--- abstract: 'It is argued that the traditional philosophical/linguistic analysis of semiotic phe-nomena is based on the false epistemological assumption that linguistic and non-linguistic entities possess different ontologies. An attempt is made to show where linguistics as the study of signs went wrong, and an unorthodox account of the na-ture of semiosis is proposed in the framework of autopoiesis as a new epistemology of the living.' altloc: [] chapter: ~ commentary: ~ commref: ~ confdates: ~ conference: ~ confloc: ~ contact_email: ~ creators_id: [] creators_name: - family: Kravchenko given: A.V. honourific: Prof. lineage: '' date: 2003 date_type: published datestamp: 2004-12-28 department: ~ dir: disk0/00/00/40/09 edit_lock_since: ~ edit_lock_until: ~ edit_lock_user: ~ editors_id: [] editors_name: - family: Mendoza Ibanez given: Francisco J. R. de honourific: Dr. lineage: '' eprint_status: archive eprintid: 4009 fileinfo: /style/images/fileicons/application_pdf.png;/4009/1/OntologyOfSigns.pdf full_text_status: public importid: ~ institution: ~ isbn: ~ ispublished: pub issn: ~ item_issues_comment: [] item_issues_count: 0 item_issues_description: [] item_issues_id: [] item_issues_reported_by: [] item_issues_resolved_by: [] item_issues_status: [] item_issues_timestamp: [] item_issues_type: [] keywords: 'sign, semiosis, ontology, epistemology' lastmod: 2011-03-11 08:55:48 latitude: ~ longitude: ~ metadata_visibility: show note: ~ number: ~ pagerange: 179-191 pubdom: FALSE publication: Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics publisher: John Benjamins refereed: TRUE referencetext: | Akmajian, A., Demers, R. A., Farmer, A. K. & Harnish, R. M. (1990). Linguistics: An introduction to language and communication. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Barlow, M. & Kemmer, S.(2000). Usage-based models of language. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Bickerton, D. (1990). Language & species. Chicago & London: The University of Chi-cago Press. 189 Bod, R. (1998). Beyond grammar: An experience-based theory of language. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Croft, W. (1998). Linguistic evidence and mental representations. Cognitive Linguistics, 9 (2), 151-173. Dennett, D. (1996). Kinds of minds. New York: Basic Books. Dineva, A. (1994). Some theoretical principles of cognitive linguistics and their applica-tion to the study of the semantics of verbal tenses. Studia Kognitywne 1. Semantyka kategorii aspektu i czasu. Warszawa. 149-159. Dirven, R. & Verspoor M. (Eds.). (1998). Cognitive exploration of language and lin-guistics. John Benjamins. Eco, U. (1984). Semiotics and the philosophy of language. Basingstoke, etc.: Macmil-lan. Frumkina, R. M. (1999). Samosoznanije lingvistiki — vchera i zavtra. Izvestija akademii nauk. Serija literatury i jazyka, 58 (4), 28-38 [“Self-awareness of linguis-tics — yesterday and tomorrow.” Newsletter of the Academy of Sciences. Literature and Language Series. Moscow]. Geeraerts, D. (1988). Cognitive grammar and the history of lexical semantics. In B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Ed.), Topics in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 647-677). Amster-dam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.. Grice, H. P. (1989). Studies in the way of words. Harvard University Press. Grush, R. 1997. The architecture of representation. Philosophical Psychology, 10 (1), 5-23. Heine, B. (1997). Cognitive foundations of grammar. Oxford University Press. Keller, R. (1998). A theory of linguistic signs. Oxford University Press. Kravchenko, A. V. (1996). Jazyk i vosprijatije: Kognitivnyje aspekty jazykovoi kategori-zatsii [Language and perception: Cognitive aspects of linguistic categorization]. Iz-datelstvo Irkutskogo universiteta. Kravchenko, A. V. (2001a). Kognitivnaja lingvistika i novaja epistemologija. Izvestija Akademii Nauk. Serija literatury i jazyka, 60 (5), 3-13 [Cognitive linguistics and new epistemology. Newsletter of the Academy of Sciences. Literature and language se-ries. Moscow]. Kravchenko, A. V. (2001b). Znak, znachenije, znanije: Ocherk kognitivnoi filosofii jazyka [Sign, meaning, knowledge: An essay in the cognitive philosophy of lan-guage]. Irkutsk. Kravchenko, A. V. (2002). Cognitive linguistics as a methodological paradigm. In B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk & K. Turewicz (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics today (pp. 41-54).Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang. Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol. 1: Theoretical pre-requisites. Stanford University Press. Langacker, R. W. (1991). Concept, image, and symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Malinowski, B. (1927). The Problem of meaning in primitive languages. In C. K. Ogden & I. A. Richards, The meaning of meaning: A study of the influence of language upon thought and of the science of symbolism. 2nd revised edition (Sup-plement I, pp. 296-336). New York: Harcourt, Brace & Company. Margolis, E. & Laurence, S. (Eds.). (1999). Concepts. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Maturana, H. (1970). Biology of cognition. BCL Research Report 9.0, Urbana, IL: Uni-versity of Illinois. 190 Maturana, H. (1978). Biology of language: The epistemology of reality. In G. Miller & E. Lenneberg (Eds.), Psychology and biology of language and thought (pp. 28-62). New York: Academic Press. Maturana, H. (1983). On the misuse of the notion of information in biology. Journal of Social and Biological Structures, 6, 155-158. Maturana, H. (1987). Everything said is said by an observer. In W. Thompson (Ed.), Gaia: A way of knowing (pp. 65-82). Hudson, NY: Lindisfarne Press. Maturana, H. & Varela, F. (1980). Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. Dordrecht, Holland: Reidel. Maturana, H. & Varela, F. (1987). The tree of knowledge: The biological roots of hu-man understanding. Boston: Shambhala. Moreno, A., Merelo, J. J. & Etxeberria, A. (1992). Perception, adaptation and learning. In B. McMullin & N. Murphy (Eds.), Autopoiesis and perception: A workshop with ESPRIT BRA 3352 (pp. 65-70). Dublin. Murphy, N. (1992). The causal and symbolic explanatory duality as a framework for understanding vision. In B. McMullin & N. Murphy (Eds.), Autopoiesis and percep-tion: A workshop with ESPRIT BRA 3352 (pp. 15-25). Dublin. Nemeth, E. (Ed.). (2001). Cognition in language use (Selected Papers from the 7th In-ternational Pragmatics Conference, Vol. 1). Antwerp: International Pragmatics As-sociation. Sandra, D. (1998). What linguistics can and can’t tell you about the human mind: A reply to Croft. Cognitive Linguistics, 9, 361-378. Saussure, F. de (1916/1922). Cours de linguistique générale. Paris: Payot & Cie. Stich, S. (1992). What is a theory of mental representation? Mind, 101, 243-261. Turewicz, K. (2000). Applicability of cognitive grammar as a foundation of pedagogi-cal/reference grammar. Lódz: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Lódzkiego. Van Valin, R. D. & LaPolla, R. L. (1997). Syntax: Structure, meaning and function. Cambridge UP. Watson, R. A. (1995). Representational ideas: From Plato to Patricia Churchland. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. Wilson, D. (1997). Linguistic Structure and Inferential Communication. Paper presented at the 16th International Congress of Linguists. Paris, July 25. Zvegintsev, V. A. (1996). Mysli o lingvistike [Thoughts about linguistics]. Izdatelstvo Moskovskogo Universiteta. relation_type: [] relation_uri: [] reportno: ~ rev_number: 12 series: ~ source: ~ status_changed: 2007-09-12 16:55:00 subjects: - phil-lang - ling-prag - phil-epist succeeds: ~ suggestions: ~ sword_depositor: ~ sword_slug: ~ thesistype: ~ title: "The ontology of signs as linguistic and non-linguistic entities: a cognitive perspective\n" type: bookchapter userid: 5318 volume: ~