Some Original Notes by Margith Strand/ Fielding Graduate University/ July 25, 2011

Peircean model of the sign: Peirce's model of the sign had three elements - the representamen, an interpretant and an object. It is thus a triadic model. See also: Saussurean model:the Peircean model appears to be more functional/ May 22, 2011/Margith Strand How do you account for the differentiation in the realization of the abstract to physical reality?The abstract terms hold the key to the physical world and this all seems to be missing in the discussions in the signs and even for the Precians. If we have the concrete, being the doorknob..how do we design the color of the doorknob or decide on the color of the doorknob? This process is the background, the contextual thinking and the Phenomenological-Contextual mechanisms. The connections are a flow of decision making and so the channeling may work here. I may not be looking far enough..the lucid and the luminescence in the brightness:) Intuitively, there is some transcedence going on here in transferring from the abstract to the concrete..I do think, though..it is concrete broken down to generate the abstract...in terms of those "words" that are called "abstract"

Object: Term used in Peirce's triadic model of the sign to describe the referent of the sign - what the sign 'stands for'. Note that unlike Saussure's abstract signified, the referent is an object in the world. This need not exclude the reference of signs to abstract concepts and fictional entities as well as to physical objects, but Peirce's model allocates a place for an physical reality which Saussure's model did not feature (though Peirce was not a naive realist, and argued that all experience is mediated by signs). See also: Peircean model of the signObject is the Structuration (Theory) ??? ergo…Transcendentalism??..spirit of the process..agency and structure..intentionality override…for Constitution of Meaning to hold..check out the logisticsJ I don’t know…I know that the Constitution of Meaning is it…Phenomenology..Spirit of the Meaning is the Constitution..check out the difference in the meaning of this.Term used in Peirce's triadic model of the sign to describe the referent of the sign - what the sign 'stands for'. Note that unlike Saussure's abstract signified, the referent is an object in the world. This need not exclude the reference of signs to abstract concepts and fictional entities as well as to physical objects, but Peirce's model allocates a place for an physical reality which Saussure's model did not feature (though..if the referent of the sign..i.e..what the sign stands for is the object, and the sign stands for the structuration, then …the structuration is the object..so we must define the structuration as a part of the learning structure..do not use the signified and the Saussure’s model..triadic is better because of the interpretant..I am also interested in perception to function for the learning structure of distance education….Parsimony, ontological: See Ontology Perceptual codes: These is classified here as a type of interpretative code. Some semioticians regard sensory perception as a code. Various arguments are encountered, in particular: a) that interpretation cannot be separated from perception; b) that human perceptual apparatus differs from that of other organisms and so presumably different species inhabit different perceptual realities; and/or c) that even within the human species, that there are socio-cultural, sub-cultural and environmental differences in perception. Perceptual codes must thus be learnt. As a semiotic code, perception involves representation. Unlike most codes, the notion of a perceptual code does not assume intentional communication (there need be no 'sender'). See