Semiotika: Perbedaan antara revisi

Istilah '''semiotika''' berasal dari [[Yunani Kuno|bahasa Yunani]] σημειωτικός ''sēmeiōtikos'', "tanda-tanda jeli"<ref>[http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3Dshmeiwtiko%2Fs σημειωτικός], Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, ''A Greek-English Lexicon'', on Perseus</ref> (dari σημεῖον ''sēmeion'', "tanda, cap"<ref>[http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3Dshmei%3Don σημεῖον], Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, ''A Greek-English Lexicon'', on Perseus</ref>) dan pertama kali digunakan dalam [[bahasa Inggris]] oleh [[Henry Stubbes]]<ref>Stubbe, H.,''The Plus Ultra reduced to a Non Plus'' ... (London, England, 1670), page 75: "... nor is there any thing to be relied upon in Physick, but an exact knowledge of medicinal phisiology (founded on observation, not principles), '''semeiotics''', method of curing, and tried (not excogitated, not commanding) medicines ...."</ref> dalam arti yang sangat tepat untuk menunjukkan cabang ilmu kedokteran yang berkaitan dengan interpretasi dari tanda-tanda.<ref>For the Greeks, "signs" occurred in the world of nature, “symbols” in the world of culture. Not until [[Augustine of Hippo]] would a thematic proposal for uniting the two under the notion of "sign" (''signum'') as transcending the nature/culture divide and identifying symbols as no more than a species (or sub-species) of ''signum'' be formally proposed. See the monograph study on this question ''Le teorie del segno nell’antichità classica'' by Giovanni Manetti (Milan: Bompiani, 1987); trans. by Christine Richardson as ''Theories of the Sign in Classical Antiquity'' (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1993). Classic also is the article by Luigi Romeo, “The Derivation of ‘Semiotics’ through the History of the Discipline”, in ''Semiosis'' 6, Heft 2 (1977), 37–49. See also Andrew LaVelle’s discussion of Romeo on Peirce-l at [http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/3252] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181001220553/http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/3252 |date=2018-10-01 }}.</ref> [[John Locke]] menggunakan istilah '''sem(e)iotike''' dalam Buku 4, Bab 21 dari ''An Essay Concerning Human Understanding'' (1690).<ref>Locke used the Greek word σημιωτική{{sic}} in the [http://books.google.gr/books?id=hGeKsjjtu6EC&source=gbs_navlinks_s 4th ed. of 1700] of his ''Essay concerning Human Understanding''. He notably writes both (a) σημιωτικὴ<!--non-capitalized first letter and featuring a grave-accented last vowel--> and (b) Σημιωτική<!--capitalized first letter and featuring an acute-accented last vowel-->—when term (a) is followed by any kind of punctuation mark, it takes the form (b); see ''[[Ancient Greek accent]]''. The 1689/1690 first edition of Locke’s ''Essay concerning Human Understanding'', in the concluding “Division of the Sciences” chapter, Locke introduces, in §4, "σημιωτική" as his proposed name synonymous with “''the Doctrine of Signs''” for the development of the future study of the ubiquitous role of signs within human awareness. In the 1689/1690 original edition, the “Division of the Sciences” chapter was Chapter XX. In the 4th ed. of 1700, a new Chapter XIX “Of Enthusiasm” is inserted into Book IV, after which the Chapter XX of the 1st ed. becomes Chapter XXI for all subsequent editions.&nbsp;— see in John Deely, ''Why Semiotics?'' (Ottawa: Legas, 2004), 71–88, esp. 77–80 for the editions of Locke’s ''Essay'' from 1689 through 1716. It is an important fact that Locke’s proposal for the development of semiotics, with three passing exceptions as “asides” in the writings of [[George Berkeley|Berkeley]], [[Leibniz]], and [[Étienne Bonnot de Condillac|Condillac]], “is met with a resounding silence that lasts as long as modernity itself. Even Locke’s devoted late modern editor, [[Alexander Campbell Fraser]], dismisses out of hand ‘this crude and superficial scheme of Locke’” (see “Locke’s modest proposal subversive of the way of ideas, its reception, and its bearing on the resolution of an ancient and a modern controversy in logic” in Chap. 14 of Deely’s ''Four Ages of Understanding'', pp. 591–606). In the 1975 Oxford University Press critical edition prepared and introduced by Peter Harold Nidditch, Nidditch tells us, in his “Foreword”, p. vii, that he presents us with “a complete, critically established, and unmodernized text that aims at being historically faithful to Locke’s final intentions”; p. xxv tells us further that “the present text is based on the original fourth edition of the ''Essay''”, and that “readings in the other early authorized editions are adopted, in appropriate form, where necessary, and recorded otherwise in the textual notes”. The term "σημιωτική" appears in that 1700 4th edition, the last published (but not the last prepared) within Locke’s lifetime, with exactly the spelling and final accent found in the 1689/1690 1st edition. Yet if we turn to the final Chapter XXI of the 1975 Oxford edition, we find on p. 720 not "σημιωτικὴ" but rather do we find substituted the "σημειωτικὴ" spelling (and with final accent reversed). (Note that in [[Greek orthography|Modern Greek]] and in [[Pronunciation of Ancient Greek in teaching|some systems for pronouncing classical Greek]], "Σημ'''ι'''ωτικὴ" and "Σημ'''ει'''ωτική" are pronounced the same.)</ref><ref>Prior to Locke, the notion of "sign" as transcending the nature/culture divide was introduced by [[Augustine of Hippo]]—see John Deely, ''Augustine & Poinsot: The Protosemiotic Development'' (Scranton: University of Scranton Press, 2009) for full details of Augustine’s originality on this point—a specialized study was firmly established. Himself a man of medicine, Locke was familiar with this "semeiotics" as naming a specialized branch within medical science. In his personal library were two editions of Scapula’s 1579 abridgement of Henricus Stephanus’ ''Thesaurus Graecae Linguae'', which listed σημειωτική as the name for “diagnostics”, the branch of medicine concerned with interpreting symptoms of disease (“[[symptomatology]]”). Indeed the English physician and scholar [[Henry Stubbes]] had transliterated this term of specialized science into English precisely as “semeiotic” in his 1670 work, ''The Plus Ultra Reduced to a Non Plus'' (p.&nbsp;75).</ref>

Sudut pandang filosofis yang menjadi fundamen bagi semiotika adalah bahwa bahasa dan sejarah mendahului diri manusia. Manusia lahir ke dunia ketika sejarah dan bahasa yang telah ada sebelumnya telah memutuskan penggunaannya. Lalu, manusia hanya dapat hidup, menghidupi, dan dihidupi oleh keberadaannya dalam bahasa. Pada titik inilah, juga serta merta peranan etika dan estetika, nilai didasarkan pada norma-norma yang akan disadari pentingnya memahami semiotika yang juga merupakan sebuah studi tentang bahasa.

Sebuah tanda adalah sesuatu yang hadir untuk (menggantikan) sesuatu yang lain. Tanda yang paling umum adalah bahasa, tetapi harus dipahami bahwa lampu lalu lintas, tanda baca, dan bagian-bagian dalam buku yang distabilo adalah juga tanda. Perlunya perkembangan pada lingkup benda yang telah di buat yg merupakan simbol atau tanda baik umum dan khusus. Pada lingkup yang lebih luas, baju, mimik, dan teks adalah tanda dalam sebuah sistem yang lebih besar.

Definisi Peirce dari istilah "[[Semiotika (grup musik)|semiotik]]" sebagai studi tentang kegunaan yang diperlukan dari tanda-tanda juga memiliki efek pembeda disiplin ilmu dari linguistik sebagai studi fitur kontingen tentang bahasa dunia yang terjadi dan diperoleh dalam perjalanan evolusi mereka.

Dari sudut pandang subjektif, mungkin yang lebih sulit adalah perbedaan antara semiotika dan filsafat bahasa. Dalam arti, perbedaannya terletak antara tradisi-tradisi yang terpisah dan bukan subyek-subyeknya. Penulis yang berbeda telah menyebut diri mereka sebagai "filsuf bahasa" atau "semiotika". Perbedaan ini tidak sesuai dengan pemisahan antara [[filsafat analitik]] dan kontinental.

Dilihat lebih dekat, mungkin ditemukan ada beberapa perbedaan mengenai subjek. Filsafat bahasa membayarnya dengan lebih memperhatikan bahasa alami atau bahasa pada umumnya, sedangkan semiotika sangat berkonsentrasi dengan signifikansi non-linguistik. Filsafat bahasa juga dikenakan koneksinya untuk linguistik, sedangkan semiotika mungkin tampak lebih dekat ke beberapa [[humaniora]] (termasuk [[teori sastra]]) dan antropologi budaya.

* [http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/french/as-sa/index.html Applied Semiotics / Sémiotique appliquée] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100903073250/http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/french/as-sa/index.html |date=2010-09-03 }}