Literary biosemiotics and the postmodern ecology of John Clare

Coletta, W. John

doi:10.1515/semi.1999.127.1-4.239

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Earlier (Coletta 1996(Coletta , 1999, we have argued that the skeleton of our language, syntax, is analogous to, or literally derives in part from, the visual syntax (or layering and embeddedness of figures of sight) of biological mimicry in the context of predator-prey relationships. In some cases of biological mimicry, animals -which, like verbal phrases, have phrasal heads and directionality and embedded signs that are detachable and substitutable -are themselves the embodiment of complex visual puzzles the meaning of which is a ''matter'' of interpretation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The semiosis of stone: A “rocky” rereading of Samuel Taylor Coleridge through Charles Sanders Peirce

Coletta¹,

Wiegand²,

Haley³

2009

Semiotica

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present several existential-like graphs and models of the ontological links found along a continuum from physiosemiosis to anthroposemiosis. Our models derive from our rereading of Samuel Taylor Coleridge's theories of the symbol and of his notion of the ''outness'' of mind in terms of Charles Sanders Peirce's ''semeiotic,'' a rereading by which we introduce an ecocritical and pansemiotic mode of literary ecology called Renewable Historicism and argue for a new, distributed understanding of intentionality, one that connects the self-organization of rocks in the lithosphere to that phenomenon whereby inanimate objects (such as rocks) get themselves transformed into human objectives.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Paul Bouissac (1993) writes compellingly of the necessity of even the biological origin of the arbitrary sign. And the natural world is itself a semiotic sphere both of representation and of misrepresentation, irony, and earnestness (Coletta 1993(Coletta , 1996(Coletta , 1997(Coletta , 1999.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%