Re: SUO: Re: Re: Monosemy, Semantics, and Natural Language
John,
Thanks for the clarification. From your
comment, I take it that the act of interpretation
causes physical phenomena to acquire the status
of a "sign"? In that case smoke rising from a fire
would not be a sign unless there is some cognitive
agent that notices it?
Pat
================
John F. Sowa wrote:
>
> Pat,
>
> The only feature that is common to all signs is
> that some life form (perhaps including robots)
> interprets them.
--
=============================================
Patrick Cassidy
MICRA, Inc. || (908) 561-3416
735 Belvidere Ave. || (908) 668-5252 (if no answer above)
Plainfield, NJ 07062-2054
internet: cassidy@micra.com
=============================================
- References:
- SUO: RE: Re: Monosemy, Semantics, and Natural Language
- From: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@virgilio.it>
- SUO: Re: Monosemy, Semantics, and Natural Language
- From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@bestweb.net>
- SUO: Re: Re: Monosemy, Semantics, and Natural Language
- From: "Leonid Ototsky" <leo@mmk.ru>
- Re: SUO: Re: Re: Monosemy, Semantics, and Natural Language
- From: Patrick Cassidy <pcassidy@bellatlantic.net>
- Re: SUO: Re: Re: Monosemy, Semantics, and Natural Language
- From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@bestweb.net>