Objects are whatever we can think about, talk about indicate in live experience, and make new representations of for future interpretation.

Signs and symbols are relations, not things.

Sign is something by knowing which we know something more.

对象是我们可以考虑的任何东西，可以谈论生活经验中的指示，
也可以为未来的解释做出新的表示。

标志和符号是关系，不是事物。

通过了解标志，我们知道更多的东西。

Objects are whatever we can think about, talk about indicate in live experience, and make new representations of for future interpretation.

Signs and symbols are relations, not things.

Sign is something by knowing which we know something more.

对象是我们可以考虑的任何东西，可以谈论生活经验中的指示，
也可以为未来的解释做出新的表示。 标志和符号是关系，不是事物。 通过了解标志，我们知道更多的东西。

Objects are whatever we can think about, talk about indicate in live experience, and make new representations of for future interpretation.

Signs and symbols are relations, not things.

Sign is something by knowing which we know something more.

对象是我们可以考虑的任何东西，可以谈论生活经验中的指示，
也可以为未来的解释做出新的表示。 标志和符号是关系，不是事物。 通过了解标志，我们知道更多的东西。

“By a Type, I mean a general form which can be repeated indefinitely and is in all its repetitions one and the same sign.” (p20)

Indeed , the above procedure just proved Pierce’s definition of “sign/symbol types”, which the presence of the sign types can change their physical representations but at the same time remain their original meanings. Even if I use pen to write these sentences down on a piece of paper, it will not change their meanings. 

Though Google has done its best to translate source sentences that I just typed in, however, the result is not that satisfying. By simply translated the literal meaning of words, the result Mandarin sentences did not offer me a very clear understanding of what the original sources mean and I would get confused if I have not read these sentences in the reading. Thus, I am also interpreting and verifying this translation result by my past experiences and offer them meanings more than its literal meanings that Google Translate offered me. This process explained perfectly what Pierce said “we have sign overlying sign” means.

I then try to think about why the translation result is not that satisfying. During the procedure of translating that happened in the google server and the “blackbox”, comparing the procedure of translating that I do in my own brain, a process of further interpretation, or I would call it “associate” is missing. When I am reading a sentence (a SIGN made of each sign[word]), I am not just reading it, I am also trying to connect what I am reading with my past experiences and put it in different contexts to offer it multiple possible meanings. For example, when I typed “Mirror in a movie represents more than mirror” in the source box, and the translation result in Mandarin would be “电影中的镜子代表的不仅仅是镜子“, which did not offer a further and deeper concept about what mirror truly is, however, since I have learned about semiotics and visual representation before, I could then, interpreted “mirror” in an analogical/ metaphorical way. which I think for now the computer still can not do.

Reference

Prof. Irvine, “Introduction to Peirce’s Semiotic Theory and Computing Systems as Semiotic Systems.”

The triadic theory is very fresh and exciting in the chapter Introducing C. S. Peirce’s Semeiotic (Irvine). In this theory, the symbol is used as a communication medium or a bridge.
The receiver’s understanding of the symbol is called the interpretation item. Then the interpreter turns into the sender, and the interpretation item that has become a symbol is sent to the next receiver. Thus gets a new interpretation, which continues to develop to infinite.

Another exciting thing I found is that “signs and symbols are interpretable only in the social context of use” (Irvin). From my understanding, it means the meaning/relation depends on the social context that is flexible and dynamic. If there is no code and metalanguage provided by the social cultural context, we cannot intuitively infer “meaning” (or “thing”) from “symbols”. For example, if I say “an apple,” people in the English context must know that I am talking about an apple, and if I say “苹果” then only Chinese or people who have studied Chinese can understand that I am talking about an apple. Understanding a meaning needs to be consistent with the cultural context.

English：One loves the sunset when one is so sad.
Chinese：当一个人如此悲伤时，它就爱日落。
Japanese：人は悲しみに沈む夕日を愛しています。

English：One loves the sunset when one is so sad.
Chinese：当一个人如此悲伤时，它就爱日落。
Japanese：人は悲しみに沈む夕日を愛しています。

English：One loves the sunset when one is so sad.
Chinese：当一个人如此悲伤时，它就爱日落。
Japanese：人は悲しみに沈む夕日を愛しています。

Even I change the fonts and the color, I still know the meaning of the sentence. Peirce’s triadic theory explain this point; he said human has the capacity to figure out the invariant patterns and focus on function in a process (Irvin). (Does that mean we should focus on “grammar”?)

In the chapter Introducing C.S. Peirce’s Semeiotic (Irvine), I question symbols reflexivity. What does “reflex back itself at different conceptual “levels mean? Could you please give me some examples?

Reference:

Danae Theocharaki

It is interesting to see how people tend to rely on tech platform or tools to find the correct answer, the right solution, the best option. Even though that can be true, for a myriad of things, people with good knowledge of more than one language who have come across Google Translate know and will divert you from fully trusting this tool. But we never really think of the why. Since this tool isn’t an actual human translator available 24/7 for every language, what we’re seeing (“the target”) is, simply put,  the result of the “decoding” process that has occurred by translate word by word. 

The insert tokens into the “source” text box:

“I hope you’re pleased with yourselves. We could all have been killed — or worse, expelled. Now if you don’t mind, I’m going to bed.” ― Hermione Granger

Greek Translation:

” Ελπίζω να είστε ευχαριστημένοι με τον εαυτό σας. Θα μπορούσαμε όλοι να σκοτωθούμε – ή χειρότερα, να αποβληθούμε. Τώρα αν δεν σας πειράζει, θα κοιμηθώ. “

“Retokenizing the tokens”:

“I hope you’re pleased with yourselves. We could all have been killed — or worse, expelled. Now if you don’t mind, I’m going to bed.”

“I hope you’re pleased with yourselves. We could all have been killed — or worse, expelled. Now if you don’t mind, I’m going to bed.”

“Ελπίζω να είστε ευχαριστημένοι με τον εαυτό σας. Θα μπορούσαμε όλοι να σκοτωθούμε – ή χειρότερα, να αποβληθούμε. Τώρα αν δεν σας πειράζει, θα κοιμηθώ. “

“Ελπίζω να είστε ευχαριστημένοι με τον εαυτό σας. Θα μπορούσαμε όλοι να σκοτωθούμε – ή χειρότερα, να αποβληθούμε. Τώρα αν δεν σας πειράζει, θα κοιμηθώ.”

The contents of the translated sentence can somewhat make sense, however the actual tone and conjugations can be considered pretty far off. To begin with, the quotation marks have not been “translated” properly and would be « ». It happens that the verbs in this sentence are directed towards more than one person which in English is indicated by the presence of the word “yourselves”. In Greek there are two different tones, the “formal” (for someone older than you or of higher position/rank) and the “informal”. However, Google Translate will always translate the verbs into a plural audience which also happens to be similar to the formal tone, making it unrecognisable and also wrong if only referring to one person. Finally, grammatically it has many errors which highlights the boundaries of “machine translation”. 

In Semiotics: The Basics (2017), Chandler discusses Susanne Langer’s interpretation; “symbolic signs ‘are not proxy for their objects but are vehicles for the conception of objects “. Even though this isn’t the strongest example of a sentence for my following point, I wonder if the word changed is meaning then doesn’t the concept of it change too? Exploring this further signifies the relationship between a specific word and its representation/concept/definition but also the unique significance of each sign as “a sign of a sign”.  (Derrida trough Chandler). 

References 

Daniel Chandler, Semiotics: The Basics. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Routledge, 2007. Excerpts.

Prof. Irvine, “Introduction to Key Terms and Concepts: Code.”

What does “code” really mean? Code comes from Latin origins: used to mean a bound book (Irvine). Later, the term broadened to be attributed to a wider range of concepts. Some being, signs, symbols, representation, meanings, and interpretations (Irvine). Modern day code refers to systems of signal-sign units (some of the earliest versions of this were Morse Code) (Irvine). An obvious form of interpretation is via translation.

Example of interpretation code using Google Translate:

English: “The grass is always greener on the other side”

German: “Auf der anderen Seite ist das Gras immer grüner”

(Google Translate)          

Here, Google Translate performs a black box of computational functions. This common English phrase is translated word-by-word in German. Although it isn’t something people commonly say in German, it makes sense – grammatically speaking. In English it’s common to say “Happy New Year” on December 31’st, preempting the new year, whereas in German its common to say “Guten Rutsch!” – which means “Good slide!”. This would be like saying, “I hope you have a good start to the New Year”. This example demonstrates how Google Translates fails to capture colloquial idioms in its translation process, just like the translated example from above.

The following demonstrates a simple retokenizing of the translated text:

“The grass is always greener on the other side”

“Auf der anderen Seite ist das Gras immer grüner”

“The grass is always greener on the other side”

“Auf der anderen Seite ist das Gras immer grüner”

“The grass is always greener on the other side”

“Auf der anderen Seite ist das Gras immer grüner”

References

Irvine, “Introduction to Key Terms and Concepts: Code”

As conscious beings we pursue the acquisition of knowledge  in being able to interpret anything into signs. This includes “words, images, sounds, odors, flavors, actions, events, objects, and so on”. Our ability to understand and define signs (with limitations) we are able to source information broadly. “Semiotics tells us things we already know in a language we will never understand” (Paddy Whannel, cited in Seiter 1992, 31)- Chandler-Semiotics-The Basics. While Wannel’s quote stings true to what many may perceive to be jargon when delving into semiotics, we still use semiotics to decipher and make more concise definitions for the things we know.

In the age of computing, the evolution of semiotics was transferred into code for the computer to be able to decipher it. More specifically, computers use binary code (true-false) to represent symbolic media and adding information into machines is another layer of semiotics and understanding symbols to transfer the knowledge for users to comprehend as a book.

When feeding the Google Translator source text box the following sentences by Oscar Wilde-

“Live! Live the wonderful life that is in you! Let nothing be lost upon you. Be always searching for new sensations. Be afraid of nothing.”

The Google Translator understands it to be English. When I translate it to Urdu, Google takes each words and literally translates the Wilde quote, word for word. With translation, we often see grammatical mistakes. But Google Translate’s objectives are to translate not make much sense of the sentence.

Translated to Urdu:

جیو! آپ میں ہے کہ حیرت انگیز زندگی بسر کریں! آپ پر کچھ ضائع نہ ہونے دیں۔ ہمیشہ نئے احساسات کی تلاش میں رہیں۔ کسی چیز سے خوفزدہ ہوں

The stark difference between English and Urdu script makes it impossible for someone to read the other if they are monoglot. While English, Spanish, French, Italian, German and so many more languages use the same script but the letters stringed together in each of those languages vary in meaning.

Exercising token principle:

Live! Live the wonderful life that is in you! Let nothing be lost upon you. Be always searching for new sensations. Be afraid of nothing.

Live! Live the wonderful life that is in you! Let nothing be lost upon you. Be always searching for new sensations. Be afraid of nothing.

Live! Live the wonderful life that is in you! Let nothing be lost upon you. Be always searching for new sensations. Be afraid of nothing.

جیو! آپ میں ہے کہ حیرت انگیز زندگی بسر کریں! آپ پر کچھ ضائع نہ ہونے دیں۔ ہمیشہ نئے احساسات کی تلاش میں رہیں۔ کسی چیز سے خوفزدہ ہوں

جیو! آپ میں ہے کہ حیرت انگیز زندگی بسر کریں! آپ پر کچھ ضائع نہ ہونے دیں۔ ہمیشہ نئے احساسات کی تلاش میں رہیں۔ کسی چیز سے خوفزدہ ہوں

جیو! آپ میں ہے کہ حیرت انگیز زندگی بسر کریں! آپ پر کچھ ضائع نہ ہونے دیں۔ ہمیشہ نئے احساسات کی تلاش میں رہیں۔ کسی چیز سے خوفزدہ ہوں