Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education

2014 Edition
| Editors: Stephen Lerman

Semiotics in Mathematics Education

  • Norma Presmeg
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4978-8_137

Definitions and Background

Because mathematical objects cannot be apprehended directly by the senses (e.g., Otte 2006), their ontological status requires signs such as symbols and diagrams for their communication and learning. A sign (from ancient Greek semeion, meaning sign) is described by Colapietro (1993) as “something that stands for something else” (p. 179). Then semiosis is “a term originally used by Charles S. Peirce to designate any sign action or sign process; in general, the activity of a sign” (p. 178). Semiotics is “the study or doctrine of signs; the systematic investigation of the nature, properties, and kinds of sign, especially when undertaken in a self-conscious way” (p. 179). Both Duval (2006) and Otte (2006) stressed that mathematical objects should not be confused with their semiotic representations, although these signs provide the only access to their abstract objects. Ernest (2006) suggested that there are three components of semiotic systems (clearly...

Keywords

Signs Semiosis Semiotics Mathematical objects Semiotic representations Communicating mathematically Decontextualization Contextualization Signifier Signified De Saussure Triads Charles Sanders Peirce Object Representamen Interpretant Iconic Indexical Symbolic Intensional interpretant Effectual interpretant Communicational Interpretant Cominterpretant Commens Epistemological triangle Semiotic bundles Diagrammatic reasoning Abduction Onto-semiotic theoretical model Semiotic mediation 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Arzarello F, Sabena C (2011) Semiotic and theoretic control in argumentation and proof activities. Educ Stud Math 77:189–206Google Scholar
  2. Bakker A (2004) Design research in statistics education. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Utrecht University, UtrechtGoogle Scholar
  3. Colapietro VM (1993) Glossary of semiotics. Paragon House, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Duval R (2006) A cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in a learning of mathematics. Educ Stud Math 61:103–131Google Scholar
  5. Falcade R, Laborde C, Mariotti MA (2007) Approaching functions: Cabri tools as instruments of semiotic mediation. Educ Stud Math 66:317–333Google Scholar
  6. Fried M (2011) Signs for you and signs for me: the double aspect of semiotic perspectives. Educ Stud Math 77:389–397Google Scholar
  7. Hall M (2000) Bridging the gap between everyday and classroom mathematics: an investigation of two teachers’ intentional use of semiotic chains. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Florida State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  8. Hoffman M (2006) What is a “semiotic perspective”, and what could it be? Some comments on the contributions to this special issue. Educ Stud Math 61:279–291Google Scholar
  9. Maschietto M, Bartolini Bussi MG (2009) Working with artefacts: gestures, drawings and speech in the construction of the mathematical meaning of the visual pyramid. Educ Stud Math 70:143–157Google Scholar
  10. Morgan C (2006) What does social semiotics have to offer mathematics education research? Educ Stud Math 61:219–245Google Scholar
  11. Otte M (2006) Mathematical epistemology from a Peircean semiotic point of view. Educ Stud Math 61:11–38Google Scholar
  12. Peirce CS (1992) The essential Peirce, vol 1. Houser N, Kloesel C (eds). Indiana University Press, BloomingtonGoogle Scholar
  13. Peirce CS (1998) The essential Peirce, vol 2. Peirce Edition Project (ed). Indiana University Press, BloomingtonGoogle Scholar
  14. Presmeg NC (1998) Ethnomathematics in teacher education. J Math Teach Educ 1(3):317–339Google Scholar
  15. Presmeg N (2003) Ancient areas: a retrospective analysis of early history of geometry in light of Peirce’s “commens”. Svensk Förening för Matematik Didaktisk Forskning, Medlemsblad 8:24–34Google Scholar
  16. Presmeg NC (2006) Semiotics and the “connections” standard: significance of semiotics for teachers of mathematics. Educ Stud Math 61:163–182Google Scholar
  17. Radford L, Schubring G, Seeger F (guest eds) (2011) Signifying and meaning-making in mathematical thinking, teaching and learning: Semiotic perspectives. Special Issue, Educ Stud Math 77(2–3)Google Scholar
  18. Sáenz-Ludlow A (2006) Classroom interpreting games with an illustration. Educ Stud Math 61:183–218Google Scholar
  19. Sáenz-Ludlow A, Presmeg N (guest eds) (2006) Semiotic perspectives in mathematics education. A PME Special Issue, Educ Stud Math 61(1–2)Google Scholar
  20. Santi G (2011) Objectification and semiotic function. Educ Stud Math 77:285–311Google Scholar
  21. de Saussure F (1959) Course in general linguistics. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Steinbring H (2005) The construction of new mathematical knowledge in classroom interaction: an epistemological perspective. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Steinbring H (2006) What makes a sign a mathematical sign? An epistemological perspective on mathematical interaction. Educ Stud Math 61:133–162Google Scholar
  24. Walkerdine V (1988) The mastery of reason: cognitive developments and the production of rationality. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Whitson JA (1997) Cognition as a semiotic process: from situated mediation to critical reflective transcendence. In: Kirshner D, Whitson JA (eds) Situated cognition: social, semiotic, and psychological perspectives. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, MahwehGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MathematicsIllinois State UniversityMaryvilleUSA