General
Introduction
Semiotics defined:
1. studies signs relating to natural
languages as well as other cultural sign systems;
2. Systems of signification can be understood
and elaborated upon through metalinguistic operations, that is,
through access to secondary level of discourse . . .
3. Systems of signification encompass
denotative signs [and] connotative codes.
In short the universe of signs includes:
the non-physiological part of perception; conception; scientific modes
of discourse; and the value systems, or the socially constituted world
views of social subjects, . . . " (2-3)
[different definitions] Thus the
issue framed by the articulated differences in approaches to semiotics
in general becomes whether or not a unified perspective can be found to
integrate at once all the social sciences and psychology, on the one hand,
and logic and epistemology, on the other, by some general theory of semiotics
-- and whether biology, ecology, and ethology can be included in the synthesis,
. . . " (4)
[The book's] approach -- asserts
that semiotic systems contain, besides denotative codes, socially constructed
values or ideologies which operate as connotative codes inseparable from
denotation. (4)
Two
separate approaches to urban
semiotics:
1. purely semiotic one and focuses
on spatial systems [disregarding social context];
2. links such systems with their social
contexts through the study of the ideology incorporated in them.
Socio-semiotics, therefore, studies both
systems of denotation and metalinguistic systems in relation to the culturally
specific systems of connotation operating behind them. (5)
Critique
of Kevin Lynch and cognitive geography
Lynch['s environmental
image of city] ignored the connotaive level,
There is little argument that the work
of Lynch has led to a more human approach to urban design; one that explicitly
recognizes the role of users in fathoming urban space. Yet . . .
-
cognitive mapping research relies on a methodological
individualism which accepts unquestioningly intra-subjective pictures of
the environment as the basis of urban behavior. Thus cognitive approaches
arrive at the signification of the city through the perception
of its inhabitants rather than their conception.
-
urban environment is reduced to a perceptual
knowledge of physical form.
-
the famous five-fold distinction of paths,
edges, nodes and so on, reduce the use of urban environments to activity
of movement.
re-evaluating
Lynch's contributions:
. . .
-- has uncovered some important
means by which inhabitants of the city organize their behavior. Chief
among these is the realization that conceptual stimuli in the environment
play a more fundamental role than mere formal perscption, so that physical
forms are assigned a certain significations which then aid in directing
behavior. Urban structures act as stimuli because they have
become symbols and not because they support behavior by facilitating
movement. Thus we can say that the image of the city is a conceptual
rather than perceptual one.
[this is where socio-semiotics comes in.]
Urban/Socio-Semiotics
--different kinds
1. architectual semiotics -- weaknesses:
monolithic view of city inhabitants by ignoring the social stratification
of signification and by clustering together finance capitalists, real estate
developers, the working class, and teenage graffiti sprayers as the same
group of inhabitants . . .
2. The formal semiotic approach -- it
limits analysis to the discovery of generative grammars underlying spatial
structures. Urban semiotics then becomes the study of spatial structures
derived from internalized grammars of patterns and designs which become
externalized through semiosis.
3. [The editors' perspective] -- urban
space is not a text but a "pseudo-text," because it is produced by non-semiotic
processes as well as semiotic ones and because there is not always a sender
in the historically conditioned built environment. A socio-semiotic
analysis of an urban sign system or "pseudo-text" would then procede as
follows.
-
On the one hand, observational data would
be collected on both the substance and form of the expression.
In the first case (substance), a description of material urban space invested
by signifcation would be obtained, while in the second (form), attention
would be given to the specific spatial elements which are the vehicles
of signification.
-
On the other hand, cultural research is required
to document the forms and substance of the content. Such a task requires,
firstly, attention to historically and culturally established signification,
realized through research into the general cultural traits of the society
within which the settlement space is embedded. Secondly, considerable
case study research is required to document the codified ideology structuring
the signified of space.
|