01.02.2015 Views

69249454-chandler-semiotics

69249454-chandler-semiotics

69249454-chandler-semiotics

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

ANALYSING STRUCTURES 111<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

4<br />

5<br />

6<br />

7<br />

8222<br />

9<br />

10<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

4<br />

5<br />

6<br />

7<br />

8<br />

9<br />

20<br />

1222<br />

2<br />

3<br />

4<br />

5<br />

6<br />

7<br />

8<br />

9<br />

30<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

4<br />

5<br />

6<br />

7222<br />

one important consequence is that whereas a verbal or musical<br />

sequence ‘exhibits a consistently hierarchical structure and is resolvable<br />

into ultimate, discrete, strictly patterned components’, in the case<br />

of a ‘primarily spatial, simultaneously visible picture’ there are ‘no<br />

similar components . . . and even if some hierarchical arrangement<br />

appears, it is neither compulsory nor systematic’ (Jakobson 1963d,<br />

336; cf. 1967, 341 and 1968, 701). Saussure noted only in passing<br />

that visual signifiers (he instanced nautical flags) ‘can exploit more<br />

than one dimension simultaneously’ (Saussure 1983, 70). Of course<br />

many semiotic systems (including all audio-visual media, such as<br />

television and film) rely heavily on both spatial and temporal syntagms.<br />

In any case, what Jakobson called Saussure’s ‘linearity dogma’<br />

(Jakobson 1963d, 336) is clearly not a ‘general principle’ of the sign<br />

(even of linguistic signs) and any adequate semiotic framework<br />

should acknowledge this.<br />

Unlike sequential syntagmatic relations, which are essentially<br />

about before and after, spatial syntagmatic relations include:<br />

• above/below;<br />

• in front/behind;<br />

• close/distant;<br />

• left/right (which can also have sequential significance);<br />

• north/south/east/west; and<br />

• inside/outside (or centre/periphery).<br />

Such structural relationships are not semantically neutral. The ‘cognitive<br />

semanticists’, George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, have shown how<br />

fundamental ‘orientational metaphors’ are routinely linked to key concepts<br />

in a culture (Lakoff and Johnson 1980, Chapter 4). Gunther<br />

Kress and Theo van Leeuwen identify three key spatial dimensions in<br />

visual texts: left/right, top/bottom and centre/margin (Kress and van<br />

Leeuwen 1996 and 1998).<br />

The horizontal and vertical axes are not neutral dimensions of<br />

pictorial representation. Since writing and reading in European cultures<br />

proceed primarily along a horizontal axis from left to right (as<br />

in English but unlike, for instance, Arabic, Hebrew and Chinese), the<br />

‘default’ for reading a picture within such reading/writing cultures<br />

(unless attention is diverted by some salient features) is likely to be

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!