To distinguish
1. the sign that meets the requirements of denoting an object and calling an interpretant
from
2. the sign as the object that does the job
I use representamen to indicate the signobject.

---------

A rhematic connection exists between sign and interpretant if the interpretant is nothing else then an idea called forth.
There is no relation with a particular object at a particular time and place.
There is no possibility to take a stance, as when we are dealing with a propositional relation.
And no reaction is asked for, like when we are dealing with an argumentative relation.
It is something like without reason uttering the sentence 'sheep with five legs' or inserting the SHELL mark.

----------

The connection between sign and interpretant is propositional if an idea is being raised and in addition the idea is connected with an object. But a reaction other than 'it is true' or 'it is false' is not asked for.

Examples:
Without any reason stating
"The first day of Christmas was a rainy day"
or
Without any reason presenting a trademark, for instance the NedTrain trademark, to someone.

---------

If a sign has an argumentative relation to its interpretant thought, then:
1. At least one idea is called up.
2. A relation is being established between idea and object in order to make a judgement possible.
3. A reaction is being asked for.

Always the argumentative relation involves several propositions. The propositions must be connected with each other in a correct way.

An informal example: A Nedtrain job opening in the Saturday newspaper to which the trademark of Nedtrain is attached.

The newspaper section in which the advertisement is placed together with picture mark, name and accompanying text must reinforce each other in such a way that a suitable candidate is going to react.

There are three main types of argument:
1. hypothesis
2. deduction
3. induction

Each of them has its own merits.

Design processes can be used to give a first rough impression of the different types of argument.

Usually they start with a briefing in which the commissioner formulates the aims. The designer uses them for inspiration and guidance and starts making sketches. Often two or three main lines of thought are pursued. This results in some proposals.
This is the hypothetical stage in which new ideas are generated.

The proposals will be discussed with the commissioner. In ideal circumstances the different proposals will be evaluated against the background of the briefing statements. The later function as general rules with which the specific proposals are matched. The proposal that is most true to the general statement will be chosen for further development.
This is the deductive stage in which the ideal conclusion is that a specific proposal is an instance of a general rule (the set of aims).

After finishing, let's say the trademark, the design is send into the world. This means that people are going to be confronted with instances of the design and instances of company behaviour. As a result interpretative habits are being generated.
This is the inductive stage.
This stage makes it possible for SHELL to drop the name out of its trademark.

---------

Colour impressions, sounds, tactile impressions, impressions of taste en smell, but always in their most elementary form, without composition.
See also: Peirce: CP 2.244, 8.334, 8.335

-------

The sinsign aspect rules the factual existence of our signs. See also: replica sinsign.

Also known as token.

The aura of a unique work of art, before the advent of its easy technical reproducibility has its foundation in the sinsign character.

See also: Peirce: CP 2.245, 8.334, 8.334

-------

A legisign is a law or a rule that functions as a sign. We never meet legisigns 'direct'; they need a (replica) sinsign for their embodiment.

So a legisign is a general type that bestows significance to its instances. The words 'one', 'One' en '1' differ in some respects (shape, place). Still we know that we are dealing with the same word. This is due to the legisign character of the sign. Conventional signs for instance are legisigns.

Also known as 'type'.

See: Peirce: CP 2.246, 8.334, 8.335

--------------

To distinguish
1. the sign that meets the requirements of denoting an object and calling an interpretant
from
2. the sign as the object that does the job
I use representamen to indicate the signobject.

To consider a sign in itself is strictly speaking impossible, for we have in that case no way of dealing with the relations between a sign and the object(s) it stands for or the relations between a sign and the interpretant thought(s). In which case we drop the essence of the sign and look at it as if it were an object.

Still, if, for the sake of analysis, we disregard the relations between on the one hand signs and on the other hand their objects and their interpretant thoughts and we look at all the signs we have met as if they stood aloof, what can we say about them?

1. They have an internal structure or, in other words, they consist of combinations of qualities.
2. They have a factual existence, exist as individual entities.
3. They represent general rules of understanding, that is to say, they exist as special instances of rules or conventions.
See qualisign, sinsign and legisign.

---------

Since the concept of interpretant is derived from the concept of sign, I will start with 2.

2 relations between sign and object
There are three possible ways in which a sign may be connected to its objects.
1. The sign is connected with its object through a similarity between sign and object.
2. The sign may be physically connected with its object.
3. The sign may be connected to its objects by convention or a habit that grew.
See: iconic, indexical and symbolic.
1 the kinds of objects possible.
If we are confronted with a sign that states something about the world, then the sign itself presents an object that may be compared with the state of affairs in the world. This gives rise to a distinction between:
1. the object as presented by the sign
2. the object in the world that the sign aims at.
See immediate and dynamical object

------------

Since the concept of interpretant is derived from the concept of sign I will start with 2.

2 Relations sign - interpretant
What are the ways in which a sign may address an interpretant?

A sign may:
1. call into the mind an idea
2. state a relation between an idea and an object
3. raise an interpreting thought that acts like a conclusion out of premises.
See: Rhematic, propositional, argumentative.

1 the kinds of interpretants possible
1. a feeling produced by the sign
2. an effort of the body, of the mind or both
3. a mental sign; this sign even may be a habit (change)
See also emotional, energetic and logical interpretant.

------------

If Pierce is right in his insistence on the triadic character of signs. A monadic, dyadic and triadic treatment must be possible. This scheme only gives the first two treatments. So a third treatment must be possible. The hypothesis is that this third treatment consists in a scheme that gives the conventions that rules the ways in which the interpretant follows:
1. conventions that rule the composition of signs and signscombinations
2. conventions that rule the ways in which the sign connects to the object, how does the sign communicate the reality it is connected to? See for instance Kress on modality markers.
3. conventions that rule signinterpretation

Proposed methods:
1 trying to incorporate the Kress/Leeuwen work. But also Eco has some good remarks.
2 investigation of professional designprocesses, i.e. processes in which signs are being generated (graphical work, new media).

-------

An iconic relation exists when the sign and object have characters in common. A not manipulated photograph is an example. But still a tricky one for the elements of photo and photographed reality do not correspond exactly, is not 1 to 1.
In a certain sense projection rules always play an important part in deciding how the icon is to be matched on reality.
A point stressed heavily by Eco.

For instance, take a car and compare:
1. drawing what you know,
2. drawing what you see,
3. drawing what you experience,
4. drawing at abstraction level x,
Etc.

see also designations

---------

-----

A pure indexical relation exists between a sign and its object when they have a direct physical connection, like smoke and fire or the weathercock and the wind.

But as with iconic relation's conventions enter the game quickly. The pointer of a thermometer has a complicated and today logically mediated relation with the outside world.

An index is a sinsign that has an indexical relation with its object.

See also: replica index

----------

By far the most signs we encounter have a relation with their objects that is mediated by conventions. We are only able to make the connection because we learned rules.

Words have a symbolic relation with their objects. We learned what kind of object are designated by 'horse', 'table' and mind. But there are lots of other kinds of symbols. Take for example the Nike trademark. You can't tell by the wing that it is pointing to a business and calls forth at the same time the idea of victory.

Symbols can be iconic and/or indexical.

In languages like English a noun, like horse, is iconic. It aims at picturing objects. But also a complete story, for instance a metaphor, can be iconic.

Demonstratives are indexical, they point at objects without conveying any information about them, like the word 'there'.

In trademarks we often encounter the combination of a picture mark with a company name. The picture mark often expresses in a iconic way what we may expect from the company that is designated by the indexical name. See for example the NedTrain trademark.

But beware:
1. The name is typecast in a heavy type. This type is chosen in order to establish an iconic relation with the customary type in the branch that deals with heavy machinery.
2. A footprint in the sand has an iconic and an indexical relation with its object at the same time. It is an icon because the form of the foot is a special instance (replica sinsign) of a legisign, i.e. the foot form. It is an index because somebody walked the sand and left the impression (real sinsign).
(sinsign) karakter (het is een afdruk).

------------

-----

-------