Re: The word "symbol"

vc wrote:
> David Cressey wrote:

>>VC wrote:
[snip]
> When we confine ourselves to the realm of formal structures of which
> database theory is an example, ...

Ah! This creates perspective. I do not share this opinion. To me there is a part of database theory that deals with formal structures.

[snip]

> Semiotics has quite a few non-intersecting branches depending on the
> semiotician you talk to ;). Some claim it studies the interaction
> between the "signifier" (name) and the "signified" (entity) and that
> the "signified" can be influenced by the "signifier". Others say that
> "signs" (or "symbols" where "symbol" is a synonym of "sign") as
> "signifiers" have meanings of their own unrelated, or weakly related,
> to that of the "signified". One of the more interesting semioticians
> is the writer Umberto Eco who used some semiotics ideas in his books
> (e.g., Foucault's Pendulum). However, I do not see how this stuff
> can be applicable to study of formal systems, like the RM.

Semiotics is not applied to the study of formal systems per se but it does give handles to provide content, context, meaning and use of formal systems. Received on Fri Aug 12 2005 - 20:02:46 CDT