Another expression (word, sentence, sign, etc.) of some language. The meanings of linguistic expressions are studied in linguistics, logic and semiotics.

3) The value of a physical quantity is an assessment of this quantity in the form of a certain number of units accepted for it, for example. 3 kg is the value of the mass of a certain body, etc.

4) Meaning in computer science, see Name in computer science.

Big Encyclopedic Dictionary. 2000 .

Synonyms:

See what “MEANING” is in other dictionaries:

Content indicated by one or another linguistic expression, word, sentence, sign, etc. The question of the meaning of linguistic expressions is studied by linguistics, semiotics, and logical semantics. A distinction is made between objective, semantic and expressive language... Philosophical Encyclopedia

Meaning, reason; weight, importance, authority, dignity, strength, value. Real, figurative, direct, proper, strict, figurative, literal, broad sense of the word. This girl is an artist in the full sense of the word. Turg. The mind of the law (prot.:).... ... Synonym dictionary

One of the main elements of culture, along with custom, norm, value and meaning; a specifically cultural means of connecting a person with the outside world or, in general, a subject with an object through signs. If in economic activities... ... Encyclopedia of Cultural Studies

meaning- a generalized form of imprinting by a subject of socio-historical experience acquired in the process of joint activity and communication and existing in the form of concepts objectified in patterns of action, social roles, norms and values.... ... Great psychological encyclopedia

VALUE, values, cf. (book). 1. Meaning, what a given object (Word, gesture, sign) means. The word knowledge has several meanings. The word sick as a noun. The meaning of this gesture was difficult to determine. 2. Importance,... ... Ushakov's Explanatory Dictionary

meaning- MEANING, MEANING, MEANING French. signification, signifiant, SIGNIFIE. The basic concepts of modern linguistics for describing a sign were substantiated by the classic of this science F. de Saussure. According to the scientist’s definition, the signifier/signified are... ... Postmodernism. Glossary of terms.

MEANING, content associated with a particular expression (word, sentence, sign, etc.) of a certain language. The meaning of linguistic expressions is studied in linguistics, logic and semiotics... Modern encyclopedia

The content side of a sign or a series of signs: language, situation, action, idea or object. In English: Signification English synonyms: Signifiance, Meaning See also: Meanings of Signs Financial Dictionary Finam... Financial Dictionary

meaning- MEANING ideal constructions in which forms of generalizations of cumulative social experience are presented. 3. refers to the content of a sign, symbol, image, expressive movement, ritual behavior, etc. in its invariant… … Encyclopedia of Epistemology and Philosophy of Science

Meaning- MEANING, content associated with a particular expression (word, sentence, sign, etc.) of a certain language. The meaning of linguistic expressions is studied in linguistics, logic and semiotics. ... Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary

Books

• The significance of the reign of Catherine II, V.S. Ikonnikov. The significance of the reign of Catherine II: Read. in East island of Nestor the chronicler 17 Nov. 1896 / Op. V. S. Ikonnikova W 188/212 J 28/68 A 239/398: Kyiv: typ. Imp. University of St. Vladimir, 1897: Op.…
• The importance of preparation for war in general and preparatory strategic operations in particular, Leer. The importance of preparation for war in general and preparatory strategic operations in particular / Op. G. A. Leera, prof. Academician Gene. headquarters D 7/230? 7/122: St. Petersburg: typ. V. Bezobrazova and...

Hello, dear readers of the blog site. In the Russian language there are a number of words borrowed from other languages, the meaning of which seems to be clear from the context, but it is not entirely clear what they are.

And one of the striking examples is the word “prerogative”, the meaning of which we will briefly talk about today.

The meaning of the word prerogative (what is it)

Prerogative is a privilege, an exclusive right to make decisions on certain issues. It is associated with the special social position of the owner, the position he holds.

The concept comes from the Latin “praerogativa” (“ advantage") and goes back to the peculiarities of the ancient Roman socio-political structure.

The meaning of the word "prerogative" in the narrow sense– the preemptive right of a government body or official to make certain decisions and perform politically significant actions.

The term is used to designate the set of powers of the king in relation to parliament: to dissolve and convene the legislative body, open its meetings, etc.

In a broad sense the concept of “prerogative” is used as a synonym for the concept of “preemptive right”.

For example, it would be appropriate to use the word in the following sentences:

1. Signing to is the prerogative of the financial director.
2. The location of the World Cup is determined by FIFA, this is its prerogative.
3. Contact the dean's office: its prerogative is to distribute students into study groups.
4. The adoption of laws is the prerogative of the State Duma of the Russian Federation.

The term gradually loses its political meaning and takes root in colloquial speech and everyday use. No one has the ability to prohibit those who wish to use this word to indicate pre-emptive right one side before the other.

When is it appropriate to use the word "prerogative"

According to the explanatory dictionary, this is a designation of exclusive right. Synonyms for this word include:

1. exceptional opportunity;
2. benefit;
3. advantage;
4. peculiarity;
5. championship;

The concept of “prerogative” originally referred to business, professional vocabulary, denoting the advantages that authorities have.

In modern Russian language the term is used to refer to any exclusive rights, for example:

The use of this word is acceptable in oral, colloquial speech, but not always justified. It is easy to replace it with synonyms “right”, “advantage”. Using them will not change the meaning of the sentence, but will make it easier for others to understand.

History of the origin of the word

Literally translated from Latin into Russian, “praerogativa” means “ first speaker" The history of the term is associated with the peculiarities of the political structure of Ancient Rome. In the 6th century BC. Emperor Servius Tullius divided the inhabitants of the state into five classes depending on their financial well-being. The poor and the workers remained outside this system.

According to the laws of that time, each class had to gather a certain number of soldiers to defend the state. The army was divided into centuries (centuria), consisting of 100 people. Citizens included in them regularly gathered to vote.

At first, the centuries were limited to choosing commanders, but over time their powers expanded to discuss political issues. They determined the composition of government bodies, expressed their opinions on the laws adopted, and determined sentences for criminals.

The voting order was decided by lots, which were cast by representatives of different classes. The appearance of the soldiers and residents from among whom they were selected was voluntary. What is prerogative in ancient Roman law? This is the name of the century that received the right to vote first.

The voting was open: representatives of the century rose to the podium and expressed their opinion on a specific issue. The right of primacy had a great influence on the election results: subsequent speakers were guided by the previously expressed point of view.

Prerogatives of the British Queen

This is a term that is often . According to the laws of the country, the Crown has many prerogatives, including:

1. declare war without giving a reason;
2. dissolve the government and parliament;
3. speak before parliament annually and voice a list of demands;
4. appoint foreign ambassadors;
5. conclude a truce;
6. ratify treaties with other countries;
7. appoint judges;
8. present the highest awards;
9. have mercy on the condemned.

The British Queen cannot be tried or prosecuted for criminal acts. It is forbidden to approach her closer than 3 yards, unless she invites her, you cannot touch her with your hands, or start a conversation with her. Subjects answer “Yes” or “No” to questions asked by the sovereign, unless they are asked for details.

Many prerogatives belonging to the British crown have long been outdated and have become meaningless, but the inhabitants of the country do not abolish them out of respect for traditions.

Good luck to you! See you soon on the pages of the blog site

You can watch more videos by going to

");">

You might be interested

What is a drop, dropped or released domain? Emancipation is the equalization of the rights and freedoms of women with men, minors with parents and other disadvantaged groups Trends and tendencies - what are they and what are the differences? How to Automatically Add an Alt Attribute to Your WordPress Blog's Img Tags (Where They Don't Have Them) CoinMarketCap - official website of the cryptocurrency rating CoinMarketCap (Cryptocurrency Market Capitalizations) Trivial and non-trivial - what is it (meaning of words)

Meaning is an abstract or material object that is represented in human consciousness by another object - sign(cm. ); between two objects, acting respectively as a sign and a meaning, in the process semiosis(see) the relationship is established designations. Meaning is an integral part of any sign, regardless of its nature. Marks are created and used for acquisition, storage, processing and transfer information, so meaning can also be defined as the information conveyed by a sign in the process communications with him interpreter. In the broad sense of the word, meaning refers to all information, the carrier of which is a sign, and varieties of this information are also called meanings, adding clarifying definitions.

Meaning and sign are subjects of study in various disciplines: philosophy, logic, linguistics, cultural studies, psychology, sociology and others, but they became the central objects of study in the special science of signs and sign systems - semiotics(cm. ). The relationship between signs and their meanings in abstraction from sign situations and the subjects taking part in them is the central subject of study in a special section of semiotics - semantics(cm. ). IN linguistics allocated as a special section linguistic semantics, V logic(cm. ) - logical semantics(cm. ).

IN linguistic semantics the value is treated as an internal form language sign- unit content plan, in contrast to its external form - expression plan, which has its own structure and its own units of division: phonemes, morphemes, lexemes, words, sentences. In linguistics, several types of meanings of linguistic signs are distinguished depending on the types of signs themselves; in this case, the most important and typical linguistic signs are words, the meaning (signified) of which is called lexical meaning. There are characterizing signs represented by full-meaning words, the objective meaning of which consists of abstract or material objects, phenomena, actions, feelings of people, and so on, and verbal signs (pronouns, prepositions, conjunctions, etc.), the meaning of which is information about the internal relations of signs in composition of complex linguistic expressions, such as statements and sentences. Within words, special structural units are distinguished - morphemes that have a specific signified. At the same time, word-forming and inflectional morphemes realize their meaning only in combination with other signs, which is why they are also called half signs. Morphemes, in turn, consist of phonemes (articulated sounds or letters), a limited number of which exist in any particular language and which themselves do not have independent meaning, but their combinations, obtained according to certain rules in each language (see), create an unlimited possibility of designation any elements of reality or abstract entities.

There are three main types of meaning usually associated with a sign: subject(designated object); semantic(image of the designated object); expressive(expression of certain feelings).

Under substantive meaning a sign implies an object that is replaced, represented by a given sign; this object can be material or ideal, exist in reality or in an imaginary world, be a separate object or class, property or relationship, and so on. Often, especially in natural languages, the same sign can denote different objects. What specific objective meaning is associated with the sign each time it is used is determined by the context or situation in which the sign is used. In logic, the polysemy of terms is usually assessed as a disadvantage of natural language, therefore, when constructing artificial formalized and machine languages, they strive to ensure that each sign has only one meaning (at least within the limits of a given interpretation or a set of possible interpretations). In linguistics, the polysemy of signs in natural languages ​​is assessed as an important property of the language, increasing its expressive means. Different signs of the same language may have the same object(s) as their objective meaning; signs whose objective meanings are identical are called synonyms. Moreover, the presence of several meanings for one sign in a language does not cause confusion when using it due to the connection of each of these meanings with a certain context or a certain agreement (convention) concluded between the interpreters of these signs. Signs from different languages ​​can have the same objective meaning, in which case such a sign is characterized as translation some other sign from one language to another.

Under semantic meaning a sign implies information about the objective meaning that is carried or transmitted by the sign itself, and which is understood or interpreted by the subject perceiving the sign; This is information about the properties, characteristics and other characteristics of objects that make up the objective meaning of a given sign. In the case when the object that is the objective meaning of a given sign does not exist in reality, its semantic meaning is determined by an idealized object or abstraction.

Under expressive meaning sign refers to the emotions, feelings, desires of a person, expressed by him through the use of this sign in a given context or situation. The tone in which an expression is pronounced (in non-tonal languages) - for example, joyful, surprised, irritable, sad and so on, intonations - for example, interrogative, directive and others, volume - can express the joy, anger, sadness and other emotions of the speaker, which and constitutes the expressive meaning of the sign for its given use. Moreover, the same sign in different situations and contexts of use can receive different expressive meanings. The expressive meaning of a linguistic expression is also closely related to the choice of vocabulary. Certain linguistic expressions, such as interjections, have only expressive meaning. Since the expressive meaning is associated with the context of use of the sign, it is the subject of study not so much in semantics, but in pragmatics(cm. ).

IN logical semantics, which explores the relationship between signs and their meanings, does not study the expressive meanings of signs, but only those that in semiotics are defined as objective and semantic meaning and in logic are most often called denotation and sense. Within the framework of the corresponding logical-semantic theories and methods, work is underway to explicate these concepts and to build a general theory of reference and theory of meaning. The most accurately indicated types of meanings are described in the concept of meaning proposed by G. Frege at the end of the 19th century and further developed in the works of B. Russell, C. I. Lewis, R. Carnap, A. Church and other researchers. Here, meaning is understood as an object that is compared, when interpreting some natural or artificial language, to any of its expressions, acting as name(cm. ). The object denoted by a linguistic expression is called denotation this expression (see). This object can be an object or a class of objects, on the one hand, and a concept or judgment, on the other hand. Accordingly, they differ extensional meaning And intensional meaning, corresponding to “meaning” (denotation) and “co-meaning” (connotation), or “scope of the concept” and “content of the concept” in traditional logic. The difference between these two types of meanings is manifested primarily in the fact that replacing one expression with another having the same extensional meaning is not possible in all contexts in which it is possible to replace one expression with another having the same intensional meaning.

A similar pair of concepts “signification - co-signification” was highlighted by J. St. Mill (denotation - connotation). G. Frege in his naming theories compared the denotation (Bedeutung) and meaning (Sinn) of the name. P. Carnap associated each denoting expression - designator extensional(extension) and intension(intention). In the semantics built by R. Carnap and the formalized semantics built by J. J. Kemeny, a statement about the identity of two expressions turns out to be synthetically true if these expressions have the same extensional meaning, and analytically true if they have the same intensional meaning. With this definition, it turns out that all analytic sentences have the same intension, that is, the same meaning. But not all expressions that have the same intension are interchangeable in indirect contexts such as sentences expressing opinions. Therefore, Carnap introduces another, narrower, relation to clarify the concept of “identity in meaning” for complex expressions: the relation of intensional isomorphism. Expressions that are constructed in the same way from elementary expressions having the same intension are intensionally isomorphic. In the theory of C. I. Lewis, there are four types of meanings: one extensional and three intensional. The extension, or denotation, of a term is the class of all actually existing objects to which this term is applicable; coverage (comprehension) of a term is the class of all possible (conceivable) objects to which this term is applicable; The signification of a term is a property, the presence (absence) of which in an object determines the applicability (inapplicability) of the term to this object; The intension of a term is the conjunction of all terms, each of which is applicable to any subject to which the term is applicable. A similar distinction is made for sentences and propositional functions.

The concepts of meaning (denotation, nominative, extension) and meaning (intension) developed within the framework of the relevant theories can be used to analyze expressions of both natural and artificial languages. But they can be strictly defined only for artificial formalized languages. Usually in modern logic it is customary to build a formalized language L, and for L metalanguage M.L., in which the syntactic SinML, semantic SemML and [if necessary] pragmatic PrML parts. The syntactic part of the metalanguage contains translations of language expressions L into metalanguage, rules of construction and rules of inference. All language signs are pre-divided into meaningful and syncategorimatic - auxiliary (parentheses, commas, etc.). In the semantic part of the metalanguage, all meaningful expressions are assigned meanings (extensions) using a special function of assigning meaning R: singular terms - individuals from the individual domain of a given interpretation ( R(a) = ν ), one-place predicates - properties, two- and more local - relations. Moreover, properties and relationships can be specified extensionally - by indicating a set of individuals or, accordingly, ordered n-ok individuals for whom these predicates are satisfied. As values, sentences (correctly constructed formulas without free variables) are assigned logical valences: “true - false” or “1 - 0” in two-valued logic, in three-valued logic: “true - false - uncertainty” and so on. In infinite-valued logic, a sentence is assigned values ​​from one to infinity. In recent years, logics with meaning gaps have developed, in which not all sentences receive a certain meaning.

The term “meaning” is widely used in other disciplines, where it often receives a special meaning from various researchers.

In philosophy, P. Bridgman identified the meanings of scientific terms with operations to study the objects to which these terms are applied; L. Wittgenstein understands the meaning of a sign as the way this sign is used in language; E. Husserl, B. Bolzano and F. Brentano understand the meaning of a sign as a special ideal object or a special property of thought about an object, and so on. The philosophy of knowledge considers the epistemological content of the concept of meanings of expressions in natural and artificial languages, excluding from consideration types of meanings of expressions that are not essential for the theory of knowledge (for example, the meaning of an expression as a manifestation of intentions, interests, etc.); the interpretation of the meaning of an expression (and a sign in general) here is closely related to the understanding of the cognitive role of the sign.

In psychology (behaviorism, pragmatism), the meaning of a linguistic expression is identified with the behavioral reactions of the subject to the perceived sign. The modern psychological interpretation of meaning is based on the idea of ​​it as a complex, multicomponent, hierarchically organized system, consisting of units that are more fractional than the meaning itself, called “semes”, “semantic features”, “semantic factors”, “atoms of meaning” and in other terms. The meaning is revealed only in the system of meanings, while the semantic components are not morphological, but functional formations, depending on the content of the system in which the analyzed meaning is contained. Semantic components are revealed as folded relationships of meanings with other meanings within a certain system. The formation of an individual system of meanings occurs in the course of training, the “appropriation” by the subject of knowledge and skills developed by humanity and fixed in the structures of the meaning of social consciousness. At the same time, meaning is interconnected with the images and feelings of the individual and exists in the individual consciousness in unity with other constituents of consciousness: sensory tissue and personal meaning. Personal meaning sets the bias for human consciousness, and sensory tissue acts as a figurative basis that connects consciousness with the world through the senses. At the same time, meaning, personal meaning, sensory tissue are understood not as independent units, but as formative, ultimate abstractions of various aspects of some integrity of individual meaning. Meanings exist only in a system of relations of meanings and are revealed through it. Therefore, a certain integrity - a sentence, a text, an image - has full meaning, and not their individual elements. In functional terms, meaning is understood in two ways: as a standard, acting as a link of control in speech-cognitive activity, and as the generated content of a sentence or text during the generation and perception of a speech utterance. In the latter case, meaning is revealed as “the path from thought to word” (L. S. Vygotsky, A. A. Leontiev). In perceptual activity, meaning also appears in two forms. Mediating the construction process image, it carries the logic of subject norms and allows for control in perceptual activity. On the other hand, meaning is the content of the image in its normative aspect, invariant for all individuals of a given culture.

MEANING

MEANING

Content indicated by one or another linguistic expression - a word, sentence, sign, etc. The question of the meaning of linguistic expressions is studied by linguistics, semiotics, and logical semantics. There are objective, semantic, and expressive meanings of linguistic expressions. These types of logic are most accurately described by logical semantics, in which the concept of logic proposed by G. Frege in his con. 19th century and received further development in the works of B. Russell, K.I. Lewis, R. Carnap, etc.
In the concept of Frege and his followers, all linguistic expressions are considered as names, i.e. as designations of some extra-linguistic objects. The object denoted by a linguistic expression is called the denotation (volume, extension) of this expression. For example, the proper name “Leo Tolstoy” means Russian. writer Leo Tolstoy, and this writer himself is a denotation of the name “Leo Tolstoy”. Common nouns denote classes of objects, and these classes are denotations of the corresponding common names.
Sometimes denotation is identified with denotation. However, such an identification is not legitimate, since denotation represents only one side of denotation in linguistic expressions. This is easy to verify by comparing two names that have the same denotation, but are nevertheless different: “Lev Tolstoy” and “the author of the novel “War and Peace.” The first of them says that the person designated by it bears the name “Lev” and the surname “Tolstoy”, while the second of these names indicates that the person designated by it wrote a certain literary work. The fact that the meaning of linguistic expressions is not limited to their objective meaning is clearly revealed in various contexts of their use. For example, it is quite reasonable to ask: “Was Leo Tolstoy the author of the novel War and Peace?”, but the question is unlikely to be equally meaningful: “Was Leo Tolstoy Leo Tolstoy?”
Therefore, it is believed that each linguistic expression, along with denotation, also has a meaning - the content of the expression, which is acquired in the process of understanding it. The meaning of an expression serves to indicate its denotation, fixing certain aspects, features, properties of objects denoted by a given expression. A linguistic expression denotes its denotation and expresses its meaning. Different expressions may have the same denotation, but differ in their meaning. An expression always has a meaning, but sometimes it may not have a denotation, for example, the word “mermaid” has a meaning, but does not have a denotation: in reality there are no such creatures. In connection with expressions of everyday language, sometimes expressive language is also distinguished - an emotional assessment of designated objects with visual expression. a certain subject.
This concept of language expressions also applies to sentences. As a denotation of a sentence, one can consider its truth value - truth or falsehood - and consider sentences as names of truth or falsehood. Truth is the denotation of a true sentence, false is the denotation of a false sentence. All true sentences have the same denotation - truth, all false sentences also have one denotation - lie. The meaning of a sentence is the thought or judgment it expresses.

Philosophy: Encyclopedic Dictionary. - M.: Gardariki.Edited by A.A. Ivina.2004 .

MEANING

content associated with a particular expression (words, sentences, signs and T. c.) nekrogo language. 3. Linguistic expressions are studied in linguistics, logic and semiotics. In the science of language, iodine 3. understand the semantic content of a word. In logic (and semiotics) 3. linguistic expression means the object or class of objects that is designated (called) with this expression (subjective, or extensional, 3.), and under the meaning of the expression (semantic, or intensional, 3.)- its conceivable content, i.e. that information contained in the expression, thanks to the cut, the expression is attributed to a particular object (subjects). For example, the objective 3. expressions “Evening star” and “Morning star” are the same object - the planet Venus, while their mental contents - semantic 3. - are different. Exploring issues related to equality criteria 3. (meanings) constitutes one of the logical tasks. semantics.

see also Art. Sign and lit. To her.

Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia.Ch. editor: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov.1983 .

MEANING

importance, significance, role of an object, phenomenon, action in human activity. According to Sartre, “a mediator between the present thing, which is the bearer of meaning, and the absent object, to which meaning points” (Baudelaire, 1947). Each spoken word makes it possible to judge what the speaker means, i.e. what the word means (all things considered). The doctrine of meaning is semantics.

Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary.2010 .

MEANING

the concept of philosophy, logic, general theory of signs and the science of language. Philosophy considers epistemological. the content of the concept of expressions of natural and artistic expressions. languages, excluding from consideration types of cognition expressions that are not essential for the theory of knowledge (for example, cognition expressions as a manifestation of intentions, interests, etc.); interpretation of Z. expressions (and signs in general) is closely related to the understanding of cognition. role of the sign.

In the history of philosophy, especially from the 2nd half. In the 19th century, various interpretations of the concept of a sign developed. According to one of them, a three-word expression is the object designated by this expression (Frege, Quine, Morris, Church, etc.); This understanding of Z. is related to that developed by Peirce, who sought the basis of Z. in the field of practical science. consequences of using signs; Bridgman identified the concepts of scientific terms with operations to study objects corresponding to these terms, with thinking. operations of defining scientific concepts and operations of applying terms; this interpretation is similar to the understanding of the sign as the use of a sign in language (Wittgenstein) and, when applied to sentences, as a method of verifying the truth of the latter (Schlick). B. Bolzano, F. Brentano and Husserl took a different path, interpreting Z. as an ideal object or as a special (ideal) property of thought about an object and emphasizing the relation. stability of thoughts and their independence from specific acts of thinking. Since the 30s. 20th century An approach to understanding symbolism that combined the interpretation of symbolism as a special kind of relationship between signs, as a relationship between a sign and an object, and as a relationship between a sign and a thought about an object, which was associated with the concepts of logical logic that arose at that time, was becoming widespread. syntax and logic. semantics.

The problem of interpreting the concept of Z. expressions has acquired a leading role in the so-called. philosophy of analysis. Within the framework of this direction, the analysis of a certain expression is understood as the identification of its meaning; in this case, the analysis is conceived either as an equivalent replacement of the definition of a given concept with other definitions (Pap), or as a reduction (reduction) of theoretical. sentences to sentences about “facts” (Carnap) or in other forms. The purpose of identifying Z. expressions is also understood in different ways; Moore, for example, considered it to be the identification of the structure of knowledge through the structure of language, and Russell considered it to be the establishment of the structure of the domain of “facts”; modern representatives of analytical In philosophy, such a goal is usually considered to be clarification (explication) of language expressions and “clarification” in general. Different understandings of the term “analysis” correspond to different aspects of the interpretation of the concept of Z.

The aspects of Z. linguistic expressions presented in the above concepts actually take place, and their study is based on the principles of dialectical-materialistic. epistemology is an important task of science. However, each of these aspects comes to prominence only in a specific way. conditions and is not independent in itself. Idealistic interpretation of the concept of z. in bourgeois. philosophy is precisely connected with metaphysics. absolutization of dep. aspects of knowledge. Thus, the identification of language expressions with behavioral (behaviourism, pragmatism), physiological (physicalism) and linguistic (operationalism) reactions of the subject to a perceived sign, reducing the problem of knowledge to the problem of the so-called verifiability of proposals (neopositivism) in the context of idealism. Philosopher views (within the framework of which such concepts as “fact”, “object”, “operation” are interpreted subjectively and idealistically) means subjectivism in Z.’s understanding of expressions of nature. and arts. languages. This is not surprising, since a one-sided understanding of Z., for example, a purely operational interpretation of it, is not able to show Z. theoretically. and philosopher judgments, reveal Z. arts. images, etc., which opens the way to idealism. speculation according to areas. Absolutization of Z. as an ideal object also leads to subjective idealism. interpretations of Z. (Thomism, phenomenology) or to the view that the concept of Z. is generally inaccessible to analysis, because is a kind of mystic. essence (Heidegger). Irreconcilably hostile to materialism is the view developed by neopositivism that the problem of protection has no relation to one or another solution to the fundamentals. question of philosophy; on the same view. There are, in essence, representatives of the “philosophy of analysis”, who see the task of analyzing Z. expressions in the elimination of philosophy. issues (Austin).

From view dialectical materialism, Z. expressions of nature. and arts. languages ​​are means of reflecting objective reality in people’s minds; the content of language expressions is determined by the outside world. In the broadest sense, knowledge of linguistic expression is information about things and their properties and relationships, about phenomena and processes of the external world, which is ultimately established and verified by practice. Associated with this basic content of the concept of concept are its other aspects—psychological, formal-logical, operational, and other concepts of expression—these contain invariants. reflections (in sensory images, thoughts, scientific theories) of objects and phenomena of reality among people who use linguistic and other signs. See also Sign, Verifiability principle; For the relationship between the word and the concept, see Word, Concept.

I. Narsky. Moscow.

In logical In semantics, Z. is understood as an object that is compared when interpreting a certain nature. or arts. language to any of its expressions acting as a name. This object can be a thing or an object, on the one hand, and a concept or judgment, on the other hand. In accordance with this, in logical. In semantics, it is customary to distinguish between two main ones. type Z.: extensional (object or class of objects denoted by this expression) and intensional (mental content, or meaning, expressions). The first refers, in Quine’s terminology, to the theory of reference (a theory that deals with issues related to the concept of truth of expressions and the concept of designation, see Relation of Designation), the second refers to the theory of meaning. The pair of concepts “designated” - “meaning” generally corresponds to the pairs of concepts: “meaning” (denotation) and “connotation” (connotation) in J. S. Mill, “subject” (Gegenstand), or “meaning” (Bedeutung), and “meaning” (Sinn) in Frege, “extension” (extension) and “intension” (intension) in Carnap, “volume” and “content” in traditional. logic. The difference between these two types of clauses is manifested primarily in the fact that replacing one expression with another that has the same extensional clause is not possible in all contexts, in which it is possible to replace one expression with another that has the same intensional clause. (see Fungibility relation).

In the semantics built by Carnap and the formalized semantics built by Kemeny, a statement about the identity of two expressions turns out to be synthetically true if these expressions have the same extensional clause, and analytically true if they have the same intensional clause. With this definition, it turns out that everything is analytical . sentences have the same intension, i.e. same meaning. But not all expressions that have the same intension are interchangeable in indirect contexts such as sentences expressing opinions (cf. context V in Art. Interchangeability relation). Therefore, Carnap introduces another, narrower, relation to clarify the concept of “identity in meaning” for complex expressions: the relation of intensional and isomorphism. Expressions that are constructed in the same way from elementary expressions having the same intension are intensionally isomorphic.

In the theory of C. I. Lewis, there are four types of laws: one extensional and three intensional. The extension (or denotation) of a term is the class of all actually existing things to which the term applies; comprehension of a term is the class of all possible (conceivable) things to which this term is applicable; signification of a term is a property, the presence (absence) of which in an object determines the applicability (inapplicability) of the term to this object; The intension of a term is the conjunction of all terms, each of which is applicable to any subject to which the given term is applicable. A similar distinction is made for sentences and propositional functions. For various theories of meaning, see Semantics.

When analyzing the languages ​​of natural sciences. theories, the question arises about the criterion for the significance of sentences in these languages, i.e. the question of under what conditions sentences in these languages ​​have Z. According to the concept most common in modern times. logic, proposals of natural sciences. languages ​​are divided into analytical and synthetic. Analytical sentences and their negations - contradictory sentences - have logical. Z., i.e. Z., identified through logical. analysis of their structure. Synthetic proposals have empirical Z.; a proposition is considered empirically significant if a method for testing it is specified, i.e. comparing it with facts that confirm or refute the theory. Concept in linguistics is the semantic content (meaning) of a word in a given (natural) language. See Word.

D. Lahuti, V. Finn. Moscow.

Lit.: Hobbes T., The Doctrine of the Body, El. soch., M.–L., 1926; Zvegintsev V. A., The problem of symbolic language, M., 1956; his, Semasiology, M., 1957; Wittgenstein L., Logico-philosophical treatise, M., 1958; Carnap R., Meaning and Necessity, trans. [from English], M., 1959; Locke J., Izbr. Philosopher proizv., vol. 1, M., 1960; Narsky I.S., Lectures of the Polish Marxist philosopher on the theory of meaning, "Vestn. MGU", 1960, No. 1; his, Modern Positivism, M., 1961; Church A., Introduction to Mathematical Logic, trans. from English, [t. 1], M., 1960 (Introduction); Biryukov B.V., Gottlob Frege's theory of meaning, in the book: Application of logic in science and technology, [M., 1960], p. 502–55; New in linguistics. Sat., issue. 1, M., 1960; too, vol. 2, M., 1962; Frege G., Über Sinn und Bedeutung, "Z. Philos, und philosophische Kritik", 1892, Bd 100; Welby V., What is meaning?, L., 1903; Russell W., On denoting, "Mind", new ser., 1905, No. 56, p. 479–93; his, An inquiry into meaning and truth, L., 1951; Husserl E., Logische Untersuchungen, Bd 1–2, Halle, 1913–21; Schiller F. C. S., Russell W., Joachim H. H., Meaning of meaning. (Symposium), "Mind", 1920, No. 116, p. 385–414; Brentano F., Über das Sein im uneigentlichen Sinne, abstrakte Namen und Verstandesdinge, in his book: Psychologie vom empirischen Standpunkt, Bd 2, Lpz., 1925; Ramsey F. P. and Moore G. E., Facts and propositions, in: Proc. of the Aristot. Soc., Supplementary volumes, v. 7, Oxf., 1927; Heidegger M., Was ist Metaphysik?, Bonn, 1929; Ajdukiewicz K., About znaczeniu wyrażeń, Lw., 1931; his, the same, in the collection: Język i Poznanie. Wybór pism, t. 1, Warsz., 1960; Eaton R. M., General logic, N. Y., 1931, ch. 6; Carnap R., Testability and meaning, "Philos. Sci.", 1936, v. 3, No. 4, 1937, v. 4, No. 1; same, A reply to Leonard Linsky. (Remarks on paradox of analysis), ibid., 1949, No. 4; same, Meaning postulates, "Philos. Studies", 1952, No. 5; him, Meaning and synonymy in natural languages, ibid., 1955, No. 3; Schlick M., Meaning and verification, in his book: Gesammelte Aufsätze. 1926–36, W., 1938; Lewis S. I., The modes of meaning, in: Philos, and Phenomenological Research, 1944, No. 4; his, Analysis of knowledge and valuation, La Salle; Schaff A., Pojęcie i słowo, Łódź, 1946; his, Wstęp do semantyki, Warsz., 1960; Black M., Language and philosophy, N.Y., 1949; Bridgman P., The logic of modern physics, N. Y., 1949; Hayakawa S. I., Language in thought and action, N. Y., 1949; Pap A., Elements of analytic philosophy, N. Υ., 1949; Gardiner A. , The theory of speech and language, Oxf., 1951; Hempel S. G., Concept of cognitive significance: a reconsideration, "Amer. Acad. of Arts and Sci. Proceedings", 1951, v. 80, No. 1, p. 61–77; him, Problems and changes in the empiricist criterion of meaning, in: Semantics and the Philos, of Language, Urbana, 1952; Ogden S.K., Richards I. A., The meaning of meaning, L., 1953; Quine W. V., Notes on the theory of reference, in his book: From a logical point of view, Camb., 1953; Rapoport A., Operational philosophy, N. Υ., 1953; Kemeny J. G., A new approach to semantics, "J. Simb. Logic", 1956, v. 21, No1–2; Straus E., Vom Sinn der Sinne, V., 1956; Urmson J., Philosophical analysis. Its development between the two world wars, Oxf., 1956; Kotarbińska J., Pojęcie znaku, "Studia Logica", 1957, t. 6; Ryle G., The theory of meaning, in. Sat.: British Philos, in the Mid-Century, ed. by S. A. Mace, L., 1957; Peirce S., How to make our ideas clear, in: Values ​​in a universe of change, Stanford (California), 1958; Ayer A. Y., Meaning and intentionality, in: Atti del Congresso internationale di filosofia, v. 1, Firenze, 1958; Kokoszyńska M., Ζ marksistowskiej semantyki, "Studia filozoficzne", 1961, No. 4 (25); Austin I. L., Sens and sensibilia, Oxf., 1962. See also lit. under the articles Sign, Name.

Philosophical Encyclopedia. In 5 volumes - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia.Edited by F. V. Konstantinov.1960-1970 .

MEANING

MEANING (in semiotics) - an object that is designated, replaced, represented by another object - a sign; between two objects, respectively acting as a sign and a meaning, a designation relationship is established in the process of semiosis. The establishment of such a relationship depends on the nature of the signs: for indexical, iconic and participatory signs, it can be said that the interpreter perceives an existing (real or imaginary) connection between the sign and its meaning, which consists of a cause-and-effect relationship between them, their similarity, or the presence of a common nature in the sign and its meaning, while for conventional signs the designation relation is established by the interpreter arbitrarily or by agreement with other interpreters.

The relationship between signs and their meanings is the central subject of study in a special branch of semiotics (the science of signs) called semantics. In semantics, the researcher abstracts from such a component of semiosis as the interpreter. Linguistic semantics is distinguished as a special section in linguistics, and logical semantics in logic.

In semiotics, a sign is usually associated with several types of meanings: objective, semantic and expressive. It is customary to say that a sign denotes its objective meaning, but expresses semantic and expressive meaning. By objective meaning we mean that object (object, subject, property, relation, phenomenon, situation, action, etc.) that is actually replaced, represented by a given sign; this object can be material or ideal, exist in real reality or in the virtual world, be a separate object or class, property or relationship, etc. Often, especially in natural (national) languages, the same sign can denote different objects ; what specific objective meaning is associated with this sign each time it is used is determined by the context or situation in which the sign is used. In logic, polysemy of terms is usually assessed as a deficiency of natural language. When constructing artificial formalized languages, they strive to ensure that each sign has only one meaning (at least within the limits of a given interpretation or a set of possible interpretations). In linguistics, the polysemy of signs in natural languages ​​is assessed as an important property of the language, increasing its means of expression and serving as the basis for the creation of tropes and metaphors.

Different signs of the same language may have the same object(s) as their objective meaning; signs whose objective meanings are identical are called synonyms. Signs of different languages ​​can have the same objective meaning, then one sign is characterized as a translation of another sign from one language to another. The same object can be designated by unbounded

a limited number of characters even within the same language.

Signs, being independent objects, can themselves act as meanings of other signs; then we are dealing with signs of signs; In natural languages, special methods of forming names for names are recorded. Thus, the name “Moon”, formed by placing the name inside quotation marks, is not the name of an object - the natural satellite of the Earth - but a linguistic expression - the name inside the quotation marks. Signs of signs must be distinguished from synonyms and translations; The English name for the Moon - Moon - is not the name of a name, but a name with the same objective meaning as the corresponding Russian word.

A special case of the use of signs is their autonomous use, in which the sign designates itself. In this case, we are dealing with the same material object, which, from the point of view of semiotics, acts both as a sign and as the objective meaning of this sign.

By the semantic meaning of a sign we mean that information about the objective meaning that is carried or transmitted by the sign itself, which is put into the sign by the person producing it, and understood by the subject who perceives the sign; This is information about certain properties, features, characteristics of objects that make up the objective meaning of a given sign. In the case when the object, which is the objective meaning of a given sign, does not exist in reality, the semantic meaning sets and forms an idealized object or abstraction.

The expressive meaning of a sign refers to the emotions, feelings, desires of a person expressed by him through the use of this sign in a given context or situation. The tone with which the expression is pronounced (in non-tonal languages) - for example, joyful, surprised, irritable, sad, etc., intonation - for example, interrogative, command, etc., volume - can express joy, anger, sadness and other emotions of the speaker, which constitutes the expressive meaning of the sign for its given use. Moreover, the same sign in different situations and contexts of use can receive different expressive meanings.

The expressive meaning of a linguistic expression is closely related to the personality and the normal usage of words for that personality. Thus, the words “That’s not a very smart thing to do” in the mouth of a polite and sensitive person can express much stronger negative emotions than the words “That’s an idiotic thing to do” in the mouth of a less well-mannered person. And vice versa, the rudest curses, curses and gods in the mouth of a person accustomed to such word usage can express joy, tenderness, tenderness, etc. Expressive meaning is also associated with the choice of vocabulary. Thus, the use of one of the synonymous terms “face - face - muzzle - mug” can express the speaker’s feelings in relation to the described object. For example, for the Avesta, a special “devoic” language is recorded, in which, when describing devas (evil gods), special terminology is used: instead of “head” - “head”, instead of “hands” - “paws”, etc., which serves a means of expressing the negative emotions of Zoroastrians towards these characters. Interestingly, after the conquest of Persia by Alexander the Great, this language began to be used by the victims when describing the conqueror.

Certain linguistic expressions, e.g. interjections have only expressive meaning. Since expressive meaning is associated with the context of use of a sign, it is the subject of study not so much in semantics as in pragmatics.

In logic, the relationship between signs and their meanings is studied in logical semantics. Logical semantics does not deal with expressive meanings, but only those that in semiotics are defined as objective and semantic meaning and in logic are most often called denotation, meaning and sense. Within the framework of the corresponding logical-semantic theories and methods, work is underway to explicate these concepts and to build a general theory of reference and theory of meaning.

A similar pair of concepts “meaning - co-signification” was highlighted by J. Art. Millem (denotation - connotation); G. Frege in his naming theory compared the name denotation (Bedeutung) and meaning (Sinn); P. Carnap associated each denoting expression - designator - with an extension and an intension, etc.; C. I. Lewis compared four types of meaning to a sign: extension, or denotation, by which he understood the class of all truly existing objects to which a given sign is applicable; coverage (comprehention) - the class of all possible (consistently conceivable) objects to which a given sign is applicable; signification - a set of properties, the presence or absence of which in an object allows a given sign to be applied to it; Intention is a conjunction of all terms, and each of them is applicable to any object that can be designated by a given sign.

The concepts of meaning (denotation, nominative, extension) and meaning (intension) developed within the framework of the relevant theories can be used to analyze expressions of both natural and artificial languages. But they can be strictly defined only for artificial formalized languages. Usually in modern logic it is customary to build a formalized language L, and for L a metalanguage ML, in which syntactic SinML, semantic SemML and, if necessary, pragmatic PrML parts are distinguished. The syntactic part of the metalanguage contains translations of language L expressions into the metalanguage, construction rules, and inference rules. All language signs are divided in advance into meaningful and syncategorimatic - auxiliary (parentheses, commas, etc.). In the semantic part of the metalanguage, all meaningful expressions are assigned meanings (extensionals) using a special function of assigning a value R: singular terms - individuals from the individual domain of a given interpretation (D(u) = v), one-place predicates - properties, two- and more local - relations . Moreover, properties and relations can be specified extensionally - by pointing to a set of individuals or, accordingly, ordered n-ok individuals for which these predicates are satisfied. As values, sentences (correctly constructed formulas without free variables) are assigned logical valences: true-false or 1-0 in two-valued logic, in three-valued logic: true-false, uncertainty, etc. In infinite-valued logic, values ​​from one to infinity are assigned to a sentence. In recent years, logics with meaning gaps have developed, in which not all sentences receive a certain meaning.

Following Frege's understanding of the meaning of a name as a way of assigning its meaning (denotation), the intension of a term is often explicated as a function of assigning meaning.

In linguistics, several types of meanings of linguistic signs are distinguished depending on the types of signs themselves; in this case, the most important and typical linguistic signs are words, the meaning (signified) of which is called lexical meaning. There are characterizing signs represented by full-meaning words, the objective meaning of which consists of objects of the real world, feelings and desires of people, etc., and verbal signs (pronouns, prepositions, conjunctions, etc.), the meaning of which is information about the internal relations of the signs as part of complex linguistic expressions, for example, statements.

Within words, special structural units are distinguished - morphemes that have a specific signified. At the same time, derivational and inflectional morphemes realize their meaning only in combination with other signs, which is why they are also called half-signs. Morphemes, in turn, consist of phonemes (articulated sounds or letters), a limited number of which exist in any particular language and which themselves do not have independent meaning, but their combinations, obtained according to certain rules in each language, create an unlimited possibility of designating any elements of the real or virtual world.

The term “meaning” is widely used in other disciplines, where it often receives a special meaning from various researchers. Thus, in philosophy, one can highlight the understanding of this term by P. Bridgman - he identified the meanings of scientific terms with operations to study the objects to which these terms are applied; L. Wittgenstein understands the meaning of a sign as the way this sign is used in language; E. Husserl, B. Bolzano and F. Brentano understand the meaning of a sign as a special ideal object or a special property of thought about an object, etc.

In psychology (behaviorism, pragmatism), the meaning of a linguistic expression is identified with the behavioral reactions of the subject to the perceived sign.

Lit.: Arutyunova N.D. The sentence and its meaning. Logical-semantic problems. M., 1976; Verzhbitskaya A. Language. Culture. Cognition. M., 1996; Lewis K.I. Types of meaning. - In: Semiotics. M., 1983; Mulud N. Analysis and meaning. M., 1979; Pavilionis R. The problem of meaning. Modern logical-semantic analysis of language. M., 1983; Piaget J. Action patterns and language acquisition.- In: Semiotics. M., 1983; Problems of sign and meaning. M., 1969; Jacobson R. In search of the essence of language. - In: Semiotics. M., 1983. See also lt. sang Sign.

← INNATE KNOWLEDGE

one of the main elements of culture, along with custom-norm, value and meaning; specifically cultural a means of connecting a person with the outside world or, in general, a subject with an object through signs . If in economic activity, a person connects with the outside world through housekeeping, and in politics - through power relations, then culture gives meaning to the facts, phenomena and processes of this world. Moreover, culture forms a complex and diverse sign system, through which experience is accumulated, maintained and organized. Sign systems include natural. and arts. languages, various alarm systems, languages ​​will be displayed. systems (images, symbolism). Specialist. the discipline that studies the properties of sign systems is Semiotics. A synonym for the term 3. is the word “meaning,” although these two terms are not completely synonymous, because “meaning” is usually associated with a subjective understanding of cultural means and is the subject of cultural studies, in contrast to the consideration of objectified 3. cultural components in the system of cultural regulation. Theor. approach to the study of the relationship between the system 3. and other systems of social regulation was developed within the framework of symbolic. interactionism (see Symbolic interactionism). Theory 3. and its relationship with the process of cognition is an important problem. Philosopher directions, primarily analytical. philosophy that reveals logical. and semantic aspects of sign systems. For cultural studies, it is important to reveal the relationship between the semantic content and various. sign systems from the viewpoint their relationship with social processes and the specifics of the cultural environment. The signs themselves may not contain information; they require decoding, i.e. bringing to the consciousness of a person, their understanding. This is well known to people who study foreign languages. language, and a scientist deciphering “mysterious writings.” The processes of acquiring knowledge, developing meanings and transmitting them are not the same, as can be demonstrated in many scientific discoveries. The lack of demand for scientific discoveries, new technologies or works of art is a well-known phenomenon from the history of culture and science. What determines the need for a person to develop meanings, to designate things, their own. actions and experiences? Things, people's actions, psychology. processes in themselves do not constitute culture. It just builds. material for her. But once designated, they are “drawn” into culture, organized into systems, included in the functioning of social institutions and in the life of individuals. personality. Culture attaches importance to defining, turning points in human life. life: birth, love, death, struggle, defeat, victory. 3. can relate to both natural phenomena (the location of stars in the sky, sunrise and sunset, rainbows and hurricanes) and internal ones. human conditions. 3. - a means that allows a person to “distance himself” from his own. experiences and from observed phenomena, and therefore the ability to develop completely special forms of activity. 3. make it possible to mentally model the phenomena with which one has to deal, and behavior itself becomes an increasingly universal way of a person’s relationship to reality. Man as a social being must conform to the interests of others, as well as cultural requirements. It is through the system 3. that such coordination occurs. The society must consolidate its experience in universally significant symbols, which could be correlated with each other, systematized and passed on to future generations. By means of culture, signs, titles, and names are created that make it possible to recreate in the imagination images of missing objects, to list and combine them in any sequence. Thanks to it, a branched system of meanings is born, with the help of which one can distinguish from each other, differentiate the subtlest shades in experiences or phenomena of the visible world. A complex hierarchy of assessments concentrates the experience of many generations. By designating and evaluating phenomena, a person orders, interprets, comprehends the world and his existence in it, and gets the opportunity to navigate reality. Giving a name to an object means taking the first step towards understanding it. The name fixes the place of the object in experience and allows you to recognize it when you meet it. It is known that 3. signs of words do not correspond to the actual properties of objects, phenomena or processes. They are developed by culture in the course of human interaction with nature and the formation of objective and symbolic. his living environment. Mythology “the creation of the world” included the designation of everything that a person deals with that the gods or cultural heroes took upon themselves. 3. may have a real “source” in the objective world (symbolization of a thunderstorm, earthquake, sun, moon, tree, etc.), but may not have it, but, on the contrary, generate an imaginary entity in the world of cultural phenomena. The most important person. The carrier of the system 3. is language as the most universal means in comparison with other sign systems. Language is able to convey temporal dimensions (present, past and future), modality, person, etc. A developed language has a huge store of verbal meanings, and, moreover, the discreteness of its units and the ability to combine them according to diverse rules do not eliminate its systematic nature and ability to adapt, to convey ever new meanings. Along with the transmission of verbal meanings, measurement measures are important already in the early stages of culture. It is the symbolic functions that invariably prevail in art. culture. The complex language of architecture, drama, music, dance, formed by the combination of familiar elements and creatively processed or introduced anew, creates a special sphere of culture, through which a person comprehends the most complex and diverse. forms of socialization. Ritual as formalized and specialized. behavior serves the purpose of strengthening connections either between permanent members of groups or in interactions between groups, relieving tension, mistrust and increasing the level of communication and a sense of community. Pluralism and polymorphism of the cultural life of each complex society requires well-functioning regulation of local, culturally specific ones. and common rituals, holidays and anniversaries. By themselves, 3. can be neutral, since the circle of designations required by society is incredibly wide. However, by connecting with norms and values, some of them can acquire a special status that elevates them above others, ordinary and everyday ones. A striking example of such exaltation is taboo, i.e. categorical a symbolic ban on specially designated objects, actions and words, violation of which entails severe punishment from the team. Taboos can be irrational and even absurd. But the apparent absurdity only confirms the special role of this means in maintaining sociocultural order. However, tabooing is included in the set of means of regulation of relatively undeveloped societies. In complex religions. systems, it is usually replaced by a set of graduated prohibitions (transgression, expiable sin, mortal sin, etc.) and “deferred” sanctions, which allow for “begging,” “repentance,” “atonement,” etc. At the same time, a wide and variable network of sacred 3. is created, expressed in word, text (even the most sacred book), gesture, image, fixing the complex hierarchy of values ​​and norms of a given religion. In all cultures, an indispensable means of signification, i.e. expressions of symbolic content serve not only special purposes. symbols, but also the living environment, designed through architecture and landscape, as well as household items, including housing, clothing, kitchen, etc. Of course, the sign content also carries the external appearance of a person and his inherent nature. features - his genetic, ethnic, age appearance. A person’s behavior, the way he behaves, speaks, communicates, has a high symbolic meaning, depending on what he is recognized or not recognized as “one of our own,” as worthy or unworthy of the definition. status in the society. Clothing that is used by a person not only for the purpose of protection from bad weather and the environment has a high symbolic functionality. Almost any clothing also denotes a person’s gender and age role, his status, wealth, etc. If a culture attaches high importance to the affirmation of identity - ethnic, national, religious - then it is customary to use certain elements of clothing for this. Among the culturally significant costume options, it is customary to distinguish the following: folk, ethnic, class, festive, official, functional, fashionable, everyday. And this, of course, does not include all the sophisticated diversity of modern times. fashionable clothes. Clothes bear a heavy burden as a status symbol in the army. In the army, importance is also attached to signal systems - auditory and visual: commands, lights, flags. However, neither the transport network, nor sports, nor information can do without these signals. system. Along with clothing, the person invariably also has symbolic content. housing, utensils, furniture, household items, etc. An important cultural sign of a person’s gender and age is usually their natural signs: skin color, hair, facial features, body structure, etc. But in any culture these signs are subject to further cultural “processing”. This same natural. a sign can also be subject to secondary re-signification, acquiring a connection with class or religious affiliation. The third type 3. of the same subject is intercultural differences, the design of external otherness, when hairstyles and hats indicate belonging to one’s ethnicity. group or subculture, its desire to be different from others. An important area of ​​symbolic socialization of the younger generation is games and toys. From an early age, a child masters the meanings of the “adult world” through toys, visually and practically perceiving those objects and relationships of the big world with which he will subsequently have to deal. These and other types of toys change with changes in the style of the era and contribute to these changes. A sign used as an intermediary in many actions and relationships in every society (except for the most primitive and primary social structures and groups) is money. Items used as money are always associated with the level of development of the society and its culture. At the same time, their increasing “dematerialization” occurs. The money of the agricultural society was quite “material”: the number of heads of livestock or other natural product. Then precious and semi-precious metals began to be used for this function. In industrial society, they took the form of paper symbols of various kinds. The formation of the information society is associated with the transition to electronic impulses, which contain some information about monetary wealth in the memory of a computer system. Electronic money, like electronic information in general, fundamentally changes the entire technology of financial transactions and affects many forms of activity and the very way of life of citizens of a post-industrial society. Lit. Excellent definition

Incomplete definition ↓