previous sub-section
Chapter Six— Rejecting Nonconventional Syntax and Semantics for Symbols
next sub-section

6.4—
Further Objections

In spite of the lack of clear alternative paradigms for the usage of the semiotic vocabulary, it nevertheless might be argued that even the ordinary usage of words such as 'symbol' in fact involves two distinct elements: a non conventional element that defines the essence of symbolhood, syntax, or semantics, and a conventional element that is required in the case of utterances and inscriptions only because they are symbols-used-communicatively, and conventions are needed for communication. Indeed, one might suggest that the notion of a machine-counter provides


154

an analysis of a "pure" notion of symbolhood and syntax, while some other kind of analysis might do the same for semantics. The notions of "symbol" and "syntax" might thus be adequately and perspicuously developed along functional or functional-causal lines, while semantics might be given a nonconventional analysis in terms of the kind of semantic theory proposed by Tarski, which depends on an (arguably nonconventional) notion of satisfaction .


previous sub-section
Chapter Six— Rejecting Nonconventional Syntax and Semantics for Symbols
next sub-section