К построению функциональной типологии знаков

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a sketch of the functional classification of the sign as the main object of semiotics. The well-known structural classifications of the sign as a carrier of meaning and information were based on its use in communication, while the cognitive value of the sign as a means of cognition was emphasized. As a mental entity, developing in the process of cognition, from the idea of Possibility to revealing Regularity, the sign was represented by Ch. Pierce, who defined its basic, cognitive, function. In linguistics the role of the sign in communication was especially emphasized, systems of communicative functions of the language sign were proposed by K. Bühler and R. Jacobson. However, the specific tasks that different signs perform are not only related to the aspect of meaning, but also to their significance. Signs that regulate social interaction, as well as signs of art, highlight the value side of their content. R. Barthes believed that the function of a thing can be determined on the basis of its structure – in decomposing it into component parts and then in recomposing it; this way you can understand how the whole works. If you use this method, you can distinguish between different functional character types. In the process of semiosis semantic relations between the two sides of the sign (signans vs signatum) can be different, which allows us to distinguish three main functional types of signs: identifiers, regulators and models. A sign-identifier is usually closely connected with its object, it seems to be “talking about itself”; a sign-regulator has the character of an indication or imperative, it “tells you”, indicating the path to its object; a sign-model recreates the image of an object in another space – it “tells about something”. Modeling signs represent the most complex level of sign organization and semiotic problems. Modeling can use iconic techniques, including the principle of harmonic similarity (or syntactic coding, according to U. Eco), or use the principle of functional similarity. Modifications are possible for any type of signs. The functional types of signs are in a sense correlated with the functions of language in the model of K. Bühler. The proposed classification could systematize ideas about the functions of the sign and the essence of semiosis, in which, according to Ch. Morris, “something functions as a sign”. Functional typology of signs can serve as a methodological basis for a particular semiotic analysis in different areas of semiotics and linguistics.