Models as icons: modeling models in the semiotic framework of Peirce’s theory of signs

Kralemann, Björn; Lattmann, Claas

doi:10.1007/s11229-012-0176-x

Cited by 49 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To grasp the processual nature of models and move the focus from data models to the creation of models as standards themselves or as instantiations of standards, we ground our analysis on a general concept of modelling and model as recently defined in [15]. The definition covers disparate uses of the term 'model', such as modelling in art, scale models in design processes, mathematical equations, and photographs.…”

Section: Modelling In Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6 CIDOC is the International Committee for Documentation of the International Council of Museums (ICOM). object, the model, as a sign for another object, the original, in the context of a chosen theory or language in order to attain a specific end by instituting a representational relation in which the syntactic structure of the model, its attributes and relations, represents by way of a mapping the properties of the original, which hence are regarded as or are postulated to be similar in a relevant manner [15,3419].…”

Section: Modelling In Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The concept of similarity between models and objects to be modelled, as described in [15], allows us to capture both the processes usually referred to as 'mapping'-performed by CIDOC-CRM users when fitting specific museum documentation resources into the CIDOC-CRM conceptual model -and as 'document analysis'-performed by TEI users when categorising specific textual features to be annotated in compliance with the TEI scheme. 7 This definition also accounts for the dependence of any act of modelling on its theoretical setting and use of language.…”

Section: Modelling In Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Reflections on cultural heritage and digital humanities

Ciula

Eide

2014

Proceedings of the First International Conference on Digital Access to Textual Cultural Heritage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computer based modelling in cultural heritage has focused on database development, generalised as data standards and, since the 1990s, also formal ontologies. Modelling in digital humanities has had its core in textual scholarship, including close reading and text encoding of literary and historical sources as well as models of text corpora, usually relying on statistical methods. Integration between the two modelling paradigms has been undertaken at the practical level. This paper goes beyond pragmatic concerns by focusing on comparing the two modelling traditions at a more abstract level.To this end, one core standard development undertaken in each domain is selected: CIDOC's Conceptual Reference Model (CRM) for modelling in cultural heritage-narrowed down to museum documentation-and Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) for modelling in digital humanities-narrowed down to textual scholarship. This does not imply that these two standards are only used in the two areas mentioned above, rather that their main focus has been in those areas. We will use the two standards to investigate what is meant by modelling in the two communities, thus, clarify the differences and the similarities between the concepts of modelling and models as they are used in each community. Partly this will be done based on a survey of previous literature, and partly by an investigation into modelling practices within these two standardisation initiatives. Minutes and reports, descriptions of the standards themselves and their developments, mailing lists threads, and the participants' own experience in the development of the respective standards have informed this study.

show abstract

Section: Modelling In Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Modelling In Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Modelling In Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reflections on cultural heritage and digital humanities

Ciula

Eide

2014

Proceedings of the First International Conference on Digital Access to Textual Cultural Heritage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consequently, the study of modelling and models has to be situated within the specific digital materialities in which they are enacted, as, for example, Dourish' does in his analysis of the materialities of databases (Dourish 2014). Kralemann and Lattmann (2013) claim that models should be understood as signs in the Peircean sense. In Peirce's seminal theory of signs, the sign is a triadic relation between a representamen (the sign from which the relation begins, sometimes also called in the literature the sign-vehicle), its object, and the interpreting thought.…”

Section: Modelling Textualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Digital humanities and practical memory: modelling textuality

Ciula

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In recent approaches to the study of the concept of 'model' in scientific discourse, Peirce's semiotics and his philosophy of science have been sources of inspiration for several authors (Magnani et al 2010;Kralemann, Lattmann 2013;Zeidler 2013: 124-134;Ciula, Eide 2017;Magnani, Bertolotti 2017). Most of their studies have focused on Peirce's notion of the diagram.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The semiotics of models

Nöth

2018

SSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The paper sheds light on the concept of model in ordinary language and in scientific discourse from the perspective of C. S. Peirce's semiotics. It proposes a general Peircean framework for the definition of models of all kinds, including mental models. A survey of definitions of scientific models that have been influential in the philosophy of science and of the typologies proposed in this context is given. The author criticizes the heterogeneity of the criteria applied in these typologies and the lack of a semiotic foundation in typological distinctions between formal, symbolic, theoretical, metaphorical, and iconic models, among others. The paper argues that the application of Peirce's subdivision of signs into the trichotomies of the sign itself, its object, and its interpretant can offer a deeper understanding of the nature of models. Semiotic topics in the focus of the paper are (1) the distinction between models as signs and (mental) models as the interpretants of signs; (2) models considered as a type (or legisign) and models considered as tokens (or replicas) of a type; (3) the iconicity of models, including diagrammatic and metaphorical icons; (4) the contribution of indices and symbols to the informativity of models; and (5) the rhetorical qualities of models in scientific discourse. The paper argues in conclusion that informative models are hybrid signs in which a diagram incorporates indices and symbols in a rhetorically efficient way.

show abstract

Models as icons: modeling models in the semiotic framework of Peirce’s theory of signs

Cited by 49 publications

References 20 publications

Reflections on cultural heritage and digital humanities

Reflections on cultural heritage and digital humanities

Digital humanities and practical memory: modelling textuality

The semiotics of models

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About