Elements of Semiotic Analysis of Ruth Schranz Ratingen’s Painting

About the author:

Pierre Marillaud, Dr. of Linguistics, Associate Researcher, University Toulouse-Jean Jaurès (France); Inspector of the Honorary Academy; p.marillaud.cals@orange.fr

Abstract:

Our analysis consists of one approach of planar semiotics presented and thoroughly explained in chapter 9 of “Précis de Sémiotique Générale” by Jean-Marie Klinkenberg (1996) with a nod to other references. It goes without saying that we suggested our personal remarks and points of view in such analysis. The reason for writing this article is due to our persuasion that the importance of signs, even if it has been increasing since the past, is of such high level nowadays and that our society lives in day-to-day proliferation of images of different sorts. In our research, we have established relations between sign and linguistic structures like narrativity, for instance. However, it is utmost obvious that processes of sense construction are different whether we study a text or an image. Given an intention for our approach to be the most objective, we took into consideration the fact that spectator’s subjectivity interferes with esthetic considerations and we tried to highlight the importance of cultural influence in conception and interpretation of a painting. We did not want to limit our findings to the old idiom “tastes differ”. We hope that we were able to avoid that as well as to clarify our approach with the application of A. J. Greimas’ semiotic square.

References:

1. Baudrillard J. 1968. Le système des objets. Paris: Gallimard.

2. Greimas A. J., Courtés J. 1979. Sémiotique, dictionnaire raisonné de la théorie du langage. Hachette Université.

3. Klinkenberg J. M. 2000. Précis de sémiotique générale. Paris: Seuil, Points Essais.

4. Sartre J.-P. 1957. L’Être et le Néant. 53e édition. Paris: Gallimard, Bibliothèque des idées.

5. Van Lier H. 2010. Anthropogénie. Les Impressions nouvelles.