{"title":"Concepts and Categories: A Data Science Approach to Semiotics","authors":"André Włodarczyk","doi":"10.2478/slgr-2022-0010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Compared to existing classical approaches to semiotics which are dyadic (signifier/signified, F. de Saussure) and triadic (symbol/concept/object, Ch. S. Peirce), this theory can be characterized as tetradic ([sign/semion]//[object/noema]) and is the result of either doubling the dyadic approach along the semiotic/ordinary dimension or splitting the ‘concept’ of the triadic one into two (semiotic/ordinary). Other important features of this approach are (a) the distinction made between concepts (only functional pairs of extent and intent) and categories (as representations of expressions) and (b) the indication of the need for providing the mathematical passage from the duality between two sets (where one is a singleton) within systems of sets to category-theoretical monoids within systems of categories while waiting for the solution of this problem in the field of logic. Last but not least, human language expressions are the most representative physical instances of semiotic objects. Moreover, as computational experiments which are possible with linguistic objects present a high degree of systematicity (of oppositions), in general, it is relatively easy to elucidate their dependence on the concepts underlying signs. This new semiotic theory or rather this new research program emerged as the fruit of experimentation and reflection on the application of data science tools elaborated within the frameworks of Rough Set Theory (RST), Formal Context Analysis (FCA) and, though only theoretically, Distributed Information Logic (DIL). The semiotic objects (s-objects) of this theory can be described in tabular datasets. Nevertheless, at this stage of formalisation of the theory, lattices (not trees) can be used as working representation structures for characterizing the components of concept systems and graphs for categories of each layer.","PeriodicalId":38574,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric","volume":"67 1","pages":"169 - 200"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/slgr-2022-0010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract Compared to existing classical approaches to semiotics which are dyadic (signifier/signified, F. de Saussure) and triadic (symbol/concept/object, Ch. S. Peirce), this theory can be characterized as tetradic ([sign/semion]//[object/noema]) and is the result of either doubling the dyadic approach along the semiotic/ordinary dimension or splitting the ‘concept’ of the triadic one into two (semiotic/ordinary). Other important features of this approach are (a) the distinction made between concepts (only functional pairs of extent and intent) and categories (as representations of expressions) and (b) the indication of the need for providing the mathematical passage from the duality between two sets (where one is a singleton) within systems of sets to category-theoretical monoids within systems of categories while waiting for the solution of this problem in the field of logic. Last but not least, human language expressions are the most representative physical instances of semiotic objects. Moreover, as computational experiments which are possible with linguistic objects present a high degree of systematicity (of oppositions), in general, it is relatively easy to elucidate their dependence on the concepts underlying signs. This new semiotic theory or rather this new research program emerged as the fruit of experimentation and reflection on the application of data science tools elaborated within the frameworks of Rough Set Theory (RST), Formal Context Analysis (FCA) and, though only theoretically, Distributed Information Logic (DIL). The semiotic objects (s-objects) of this theory can be described in tabular datasets. Nevertheless, at this stage of formalisation of the theory, lattices (not trees) can be used as working representation structures for characterizing the components of concept systems and graphs for categories of each layer.
与索绪尔(F. de Saussure)的二元(能指/所指)和皮尔斯(Ch. S. Peirce)的三元(符号/概念/对象)的传统符号学方法相比,该理论可以被描述为四元([符号/半元]//[对象/意象]),它要么是沿着符号/普通维度加倍二元方法的结果,要么是将三元的“概念”一分为二(符号/普通)的结果。该方法的其他重要特征是:(a)区分概念(仅限范围和意图的功能对)和范畴(作为表达式的表示);(b)指出需要提供从集合系统内两个集合之间的对偶性(其中一个是单态)到范畴系统内的范畴论单群的数学通道,同时等待在逻辑领域中解决这个问题。最后但并非最不重要的是,人类语言表达是符号学对象最具代表性的物理实例。此外,由于对语言对象可能进行的计算实验呈现出高度的系统性(对立),一般来说,阐明它们对潜在符号的概念的依赖相对容易。这个新的符号学理论,或者更确切地说,这个新的研究项目,是在粗糙集理论(RST)、形式上下文分析(FCA)和分布式信息逻辑(DIL)框架内阐述的数据科学工具应用的实验和反思的结果。该理论的符号对象(s-objects)可以用表格数据集来描述。然而,在理论形式化的这个阶段,格(不是树)可以用作表征概念系统组件和每层类别图的工作表示结构。