Abstract
A dynamic transition of language signs appears to be the key issue in the semiotic project. This is, as Kevelson suspected, particularly of essence in law and legal discourse. Semioticians thus determine the relations between meaning and reality so that we think to succeed to articulate ‘how things really are’. Signs have for the lawyer legal quality because they reach him or her via legal discourse in his professional and social discourse. Legal signs are the result of a legal codification before a lawyer can unfold any legal activity. We thus consider the need to qualify (a) how signs become specifically legal, (b) whether there are parallel processes in other fields of professional signification, and (c) how the social field comes to accept those signs in their legal sense and evolves in accordance with the legal meanings of them.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Wagner (2006), p. 321.
- 2.
A selection of research themes on the basis of Kevelson’s Works as well as her Office Papers and Notes is offered in Chap. 6, Appendix A.
- 3.
Pencak and Palecek (2002), (Op. Cit.), p. 45f.
- 4.
www.perso.numericable.fr/robert.marty/semiotique/76defeng.htm, dd. 04.20.2017.
- 5.
- 6.
Wagner (2010), p. 77f.
- 7.
Pencak (2002), (Op. Cit.), p. 144.
- 8.
See www.perso.numericable.fr/robert.marty/semiotique, (Op. Cit.), No. 5 (1873), No. 62 (non-dated text).
- 9.
Percy wrote in his 1983: “There is this perennial danger which besets semiotics: … with man using signs in everything that he does, semiotics runs the risk of being about everything and hence about nothing.”, p. 85.
- 10.
Broekman (2017), (Op. Cit.), pp. 1–22.
- 11.
This has, next to Sebeok’s zoo-semiotics, far reaching consequences. If all hominids create their own semiotic system, is the history of mankind in that perspective not identical to the history of semiotics?
- 12.
References
Bednarik RG (2000) Beads and the origins of symbolism. www.semioticon.com/frontline/bednarik.htm
Bednarik RG (2015) The tribology of cupules. Geol Mag 152(4), Cambridge
Broekman JM (2017) Verbal and non-verbal in Semiotics. In: Semiotica. Journal of the International Association for Semiotic Studies/Revue de l’Association Internationale de Sémiotique, May 2017, No 126, p 19ff. De Gruyter Mouton
Garrett M (2010) Trademarks as a system of signs: a semiotic look at trademark law. Int J Semiot Law 23(1)
Harvill N (2010) Use the purpose by which all may benefit: the semiotics of ‘Public Use’. Int J Semiot Law 23(1)
Pencak W (2002) A conversation with Roberta Kevelson. In: Pencak W, Palecek C (eds) From Absurdity to Zen. The Wit and Wisdom of Roberta Kevelson, Peter Lang, New York. In: Pencak WA, Lindgren JR (1988) New approaches to semiotics and the human sciences, De Lang Publishers, New York etc.
Percy W (1983) Lost in the cosmos. Picador USA, New York
Wagner A (2006) The rules of the road, a universal visual semiotics. Int J Semiot Law 19(3)
Wagner A (2010) Mapping legal semiotics. Int J Semiot Law 23(1)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Broekman, J.M., Fleerackers, F. (2018). Kevelson’s Semiotics Today. In: Legal Signs Fascinate. SpringerBriefs in Law. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69520-4_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69520-4_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-69519-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-69520-4
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)