A school of thought , or intellectual tradition , is the perspective of a group of people who share common characteristics of opinion or outlook of a philosophy , discipline , belief , social movement , economics , cultural movement , or art movement .
41-413: The Tartu–Moscow Semiotic School is a scientific school of thought in the field of semiotics that was formed in 1964 and led by Juri Lotman . Among the other members of this school were Boris Uspensky , Vyacheslav Ivanov , Vladimir Toporov , Mikhail Gasparov , Alexander Piatigorsky , Isaak I. Revzin , and others. As a result of their collective work, they established a theoretical framework around
82-448: A 19th-century tradition of evolutionary explanation in linguistics. A dualistic opposition between synchrony and diachrony has been carried over into philosophy and sociology , for instance by Roland Barthes and Jean-Paul Sartre . Jacques Lacan also used it for psychoanalysis . Prior to de Saussure, many similar concepts were also developed independently by Polish linguists Jan Baudouin de Courtenay and Mikołaj Kruszewski of
123-497: A closer inspection, this turns out to be an illusion because each picture is static ('synchronic') and there is nothing between the pictures except a lifeless frame. In a similar manner, the "life" of language—simply language change —consists of a series of static points, which are physically independent of the previous stage. In such a context, Saussure warns against the confusion of synchrony and diachrony expressing his concern that these could be not studied simultaneously. Following
164-561: A defined object is static, and the need to also take into account cultural dynamics led Juri Lotman to introduce the notion of semiosphere. Although the attributes of semiosphere resemble those of text (definability, structurality, coherence), it is an important shift from the point of view of culture's analyzability. Human culture constitutes the global semiosphere, but that global system consists of intertwined semiospheres of different times (diachrony of semiosphere) and different levels (synchrony of semiosphere). Each semiosphere can be analyzed as
205-420: A given stage in the history of English functions as a whole. The diachronic approach, by contrast, studies language change by comparing the different stages. This latter approach is what surface analysis often relies on, as a given composition may not have appeared synchronously in history. The terms synchrony and diachrony are often associated with historical linguist Ferdinand de Saussure , who considered
246-445: A high spirit of academic tolerance, an openness to all-Europe cultural trends. [From: Lotman, Juri. 2016[1982]. Universitet – nauka – kul’tura [University – science – culture]. In: Lotman, Juri M.; Uspenskij Boris A. Perepiska 1964–1993 . Tallinn: Tallinn University Press, 679–688.] A distinctive feature of TMS was the combination of structuralist and semiotic approaches to language, literature and culture. Consisting of nine “theses”,
287-424: A language at a moment in time without taking its history into account. In contrast, a diachronic (from δια- "through" and χρόνος "time") approach, as in historical linguistics , considers the development and evolution of a language through history. For example, the study of Middle English —when the subject is temporally limited to a sufficiently homogeneous form—is synchronic focusing on understanding how
328-897: A linguistic circle founded in Prague ; and the Tartu–Moscow Semiotic School , whose representatives lived in Tartu and Moscow . An example of a school of thought in Christianity (and Gnosticism ) is Neoplatonism , which has massively influenced Christian thought , from Augustinianism to Renaissance / Humanism to the present day. This philosophy -related article is a stub . You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it . Diachrony and synchrony Synchrony and diachrony are two complementary viewpoints in linguistic analysis. A synchronic approach (from Ancient Greek : συν- "together" and χρόνος "time") considers
369-412: A material creation, experience, occurrence, etc., particularly those things that are culturally integrated or artistic. With the boundary of content set, the interrelations between it and exterior texts can be more clearly examined. As the boundaries are variable there is no strict definition of how a Text can be made of subject matter, and instead it emphasizes the cultural signification seen in comparing
410-508: A series of texts, a supercode of textuality, or a memory storage pattern utilizing texts. The paradigmatic shift in Lotman's works of the 1980s (from “signs” to “texts”, from the binary understanding of meaning to the “clusters of meanings” typical of complex texts) was just a further step in his permanent effort to illustrate tension between the individual-singular and the systemic-holistic. The notion of meaning-generation and amplification and
451-527: A simple revival of formalist. Even in the first volume of Trudy po znakovõm sistemam (Lectures on structural poetics 1964), Lotman was quite critical to pure formalist statement and methods. 2nd phase The next step was to introduce the concept of text as the principal concept of cultural semiotics (Chernov text as “main hero” of TMS), since as a term it can denote both a discrete artefact and an invisible abstract whole (a mental text in collective consciousness or subconsciousness). Text and textualisation symbolize
SECTION 10
#1732775874093492-422: A single whole, yet we need to bear in mind that each analyzed whole in culture is a part of a greater whole, which is an important methodological principle. It is an infinite dialogue of whole and parts and the dynamics of the whole dimension. School of thought The phrase has become a common colloquialism which is used to describe those that think alike or those that focus on a common idea. The term's use
533-514: A system of semiotic systems. Lotman: "The alumni of Moscow University and Leningrad University formed the Soviet school of semiotics as a synthesis of these two traditions in the humanities. To them, a third tradition was added: the University of Tartu. It was not a mere chance: the University of Tartu had its own, well-established linguistic school, and, moreover, was always characterized by
574-428: Is central to the later semiotics of culture, and as a concept it is given explicit characterization in an article of Lotman's first published in 1984. The semiosphere is the semiotic space outside of which semiosis cannot exist. The semiosphere precedes any individual text or isolated language, it is the “greater system” outside of which language does not only function, it does not even exist. The principal attribute of
615-496: Is common place. Schools are often characterized by their currency, and thus classified into "new" and "old" schools. There is a convention, in political and philosophical fields of thought, to have "modern" and "classical" schools of thought. An example is the modern and classical liberals . This dichotomy is often a component of paradigm shift . However, it is rarely the case that there are only two schools in any given field. Schools are often named after their founders such as
656-653: Is considered one very distinct and innovative branch of general semiotics, and during its development a controversial one. Alongside the five authors mentioned, the school had a broad international membership, and amongst this decentralized constituency there is a great diversity in publications covering a wide variety of topics. A brief timeline may help contextualize: - USSR supported development in linguistics. - Juri Lotman's associate Igor Černov connects Moscow and Estonian intellectuals - Estonian interest in structuralism , alongside Tartu support for Russian Studies, makes such crossover easy. The Taru-Moscow School of semiotics
697-507: Is the oldest semiotics journal in the world, established in 1964. In its first period, the 1960s and 1970s, TMSS followed a structuralist approach and was strongly influenced by Russian formalism . The term " semiotics " was banned in the Soviet Union at that time, and the researchers used the obfuscated term "secondary modeling systems" ( Russian : Вторичные моделирующие системы ) coined by Juri Lotman and Vladimir Uspensky , in
738-406: The neo-grammarian manifesto according to which linguistic change is based on absolute laws. Thus, it was argued that ancient languages without surviving data could be reconstructed limitlessly after the discovery of such laws. In contradiction to his predecessors, Saussure demonstrated with multiple examples in his Course that such alleged laws are too unreliable to allow reconstructions far beyond
779-567: The semiotics of culture . The Tartu–Moscow School of Semiotics developed an original method of multidimensional cultural analysis . The languages of culture are interpreted as secondary modelling systems in relation to verbal language. This method permits a productive understanding of the use of different languages of culture. This school is widely known for its journal, Sign Systems Studies (formerly published in Russian as Труды по знаковым системам ), published by Tartu University Press . It
820-623: The " Rinzai school " of Zen , named after Linji Yixuan ; and the Asharite school of early Muslim philosophy , named after Abu l'Hasan al-Ashari . They are often also named after their places of origin, such as the Ionian school of philosophy , which originated in Ionia ; the Chicago school of architecture , which originated in Chicago, Illinois ; the Prague school of linguistics, named after
861-466: The 1960s, an official birth year for the semiotics of culture could be marked as 1973, when Lotman - alongside Vjacheslav V. Ivanov , Aleksandr M. Pjatigorskij , Vladimir N. Toporov , and Boris A. Uspenskij - first published the manifesto "Theses on the semiotic study of cultures (as applied to Slavic texts)". The Text, considered the foundational tool of the School, is used to view the boundaries of
SECTION 20
#1732775874093902-553: The University of Tartu and led by Kalevi Kull , Peeter Torop , Mihhail Lotman , Timo Maran , and others. The semiotics of culture is a research field within general semiotics founded by the Tartu-Moscow School. It originated in the structural linguistics of Ferdinand de Saussure , the ideas of Russian Formalism, and the Prague Linguistic Circle , alongside various individual theorists, although
943-414: The boundaries of the text to its use in society. A general statement of the research program of the semiotics of culture is that it aims to examine the entire aggregate of sign systems as united by culture, to ascertain their number, their hierarchy, their mutual influence, or their functional correlation, both synchronically and diachronically . The semiosphere is a concept of Juri Lotman's and one that
984-412: The definition of the object of study; the textual aspect of text analysis means the operation with clearly defined sign systems, texts or combinations of texts. The processual aspect of text analysis presupposes definition, construction or reconstruction of a whole. Thus the analysis assembles the concrete and the abstract, the static and the dynamic in one concept—the text. 3rd phase Yet the analysis of
1025-529: The early 1960s and as a result of various summer schools organized in Estonia, the Tartu-Moscow School was established. With Juri Lotman as its main representative, the Tartu-Moscow School developed the tradition of the semiotics of culture. In 1973, Lotman, Vjacheslav V. Ivanov , Aleksandr M. Pjatigorskij , Vladimir N. Toporov , and Boris A. Uspenskij first published the manifesto Theses on
1066-456: The empirical data. Therefore, in Saussure's view, language change (diachrony) does not form a system. By contrast, each synchronic stage is held together by a systemic equilibrium based on the interconnectedness of meaning and form. To understand why a language has the forms it has at a given stage, both the diachronic and the synchronic dimension must be considered. Saussure likewise rejected
1107-465: The idea of the Darwinian linguists August Schleicher and Max Müller , who considered languages as living organisms arguing that linguistics belongs to life sciences . Saussure illustrates the historical development of languages by way of his distinction between the synchronic and the diachronic perspective employing a metaphor of moving pictures . Even though objects on film appear to be moving, at
1148-420: The manifesto Theses on the semiotic study of cultures (as applied to Slavic texts) laid the foundation for the semiotics of culture and represents a milestone in the legacy of the Tartu-Moscow School. It was co-authored by Juri M. Lotman, Vjacheslav V. Ivanov, Aleksandr M. Pjatigorskij, Vladimir N. Toporov, and Boris A. Uspenskij. The first two theses describe the research program of the semiotics of culture, and
1189-607: The name of the Tartu Summer Schools on semiotics.. Since the 1980s, the approach of TMSS can be characterized as post-structuralist (highly dynamic and complex), and is connected with the introduction of Juri Lotman 's concept of semiosphere and its relation to organicism . From 1990s, TMSS has been succeeded by the Tartu Semiotics School, which is based in the Department of Semiotics of
1230-626: The posthumous publication of Saussure's Course, the separation of synchronic and diachronic linguistics became controversial and was rejected by structural linguists including Roman Jakobson and André Martinet , but was well-received by the generative grammarians , who considered Saussure's statement as an overall rejection of the historical-comparative method. In American linguistics, Saussure became regarded as an opponent of historical linguistics. In 1979, Joseph Greenberg stated By contrast, Mark Aronoff argues that Saussure rooted linguistic theory in synchronic states rather than diachrony breaking
1271-582: The procedures of structuralist linguistics. Opoyaz, the Moscow Linguistic Circle and the Prague Linguistic Circle the predecessors of TMS The group shared an interest in the Russian formalists and in contemporary linguistics, semiotics and cybernetics. During the 1970s prominent members of the group, such as Juri Lotman and Boris Uspenskii, turned from more theoretical and formalized work to historical studies of culture as
Tartu–Moscow Semiotic School - Misplaced Pages Continue
1312-461: The semiosphere is the presence of a boundary, which translates external communications into understandable information. The division between the core (completely semioticized) and the periphery (partially semioticized, in constant flux with the asemiotic) is a law of the internal organization of the semiosphere. The semiosphere is an exceptionally dynamic mechanism with synchronic and diachronic dimensions and multiple codes engaging with each other. In
1353-508: The semiotic study of cultures (as applied to Slavic texts), which laid the foundation for the semiotics of culture and represents a milestone for the school. The theoretical origins of the school lie in the structural linguistics of Ferdinand de Saussure, the ideas of Russian Formalism, and the Prague Linguistic Circle, alongside other individual theorists, although the theories developed in the semiotics of culture (especially its later iterations) depart radically from these influences. The school
1394-491: The semiotics of semiosphere. 1st Phase Cultural semiotics started from the realization that in a semiotical sense culture is a multilanguage system, where, in parallel to natural languages, there exist secondary modelling systems (mythology, ideology, ethics etc.), which are based on natural languages, or which employ natural languages for their description or explanation (music, ballet) or language analogization ("language" of theatre, "language" of movies). The Soviet semiotics
1435-649: The synchronic perspective as systematic but argued that language change is too unpredictable to be considered a system. The concepts were theorized by the Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure, professor of general linguistics in Geneva from 1896 to 1911, and appeared in writing in his posthumous Course in General Linguistics published in 1916. Saussure's teachers in historical-comparative and reconstructive linguistics such as Georg Curtius advocated
1476-488: The text's informational richness. The TMS’ initial impetus toward “exact knowledge” in the humanities branched into a whole array of various approaches, developed by the school's participants: bright thinkers whose paths ultimately drifted apart. Their dialogue considerably increased reflection on their own theoretical premises, frameworks, and procedures, yet did not yield a general synthesis. Cultural semiotics has developed from linguistic semiotics via text semiotics towards
1517-414: The theories developed in the semiotics of culture (especially its later iterations) depart radically from these influences. Juri Lotman is considered the main representative of the semiotics of culture. Terms central to the semiotics of culture include "text" , "modeling system", "language", Lotman's conception of the "semiosphere", and of course "culture" itself. While its ideas were being formulated in
1558-474: The third through to the ninth describe various considerations and concepts relevant to culture and its study through the use of the Text as an analytic tool. An condensed and abridged summary could read as follows - Cultures can be studied through semiotic inquiry, as its building blocks are “texts”. Texts are the qualitative tool used to analyze cultures, and many things can be a text. Culture can be considered as
1599-488: The view on the artistic text as a device that performs a very important and complex work by activating linguistic, cultural, and psychological resources became a key topic in many TMS publications. In a work of art, the creative function of language, its ability to produce new meanings, is especially and intensely felt, thanks to which the text becomes a capacitor of cultural memory: an increase in complexity results from constant re-contextualization and re-reading that amplifies
1640-510: Was formed when a diverse group of scholars joined informally from the 1950s to 1980s to provide alternatives to the regnant Soviet approaches to language, literature and culture. Their work develops the linguistics of Saussure, elaborated by Trubetzkoi and Hjelmslev. They subsequently came to treat art works and other cultural artifacts as the products of ‘secondary modelling systems’, that is, as elements arranged according to rules that could be seen as language-like and hence accessible to analysis by
1681-588: Was rooted in tradition developed not by pure linguists, as it has been in Europe, and especially in United States, but also on ideas produced by literary scientists, especially in the OPOYAZ, Moscow Linguistic Circle and other formal and informal groups of the twenties combined both linguistic and literary interests. TMS that developed in sixties sought actively incorporate elements of formalists legacy, but as not