Interpretant

Interpretant is a subject (philosophy) / sign (semiotics) that refers to the same object (philosophy) as another sign (semiotics), transitively.^[1]

History[]

The concept of "interpretant" is part of Charles Sanders Peirce's "triadic" theory of the sign. For Peirce, the interpretant is an element that allows taking a representamen for the sign of an object, and is also the "effect" of the process of semeiosis or signification.

Peirce delineates three types of interpretants: the immediate, the dynamical, and the final or normal.

Immediate Interpretant[]

"The Immediate Interpretant consists in the Quality of the Impression that a sign is fit to produce, not to any actual reaction." (Letter to William James, CP 8.315, 1909)

Dynamical Interpretant[]

"[The] Dynamical Interpretant consists in direct effect actually produced by a Sign upon an Interpreter of it. [---] [The] Dynamical Interpretant is that which is experienced in each act of Interpretation and is different in each from that of the other... [it] is a single actual event." (Letter to Lady Welby, SS 110–1, 1909)

Final or Normal Interpretant[]

"[The] Final Interpretant is [...] the effect the Sign would produce in any mind upon which the circumstances should permit it to work out its full effect. [---] ...[It] is the one Interpretative result to which every Interpreter is destined to come if the Sign is sufficiently considered. [---] The Final Interpretant is that toward which the actual tends." (Letter to Lady Welby, SS 110–1, 1909)

References[]

^ Mick, David Glen (1986). "Consumer Research and Semiotics: Exploring the Morphology of Signs, Symbols, and Significance". Journal of Consumer Research. Oxford University Press. 13 (2): 196–213. JSTOR 2489226. Retrieved 12 May 2021. [T]he interpretant is actually another sign referring to the same 'object.' Since any initial meaning can be re-interpreted (and often is), each interpretant is thus a sign leading to another interpretant, and so on ad infinitum. This double nature of the interpretant—as both the interpreted sign and the interpreting sign—confers unlimited regress or extrapolation in semiosis and led Pierce to conclude that man 'is the thought,' in fact, 'a sign himself' (5.314, 6.344). ... the sign [is] the fundamental vehicle connecting objects in the broadest sense and human reactions (interpretants).

This semiotics article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by .

[1] Mick, David Glen (1986). "Consumer Research and Semiotics: Exploring the Morphology of Signs, Symbols, and Significance". Journal of Consumer Research. Oxford University Press. 13 (2): 196–213. JSTOR 2489226. Retrieved 12 May 2021. [T]he interpretant is actually another sign referring to the same 'object.' Since any initial meaning can be re-interpreted (and often is), each interpretant is thus a sign leading to another interpretant, and so on ad infinitum. This double nature of the interpretant—as both the interpreted sign and the interpreting sign—confers unlimited regress or extrapolation in semiosis and led Pierce to conclude that man 'is the thought,' in fact, 'a sign himself' (5.314, 6.344). ... the sign [is] the fundamental vehicle connecting objects in the broadest sense and human reactions (interpretants).

[1]