From: Christopher Coleman <coleman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 10:54:14 -0600 (CST)
In sec V (The Being of Language), Foucault outlines the complex
ternary scheme of renaissance language: "...it requires the formal
domain of marks, the content indicated by them, and the similitudes
that link the marks to the things designated by them." Can we map
the distinction between hermeneutics and semiology using this scheme?
Can we read the formal domain of marks as "Nature," that thin layer that holds
semiology and hermeneutics one above the other, with hermeneutics
pointing toward the content indicated by the signs/marks in nature, and
semiology focusing on the links between the marks and the content
indicated by them?
Is this distinction one that was recognized during the Renaissance?
And Flannon: What do you mean when you say"the graphics of the world
is the effect of hermeneutics and its discourse is the effect of
semiology"? I think I don't understand the word "effect," which
suggests that hermenuetics cause the graphics of the world.
Why don't ya'll run with that for a while?