Intro to Communication
Dr. P.M.G. Verstraete
WEEK 8
Signification:
Denotation / Connotation
Signification
Recap last week:
arbitrary vs
conventional codes
(aesthetic codes)
conventionalisation
cultural membership
Arbitrary vs Conventional
Codes
Arbitrary Code
= simply defined, and easily understood; where the
agreement among the users is explicit and defined;
with a stated and agreed relationship between
signifiers and signifieds
= symbolic, denotative, impersonal, and static
Arbitrary vs Conventional
Codes
Arbitrary codes have a defined, limited paradigm of signifiers with a
precisely related paradigm of signifieds. They emphasize denotative
meaning. They are simply defined and easily understood.
Arbitrary codes are static and can only change by explicit agreement amongst the users.
They are closed: meaning within the text, not much negotiation, you need to know the
code
Conventional codes have open-ended paradigms: new units can be
added; existing ones can drop out of use.
Conventional codes tend not to have an agreed paradigm of signifieds. They are thus
more dynamic and capable of change.
They are open: active negotiation from the reader
Arbitrary vs Conventional
Codes
Aesthetic Code
(= type of conventional code)
= more varied, loosely
defined, change rapidly
Aberrant decodings are
the norm in aesthetic
codes
Interior, subjective world
(= emotive)
Aesthetic Codes
Aesthetic Codes
But in art… (aesthetic/
conventional code)
R. Magritte, ‘this is not a pipe’
– it is a convention to read the painted image as a pipe
From Art to Decoration
Conventionalisation
From Art to Decoration
Cultural membership
Codes and Conventions
enable us to understand our social existence and to
locate ourselves within our culture.
Only through the common codes can we feel and
express our membership of our culture.
Today’s Class
Signification = a process of negotiation between
producer/reader and text
(cf. de Saussure & Peirce)
But so far, no attention to
the cultural experience of
the producer/reader.
So: focus on Roland Barthes’
- Denotation
- Connotation: Myth
Symbol
+ Metaphor / Metonymy
Roland Barthes
2 Orders of Signifaction
First-Order: Second-Order:
Denotation Connotation
= associated or second meaning,
= the common-sense, hidden or deeper meaning,
obvious meaning, surface (inter)subjective meaning,
meaning of the sign
based on interaction between
the sign
the feelings/emotions of the
users
the values of their culture
Roland Barthes
DENOTATION &
CONNOTATION
Rose is just a word
The reader shapes or decodes the meaning
Rose DENOTES a red
sweet-smelling flower
Rose CONNOTES
(has connotations of)
love, passion &
romance
Roland Barthes
This image denotes the movie star
Marilyn Monroe
Roland Barthes
The image connotes glamour, stardom,
sexuality, beauty
If this was one of the last
photographs of Marilyn
Monroe, we may also
associate it with her
depression, drug-taking
and ultimately death
Roland Barthes
A Movie Poster
What are the connotations of
a) The match?
b) The globe?
Roland Barthes
Photographs (= icons)
DENOTATIVE LEVEL: what we actually see
the mechanical reproduction on film of the object at which the
camera is pointed; what is photographed
CONNOTATIVE LEVEL: what you associate with this
image
the selection of what to include in the frame, of focus,
aperture, camera angle, quality of film, and so on; how it is
photographed
Roland Barthes
Connotation is largely arbitrary, specific to one culture, though it
frequently has an iconic dimension. For example: soft focus connotes
nostalgia, imprecise memory, romanticism, subjective emotion.
Roland Barthes
Also clothes can connote…
Roland Barthes
Second Order Signifiers:
Myth
= a story by which a culture explains or understands some
aspect of reality or nature; a culture’s way of thinking about
something, a way of conceptualizing or understanding it
Symbols
= something that through convention and use receives a
meaning that enables it to stand for something else (cf.
Peirce: symbol, icon, index)
Roland Barthes
Myths
Primitive
myths
Modern myths
Roland Barthes
the main way in which myths work is to naturalize
history
= the product of a social class that has achieved
dominance by a particular history
Example:
the ‘modern’ family
Roland Barthes
Roland Barthes
Roland Barthes
Myths naturalize meanings.
We need to ‘demystify’ the myth.
Change in myths is evolutionary, not revolutionary.
Roland Barthes
Myth is not universal: myth and counter-myth
Roman Jakobson
Metaphor and Metonymy
Metaphor = to express the unfamiliar in terms of the familiar
(‘vehicle’ = the familiar, ‘tenor’ = the unfamiliar)
vehicle and tenor have enough similarity to be in the same paradigm, but
enough difference for the comparison to work
- Visual metaphors: for example, advertisements
metaphor (vehicle) stands for a product (tenor)
- Everyday metaphors: to make sense of our everyday experiences
- Literary metaphors: appear widespread, common sense ‘natural’ though they
aren’t
Roman Jakobson
Visual metaphors
Roman Jakobson
Metaphor and Metonymy
Metaphor = transposing qualities from one plane of reality to another (they work
paradigmatically for imaginative effect)
Metaphors are imaginative, based on association (similarity between different
planes)
Metonymy = associating meanings within the same plane (contiguity: nearness or
neighborhood); making a part stand for the whole (they work syntagmatically for
realistic effect)
cf. (visual / literary) synechdoche
Metonymy in the news = indexical (appearing as ‘natural’ index’) + based on
arbitrary selection = one-sided, incomplete picture
Roman Jakobson
Literary metaphors (cf. figures of speech):
He was ‘drowning’ in paperwork.
As time is ‘running out’. (= now common usage, ‘dead’ metaphor)
The ham sandwich has ‘wandering hands’.
(metaphor has a metonymic basis)
Roman Jakobson
Roman Jakobson
Metaphor =
paradigmatic
Roman Jakobson
Metonymy
Roman Jakobson
Visual synechdoche as a type of
metonymy
Roman Jakobson
All photographs are metonyms…
Myth functions in news broadcasts metonymically in that one sign stimulates
us to construct the rest of the chain of concepts that constitute a myth, just as a
metonym stimulates us to construct the whole of which it is a part.