[Inquiry] Re: Logic Of The Sciences -- Discussion

[Jon Awbrey]

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

LOTS.  Discussion Note 11

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

A concordance of the various terminologies that Peirce uses
for sign relational roles in this time frame may be helpful.

In his works from this time (1865-1866) Peirce is treating
representation or signhood as a relational state of affairs,
of a type that he'd later express by the rhematic expression:
"representation of ___ to ___".  In a generic terminology, the
sign or representation that is indicated by the expression is
called the "relate" while the first and second blanks mark
the places of the 1st and 2nd "correlates", respectively.

In some systems of grammar, the fillers of the "of" and "to"
slots would be called the "object" and "patient", respectively.
At various times in this period, Peirce will refer to them as
the "object" and "subject", "correlate" and "correspondent",
or "object" and "interpretant", respectively.

One important difference in the nomenclature for relational roles
should be noted.  Names like "relate", "correlate", "correspondent"
or "relate", "first correlate", "second correlate" are bound up with
the order of the slots as they appear in a given rhematic expression,
and this may vary as a function of the particular syntactic form that
is used, but names like "sign", "object", "interpretant" have meanings
that are order-invariant.

Jon Awbrey

P.S.  Oakland Drops Alabama A&M 79-69 in Opener !!!

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
inquiry e-lab: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o