Jeff Bezemer
Social semiotics provides powerful tools to document and analyse text and other types of human artefacts. Through close inspection of the micro-logical make-up of semiotic ‘products’ – e.g. advertisements, children’s drawings, excerpts of textbooks, toys – semioticians have been successful in reconstructing what meanings are made and how in particular time-spaces, and in recognizing what is socially and culturally shared and what is unique and distinct, reflecting the sign maker’s interest. Yet the interactional processes involved in sign making and re-making, or indeed the meta-reflexive commentaries of the sign makers, have been less visible in social semiotic accounts.
One argument I will make in my talk is that while detailed analysis of semiotic artefacts can provide a robust basis for developing plausible claims about human semiosis, more and different claims can be made if it is complemented by direct observation of and close engagement with the sign makers themselves. This complement is particularly desirable, if not essential,when semioticians explore meaning making in domains they are not familiar with.
The second argument I put forward is that it is precisely this exploration of unfamiliar territory that has the potential to advance social semiotics. Thus I make a plea to expand the original frame of social semiotics along two lines. First, to look beyond the dominant (public) social domains and its canonical genres – e.g. promotional or literary texts- and to begin to explore specific domains, sites, and communities – e.g., specialist workplaces, discussion forums, communities of practice. Upon entering these specialist, even if seemingly marginal, sites, the semiotician is confronted with differently configured sign complexes, in which modes other than speech or writing are likely to play a central role. Second, I propose to explore meaning making through documentation and analysis of both artefacts and situated interactions, as well as through direct engagement with the community under study.
Thus, while cherishing the archaeological eye of the semiotician, I am making a call for inclusionof the ethnographic method in social semiotics. I will explore the possibilities of this approach with reference to my research on communication in hospital settings.
One argument I will make in my talk is that while detailed analysis of semiotic artefacts can provide a robust basis for developing plausible claims about human semiosis, more and different claims can be made if it is complemented by direct observation of and close engagement with the sign makers themselves. This complement is particularly desirable, if not essential,when semioticians explore meaning making in domains they are not familiar with.
The second argument I put forward is that it is precisely this exploration of unfamiliar territory that has the potential to advance social semiotics. Thus I make a plea to expand the original frame of social semiotics along two lines. First, to look beyond the dominant (public) social domains and its canonical genres – e.g. promotional or literary texts- and to begin to explore specific domains, sites, and communities – e.g., specialist workplaces, discussion forums, communities of practice. Upon entering these specialist, even if seemingly marginal, sites, the semiotician is confronted with differently configured sign complexes, in which modes other than speech or writing are likely to play a central role. Second, I propose to explore meaning making through documentation and analysis of both artefacts and situated interactions, as well as through direct engagement with the community under study.
Thus, while cherishing the archaeological eye of the semiotician, I am making a call for inclusionof the ethnographic method in social semiotics. I will explore the possibilities of this approach with reference to my research on communication in hospital settings.
Jeff Bezemer,
professor at University College London, Institute of Education, author of Multimodality, Learning and Communication (2015), Introducing Multimodality (2016) and a number of works on video analysis and multimodal analysis of communication in healthcare.
professor at University College London, Institute of Education, author of Multimodality, Learning and Communication (2015), Introducing Multimodality (2016) and a number of works on video analysis and multimodal analysis of communication in healthcare.