguistics as well as multimodality research, it is well understood that purely linguistic as well as conventional semiotic models, developed originally for language or other semiotic systems in isolation, are no... more
In systemic-functional linguistics as well as multimodality research, it is well understood that purely linguistic as well as conventional semiotic models, developed originally for language or other semiotic systems in isolation, are no longer an adequate basis when we move towards multimodal text analysis. Human beings have a remarkable ability to process the manifold sign types given in multimodal discourse, integrating them into a coherent interpretation; adequate models are needed for this highly complex interpretation processes.
A broad range of approaches has been proposed in the last years; the presentation will show that they can be integrated into a general model of multimodal interpretation. It is argued that multimodal text interpretation needs to be modeled as a multi-stage process, which includes the steps of determining reading order; decoding or inferring mode-specific semantic information; integrating information across modes (e.g. determining reference identity); considering relations between modes and their possible structural and semantic functions; using background knowledge to disambiguate between multiple possible readings; and considering narrative aspects and aesthetic evaluations. The presentation will outline a model that aims at an integration of aspects that are currently considered separately, such as the representation of multimodal discourse content (e.g. Bateman/Wildfeuer 2014), and the interactions between modes in multimodal texts (e.g. Liu/O’Halloran 2009, Siefkes 2015).
The talk will also present a new pattern-based description format for multimodal interpretation. The format, tentatively called “multimodal interpretation patterns”, will define different types of patterns: process patterns describing different approaches interpreters can choose towards multimodal texts; semiotic patterns that comprise meanings (and expressions) in various modes, as well as relations between modes; functional patterns for the ‘division of labour’ between modes in regard to textual and narrative functions; etc. Multimodal interpretation patterns provide a flexible description of various aspects of textual interpretation across modal borders.
Bateman, J. A. & Wildfeuer, J. (2014): “A multimodal discourse theory of visual narrative.” Journal of Pragmatics 74, 180–208.
Liu, Y. & O’Halloran, K. (2009), “Intersemiotic texture: Analyzing cohesive devices between language and images”. Social Semiotics 19(4), 367-388.
Siefkes, M. (2015): “How Semiotic Modes Work Together in Multimodal Texts: Defining and Representing In-termodal Interactions”. 10plus1 – Living Linguistics 1, 2015.
Siefkes, M. (in review), “Frames in Discourse. Connecting Frame Semantics and Discourse Analysis in an SDRT-based Model”. Submitted to Pragmatics & Cognition.
A broad range of approaches has been proposed in the last years; the presentation will show that they can be integrated into a general model of multimodal interpretation. It is argued that multimodal text interpretation needs to be modeled as a multi-stage process, which includes the steps of determining reading order; decoding or inferring mode-specific semantic information; integrating information across modes (e.g. determining reference identity); considering relations between modes and their possible structural and semantic functions; using background knowledge to disambiguate between multiple possible readings; and considering narrative aspects and aesthetic evaluations. The presentation will outline a model that aims at an integration of aspects that are currently considered separately, such as the representation of multimodal discourse content (e.g. Bateman/Wildfeuer 2014), and the interactions between modes in multimodal texts (e.g. Liu/O’Halloran 2009, Siefkes 2015).
The talk will also present a new pattern-based description format for multimodal interpretation. The format, tentatively called “multimodal interpretation patterns”, will define different types of patterns: process patterns describing different approaches interpreters can choose towards multimodal texts; semiotic patterns that comprise meanings (and expressions) in various modes, as well as relations between modes; functional patterns for the ‘division of labour’ between modes in regard to textual and narrative functions; etc. Multimodal interpretation patterns provide a flexible description of various aspects of textual interpretation across modal borders.
Bateman, J. A. & Wildfeuer, J. (2014): “A multimodal discourse theory of visual narrative.” Journal of Pragmatics 74, 180–208.
Liu, Y. & O’Halloran, K. (2009), “Intersemiotic texture: Analyzing cohesive devices between language and images”. Social Semiotics 19(4), 367-388.
Siefkes, M. (2015): “How Semiotic Modes Work Together in Multimodal Texts: Defining and Representing In-termodal Interactions”. 10plus1 – Living Linguistics 1, 2015.
Siefkes, M. (in review), “Frames in Discourse. Connecting Frame Semantics and Discourse Analysis in an SDRT-based Model”. Submitted to Pragmatics & Cognition.
Research Interests:
In the analysis of argumentation that is carried out multimodally, it is important to understand the role that different semiotic modes play, and how they are integrated into a coherent argumentation (cf. Birdsell/Groarke 2007; Wildfeuer... more
In the analysis of argumentation that is carried out multimodally, it is important to understand the role that different semiotic modes play, and how they are integrated into a coherent argumentation (cf. Birdsell/Groarke 2007; Wildfeuer in print). Semiotic modes are variously suited for different functions of argumentation (e.g. the presentation of different types of information, the use of inference rules such as modus ponens, or proof strategies such as reductio ad absurdum, the use of rhetorical devices such as captatio benevolentiae, the presentation of examples, the emotional manipulation of the audience, etc.).
The affordances of different modes for functions in multimodal argumentation, however, cannot simply be based on semiotic evaluations of mode-specific affordances that have been gleaned from monomodal sign processes. Thus, images have traditionally been regarded as well-suited for illustration of an argument with examples, for emotional influences, and for contextualizing an argument; but depending on the combination with content given in other modes (e.g. language or gesture), they can fulfil other functions in multimodal argumentation as well (Tseronis 2014).
To take an example: In a trial, the visual disparity between a small defendant and a very high wall around a property he is supposed to have climbed with bare hands can be used by the defense, by presenting a photo of the defendant before the wall, as an argument for his innocence. The image supports the visual equivalent of a reductio ad absurdum proof, but only if verbally given explanations supply an adequate contextualization: e.g. the visually presented objects have to be connected with referents in an act of Intermodal deixis (“this person is the defendant; this wall is the wall he’s supposed to have climbed”). Furthermore, background knowledge needed to draw the intended conclusion has to be supplied verbally (e.g. “the wall has the same height all around the property”).
We claim that the function of semiotic modes in multimodal argumentation cannot be determined in general, but only in specific constellations of form and content presented in both modes. Thus, a pragmatic approach to mode contributions is necessary, which considers the specific interactions between modes, depending on the formal, content, and context properties of each argumentative utterance.
To understand how modes contribute to multimodal rhetoric strategies, a pragmatic theory of multimodal argumentation will have to consider which types of interactions between semiotic modes exist, and how they influence the overall argumentative pattern. Recently, different models that describe interactions between semiotic modes have been proposed (Marsh/White 2003; Martinec/Salway 2005; Liu/O’Halloran 2009; Wildfeuer 2012). In recent work (cf. Siefkes in print), a range of intermodal interactions has been formally defined, among them Intermodal predication, Intermodal typification, and others. On the basis of examples, it will be demonstrated how this model can be used to describe the contributions of semiotic modes context-sensitively, providing an important part of the needed pragmatic theory of multimodal argumentation.
Bibliography:
– Asher, Nicolas & Alex Lascarides (2003), Logics of Conversation. Cambridge University Press.
– Birdsell, David & Leo Groarke (2007), “Outlines of a theory of visual argument”. Argumentation and Advocacy 43: 103-113.
– Bateman, John A. (2014), Text and Image: A Critical Introduction to the Visual/Verbal Divide. London: Routledge.
– Liu, Yu & Kay O’Halloran (2009), “Intersemiotic texture: Analyzing cohesive devices between language and images”. Social Semiotics 19(4), 367-388.
– Marsh, Emily E. & Marilyn D. White (2003), “A taxonomy of relationships between images and text”, Journal of Documentation 59(6), 647–672.
– Martinec, Radan & Andrew Salway (2005), “A system for image-text relations in new (and old) media”, Visual Communication 4(3), 339–374.
– Siefkes, Martin (in print), “How semiotic modes work together in multimodal texts: Towards an explanation of intermodal interactions“. 10plus1 – Living Linguistics 1, 2015 (Special issue Media Linguistics).
– Tseronis, Assimakis (2014), “Argumentative functions of visuals: Beyond claiming and justifying”, in: Dima Mohammed and Marcin Lewinski (eds.), Virtues of Argumentation. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation. Windsor: OSSA, 1-17.
– Wildfeuer, Janina (2012), “Intersemiosis in Film”. Multimodal Communication 1(3), 276-304.
– Wildfeuer, Janina (in print), “It's all about logics!? Analyzing the rhetorical structure of multimodal filmic text.” Semiotica [Special Issue on Multimodal Rhetoric].
The affordances of different modes for functions in multimodal argumentation, however, cannot simply be based on semiotic evaluations of mode-specific affordances that have been gleaned from monomodal sign processes. Thus, images have traditionally been regarded as well-suited for illustration of an argument with examples, for emotional influences, and for contextualizing an argument; but depending on the combination with content given in other modes (e.g. language or gesture), they can fulfil other functions in multimodal argumentation as well (Tseronis 2014).
To take an example: In a trial, the visual disparity between a small defendant and a very high wall around a property he is supposed to have climbed with bare hands can be used by the defense, by presenting a photo of the defendant before the wall, as an argument for his innocence. The image supports the visual equivalent of a reductio ad absurdum proof, but only if verbally given explanations supply an adequate contextualization: e.g. the visually presented objects have to be connected with referents in an act of Intermodal deixis (“this person is the defendant; this wall is the wall he’s supposed to have climbed”). Furthermore, background knowledge needed to draw the intended conclusion has to be supplied verbally (e.g. “the wall has the same height all around the property”).
We claim that the function of semiotic modes in multimodal argumentation cannot be determined in general, but only in specific constellations of form and content presented in both modes. Thus, a pragmatic approach to mode contributions is necessary, which considers the specific interactions between modes, depending on the formal, content, and context properties of each argumentative utterance.
To understand how modes contribute to multimodal rhetoric strategies, a pragmatic theory of multimodal argumentation will have to consider which types of interactions between semiotic modes exist, and how they influence the overall argumentative pattern. Recently, different models that describe interactions between semiotic modes have been proposed (Marsh/White 2003; Martinec/Salway 2005; Liu/O’Halloran 2009; Wildfeuer 2012). In recent work (cf. Siefkes in print), a range of intermodal interactions has been formally defined, among them Intermodal predication, Intermodal typification, and others. On the basis of examples, it will be demonstrated how this model can be used to describe the contributions of semiotic modes context-sensitively, providing an important part of the needed pragmatic theory of multimodal argumentation.
Bibliography:
– Asher, Nicolas & Alex Lascarides (2003), Logics of Conversation. Cambridge University Press.
– Birdsell, David & Leo Groarke (2007), “Outlines of a theory of visual argument”. Argumentation and Advocacy 43: 103-113.
– Bateman, John A. (2014), Text and Image: A Critical Introduction to the Visual/Verbal Divide. London: Routledge.
– Liu, Yu & Kay O’Halloran (2009), “Intersemiotic texture: Analyzing cohesive devices between language and images”. Social Semiotics 19(4), 367-388.
– Marsh, Emily E. & Marilyn D. White (2003), “A taxonomy of relationships between images and text”, Journal of Documentation 59(6), 647–672.
– Martinec, Radan & Andrew Salway (2005), “A system for image-text relations in new (and old) media”, Visual Communication 4(3), 339–374.
– Siefkes, Martin (in print), “How semiotic modes work together in multimodal texts: Towards an explanation of intermodal interactions“. 10plus1 – Living Linguistics 1, 2015 (Special issue Media Linguistics).
– Tseronis, Assimakis (2014), “Argumentative functions of visuals: Beyond claiming and justifying”, in: Dima Mohammed and Marcin Lewinski (eds.), Virtues of Argumentation. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation. Windsor: OSSA, 1-17.
– Wildfeuer, Janina (2012), “Intersemiosis in Film”. Multimodal Communication 1(3), 276-304.
– Wildfeuer, Janina (in print), “It's all about logics!? Analyzing the rhetorical structure of multimodal filmic text.” Semiotica [Special Issue on Multimodal Rhetoric].
Research Interests:
[talk by Ellen Fricke & Martin Siefkes] The Danish linguist and semiotician Louis Hjelmslev (1899 –1965), founder of the Copenhagen school of structuralism, developed a theory of language called “glossematics” whose basic tenets are... more
[talk by Ellen Fricke & Martin Siefkes]
The Danish linguist and semiotician Louis Hjelmslev (1899 –1965), founder of the Copenhagen school of structuralism, developed a theory of language called “glossematics” whose basic tenets are closely related to linguistic realism. Hjelmslev was critical of contemporary linguistics, which he deemed to be “vague and subjective, metaphysical and aestheticising” (1963: 10); against these tendencies, he proposed that “[i]t is the aim of linguistic theory to test […] the thesis that a process has an underlying system – a fluctuation an underlying constancy.” Hjelmslev envisaged a theory of language to which he only wanted to give the “prolegomena” or methodological basis, a theory which would follow what he called the “empirical principle”: it would be “free of contradictions (self-consistent), exhaustive, and as simple as possible” (ibid.: 11), criteria comparable to those formulated by the Vienna circle, and later by Karl Popper, for scientific theories.
More unusual than Hjelmslev’s unabashed pro-scientific stance is his opposition to induction in linguistics, which he describes as “progression from component to class”, e.g. the abstraction from individual sounds to phonemes. He argued that this sort of generalization created concepts with many accidental properties, denoting different phenomena in different single languages: categories such as “genitive”, “perfect”, or “passive” do not refer to the same phenomena in Greek, Latin, etc.
Hjelmslev contended that induction leads to descriptions that are neither self-consistent nor simple, and thus clashes with his “empirical principle”. The inductive method leads to “the abstraction of concepts which are then hypostatized as real” (ibid.: 12). Hjelmslev assumed a different kind of reality for language, not as a mere generalization of language use, but rather as an abstract object for whose investigation specific methods had to be developed. Hjelmslev therefore proposed that an approach to language can only be called “empirical” if it starts from the unanalyzed text, and proceeded to build glossematics as an analytical theory that presupposes only the text in its immediately observable form, whose units are then determined with structuralist methods (such as the commutation and replacement tests) which have to be theoretically justified.
From glossematics, an analytical theory of language formulated more than 70 years ago, a powerful argument against the dominating linguistic paradigms of recent decades can be made: both generative grammar, which presupposes grammatical categories, deep structure, and transformation rules, and cognitive linguistics, which presupposes various types of cognitive structures, do not fulfill the requirements Hjelmslev set down for empirically adequate linguistic theories.
A further important result is Hjelmslev’s distinction between form and substance, both on the level of expression and the level of content. Glossematics assumes that natural languages, as well as other sign systems, are characterized by specific systems of form distinguishing them from other languages or sign systems, systems of form which can however be manifested in different substances. Not only speech and writing, but also gesture function as substances. The distinction between form and its manifestation in specific substances is unique to glossematics, and enables an entirely new approach to problems of multimodality: an important argument for the realism of languages as abstract entities is gained by showing that languages are indeed distinct from their expression in specific substances, such as speech, writing, or gesture.
Bibliography:
– Fricke, Ellen (2012), Grammatik multimodal: Wie Wörter und Gesten zusammenwirken. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
– Fricke, Ellen (2013), “Towards a unified grammar of gesture and speech: A multimodal approach”, in: Cornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke et al. (eds.), Body – Language – Communication. An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, vol. 1, 733–754.
– Hjelmslev, Louis (1963), Prolegomena to a Theory of Language. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Translated by Francis J. Whitfield. First published as (1943): Omkring sprogteoriens grundlæggelse. Kopenhagen: Munksgaard.
– Johansen, Jørgen Dines (1998), „Hjelmslev and Glossematics“, in: Posner, Roland, Klaus Robering und Thomas A. Sebeok (Hg.) (1997–2004), Semiotik / Semiotics. Ein Handbuch zu den zeichentheoretischen Grundlagen von Natur und Kultur. 4 vols. Berlin: de Gruyter, vol. 2: 2272–2289.
– Nöth, Winfried (2000), Handbuch der Semiotik. 2nd, revised ed. Stuttgart: Metzler. 78–87.
– Siefkes, Martin (2015), “Sturm auf die Zeichen. Was die Semiotik von ihren Kritikern lernen kann”. Schriften zur Kultur- und Mediensemiotik Online 1/2015: 7–42.
The Danish linguist and semiotician Louis Hjelmslev (1899 –1965), founder of the Copenhagen school of structuralism, developed a theory of language called “glossematics” whose basic tenets are closely related to linguistic realism. Hjelmslev was critical of contemporary linguistics, which he deemed to be “vague and subjective, metaphysical and aestheticising” (1963: 10); against these tendencies, he proposed that “[i]t is the aim of linguistic theory to test […] the thesis that a process has an underlying system – a fluctuation an underlying constancy.” Hjelmslev envisaged a theory of language to which he only wanted to give the “prolegomena” or methodological basis, a theory which would follow what he called the “empirical principle”: it would be “free of contradictions (self-consistent), exhaustive, and as simple as possible” (ibid.: 11), criteria comparable to those formulated by the Vienna circle, and later by Karl Popper, for scientific theories.
More unusual than Hjelmslev’s unabashed pro-scientific stance is his opposition to induction in linguistics, which he describes as “progression from component to class”, e.g. the abstraction from individual sounds to phonemes. He argued that this sort of generalization created concepts with many accidental properties, denoting different phenomena in different single languages: categories such as “genitive”, “perfect”, or “passive” do not refer to the same phenomena in Greek, Latin, etc.
Hjelmslev contended that induction leads to descriptions that are neither self-consistent nor simple, and thus clashes with his “empirical principle”. The inductive method leads to “the abstraction of concepts which are then hypostatized as real” (ibid.: 12). Hjelmslev assumed a different kind of reality for language, not as a mere generalization of language use, but rather as an abstract object for whose investigation specific methods had to be developed. Hjelmslev therefore proposed that an approach to language can only be called “empirical” if it starts from the unanalyzed text, and proceeded to build glossematics as an analytical theory that presupposes only the text in its immediately observable form, whose units are then determined with structuralist methods (such as the commutation and replacement tests) which have to be theoretically justified.
From glossematics, an analytical theory of language formulated more than 70 years ago, a powerful argument against the dominating linguistic paradigms of recent decades can be made: both generative grammar, which presupposes grammatical categories, deep structure, and transformation rules, and cognitive linguistics, which presupposes various types of cognitive structures, do not fulfill the requirements Hjelmslev set down for empirically adequate linguistic theories.
A further important result is Hjelmslev’s distinction between form and substance, both on the level of expression and the level of content. Glossematics assumes that natural languages, as well as other sign systems, are characterized by specific systems of form distinguishing them from other languages or sign systems, systems of form which can however be manifested in different substances. Not only speech and writing, but also gesture function as substances. The distinction between form and its manifestation in specific substances is unique to glossematics, and enables an entirely new approach to problems of multimodality: an important argument for the realism of languages as abstract entities is gained by showing that languages are indeed distinct from their expression in specific substances, such as speech, writing, or gesture.
Bibliography:
– Fricke, Ellen (2012), Grammatik multimodal: Wie Wörter und Gesten zusammenwirken. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
– Fricke, Ellen (2013), “Towards a unified grammar of gesture and speech: A multimodal approach”, in: Cornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke et al. (eds.), Body – Language – Communication. An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, vol. 1, 733–754.
– Hjelmslev, Louis (1963), Prolegomena to a Theory of Language. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Translated by Francis J. Whitfield. First published as (1943): Omkring sprogteoriens grundlæggelse. Kopenhagen: Munksgaard.
– Johansen, Jørgen Dines (1998), „Hjelmslev and Glossematics“, in: Posner, Roland, Klaus Robering und Thomas A. Sebeok (Hg.) (1997–2004), Semiotik / Semiotics. Ein Handbuch zu den zeichentheoretischen Grundlagen von Natur und Kultur. 4 vols. Berlin: de Gruyter, vol. 2: 2272–2289.
– Nöth, Winfried (2000), Handbuch der Semiotik. 2nd, revised ed. Stuttgart: Metzler. 78–87.
– Siefkes, Martin (2015), “Sturm auf die Zeichen. Was die Semiotik von ihren Kritikern lernen kann”. Schriften zur Kultur- und Mediensemiotik Online 1/2015: 7–42.
Research Interests:
“They used to say that a child conceived in love has a greater chance of happiness … They don’t say that anymore.” (Gattaca, 00:09:12-20) The film Gattaca (1997, dir. A. Niccol) is set in a dystopian future in which eugenics is the... more
“They used to say that a child conceived in love has a greater chance of happiness … They don’t say that anymore.” (Gattaca, 00:09:12-20)
The film Gattaca (1997, dir. A. Niccol) is set in a dystopian future in which eugenics is the social norm, and “naturally conceived” children have become an underclass. In a flashback scene, the main protagonists’ parents are shown happily embracing, while he sadly explains that he cannot understand why his parents eschewed in-vitro-fertilisation for his conception.
This filmic example shows a subtle use of semiotic resources to illustrate, and comment on, cultural change: soft-focus images, as well as uplifting string music, demonstrate the “old” ideal of conception as an act of love, whereas the commentary accepts and embraces the rule of eugenics. This multimodally expressed contrast can be linked to changes in the frame “Conception and Birth”, including the rise of prenatal diagnosis in the late 1990s, and the discourses surrounding these changes.
In the analysis of this example, the presentation connects multimodal discourse linguistics (Bateman/Schmidt 2011; Wildfeuer 2013) with frame theory (Minsky 1975; Fillmore 1982), and shows how cultural change can be modeled via semantic frame change.
Two further examples from Gattaca demonstrate that intermodal contrasts can be used for other narrative functions as well: for the separation of narrative voices, for purposes of story development, and for perspective-taking and the construction of intentional spaces.
The film Gattaca (1997, dir. A. Niccol) is set in a dystopian future in which eugenics is the social norm, and “naturally conceived” children have become an underclass. In a flashback scene, the main protagonists’ parents are shown happily embracing, while he sadly explains that he cannot understand why his parents eschewed in-vitro-fertilisation for his conception.
This filmic example shows a subtle use of semiotic resources to illustrate, and comment on, cultural change: soft-focus images, as well as uplifting string music, demonstrate the “old” ideal of conception as an act of love, whereas the commentary accepts and embraces the rule of eugenics. This multimodally expressed contrast can be linked to changes in the frame “Conception and Birth”, including the rise of prenatal diagnosis in the late 1990s, and the discourses surrounding these changes.
In the analysis of this example, the presentation connects multimodal discourse linguistics (Bateman/Schmidt 2011; Wildfeuer 2013) with frame theory (Minsky 1975; Fillmore 1982), and shows how cultural change can be modeled via semantic frame change.
Two further examples from Gattaca demonstrate that intermodal contrasts can be used for other narrative functions as well: for the separation of narrative voices, for purposes of story development, and for perspective-taking and the construction of intentional spaces.
Research Interests:
Dieser Vortrag stellt einige Grundlagen der Multimodalitätsforschung vor, die im Workshop auf zwei Filmbeispiele („Strange days“, 1995, Kathryn Bigelow, und „Gattaca“ (1997, Andrew Niccols) angewandt wurden. [ohne Analyseprotokolle]
Research Interests:
Dieser Vortrag gibt eine kurze Übersicht über gegenwärtige Semiotik in Deutschland ohne Anspruch auf Vollständigkeit. Ausgewählte Institutionen und Studiengänge werden kurz vorgestellt. Es folgen einige Folgen zu Grundlagen der Semiotik,... more
Dieser Vortrag gibt eine kurze Übersicht über gegenwärtige Semiotik in Deutschland ohne Anspruch auf Vollständigkeit. Ausgewählte Institutionen und Studiengänge werden kurz vorgestellt. Es folgen einige Folgen zu Grundlagen der Semiotik, sowie eine Einführung in die Diskurssemiotik als einem aktuellen Anwendungsgebiet semiotischer Forschung.
Research Interests:
In linguistic and artificial intelligence research, the notion of semantic frame has been used to model background knowledge in daily conversation (Minsky 1975; Fillmore 1982). More recently, frames have been applied in linguistic... more
In linguistic and artificial intelligence research, the notion of semantic frame has been used to model background knowledge in daily conversation (Minsky 1975; Fillmore 1982). More recently, frames have been applied in linguistic discourse analysis to show patterns in discourse and their connection to culturally shared knowledge (Wengeler 2003; Ziem 2008).
The combination of frame semantics with Multimodal Discourse Analysis (e.g. Bateman/Schmidt 2011) is a highly promising new research field (Siefkes in review). To demonstrate this, we will analyse a sequence from Gattaca (1997, dir. A. Niccol). This film is set in a dystopian future in which eugenics is the norm and naturally conceived children have become an underclass. In a flashback scene, the main protagonists’ parents are shown happily embracing in a soft-focus scene with warm lighting and romantic music. In a voice-over commentary, however, the protagonist sadly explains that he cannot understand why his parents eschewed in-vitro-fertilisation for his conception. This multimodally expressed contrast can be linked to changes in the frame “Conception and Birth”, including the rise of prenatal diagnosis in the late 1990s, and the discourses surrounding these changes.
Bringing together the semiotic tools developed in Multimodal Discourse Analysis with the knowledge representation approach provided by Frame Semantics allows a precise analysis of cultural development as frame change, and the way it is expressed in film and other multimodal artefacts.
Bibliography:
– Bateman, John A. & Karl-Heinrich Schmidt (2011), Multimodal Film Analysis. How Films Mean. London: Routledge.
– Fillmore, Charles (1982), “Frame semantics”, in: Linguistics in the Morning Calm. Papers presented at the Seoul International Conference on Linguistics. Seoul: Hanshin, 111-137.
– Minsky, Marvin (1975), “A Framework for Representing Knowledge”, in: Patrick H. Winston (ed.), The Psychology of Computer Vision. New York: McGraw-Hill.
– Siefkes, Martin (in review), “Frames in discourse. Connecting frame semantics and discourse analysis in an SDRT-based model”.
– Wengeler, Martin (2003), Topos und Diskurs. Begründung einer argumentationsanalytischen Methode und ihre Anwendung auf den Migrationsdiskurs (1960–1985). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
– Ziem, Alexander (2008), Frames und sprachliches Wissen. Kognitive Aspekte der semantischen Kompetenz. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
The combination of frame semantics with Multimodal Discourse Analysis (e.g. Bateman/Schmidt 2011) is a highly promising new research field (Siefkes in review). To demonstrate this, we will analyse a sequence from Gattaca (1997, dir. A. Niccol). This film is set in a dystopian future in which eugenics is the norm and naturally conceived children have become an underclass. In a flashback scene, the main protagonists’ parents are shown happily embracing in a soft-focus scene with warm lighting and romantic music. In a voice-over commentary, however, the protagonist sadly explains that he cannot understand why his parents eschewed in-vitro-fertilisation for his conception. This multimodally expressed contrast can be linked to changes in the frame “Conception and Birth”, including the rise of prenatal diagnosis in the late 1990s, and the discourses surrounding these changes.
Bringing together the semiotic tools developed in Multimodal Discourse Analysis with the knowledge representation approach provided by Frame Semantics allows a precise analysis of cultural development as frame change, and the way it is expressed in film and other multimodal artefacts.
Bibliography:
– Bateman, John A. & Karl-Heinrich Schmidt (2011), Multimodal Film Analysis. How Films Mean. London: Routledge.
– Fillmore, Charles (1982), “Frame semantics”, in: Linguistics in the Morning Calm. Papers presented at the Seoul International Conference on Linguistics. Seoul: Hanshin, 111-137.
– Minsky, Marvin (1975), “A Framework for Representing Knowledge”, in: Patrick H. Winston (ed.), The Psychology of Computer Vision. New York: McGraw-Hill.
– Siefkes, Martin (in review), “Frames in discourse. Connecting frame semantics and discourse analysis in an SDRT-based model”.
– Wengeler, Martin (2003), Topos und Diskurs. Begründung einer argumentationsanalytischen Methode und ihre Anwendung auf den Migrationsdiskurs (1960–1985). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
– Ziem, Alexander (2008), Frames und sprachliches Wissen. Kognitive Aspekte der semantischen Kompetenz. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Research Interests:
For multimodality research, it is of central importance to understand how semiotic modes work together in multimodal texts. But whereas a broad range of approaches for describing and annotating relations between modes exist (cf. for an... more
For multimodality research, it is of central importance to understand how semiotic modes work together in multimodal texts. But whereas a broad range of approaches for describing and annotating relations between modes exist (cf. for an overview Bateman 2014), the formal, semantic, and stylistic influences between modes are still largely uncharted. To understand the precise working of multimodal meaning production, it is important to understand which interaction types we have to assume, and to integrate them into existing theoretical approaches (cf. O’Halloran/Smith 2011).
The presentation will focus on results of an ongoing research project on intersemiotic relations at the University Bremen, which develops a model of intermodal interactions in multimodal texts. The focus in this project lies on non-coded inference processes in text interpretation, aiming at a formal description of inference processes and context-dependent textual meaning production. The project builds on extensive previous research on SDRT in multimodal discourse analysis (e.g. Bateman 2011; Wildfeuer 2012).
For this project, a model is in development that considers three textual layers: (1) formal aspects; (2) semantics & discourse relations; (3) stylistic aspects. Level (2) corresponds to the current structures in SDRT, which are called “Segmented Discourse Representation Structures (SDRS)”, which include discourse referents as well as discourse relations (relations that are defeasibly inferred to hold between discourse segments). The developed theory proposes the introduction of additional logical structures into SDRSs, namely formal and stylistic discourse structures. The steps that are necessary for this expansion, and possible problems arising from it, will be discussed.
On this basis, interactions between modes can be represented. Thus, it becomes possible to define how formal properties (e.g. adjacency of two pictures; similar or different size of fonts; etc.) interact with content properties, and stylistic properties. The approach distinguishes and defines a number of interaction types between semiotic modes, such as “Disambiguation”, “Typification”, and “Intermodal predication”.
Bibliography:
– Bateman, John A. (2011), “The decomposability of semiotic modes”, in: O'Halloran/Smith 2011, 17-38.
– Bateman, John A. (2014), Text and Image: A Critical Introduction to the Visual/Verbal Divide. London: Routledge.
– O’Halloran, Kay L. & Bradley A. Smith (eds.) (2011), Multimodal Studies. Exploring Issues and Domains. London: Routledge.
– Wildfeuer, Janina (2012), “Intersemiosis in Film”. Multimodal Communication 1, 3: 276-304.
The presentation will focus on results of an ongoing research project on intersemiotic relations at the University Bremen, which develops a model of intermodal interactions in multimodal texts. The focus in this project lies on non-coded inference processes in text interpretation, aiming at a formal description of inference processes and context-dependent textual meaning production. The project builds on extensive previous research on SDRT in multimodal discourse analysis (e.g. Bateman 2011; Wildfeuer 2012).
For this project, a model is in development that considers three textual layers: (1) formal aspects; (2) semantics & discourse relations; (3) stylistic aspects. Level (2) corresponds to the current structures in SDRT, which are called “Segmented Discourse Representation Structures (SDRS)”, which include discourse referents as well as discourse relations (relations that are defeasibly inferred to hold between discourse segments). The developed theory proposes the introduction of additional logical structures into SDRSs, namely formal and stylistic discourse structures. The steps that are necessary for this expansion, and possible problems arising from it, will be discussed.
On this basis, interactions between modes can be represented. Thus, it becomes possible to define how formal properties (e.g. adjacency of two pictures; similar or different size of fonts; etc.) interact with content properties, and stylistic properties. The approach distinguishes and defines a number of interaction types between semiotic modes, such as “Disambiguation”, “Typification”, and “Intermodal predication”.
Bibliography:
– Bateman, John A. (2011), “The decomposability of semiotic modes”, in: O'Halloran/Smith 2011, 17-38.
– Bateman, John A. (2014), Text and Image: A Critical Introduction to the Visual/Verbal Divide. London: Routledge.
– O’Halloran, Kay L. & Bradley A. Smith (eds.) (2011), Multimodal Studies. Exploring Issues and Domains. London: Routledge.
– Wildfeuer, Janina (2012), “Intersemiosis in Film”. Multimodal Communication 1, 3: 276-304.
Research Interests:
Lange blieb umstritten, ob die linguistische und semiotische Pragmatik für die Beschreibung von Strukturen oberhalb der Textebene überhaupt zuständig ist. Seit den 1960er Jahren begann sich dann der Begriff ‚Diskurs‘ für thematisch... more
Lange blieb umstritten, ob die linguistische und semiotische Pragmatik für die Beschreibung von Strukturen oberhalb der Textebene überhaupt zuständig ist. Seit den 1960er Jahren begann sich dann der Begriff ‚Diskurs‘ für thematisch bestimmte Mengen von Äußerungen durchzusetzen, zunächst ausgehend von einer poststrukturalistisch orientierten Neufundierung des Diskursbegriffs durch Lacan und Foucault; in den 1980er Jahren wurde dieser in die Sozialwissenschaften, Linguistik und Semiotik übernommen und theoretisch präzisiert.
Heute ist das Spektrum diskursanalytischer Verfahren vielfältig: Es reicht von quantitativen Korpusanalysen über formale Verfahren, die allerdings bislang nur kleinräumige Strukturen erfassen können, bis zu multimodalen Korpusanalysen. In einem demnächst erscheinenden Themenheft der Zeitschrift für Semiotik wird eine Übersicht über methodisch fundierte und innovative Verfahren gegeben (Siefkes/Schöps (2014).
Im für die Sektion vorgeschlagenen Beitrag wird ein semiotisches Beschreibungsmodell für Diskurse vorgestellt, das Diskurse als Zeichenpraktiken erfasst, deren Ergebnissen Mengen von Texten sind, die Zusammenhänge und Muster aufweisen. Der Ansatz basiert auf der Unterscheidung dreier Bereiche von Kulturen, die Roland Posner in seinem Aufsatz „Was ist Kultur?“ (Posner 1992: 33) vorgeschlagen hat: der materialen Kultur, der mentalen Kultur und der sozialen Kultur. Davon ausgehend können Diskurse mit Hilfe kausaler Zusammenhänge zwischen (1) Textmustern, (2) mentalen Mustern und (3) sozialen Mustern beschrieben werden.
Auf der Basis dieses Modells wird es möglich, die Verbindungen zwischen Tabus im Zeichengebrauch, Grenzen des Denkens und gesellschaftlichen Ausschlussprozessen präziser als bislang zu fassen. Eine Diskursanalyse kann solche Verbindungen interpretierend erschließen, indem sie Textmuster als Anzeichen (Indizes) für das Vorhandensein bestimmter Muster in Mentalität und Gesellschaft interpretiert.
Literatur:
– Posner, R. (1992), „Was ist Kultur? Zur semiotischen Explikation anthropologischer Grundbegrif-fe“, in: M. Landsch u.a. (ed.), Kultur-Evolution. Fallstudien und Synthese. Frankfurt a.M.: Lang. 1-65.
– Siefkes, M. & Schöps, D. (eds.) (2014), Neue Methoden der Diskursanalyse. Themenheft, Zeitschrift für Semiotik 35, 1-2.
Heute ist das Spektrum diskursanalytischer Verfahren vielfältig: Es reicht von quantitativen Korpusanalysen über formale Verfahren, die allerdings bislang nur kleinräumige Strukturen erfassen können, bis zu multimodalen Korpusanalysen. In einem demnächst erscheinenden Themenheft der Zeitschrift für Semiotik wird eine Übersicht über methodisch fundierte und innovative Verfahren gegeben (Siefkes/Schöps (2014).
Im für die Sektion vorgeschlagenen Beitrag wird ein semiotisches Beschreibungsmodell für Diskurse vorgestellt, das Diskurse als Zeichenpraktiken erfasst, deren Ergebnissen Mengen von Texten sind, die Zusammenhänge und Muster aufweisen. Der Ansatz basiert auf der Unterscheidung dreier Bereiche von Kulturen, die Roland Posner in seinem Aufsatz „Was ist Kultur?“ (Posner 1992: 33) vorgeschlagen hat: der materialen Kultur, der mentalen Kultur und der sozialen Kultur. Davon ausgehend können Diskurse mit Hilfe kausaler Zusammenhänge zwischen (1) Textmustern, (2) mentalen Mustern und (3) sozialen Mustern beschrieben werden.
Auf der Basis dieses Modells wird es möglich, die Verbindungen zwischen Tabus im Zeichengebrauch, Grenzen des Denkens und gesellschaftlichen Ausschlussprozessen präziser als bislang zu fassen. Eine Diskursanalyse kann solche Verbindungen interpretierend erschließen, indem sie Textmuster als Anzeichen (Indizes) für das Vorhandensein bestimmter Muster in Mentalität und Gesellschaft interpretiert.
Literatur:
– Posner, R. (1992), „Was ist Kultur? Zur semiotischen Explikation anthropologischer Grundbegrif-fe“, in: M. Landsch u.a. (ed.), Kultur-Evolution. Fallstudien und Synthese. Frankfurt a.M.: Lang. 1-65.
– Siefkes, M. & Schöps, D. (eds.) (2014), Neue Methoden der Diskursanalyse. Themenheft, Zeitschrift für Semiotik 35, 1-2.
Research Interests:
Die Experimentelle Ästhetik ist eines der ältesten Forschungsgebiete der Experimentalpsychologie; ihre Entwicklung begann mit den visionären Ideen Gustav Theodor Fechners in den 1870er Jahren. Lange Zeit blieb sie ein kleines... more
Die Experimentelle Ästhetik ist eines der ältesten Forschungsgebiete der Experimentalpsychologie; ihre Entwicklung begann mit den visionären Ideen Gustav Theodor Fechners in den 1870er Jahren. Lange Zeit blieb sie ein kleines Forschungsgebiet, das zwischen Psychologie, philosophischer Ästhetik und Kunstgeschichte angesiedelt war und von wenigen Forschern vorangetrieben wurde, etwa George Birkhoff und Hans J. Eysenck, die verschiedene ‚ästhetische Maße‘ entwickelten. Ab den späten 1960er Jahren revolutionierte Daniel E. Berlyne das Feld mit der Entwicklung neuer Fragestellungen und Untersuchungsmethoden; in den 1980er Jahren begann dann Colin Martindale, Methoden der computergestützten statistischen Korpusanalyse auf große Mengen von Daten (Texte und Musikstücke) anzuwenden, um ästhetische Entwicklungsgesetze nachzuweisen.
Seit den 1990er Jahren haben sich durch die Integration der Neuroästhetik (z.B. Anjan Chatterjee) und den wachsenden Einfluss von Hypothesen der Evolutionären Ästhetik (z.B. Ellen Dissanayake; Winfried Menninghaus) neue Forschungs¬perspek¬tiven für die Experimentelle Ästhetik ergeben, die nach einer Phase rascher Expansion und methodologischer Entwicklung heute als etabliertes Forschungsgebiet mit eigenen Zeitschriften und Institutionen gelten kann. Zuletzt erfolgte 2013 die Gründung des Max Planck-Instituts für Empirische Ästhetik (MPIEA) in Frankfurt/Main.
Der Verfasser hat (zusammen mit Prof. Emanuele Arielli, IUAV Venedig) einen modalitätsüber¬greifenden experimentellen Ansatz der Stilforschung entwickelt. Stimuli in verschiedenen Kulturbereichen (Architektur, Musik, Design, Literatur u.a.) sind experimentell meist getrennt untersucht worden. Stil dagegen ist ein Aspekt von Kunstwerken und Artefakten, den es in allen Bereichen von Kunst und Kultur gibt und der daher geeignet ist, um modalitätsübergreifende Einflüsse zu untersuchen.
Im Vortrag sollen zwei Studienserien vorgestellt werden: Eine Serie untersuchte die Auswirkungen von kognitiver und emotionaler Empathie auf die Wahrnehmung von Kunstwerken; es handelt sich dabei um Aufmerksamkeit des Beobachters auf mögliche Intentionen und Emotionen der Architekten (Sender des architektonischen Zeichens). Es ergab sich unter anderem, dass gesteigerte Empathie dazu führen kann, dass Stile genauer wahrgenommen und präziser voneinander unterschieden werden. Aus semiotischer Perspektive ist zu fragen, inwieweit hier von einem genaueren Verstehen des architektonischen Zeichens – durch Reflexion über kognitive und emotionale Zustände des Senders und dessen Wirkungsintentionen – ausgegangen werden kann.
Eine zweite Studienserie betrachtete die stilistische Interaktion zwischen Musik und der Wahrnehmung von Architektur.
Seit den 1990er Jahren haben sich durch die Integration der Neuroästhetik (z.B. Anjan Chatterjee) und den wachsenden Einfluss von Hypothesen der Evolutionären Ästhetik (z.B. Ellen Dissanayake; Winfried Menninghaus) neue Forschungs¬perspek¬tiven für die Experimentelle Ästhetik ergeben, die nach einer Phase rascher Expansion und methodologischer Entwicklung heute als etabliertes Forschungsgebiet mit eigenen Zeitschriften und Institutionen gelten kann. Zuletzt erfolgte 2013 die Gründung des Max Planck-Instituts für Empirische Ästhetik (MPIEA) in Frankfurt/Main.
Der Verfasser hat (zusammen mit Prof. Emanuele Arielli, IUAV Venedig) einen modalitätsüber¬greifenden experimentellen Ansatz der Stilforschung entwickelt. Stimuli in verschiedenen Kulturbereichen (Architektur, Musik, Design, Literatur u.a.) sind experimentell meist getrennt untersucht worden. Stil dagegen ist ein Aspekt von Kunstwerken und Artefakten, den es in allen Bereichen von Kunst und Kultur gibt und der daher geeignet ist, um modalitätsübergreifende Einflüsse zu untersuchen.
Im Vortrag sollen zwei Studienserien vorgestellt werden: Eine Serie untersuchte die Auswirkungen von kognitiver und emotionaler Empathie auf die Wahrnehmung von Kunstwerken; es handelt sich dabei um Aufmerksamkeit des Beobachters auf mögliche Intentionen und Emotionen der Architekten (Sender des architektonischen Zeichens). Es ergab sich unter anderem, dass gesteigerte Empathie dazu führen kann, dass Stile genauer wahrgenommen und präziser voneinander unterschieden werden. Aus semiotischer Perspektive ist zu fragen, inwieweit hier von einem genaueren Verstehen des architektonischen Zeichens – durch Reflexion über kognitive und emotionale Zustände des Senders und dessen Wirkungsintentionen – ausgegangen werden kann.
Eine zweite Studienserie betrachtete die stilistische Interaktion zwischen Musik und der Wahrnehmung von Architektur.
Research Interests:
Preisvortrag anlässlich der Verleihung des Förderpreises 2014 der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Semiotik (DGS) für die Doktorarbeit „Stil als Zeichenprozess. Wie Variation bei Verhalten, Artefakten und Texten Information erzeugt“, Tübingen,... more
Preisvortrag anlässlich der Verleihung des Förderpreises 2014 der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Semiotik (DGS) für die Doktorarbeit „Stil als Zeichenprozess. Wie Variation bei Verhalten, Artefakten und Texten Information erzeugt“, Tübingen, 24. September 2014.
Research Interests:
Multimodality research is a rapidly growing field in semiotics and linguistics; furthermore, research on perceptual as well as semiotic modalities has also an important tradition in cognitive psychology, where it is investigated with the... more
Multimodality research is a rapidly growing field in semiotics and linguistics; furthermore, research on perceptual as well as semiotic modalities has also an important tradition in cognitive psychology, where it is investigated with the methods of experimental research. Both traditions come together in experimental aesthetics, an interdisciplinary research field dating back to the beginnings of modern psychology in the 19th century that has recently seen a dramatic revival (as witnessed, for example, by the founding of the Max Planck Institute for Empirical Aesthetics in Frankfurt/Main in 2013). In a recent international research project bridging the gap between psychology and linguistics, the question how judgments of stylistic and aesthetic qualities are influenced across perceptual modalities has been investigated experimentally.
Multimodal interactions are currently of the highest interest due to the rapidly growing percentage of cultural artefacts (multimedia artworks, films, online platforms, presentations etc.) which are inherently multimodal. To keep up with current developments in artistic production and analyze the aesthetic complexity of today’s cultures, semiotics and aesthetics have to develop methodologies for investigating multimodal artefacts. Theoretical expertise from linguistics and semiotics will have to be combined with the experimental methodological expertise from psychology.
This presentation discusses the results of two studies conducted at the IUAV Venice, which focused on the interactions between the aesthetic perception of architecture and music. We investigated how two musical styles (modern and baroque music) influence the judgment of buildings belonging to the comparable styles (modern and baroque architecture). In the two studies, we found inconclusive results for the influence of background music. Importantly, however, both studies demonstrated an effect of cross-modal congruence and incongruence on the judgment of buildings: When music was coherent with architecture (e.g. baroque architecture and baroque music), the observed architectural style was judged as more balanced, more coherent, and in one study also as more complete.
Multimodal interactions are currently of the highest interest due to the rapidly growing percentage of cultural artefacts (multimedia artworks, films, online platforms, presentations etc.) which are inherently multimodal. To keep up with current developments in artistic production and analyze the aesthetic complexity of today’s cultures, semiotics and aesthetics have to develop methodologies for investigating multimodal artefacts. Theoretical expertise from linguistics and semiotics will have to be combined with the experimental methodological expertise from psychology.
This presentation discusses the results of two studies conducted at the IUAV Venice, which focused on the interactions between the aesthetic perception of architecture and music. We investigated how two musical styles (modern and baroque music) influence the judgment of buildings belonging to the comparable styles (modern and baroque architecture). In the two studies, we found inconclusive results for the influence of background music. Importantly, however, both studies demonstrated an effect of cross-modal congruence and incongruence on the judgment of buildings: When music was coherent with architecture (e.g. baroque architecture and baroque music), the observed architectural style was judged as more balanced, more coherent, and in one study also as more complete.
Research Interests:
Der Begriff ‚Diskurs‘ wird in unterschiedlichen Forschungstraditionen unterschiedlich verwendet. Davon ausgehend haben sich verschiedene Schulen der Diskursanalyse gebildet, die auf unterschiedliche Weise zum Verständnis von Diskursen und... more
Der Begriff ‚Diskurs‘ wird in unterschiedlichen Forschungstraditionen unterschiedlich verwendet. Davon ausgehend haben sich verschiedene Schulen der Diskursanalyse gebildet, die auf unterschiedliche Weise zum Verständnis von Diskursen und ihrer Rolle in der Gesellschaft beitragen. Erfolgreiche Ansätze sind derzeit etwa die Diskursanalyse nach Foucault, die Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), die korpusorientierte Diskursanalyse, die framebezogene Diskursanalyse sowie die Multimodale Diskursanalyse.
Der Vortrag zeigt, wie diese Ansätze auf Grundlage eines semiotischen Verständnisses von Diskurs integrierbar sind, indem sie als Beschreibung verschiedener Aspekte von Diskursen aufgefasst werden.
Der Vortrag zeigt, wie diese Ansätze auf Grundlage eines semiotischen Verständnisses von Diskurs integrierbar sind, indem sie als Beschreibung verschiedener Aspekte von Diskursen aufgefasst werden.
Research Interests:
Artefakte sind menschengemachte Gegenstände. Heutzutage werden die meisten Artefakte bewusst gestaltet, und häufig spielen bei der Gestaltung eines Artefakts neben der Funktion, die es erfüllen soll, und Aspekten der Formgebung auch... more
Artefakte sind menschengemachte Gegenstände. Heutzutage werden die meisten Artefakte bewusst gestaltet, und häufig spielen bei der Gestaltung eines Artefakts neben der Funktion, die es erfüllen soll, und Aspekten der Formgebung auch Bedeutungen eine Rolle. Wenn Artefakte Bedeutungen erhalten, werden sie semantisiert: Sie sind dann nicht länger bloß menschengemachte Gegenstände mit einer Funktion, sondern werden zu Zeichen.
Eine semiotische Methode der Darstellung von Semantisierungsprozessen wird vorgestellt, die vom Verfasser entwickelt wurde. Durch die Kombination von Begrifflichkeit und Darstellungsmitteln aus Semiotik, Logik und Frame-Semantik ermöglicht sie eine Darstellung von Prozessen der Semantisierung. Dabei wird zwischen verschiedenen Mechanismen (= Prozesstypen) der Semantisierung unterschieden. So kann dadurch, dass eine bestimmte Gruppe von Menschen typischerweise ein bestimmtes Artefakt verwendet, dieses mit der entsprechenden Gruppe oder mit bestimmten ihnen kulturell zugeschriebenen Eigenschaften verbunden werden, beispielsweise wenn man bei einem Zeichenbrett sofort an Ingenieure oder bei einem Schlagstock an Polizisten denkt. Ebenso kann jedoch auch eine typische Verwendungssituation assoziiert werden, beispielsweise beim Zeichenbrett ein Großraumbüro oder beim Schlagstock eine eskalierende Demonstration. In diesem Fall kann die Semantisierung über den Bezug auf Frames (im Sinne allgemein darstellbarer Situationstypen) beschrieben werden.
Eine Semantisierung von Artefakten kann auch durch den Stil erfolgen, etwa wenn ein klar und nüchtern gestalteter Gebrauchsgegenstand als ‚sachlich‘, ‚durchdacht‘ oder ‚kalt‘ semantisiert wird. Eine weitere Möglichkeit besteht in einer Formassoziation (semiotisch ausgedrückt, einer ikonischen Zeichenrelation), etwa wenn die Verwendung floraler Formen im Jugendstil die Assoziationen von ‚Blüten‘ und ‚Natur‘ weckten, wodurch die diesen Konzepten kulturell zugeordneten Bedeutungen ‚Frische‘, ‚Unverdorbenheit‘ und eben auch ‚Jugend‘ auch auf die entsprechenden Artefakte übertrugen wurden. – Eine Reihe von weiteren Mechanismen der Semantisierung kann dargestellt werden.
Indem wir die Vorgänge verstehen, in denen Artefakten Bedeutungen gegeben werden, können wir umgekehrt die Rolle der Artefakte in der Kultur verstehen: Es wird nun nachvollziehbar, wie die materielle Seite unserer Kulturen unsere Denk- und Lebensweisen beeinflusst. Um die Funktions-weise menschlicher Kulturen zu verstehen, muss der Fokus von der (philosophiegeschichtlich als „Idealismus“ bezeichneten) Konzentration auf die Entwicklungslinien der kulturellen Repräsentationen (Ideen, Vorstellungen, Texte usw.) auf die Interaktionsweisen, die zwischen diesen Repräsentationen und der materiellen Seite der Kultur bestehen, gelenkt werden. Voraussetzung dafür ist die Klärung der Semantisierungsprozesse von Artefakten.
Eine semiotische Methode der Darstellung von Semantisierungsprozessen wird vorgestellt, die vom Verfasser entwickelt wurde. Durch die Kombination von Begrifflichkeit und Darstellungsmitteln aus Semiotik, Logik und Frame-Semantik ermöglicht sie eine Darstellung von Prozessen der Semantisierung. Dabei wird zwischen verschiedenen Mechanismen (= Prozesstypen) der Semantisierung unterschieden. So kann dadurch, dass eine bestimmte Gruppe von Menschen typischerweise ein bestimmtes Artefakt verwendet, dieses mit der entsprechenden Gruppe oder mit bestimmten ihnen kulturell zugeschriebenen Eigenschaften verbunden werden, beispielsweise wenn man bei einem Zeichenbrett sofort an Ingenieure oder bei einem Schlagstock an Polizisten denkt. Ebenso kann jedoch auch eine typische Verwendungssituation assoziiert werden, beispielsweise beim Zeichenbrett ein Großraumbüro oder beim Schlagstock eine eskalierende Demonstration. In diesem Fall kann die Semantisierung über den Bezug auf Frames (im Sinne allgemein darstellbarer Situationstypen) beschrieben werden.
Eine Semantisierung von Artefakten kann auch durch den Stil erfolgen, etwa wenn ein klar und nüchtern gestalteter Gebrauchsgegenstand als ‚sachlich‘, ‚durchdacht‘ oder ‚kalt‘ semantisiert wird. Eine weitere Möglichkeit besteht in einer Formassoziation (semiotisch ausgedrückt, einer ikonischen Zeichenrelation), etwa wenn die Verwendung floraler Formen im Jugendstil die Assoziationen von ‚Blüten‘ und ‚Natur‘ weckten, wodurch die diesen Konzepten kulturell zugeordneten Bedeutungen ‚Frische‘, ‚Unverdorbenheit‘ und eben auch ‚Jugend‘ auch auf die entsprechenden Artefakte übertrugen wurden. – Eine Reihe von weiteren Mechanismen der Semantisierung kann dargestellt werden.
Indem wir die Vorgänge verstehen, in denen Artefakten Bedeutungen gegeben werden, können wir umgekehrt die Rolle der Artefakte in der Kultur verstehen: Es wird nun nachvollziehbar, wie die materielle Seite unserer Kulturen unsere Denk- und Lebensweisen beeinflusst. Um die Funktions-weise menschlicher Kulturen zu verstehen, muss der Fokus von der (philosophiegeschichtlich als „Idealismus“ bezeichneten) Konzentration auf die Entwicklungslinien der kulturellen Repräsentationen (Ideen, Vorstellungen, Texte usw.) auf die Interaktionsweisen, die zwischen diesen Repräsentationen und der materiellen Seite der Kultur bestehen, gelenkt werden. Voraussetzung dafür ist die Klärung der Semantisierungsprozesse von Artefakten.
Research Interests:
Stil gibt es in allen Lebensbereichen. Bei Kunstwerken und Gebrauchstexten, Architektur und Artefakten, beim Argumentieren und im Sport, ja sogar bei alltäglichem Verhalten wie Autofahren oder Gehen: Überall wird „Stil“ für eine... more
Stil gibt es in allen Lebensbereichen. Bei Kunstwerken und Gebrauchstexten, Architektur und Artefakten, beim Argumentieren und im Sport, ja sogar bei alltäglichem Verhalten wie Autofahren oder Gehen: Überall wird „Stil“ für eine Möglichkeit der Variation bei grundsätzlicher Vergleichbarkeit gebraucht. Stiltheorien blieben jedoch meist auf Einzeldisziplinen wie die Kunst- oder Literaturwissenschaft beschränkt. Die vorliegende Arbeit entwickelt erstmals eine analytisch genaue allgemeine Stiltheorie.
Dazu werden mit Mitteln der Logik und Informatik die Zeichenprozesse modelliert, die beim Anwenden und beim Wahrnehmen eines Stils ablaufen. Ausgangspunkt ist die Annahme, dass Verhalten, Artefakte und Texte auf Schemata basieren. Es wird gezeigt, wie durch die Auswahl aus Alternativenklassen, die durch Schema und Kontext festgelegt sind, stilistische Merkmale erzeugt, und wie aus diesen in einer Interpretation weitergehende Schlüsse gezogen werden. Das Modell kann dank sorgfältiger Erklärungen ohne besondere Vorkenntnisse nachvollzogen werden.
Auf dieser Grundlage werden Probleme wie die Abweichung zwischen angewandtem und wahrgenommenem Stil, die Markierung von Gruppenidentitäten durch Stil, die Rolle von Stil bei der Individualisierung der Gesellschaft oder Stil als Experimentierfeld für Veränderungen untersucht.
[Überarbeitete Version des Vortrags zur Verteidigung der Dissertation, benotet mit „summa cum laude“.]
Dazu werden mit Mitteln der Logik und Informatik die Zeichenprozesse modelliert, die beim Anwenden und beim Wahrnehmen eines Stils ablaufen. Ausgangspunkt ist die Annahme, dass Verhalten, Artefakte und Texte auf Schemata basieren. Es wird gezeigt, wie durch die Auswahl aus Alternativenklassen, die durch Schema und Kontext festgelegt sind, stilistische Merkmale erzeugt, und wie aus diesen in einer Interpretation weitergehende Schlüsse gezogen werden. Das Modell kann dank sorgfältiger Erklärungen ohne besondere Vorkenntnisse nachvollzogen werden.
Auf dieser Grundlage werden Probleme wie die Abweichung zwischen angewandtem und wahrgenommenem Stil, die Markierung von Gruppenidentitäten durch Stil, die Rolle von Stil bei der Individualisierung der Gesellschaft oder Stil als Experimentierfeld für Veränderungen untersucht.
[Überarbeitete Version des Vortrags zur Verteidigung der Dissertation, benotet mit „summa cum laude“.]
Research Interests:
Der Konstruktivismus ist eng mit dem Siegeszug der Postmoderne verbunden, die von den 1970er bis 1990er Jahren die Geisteswissenschaften aufmischte. Seitdem ist er allerdings wieder ins Hintertreffen geraten. Es ist daher Zeit für eine... more
Der Konstruktivismus ist eng mit dem Siegeszug der Postmoderne verbunden, die von den 1970er bis 1990er Jahren die Geisteswissenschaften aufmischte. Seitdem ist er allerdings wieder ins Hintertreffen geraten. Es ist daher Zeit für eine kritische Bilanz. Hat der Konstruktivismus unsere Auffassung von Wissenschaft in sinnvoller Weise verändert?
Der Vortrag stellt die konstruktivistischen Konzeptionen von Paul Watzlawick (1921–2007), Heinz von Foerster (1911–2002), Ernst von Glasersfeld (* 1917), Humberto Maturana (* 1928), Siegfried J. Schmidt (* 1940) und Fritz B. Simon (* 1948) vor. Er schließt mit einem kritischen Fazit aus semiotischer Perspektive.
Der Vortrag stellt die konstruktivistischen Konzeptionen von Paul Watzlawick (1921–2007), Heinz von Foerster (1911–2002), Ernst von Glasersfeld (* 1917), Humberto Maturana (* 1928), Siegfried J. Schmidt (* 1940) und Fritz B. Simon (* 1948) vor. Er schließt mit einem kritischen Fazit aus semiotischer Perspektive.
Research Interests:
Style is one of the few terms of cultural analysis which can be fruitfully used in completely different cultural areas: Style theories have been developed for texts in general (and specifically for literature), art, architecture, music,... more
Style is one of the few terms of cultural analysis which can be fruitfully used in completely different cultural areas: Style theories have been developed for texts in general (and specifically for literature), art, architecture, music, for conversation, thinking and problem-solving. Less attention was rewarded on styles of athletes, of artisans, of working, and of unremarkable daily activities such as walking or driving. Even less interest has been attracted by questions of delimitation: Are there styles even in those cultures where the term is not used? Can animals have styles (think of race horses), or should we accord them only to humans? Which leads to important unresolved questions: Which cognitive processes are used in style creation and style recognition? In which respects differs the processing of style in different cultures?
Up to now, the development of a general theory of style with analytical precision and some depth of analysis has not been attempted. The division of the academic world in disciplines and fields has played an unfortunate role in style theory, as in many other interdisciplinary problems. Semiotics, the theory of signs and sign processes, has the potential to analyze cultural phenomena at a general level, but it has often been applied in a vague way. There is, however, an analytical school of semiotics with precise terminology and methods which I apply in my doctoral thesis to give a description of the style process at a general level. Frame theory, semantics, formal logic and information theory are used to supplement the semiotic framework.
The analytical model constructed for understanding style has two main parts. In the first, the notion of „stylistic feature“ is made explicit by defining it as a rule of choice between different variations possible in the execution of schemata. Such a rule consists of a part specifying where it is applied and another specifying properties for the chosen element. To take an example: A conspicuous feature of the style of the architect Richard Meier are white walls (often in the form of white tiles or aluminum plates). This feature can be described by giving its application condition („outside wall“) and the specified properties („white“), which in turn can be further specified in different variants including materials („white tile“, „white aluminum“). In principle, all stylistic features can be described in this way.
In the second part of the model, the general formulation of stylistic features developed in the first part is used as a starting point for stylistic interpretation. The information contained in styles is what makes them so interesting for human beings, and so influential in contemporary societies. Style can carry information about personality, influences, experiences, social background, and even about mental content not explicitly communicated, like knowledge, opinions about certain topics or schools, world-view, likes and dislikes ... The list goes on.
The general theory of style proposed is not meant to substitute domain-specific theories. However, it helps to understand the basic phenomenon, can be used as a frame for analysis in every domain and can give input to finer-grained theories.
Up to now, the development of a general theory of style with analytical precision and some depth of analysis has not been attempted. The division of the academic world in disciplines and fields has played an unfortunate role in style theory, as in many other interdisciplinary problems. Semiotics, the theory of signs and sign processes, has the potential to analyze cultural phenomena at a general level, but it has often been applied in a vague way. There is, however, an analytical school of semiotics with precise terminology and methods which I apply in my doctoral thesis to give a description of the style process at a general level. Frame theory, semantics, formal logic and information theory are used to supplement the semiotic framework.
The analytical model constructed for understanding style has two main parts. In the first, the notion of „stylistic feature“ is made explicit by defining it as a rule of choice between different variations possible in the execution of schemata. Such a rule consists of a part specifying where it is applied and another specifying properties for the chosen element. To take an example: A conspicuous feature of the style of the architect Richard Meier are white walls (often in the form of white tiles or aluminum plates). This feature can be described by giving its application condition („outside wall“) and the specified properties („white“), which in turn can be further specified in different variants including materials („white tile“, „white aluminum“). In principle, all stylistic features can be described in this way.
In the second part of the model, the general formulation of stylistic features developed in the first part is used as a starting point for stylistic interpretation. The information contained in styles is what makes them so interesting for human beings, and so influential in contemporary societies. Style can carry information about personality, influences, experiences, social background, and even about mental content not explicitly communicated, like knowledge, opinions about certain topics or schools, world-view, likes and dislikes ... The list goes on.
The general theory of style proposed is not meant to substitute domain-specific theories. However, it helps to understand the basic phenomenon, can be used as a frame for analysis in every domain and can give input to finer-grained theories.
Research Interests:
Das vorliegende Heft der „Zeitschrift für Semiotik“ bezieht verschiedene Traditionen der Diskursanalyse aufeinander, die sich innerhalb der Linguistik und Semiotik in den letzten Jahrzehnten entwickelt haben. In insgesamt 10... more
Das vorliegende Heft der „Zeitschrift für Semiotik“ bezieht verschiedene Traditionen der Diskursanalyse aufeinander, die sich innerhalb der Linguistik und Semiotik in den letzten Jahrzehnten entwickelt haben. In insgesamt 10 Forschungsartikeln wird ein großes Spektrum an Methoden abgedeckt. Die behandelten Themen reichen dabei von der Metropolenforschung über die Rezeptionsforschung bis hin zu Gender studies und (Post-)Kolonialismus. Die Einführung verortet die Beiträge innerhalb theoretischer Schulen und weist mit Hilfe semiotischer Begrifflichkeiten die Zusammenhänge und Divergenzen der Ansätze nach.
Lange Zeit war umstritten, in welchem Maß die Linguistik für formale und inhaltliche Strukturen oberhalb der Satzebene überhaupt zuständig ist. Zwar beschäftigte sich seit den 1960er Jahren die Textlinguistik mit satzübergreifenden Strukturen; doch die Analyse von Diskursen – verstanden als textübergreifende Muster des Sprachgebrauchs, aber auch als jene Praktiken und Wissensformationen, die diese erzeugen – wurde erst relativ spät als genuin linguistischer Forschungsgegenstand aufgegriffen.
Ausgehend von der Neufundierung des traditionsreichen Begriffs „Diskurs“ durch Michel Foucault, die mit Blick auf die wirklichkeits- und subjektkonstituierende Kraft der Sprache erfolgte, entwickelte sich die Diskursanalyse seit den 1980er Jahren als eine Methode, die innerhalb der Linguistik ebenso wie der Sozialwissenschaften (etwa in Soziologie, Politologie und Genderstudies) angewandt wird.
In den letzten Jahren haben sich diskursanalytische Verfahren in vielen Bereichen außerhalb der Lautsprache etabliert. Innerhalb kurzer Zeit sind diskursanalytische Ansätze unter anderem für Bilder, Filme, Gesten und Körperhaltungen entwickelt worden. Der Erfolg dieser Verfahren lässt es naheliegend erscheinen, Diskurse in allen gesellschaftlichen Praktiken anzusiedeln, in denen Bedeutung erzeugt und verhandelt wird. Die Verallgemeinerung der Diskurslinguistik zur Diskurssemiotik führte sowohl zur Anpassung der theoretischen Grundlagen als auch zur Entwicklung von Analyseverfahren für zahlreiche nicht-sprachliche Kodes. Eine weitere Herausforderung stellen multimodale Diskurse dar, bei denen mehrere Sinnesmodalitäten und/oder semiotische Modalitäten (Kodes) zusammenwirken.
Lange Zeit war umstritten, in welchem Maß die Linguistik für formale und inhaltliche Strukturen oberhalb der Satzebene überhaupt zuständig ist. Zwar beschäftigte sich seit den 1960er Jahren die Textlinguistik mit satzübergreifenden Strukturen; doch die Analyse von Diskursen – verstanden als textübergreifende Muster des Sprachgebrauchs, aber auch als jene Praktiken und Wissensformationen, die diese erzeugen – wurde erst relativ spät als genuin linguistischer Forschungsgegenstand aufgegriffen.
Ausgehend von der Neufundierung des traditionsreichen Begriffs „Diskurs“ durch Michel Foucault, die mit Blick auf die wirklichkeits- und subjektkonstituierende Kraft der Sprache erfolgte, entwickelte sich die Diskursanalyse seit den 1980er Jahren als eine Methode, die innerhalb der Linguistik ebenso wie der Sozialwissenschaften (etwa in Soziologie, Politologie und Genderstudies) angewandt wird.
In den letzten Jahren haben sich diskursanalytische Verfahren in vielen Bereichen außerhalb der Lautsprache etabliert. Innerhalb kurzer Zeit sind diskursanalytische Ansätze unter anderem für Bilder, Filme, Gesten und Körperhaltungen entwickelt worden. Der Erfolg dieser Verfahren lässt es naheliegend erscheinen, Diskurse in allen gesellschaftlichen Praktiken anzusiedeln, in denen Bedeutung erzeugt und verhandelt wird. Die Verallgemeinerung der Diskurslinguistik zur Diskurssemiotik führte sowohl zur Anpassung der theoretischen Grundlagen als auch zur Entwicklung von Analyseverfahren für zahlreiche nicht-sprachliche Kodes. Eine weitere Herausforderung stellen multimodale Diskurse dar, bei denen mehrere Sinnesmodalitäten und/oder semiotische Modalitäten (Kodes) zusammenwirken.
Research Interests:
Call für paper des Panels „Aktuelle Herausforderungen für die Methodologie der angewandten Linguistik“ auf der Konferenz der Gesellschaft für Angewandte Linguistik (GAL), 11.–14. Sept. 2018, Universität Duisburg-Essen
Research Interests:
CfP für das Panel „Chancen und Grenzen Digitaler Geisteswissenschaften“, 15. Internationaler Kongress 2017 der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Semiotik (DGS) e.V. „Grenzen. Kontakt – Kommunikation – Kontrast“ (Passau, 12. bis 16. September... more
CfP für das Panel „Chancen und Grenzen Digitaler Geisteswissenschaften“,
15. Internationaler Kongress 2017 der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Semiotik (DGS) e.V.
„Grenzen. Kontakt – Kommunikation – Kontrast“ (Passau, 12. bis 16. September 2017)
15. Internationaler Kongress 2017 der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Semiotik (DGS) e.V.
„Grenzen. Kontakt – Kommunikation – Kontrast“ (Passau, 12. bis 16. September 2017)
Research Interests:
CFP: Panel “The Potential and the Limits of the Digital Humanities” at the 15th International Conference of the German Semiotics Society (DGS) “Borders: Contact – Communication – Contrast” (Passau, 12th–16th September 2017) Deadline for... more
CFP: Panel “The Potential and the Limits of the Digital Humanities” at the 15th International Conference of the German Semiotics Society (DGS) “Borders: Contact – Communication – Contrast” (Passau, 12th–16th September 2017)
Deadline for abstract submissions: 20th Nov 2016
Deadline for abstract submissions: 20th Nov 2016
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Table of Contents of the issue 37, 3-4 of the Journal of Semiotics (Zeitschrift für Semiotik), with contributions on questions of gesture in relation to language origin, motion capture as a sign process, the evaluation of scientifc... more
Table of Contents of the issue 37, 3-4 of the Journal of Semiotics (Zeitschrift für Semiotik), with contributions on questions of gesture in relation to language origin, motion capture as a sign process, the evaluation of scientifc terminologies, a semiotic explanation of "existence", and the semiotics of binary discourse constructions in drama.
Research Interests:
Table of Contents of the thematic issue 37, 1-2 “Zeichen im öffentlichen Raum” of the Zeitschrift für Semiotik, edited and prefaced by Christine Domke.
Research Interests:
Table of content of the special issue “Biosemiotische Ethik / Biosemiotic ethics” of the Zeitschrift für Semiotik which includes German and English articles. – In the past two decades, biosemioticians such as Jesper Hoffmeyer and Kalevi... more
Table of content of the special issue “Biosemiotische Ethik / Biosemiotic ethics” of the Zeitschrift für Semiotik which includes German and English articles. –
In the past two decades, biosemioticians such as Jesper Hoffmeyer and Kalevi Kull have began to tease out the ethical implications of biosemiotics. This impetus has continued in the last decade, with a new generation of scholars attending to this core issue. The foundational argument is that if semiosis is a morally-relevant capacity, and if all living systems are semiotic, then biosemiosis can serve as the basis for justifying the attribution of moral status to humans, to animals, and in a larger perspective to all living beings. Biosemiotic ethics opens the road towards a non-functional ecological perspective that doesn't reduce other beings and ecosystems to their usefulness for human existence.
The issue has been guest-edited and prefaced by Morten Tønnessen, Jonathan Beever and Yogi Hale Hendlin, and contains original research articles by John Deely, Andreas Weber, Hans Werner Ingensiep, Jessica Ullrich, Konrad Ott, Gerald Ostdiek, and by the guest editors, and an interview with the legendary pioneer of the field, Wendy Wheeler.
In the past two decades, biosemioticians such as Jesper Hoffmeyer and Kalevi Kull have began to tease out the ethical implications of biosemiotics. This impetus has continued in the last decade, with a new generation of scholars attending to this core issue. The foundational argument is that if semiosis is a morally-relevant capacity, and if all living systems are semiotic, then biosemiosis can serve as the basis for justifying the attribution of moral status to humans, to animals, and in a larger perspective to all living beings. Biosemiotic ethics opens the road towards a non-functional ecological perspective that doesn't reduce other beings and ecosystems to their usefulness for human existence.
The issue has been guest-edited and prefaced by Morten Tønnessen, Jonathan Beever and Yogi Hale Hendlin, and contains original research articles by John Deely, Andreas Weber, Hans Werner Ingensiep, Jessica Ullrich, Konrad Ott, Gerald Ostdiek, and by the guest editors, and an interview with the legendary pioneer of the field, Wendy Wheeler.
Research Interests:
Inhaltsverzeichnis des Themenhefts “Lachen als Zeichenprozess” der Zeitschrift für Semiotik / Table of Contents of the special issue “Laughing as a Sign Process” of the Journal of Semiotics
Research Interests:
Dies ist eine Präsentation, die die Schwerpunkte der Deutschen Sntax zusammenfasst. Sie orientiert sich dabei weitgehend an: Eisenberg, Peter (2013), Grundriss der deutschen Grammatik, Bd. 2: Der Satz. 4. Aufl. Stuttgart: Metzler.... more
Dies ist eine Präsentation, die die Schwerpunkte der Deutschen Sntax zusammenfasst. Sie orientiert sich dabei weitgehend an: Eisenberg, Peter (2013), Grundriss der deutschen Grammatik, Bd. 2: Der Satz. 4. Aufl. Stuttgart: Metzler.
[aktuelle Version: Kap. 1–8)
[aktuelle Version: Kap. 1–8)