Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Signs as Educators

Peircean Insights

  • Chapter
Pedagogy and Edusemiotics

Part of the book series: Educational Futures ((EDUFUT,volume 62))

Abstract

In a weak sense, it should be indisputable that signs are educators. This is the sense in which one can say that we learn from signs, whether from words or numbers, drawings or pictures, gestures or sense data conveyed by “our great teacher Experience,” as C. S. Peirce (1839–1914) calls her (CP 5.51, 1903).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Bergman, M. (2013). Fields of rhetoric: Inquiry, communication, and learning. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 45(7), 737–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A. (1997). Being there: Putting brain, body, and world together again. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1897/1916). My pedagogic creed. In J. Dewey (Ed.), Democracy and education (pp. 4–6). New York, NY: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Tienne, A. (2003). Learning qua semiosis. S.E.E.D. Journal – Semiotics, Evolution, Energy, and Development, 3, 37–53. Retrieved from http://www.library.utoronto.ca/see/SEED/Vol3-3/De_Tienne.htm

  • Holmes, L. (1966). Peirce on self-control. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 2(2), 113–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nöth, W. (1979). Errors as a discovery procedure in linguistics. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 17, 61–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nöth, W. (2000). Handbuch der Semiotik (2nd Rev. ed.). Stuttgart, Germany: Metzler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nöth, W. (2002). Semiotic form and the semantic paradox of the abstract sign. Visio, 6(4), 153–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nöth, W. (2007). Self-reference in the media. In W. Nöth & N. Bishara (Eds.), Self-reference in the media (pp. 3–30). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nöth, W. (2009a). On the instrumentality and semiotic agency of signs, tools, and intelligent machines. Cybernetics & Human Knowing, 16(3–4), 11–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nöth, W. (2009b). Metareference from a semiotic perspective. In W. Wolf, K. Bantleon & J. Thoss (Eds.), Metareference across media: Theory and case studies (pp. 89–134). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nöth, W. (2010a). The criterion of habit in Peirce’s definitions of the symbol. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 46(1), 82–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nöth, W. (2010b). The semiotics of teaching and the teaching of semiotics. In I. Semetsky (Ed.), Semiotics education experience (pp. 1–20). Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nöth, W. (2011). Some neglected semiotic premises of some radically constructivist conclusions. Constructivist Foundations, 7(1), 12–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nöth, W. (2012). Medieval maps: Hybrid ideographic and geographic sign systems. In I. Baumgärtner & M. Stercken (Eds.), Herrschaft verorten: Politische Kartographie des Mittelalters und der Frühen Neuzeit (pp. 335–353). Zürich, Switzerland: Chronos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peirce, C. S. (1931–1958). Collected papers, Vols. 1–6, C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Vols. 7–8, A. W. Burks (Ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (quoted as CP).

    Google Scholar 

  • Peirce, C. S. (1963–1966/1979). The Charles S. Peirce papers (30 reels, 3rd microfilm ed.). Cambridge, MA: The Houghton Library, Harvard University, Microreproduction Service (quoted as MS).

    Google Scholar 

  • Santaella, L. (1999). A new causality for the understanding of the living. Semiotica, 127, 497–519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, H. A. (2010). Peircean theory, psychosemiotics, and education. In I. Semetsky (Ed.), Semiotics education experience (pp. 37–52). Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stjernfeldt, F. (2011). Signs conveying information: On the range of Peirce’s notion of propositions: Dicisigns. International Journal of Signs and Semiotic Systems, 1(2), 40–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turrisi, P. (2002). O papel do pragmatismo de Peirce na educação. Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia, 3, 122–136.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pontíficia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC), Brazil

    Winfried Nöth

Authors
  1. Winfried Nöth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Waikato, New Zealand, RosNOU, Moscow, Russia

    Inna Semetsky

  2. University of Roehampton, UK

    Andrew Stables

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Sense Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Nöth, W. (2014). Signs as Educators. In: Semetsky, I., Stables, A. (eds) Pedagogy and Edusemiotics. Educational Futures Rethinking Theory and Practice , vol 62. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-857-2_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation