2015
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-20663-9_8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Biolinguistics and Biosemiotics

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 67 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It seems that the theoreticians who insist that linguistic metaphors are either too simple or too complex, have knowingly or accidentally embraced, the assertion by Charles S. Peirce that the whole universe seems to be pervaded by signs, of which human thoughts seem to be the "chief ... mode of representation" though he also asserted that "thought is not necessarily connected with a brain. It appears in the work of bees, of crystals, and throughout the purely physical world" (for the Peircean references see the excellent analysis by Winfred Nöth [29], especially in footnotes [103][104].…”
Section: Some Theoreticians Notably Roman Jakobson Andmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It seems that the theoreticians who insist that linguistic metaphors are either too simple or too complex, have knowingly or accidentally embraced, the assertion by Charles S. Peirce that the whole universe seems to be pervaded by signs, of which human thoughts seem to be the "chief ... mode of representation" though he also asserted that "thought is not necessarily connected with a brain. It appears in the work of bees, of crystals, and throughout the purely physical world" (for the Peircean references see the excellent analysis by Winfred Nöth [29], especially in footnotes [103][104].…”
Section: Some Theoreticians Notably Roman Jakobson Andmentioning
confidence: 99%