Semiotica Vol. 1 (1)

Mead, Margaret 1969. "From Intuition to Analysis in Communication Research". In Semiotica (Vol. 1), pp. 13-25
Siin kurdab Mead selle üle, et uute tehnoloogiatega on läinud kaduma intuitiivne oskus märgata (kultuurilisi) mustreid, kuid õnneks tehnoloogia kompenseerib seda:

We have been concentrating - between 1950 and 1965 - on encouraging and developing finer and finer instrumentation to make our work more accessible to other students and more subject to cross checking (Adair and Worth, 1967). While we were doing this a new generation was growing up, many of them without either the experience or training in the arts from which part of our earlier diagnostic skills derived. But the instrumentation which will make it possible for them to construct patterns, even though they cannot perceive them intuitively, is now there for them to use. (Mead 1969: 19)

Kui eelmine tsitaat vihjas kaudselt Birdwhistelli laborile, siis järgmisel leheküljel nimetab ta kineesikast pärinevaid ühikuid koos Alan Lomaxi ühikutega, mida Birdwhistell julgustas:

For those who insist on having units to count, we can give them units, units which come from kinesic, choreometric or cantometric or proxemic analysis (Hall, 1963). (Mead 1969: 20)

Pelc, Jerzy 1969. "Meanins as an Instrument". In Semiotica (Vol. 1), pp. 26-48
Siin on viidatud Osgoodile ja Morrisele kui "arenenud behavioristidele" ja samas ka nimetatud mitteverbaalse suhtlemise alusteks olevat ikoonilised ja indeksilised märgid (märkasin seda ka Tenjese doktoritöös).

The third group of views on the meaning of expressions is formed on the STIMULUS-RESPONSE theories. They are behaviouristic in nature. In their more primitive variations they state that the meaning of an expression is that situation in which that expression has been uttered, and the listener's response to that utterance as a stimulus. In their more refiner form (Ch. Osgood, Ch. Morris) the theory emphasizes the response to the stimulus, while the stimulus situation is disregarded. The starting point here was an analysis of indexical signs, or natural signs, as opposed to conventional symbols. THe modification consists in that a defined response to an utterance ceases to be considered the meaning of that utterenace; it is replaced in that róle by the type of response, i.e., a regular and potential response. This theory is, as it were, a behaviourist, external aspect of associationism: the association of thoughts and/or ideas is replaced by a relationship between acts and types of behaviour. In both cases, however, the underlying idea is that of certain psychological and physiological regularities, with the proviso that the latter prevail in the case of the stimulus-response theory. The latter makes a bridge to the operational theory, which also is based on certain (active) forms of human behaviour. (Pelc 1969: 34)

Ekman, Paul, and Wallace V. Friesen 1969b. "The Repertoire of Nonverbal Behavior: Categories, Origins, Usage, and Coding." In Semiotica (Vol. 1), pp. 49-98
Kohe eesimeses lõigus määratlevad nad pealkirjas esiatus mõisted, millele mina annaksin alternatiivsed nimed etogeenne, kontekstuaalne/pragmaatiline ja semiootiline:

If we are to understand fully any instance of a person's non-verbal behavior - that is, any movement or position of the face and/or the body - we must discover how that behavior became part of the person's repertoire, the circumstances of its use, and the rules which explain how the behavior contains or conveys information. We will call these three fundamental considerations ORIGIN, USAGE, and CODING. (Ekman and Friesen 1969b: 49)

Kasutus:

The term 'usage' refers to regular and consistent circumstances surrounding the occurrence of a nonverbal act. Usage includes (1) the external conditions found whenever the act occurs, (2) the realtionship of the act to the associated verbal behvaior, (3) the person's awareness of emitting the act, (4) the person's intention to communicate, (5) feedback from the person observing the act, and (6) the type of information conveyed by the act. (Ekman and Friesen 1969b: 53)

Kriitika Birdwhiselli suunas:

Birdwshitell and Scheflen have applied a communication framework to nonverbal behavior, based largely upon the argument that much of the nonverbal behavior they observe influences the behavior of the other interactants. We believe that their use of the term 'communicative' is too broad; it fails to distinguish among that behavior which has a shared decoded meaning (informative), that which influences the other person's interaction (interactive), and that which intended to transmit a message (communicative). Many nonverbal behaviors may have interactive effects, but not be intended to communicate nor best be considered as analogous to verbal communication. Similarly, nonverbal behavior with a shared decoded meaning may not be intended to communicate, nor be best considered as analogous to linguistic phenomena. (Ekman and Friesen 1969b: 57)

The last of the three aspects of nonverbal behavior which must be examined is the principle of corresponcence between the act and its meaning. The code which describes how meaning is contained is a non-verbal act, that is, the rule which characterizes the relationship between the act itself and that which it signfies, may be EXTRINSIC or INTRINSIC. An extrinsic code is one in which it signifies or stand for something else, and the coding may be arbitrary or iconic. An intrinsic code is in a sense no code in that the act does not stand for but IS its significant; the meaning of the act is intrinsic to the action itself. We will characterize these as three coding principles: ARBITRARY (extrinsic) codes, ICONIC (extrinsic) codes, and INTRINSIC codes. (Ekman and Friesen 1969b: 60)

Spatial illustrators are iconic if tehy represent spatial relationships, intrinsically coded if they actually change spatial relationships. (Ekman and Friesen 1969b: 70)

Kuvamisreegleid on nelja tüüpi:

DISPLAY RULES are socially learned, probably quite early in life, and prescribe different procedures for the management of affect displays in various social settings, roles, etc. We can distinguish at least four display rules. One rule is to de-intensify the appearance clues to a given affect; for example, when one is extremely fearful he must attempt to look only moderately or slightly fearful. A second display rule is to over-intensify: for example, when one is slightly fearfl he must attempt to look extremely fearful. A third display rule is to look affectless or neutral; for example, when one is fearful, he must attempt to look as if no affect were being experienced. A fourth rule is to mask the felt affect as completely as possible by dissimulating it with another effect; for example, when one is fearful, he must attempt to look happy. (Ekman and Friesen 1969b: 75)

Implitsiitse suhtlemise mõiste satub küsimuse alla, kui näoilmed muutuvad embleemideks:

Affect displays can be related to verbal behavior in a number of ways. They can repeat, qualify or contradict a verbally stated affect, or be a separate, unrelated channel of communication. Affect displays can be emblems, in that a particular social group or culture may select an entire affective display or an element of an affective display and code it so explicitly that it is recognized and used as an emblem; the smile in many cultures is such an emblem. (Ekman and Friesen 1969b: 77)

Scholte, Bob 1969. "Compte-rendu / Review article: Lévi-Strauss' Penelopean Effort: The Analysis of Myths". In Semiotica (Vol. 1), pp. 99-124
Sarnasus Juri Lotmaniga:

More importantly, we find the continued use of such logico-mathematical terms as symmetry, inversion, equivalence, homology, isomorphism, etc. (CC: 39). Although admittedly to his prevarious and even naive usage of these concepts, Lévi-Strauss employs them freely and often, almost invariably in diagrammatic representations governed by the familiar binary logic (although analogic models are also in evidence, cf. Lévi-Strauss' reply to Leach on p. 74 of Du Miel aux cendres). (Scholte 1969: 102)

Modaalsuse ja koodid:

As this reference indicates, Mythologiques makes extensive use of codes not previously as pronounced in Lévi-Strauss' work - especially those pertaining to the senses: auditory, gustatory, olfactory and tactile. There are still other and related ones (e.g., zoological, botanical, organic, aesthetic, religious), but the codes of the senses dominate Mythologiques - from the reflection on music in the "Ouverture" in Le Cru et le cuit to the analysis of "les instruments des ténébres" in Du Miel aux cendres. (Scholte 1969: 105)