A part outside the whole? (To Anton Zimmerling's article “Really: syntactics without semiotics?”)

Before delving into the connections between linguistics and semiotics, it is essential to es­tablish a clear demarcation between these fields, which necessitates a precise definition of each subject. However, the approach taken by Anton Zimmerling in this regard is subject to de­bate. In the discuss...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Sergey V. Chebanov
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University 2023-11-01
Series:Слово.ру: балтийский акцент
Subjects:
Online Access:https://journals.kantiana.ru/slovo/5420/44179/
_version_ 1797629458595708928
author Sergey V. Chebanov
author_facet Sergey V. Chebanov
author_sort Sergey V. Chebanov
collection DOAJ
description Before delving into the connections between linguistics and semiotics, it is essential to es­tablish a clear demarcation between these fields, which necessitates a precise definition of each subject. However, the approach taken by Anton Zimmerling in this regard is subject to de­bate. In the discussion of semiotics, the focus tends to lean towards interpretations that recog­nize the dual understanding of signs, while unilateral conceptions of signs are often over­looked. Linguistics is typically confined to the study of language itself, and the treatment of linguistics concerning speech (text) is often seen as a concealed branch of philology. Moreo­ver, it remains unclear whether the distinction between language and speech pertains to lin­guistics or philology. This ambiguity extends to the status of linguistic pragmatics. To address this issue constructively, it is useful to differentiate between five concepts en­compassing language and speech: hermeneutics, philology, linguistics, semiotics, and prag­malinguistics. Each of these concepts delineates a specific ontology and corresponding metho­do­lo­gical approach. By considering them as orthogonal axes within a fan matrix, one can identify 25 possible approaches for studying speech, including those that are currently em­ployed and potential ones. Within this framework, philological linguistics, as discussed by Zimmerling, finds its place, and the transitions of scholars like Witzany from biohermeneu­tics to biopragmalinguistics and Ongstad's shift from philology become more comprehensible.
first_indexed 2024-03-11T10:53:36Z
format Article
id doaj.art-e4a91a4c05524d2aa1c47d3f2200c625
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2225-5346
2686-8989
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-11T10:53:36Z
publishDate 2023-11-01
publisher Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University
record_format Article
series Слово.ру: балтийский акцент
spelling doaj.art-e4a91a4c05524d2aa1c47d3f2200c6252023-11-13T13:54:43ZengImmanuel Kant Baltic Federal UniversityСлово.ру: балтийский акцент2225-53462686-89892023-11-0114415316910.5922/2225-5346-2023-4-9A part outside the whole? (To Anton Zimmerling's article “Really: syntactics without semiotics?”)Sergey V. Chebanov0Saint Petersburg State UniversityBefore delving into the connections between linguistics and semiotics, it is essential to es­tablish a clear demarcation between these fields, which necessitates a precise definition of each subject. However, the approach taken by Anton Zimmerling in this regard is subject to de­bate. In the discussion of semiotics, the focus tends to lean towards interpretations that recog­nize the dual understanding of signs, while unilateral conceptions of signs are often over­looked. Linguistics is typically confined to the study of language itself, and the treatment of linguistics concerning speech (text) is often seen as a concealed branch of philology. Moreo­ver, it remains unclear whether the distinction between language and speech pertains to lin­guistics or philology. This ambiguity extends to the status of linguistic pragmatics. To address this issue constructively, it is useful to differentiate between five concepts en­compassing language and speech: hermeneutics, philology, linguistics, semiotics, and prag­malinguistics. Each of these concepts delineates a specific ontology and corresponding metho­do­lo­gical approach. By considering them as orthogonal axes within a fan matrix, one can identify 25 possible approaches for studying speech, including those that are currently em­ployed and potential ones. Within this framework, philological linguistics, as discussed by Zimmerling, finds its place, and the transitions of scholars like Witzany from biohermeneu­tics to biopragmalinguistics and Ongstad's shift from philology become more comprehensible. https://journals.kantiana.ru/slovo/5420/44179/semioticsphilological linguisticsnon-philological linguisticshermeneuticsphilologypragmalinguisticsfan matriceswitzanyongstadbiosemiotics
spellingShingle Sergey V. Chebanov
A part outside the whole? (To Anton Zimmerling's article “Really: syntactics without semiotics?”)
Слово.ру: балтийский акцент
semiotics
philological linguistics
non-philological linguistics
hermeneutics
philology
pragmalinguistics
fan matrices
witzany
ongstad
biosemiotics
title A part outside the whole? (To Anton Zimmerling's article “Really: syntactics without semiotics?”)
title_full A part outside the whole? (To Anton Zimmerling's article “Really: syntactics without semiotics?”)
title_fullStr A part outside the whole? (To Anton Zimmerling's article “Really: syntactics without semiotics?”)
title_full_unstemmed A part outside the whole? (To Anton Zimmerling's article “Really: syntactics without semiotics?”)
title_short A part outside the whole? (To Anton Zimmerling's article “Really: syntactics without semiotics?”)
title_sort part outside the whole to anton zimmerling s article really syntactics without semiotics
topic semiotics
philological linguistics
non-philological linguistics
hermeneutics
philology
pragmalinguistics
fan matrices
witzany
ongstad
biosemiotics
url https://journals.kantiana.ru/slovo/5420/44179/
work_keys_str_mv AT sergeyvchebanov apartoutsidethewholetoantonzimmerlingsarticlereallysyntacticswithoutsemiotics
AT sergeyvchebanov partoutsidethewholetoantonzimmerlingsarticlereallysyntacticswithoutsemiotics