<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>The age of transdiscipinarity has brought along the fading of boundaries between disciplines. This has engaged both the fusion of metalanguages that are used for the description of cultures and sign-processes, and the launch of novel proposals for metalinguistic vocabularies. In the case of the study of culture, communication and sign-processes, it is natural that all such developments are connected with the paradigm of semiotics. At times the relevant metalinguistic and methodological proposals challenge traditional semiotic vocabulary, methods and methodological truths. This has brought along the need to recall the semiotic roots of the study of semiosis and communication, and to review transdisciplinary metalanguage in order to avoid possible misinterpretations or unnecessary repetitions of the established agreements in the paradigm of semiotics as a possible ground for transdisciplinary study of human interaction and cultural processes. However, besides occasional theoretical confusion, the spread of the semiotic methodology and vocabulary across applied scholarship has enriched semiotics in its faculties of field studies.</p></abstract>

The age of transdiscipinarity has brought along the fading of boundaries between disciplines. This has engaged both the fusion of metalanguages that are used for the description of cultures and sign-processes, and the launch of novel proposals for metalinguistic vocabularies. In the case of the study of culture, communication and sign-processes, it is natural that all such developments are connected with the paradigm of semiotics. At times the relevant metalinguistic and methodological proposals challenge traditional semiotic vocabulary, methods and methodological truths. This has brought along the need to recall the semiotic roots of the study of semiosis and communication, and to review transdisciplinary metalanguage in order to avoid possible misinterpretations or unnecessary repetitions of the established agreements in the paradigm of semiotics as a possible ground for transdisciplinary study of human interaction and cultural processes. However, besides occasional theoretical confusion, the spread of the semiotic methodology and vocabulary across applied scholarship has enriched semiotics in its faculties of field studies.

Sociosemiotics and Metalanguage: The Case of Translanguaging

Linguistic Frontiers

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

{"article-title":"Sociosemiotics and Metalanguage: The Case of Translanguaging"}

The age of transdiscipinarity has brought along the fading of boundaries between disciplines. This has engaged both the fusion of metalanguages that are used...

Sociosemiotics and Metalanguage: The Case of Translanguaging

Publié en ligne: 31 déc. 2020

Pages: 57 - 65

Reçu: 01 juil. 2020

Accepté: 01 sept. 2020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/lf-2020-0015

Mots clés
sociosemiotics, metalanguage, transdisciplinarity, modality, multimodality, mediality, coding, semiosis, modelling, translanguaging

© 2020 Anti Randviir, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Sociosemiotics and Metalanguage: The Case of Translanguaging

Publié en ligne: 31 déc. 2020

Pages: 57 - 65

Reçu: 01 juil. 2020

Accepté: 01 sept. 2020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/lf-2020-0015

Mots cléssociosemiotics, metalanguage, transdisciplinarity, modality, multimodality, mediality, coding, semiosis, modelling, translanguaging

© 2020 Anti Randviir, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Mots clés
sociosemiotics, metalanguage, transdisciplinarity, modality, multimodality, mediality, coding, semiosis, modelling, translanguaging