Philosophy

Sign and Meaning in the Perspective of Cognitive Semiotics This course offers an in-depth exploration of the notion of the sign and the conceptual short circuit that binds it to the notion of meaning. It brings into comparison the two major traditions in semiotics: the Peircean lineage and the tradition rooted in Ferdinand de Saussure and its later structuralist reformulations. Within these broad and complex theoretical paradigms, the course will focus in particular on the relationship between semiotics and semantics, with special attention to the conceptual tensions arising from the conflation of meaning and sign function. Through a critical reading of recent contributions to the field, the course will attempt to clarify the scope of cognitive semiotics, a research domain that seeks to foster dialogue between disciplines concerned with the multifaceted phenomenon of meaning. Emphasis will be placed on making explicit the underlying theoretical and philosophical models that shape this interdisciplinary field. In this framework, key notions at the intersection of semantics and semiotics—such as intentionality, (inter)subjectivity, consciousness, and normativity—will be revisited and critically examined.

It is required a basic philosophical knowledge, preferably in the fields of semiotics, linguistics and of philosophy of language, corresponding to the level of the bachelor’s degree in philosophy.

1. Saussure, F. de (1916), Course in General Linguistics. Translated by Wade Baskin (1959; ed. 2011). Edited by Perry Meisel and Haun Saussy. Some selected parts of the text will be commented on and compared with the original French version (1922 ed.) and with the Italian translation by T. De Mauro (1967). 2. Pelkey, J. (2015). Peircean Evolutionary Linguistics: A Prospectus. 10.5840/cpsem201446. 3. Di Paolo, E. A.; Cuffari, E. Clare & De Jaegher, H. (2018). Linguistic Bodies: The Continuity Between Life and Language. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press. 4. Sonesson, G. (2012). The Phenomenological Road to Cognitive Semiotics. In P. Couto Cantero, G. Enríquez Veloso, A. Passeri, & J. M. Paz Gago (Eds.), Culture of communication/Communication of culture – Comunicación de la cultura/Cultura de la comunicación. Proceedings of the 10th World Congress of the International Association for Semiotic Studies (IASS/AIS) (pp. 855-866). Universidade de Coruña. https://lucris.lub.lu.se/ws/portalfiles/portal/5916197/3437169.pdf 5. Sonesson, G. (2012). Semiosis Beyond Signs. On Two or Three Missing Links on the Way to Human Beings. 10.1007/978-94-007-2336-8_5. 6. Zlatev, J., & Konderak, P. (2023). Consciousness and Semiosis. In J. Pelkey (Ed.) Bloomsbury Semiotics Volume 1: History and Semiosis, 169-191. Bloomsbury Academic. 7. Zlatev, J. (2018). Meaning making from life to language: The Semiotic Hierarchy and phenomenology. Cognitive Semiotics. 11. 10.1515/cogsem-2018-0001. Further references will be suggested during the lectures.

Attendance is not mandatory but strongly recommended.

The exam consists of an oral interview (70% of the final grade) and a written paper (30% of the final grade), both in English. Attending students may agree with the teacher to produce a short paper (maximum 15,000 characters) providing a critical analysis of one of the texts included in the exam syllabus. The paper must be submitted by e-mail to the teacher’s institutional address at least one week before the chosen exam date. Alternatively, the paper may be replaced by an in-class presentation following the flipped-classroom format. If students do not opt for either the short paper or the in-class presentation, the exam will be conducted entirely as an oral interview.

The first part of the course will mainly consist of frontal lessons, while the second part will stimulate open discussion, also increasing a direct involvement through the flipped-classroom methodology.