The purpose of this paper is to examine C.S. Peirce's concept of the indexical sign, to show that it is inadequate to account for the 'indexical' properties of language, and to propose a modification of that concept. After a brief review of Peirce's semiotic theory, it is established that Peirce subsumed two related, but fundamentally incompatible kinds of signs as indices. These types of indexical signs are distinguished' by differing relationships between the signs themselves and what they represent. It is then shown that both types of indexical signs are found in language, and, consequently, that a fourth sign should be recognized.
Items in KU ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
We want to hear from you! Please
share your stories
about how Open Access to this item benefits YOU.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as: This work is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. For more information, please see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
The University of Kansas prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, ethnicity, religion, sex, national origin, age, ancestry, disability, status as a veteran, sexual orientation, marital status, parental status, gender identity, gender expression and genetic information in the University’s programs and activities. The following person has been designated to handle inquiries regarding the non-discrimination policies: Director of the Office of Institutional Opportunity and Access, IOA@ku.edu, 1246 W. Campus Road, Room 153A, Lawrence, KS, 66045, (785)864-6414, 711 TTY.