http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiotic_square The Semiotic Square, also known as the Greimas Square, is a tool used in the structural analysis of the relationships between semiotic signs. The Semiotic Square was developed by Algirdas J. Greimas, a Lithuanian linguist and semiotician and first presented in Semantique Structurale (1966) This book was later published as Structural Semantics: An Attempt at a Method (1983). Greimas further developed the Semiotic Square with Francois Rastier in "The Interaction of Semiotic Constraints" (1968). Greimas considered the Semiotic Square to be the elementary structure of meaning.
Basic structure
The Greimas Square is a model based on relationships:
| Structure | Relationship Type | Relationship Elements |
| Complex | Contrary | S1 + S2 |
| Neutral | Contrary | ~S2 + ~S1 |
| Schema 1 | Contradiction | S1 + ~S1 |
| Schema 2 | Contradiction | S2 + ~S2 |
| Deixes 1 | Implication | ~S2 + S1 |
| Deixes 2 | Implication | ~S1 + S2 |
- S1 = positive seme
- S2 = negative seme
- S = complex axis (S1 + S2)
- ~S = neutral axis (neither S1 nor S2)
The Semiotic Square is formed by an initial binary relationship between two contrary signs. S1 is considered to be the assertion/positive element and S2 is the negation/negative element in the binary pair:
The second binary relationship is now created on the ~S axis. ~S1 is considered to be the complex term, and ~S2 is the neutral term. This is where the principle of difference is brought into play: every element in a system is defined by its differences from the other elements.
In most modes of interpretation, the S-axis is a hyponym of the ~S-axis. The ~S1 element combines aspects of S1 and S2 and is also contradictory to S1. The ~S2 element contains aspects of neither S1 nor S2.
Finally, the ~S2 element can be identified. Considered to be "always the most critical position and the one that remains open or empty the longest time, for its identification completes the process and in that sense constitutes the most creative act of the construction.".[1]
[edit]Example
The Semiotic square - also known as Greimas' rectangle or semantic rectangle - is a way of classifying concepts which are relevant to a given opposition of concepts, such as feminine-masculine, beautiful-ugly, etc. and of extending the relevant ontology. It has been put forth by Lithuanian linguist and semiotician Algirdas Julien Greimas, and was derived from Aristotle's logical square or square of opposition.
Starting from a given opposition of concepts S1 and S2, the semiotic square entails first the existence of two other concepts, namely ~S1 and ~S2, which are in the following relationships:
- S1 and S2: opposition
- S1 and ~S1, S2 and ~S2: contradiction
- S1 and ~S2, S2 and ~S1: complementarity
The semiotic square also produces, second, so-called meta-concepts, which are compound ones, the most important of which are:
- S1 and S2
- neither S1 nor S2
For example, from the pair of opposite concepts masculine-feminine, we get:
- S1: masculine
- S2: feminine
- ~S1: not-masculine
- ~S2: not-feminine
- S1 and S2: masculine and feminine, i.e. hermaphrodite, bi-sexual
- neither S1 nor S2: neither masculine nor feminine, asexual
[edit]Styles of interpretation
The Greimas Square is a tool used within the system of semiotics.
- As such, one form of interpretation is to look at each of the elements: S1, S2, ~S1, and ~S2 as either developed by Ferdinand de Saussure (bi-modal) orCharles Sanders Peirce (tripartite) sign.
- In the Piercean system of semiotics, the interpretant becomes the representamen for another, interrelated sign. In this same way, each of the elements of the Semiotic Square (S1, S2, ~S1, and ~S2) can become an element in a new, interrelated square.
- Finally, Greimas suggests placing semiotic squares of associated meaning on top of one another to created a layered effect and another form of analysis and interpretation.
"The square is a map of logical possibilities. As such, it can be used as a heuristic device, and in fact, attempting to fill it in stimulates the imagination. The puzzle pieces, especially the neutral term, seldom fall conveniently into place … playing with the possibilities of the square is authorized since the theory of the square allows us to see all thinking as a game, with the logical relations as the rules and concepts current in a given language and culture as the pieces".[2]