Perceive, Co-opt, Modify, and Live! Organism as a Centre of Experience

Kleisner, Karel

doi:10.1007/s12304-010-9093-x

Cited by 17 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…More specifically, semiotic co-option describes a situation when some feature, either novel or previously existing, that was shaped for serving a particular role or having a specific meaning within the Umwelt of an organism, is recognized as meaningful by another organism (cf. Kleisner 2010). Semiotic cooption is a phenomenon that is theoretically describable on all levels of biological organization above the cellular level.…”

Section: When Nature Remodels Itself-semiotic Co-optionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards an Evolutionary Biosemiotics: Semiotic Selection and Semiotic Co-option

Maran

Kleisner

2010

Biosemiotics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In biosemiotics, living beings are not conceived of as the passive result of anonymous selection pressures acted upon through the course of evolution. Rather, organisms are considered active participants that influence, shape and re-shape other organisms, the surrounding environment, and eventually also their own constitutional and functional integrity. The traditional Darwinian division between natural and sexual selection seems insufficient to encompass the richness of these processes, particularly in light of recent knowledge on communicational processes in the realm of life. Here, we introduce the concepts of semiotic selection and semiotic co-option which in part represent a reinterpretation of classical biological terms and, at the same time, keep explanations sensitive to semiosic processes taking place in living nature. We introduce the term 'semiotic selection' to emphasize the fact that actions of different semiotic subjects (selectors) will produce qualitatively different selection pressures. Thereafter, 'semiotic co-option' explains how semiotic selection may shape appearance in animals through remodelling existing forms and relations. Considering the event of co-option followed by the process of semiotic selection enables us to describe the evolution of semantic organs.Evolutionary topics are central for contemporary biology. And yet, the role of organisms as living subjects in evolution is generally neglected. Biological organisms are rather considered only as being subjected to physical or anonymous

show abstract

Section: When Nature Remodels Itself-semiotic Co-optionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards an Evolutionary Biosemiotics: Semiotic Selection and Semiotic Co-option

Maran

Kleisner

2010

Biosemiotics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The specifics of this process, and the patterns and limitations in it, are, however, not very well scrutinised in semiotics. Karel Kleisner's concept of semiotic cooption, defined as a situation when the character that was shaped serving a particular role or having a specific meaning within the Umwelt of an organism is coopted by another organism gaining thus a new meaning within its Umwelt, hints at a possible direction (Kleisner 2010). In such a process of sign formation, similarity and categorisation can turn out to be vital mechanisms.…”

Section: Searching For Common Ground Between Semiotics and Evolutionary Biologymentioning

confidence: 99%

John Maynard Smith’s typology of animal signals: A view from semiotics

Maran¹

2009

SSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Approaches to animal communication have for the most part been quite different in semiotics and evolutionary biology. In this context the writings of a leading evolutionary biologist who has also been attracted to semiotics — John Maynard Smith — are an interesting exception and object of study. The present article focuses on the use and adaptation of semiotic terminology in Maynard Smith’s works with reference to general theoretical premises both in semiotics and evolutionary biology. In developing a typology of animal signals, Maynard Smith employs the concepts of icon, index and symbol to denote distinct signal classes. He uses “indices” or “indexes” to express a signal type where the relation between signal properties and meaning is restricted because of physical characteristics. Such approach also points out the issue of the motivatedness of signs, which has had a long history in semiotics. In the final part of the article the usage and content of the concepts of signal form and meaning in Maynard Smith’s writings are analysed. It appears that in evolutionary biology, the “signal” is a vagueconcept that may denote a variety of things from an animal’s specific physiological status to artificial theoretical constructs. It also becomes evident that in actual usage the concept of signal often includes references to the receiver’s activity and interpretation, which belong rather to the characteristics of sign process. The positive influence of Maynard Smith’s works on semiotics could lie in paying attention to the role of physical necessities in animal communication. Physical constraints and relations also seem to have a significant role in semiotic processes although this is not always sufficiently studied or understood in semiotics.

show abstract

The Czech Reception of Portmann

Komárek

2021

Biosemiotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Perceive, Co-opt, Modify, and Live! Organism as a Centre of Experience

Cited by 17 publications

References 37 publications

Towards an Evolutionary Biosemiotics: Semiotic Selection and Semiotic Co-option

Towards an Evolutionary Biosemiotics: Semiotic Selection and Semiotic Co-option

John Maynard Smith’s typology of animal signals: A view from semiotics

The Czech Reception of Portmann

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About