"Introducing Social Semiotics" - Van Leeuwen

The main person related to the semiotics is someone by the name of Ferdinand De Saussure. a familiar name who talks about the ‘signifier’ and the ‘signified’.

A ‘signifier’ basically refers to anything physical, while a ‘signified’ refers to a meaning that is associated to a ‘signifier’. To link this to the reading, and to put this in my own words, a ‘signified’ can be divided into denotation & connotation (p.37). In denotation, a ‘signifier’ means exactly what it is as according to any dictionary in general. As for connotation, the ‘signifier’ may possess some form of symbolism which is usually not found in the dictionaries. Do note that a ‘signifier’ can be a physical object or in linguistic form. I will provide one physical object as an example – a toy car. A toy car, based on any dictionary, may be a synthetic vehicle that resembles a real car, but smaller, played by children. The meaning given by the dictionary is a denotative ‘signified’ of a toy car (which is the ‘signifier’). Now, looking at the connotative ‘signified’, one can say that a toy car may symbolise one’s childhood, which can then be linked to innocence, childishness, and maybe even simplicity of life. The toy car may also symbolise the advancement of technology to another person, as this person may think of how cars are non-existent in primitive time. Hence, we see two very different connotations (or ‘signifieds’) of a toy car.

To link the aforesaid connotations given to a toy car to our readings, we see the semiotic potential of a toy car, for this toy car has the potential to generate an eclectic mix of meanings. This is also known as the affordances of the toy car – “the potential uses of” (p.4) the toy car. The reading also states that “different observers might notice different affordances, depending on the needs and interests and on the specifics of the situation at hand” (p.4-5). In other words, people who base a ‘signifier’ on different contexts will generate different meanings from the same ‘signifier’.

I think one’s life experiences are also a crucial aspect in looking out for the affordances for any particular thing. As one exposes oneself to more stuff, one might be able to generate more affordances for that particular thing. Thus, I think the number or amount of affordances any item possesses is as many as a person can produce based on his/her background and life experiences.

With all the elements of semiotics explained in the readings – segregation, separation, integration, overlap, rhyme, & contrast – we see that every single thing a we see from anything around us does denote and connote some meanings; they are there, and it only depends on whether we can see them. This is very much in line with what the readings states about “‘metaphors we live by’” (p.32).Sometimes, some things seem so natural to us they just do not stand out and we would just see them as something that is normal & that they do not carry any meanings in them, as “[t]hey embody our everyday reality” (p.31). This also applies to the ‘word image’ & ‘typographic image’ (p.29) of the printed words.

By drawing together all of the aforementioned, we ought to get a new form of typography which is multimodal. According to the readings,

“[i]t communicates not just through the letterforms themselves but also through colour, through texture, through perspective, through framing and through motion” (p.42).