Before we jump into social semiotics, the topic of the day, I think it might be helpful to first understand what semiotics is. To be brief, semiotics is essentially the study of signs and symbols and meaning making. A sign is anything from which meaning can be interpreted by someone, and interpretation will vary based on many factors. For example, certain hand gestures are interpreted differently based on our cultures and where we live.
Social semiotics is a branch of semiotics. Moving on…
Intro to Social Semiotics
Social Semiotics is a theoretical framework that helps us understand how images convey meaning. There are several theories that allow us to do this. For example, art theory and Gestalt theory. What sets social semiotics apart from other frameworks that examine meaning in images is that this theory stresses that examining meaning in images is a social process in its own right (Harrison 47). Social semiotics was strongly influenced by linguistic theorist Michael Halliday, who introduced the phrase in his book Language as Social Semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning (Morgan 219). Robert Hodge and Gunther Kress went on to systemize and define the term ten years later (Wilson 436).
There is, in other words, a sort of negotiation that takes place between the “producer” and the “viewer” of a given image. This is because image interpretation requires the involvement of the social, cultural, and political views and values held by both parties (Harrison 47).
With the overload of information on the internet, competition for attention can be a challenge. What makes a viewer more likely to gravitate towards a certain message over another? Social semiotics is a great tool for online communication and for decoding the messages we see all day, every day!
Social semiotics calls for the application of 3 core principles: everyone sees the world in signs, the meaning of signs is created by people through their specific cultural and social processes (there is no universal truth), and semiotic systems provide resources for creating meaning (which gives communicators choices) (Harrison 48).
Understanding semiotic resources can help us understand what people want to communicate through images (Harrison 48). For example, a photo taken from a birds-eye view may communicate something different than a photo taken straight on. Then, one can consider why the producer chose one style over another.
Social semiotics can also help us analyze images in relation to their accompanying text.
Some Rules of Social Semiotics
Visual domains have elements and structures which communicate intended messages by way of how they are represented in an image (design, layout, etc.). Intended meanings are conveyed by “visual modes” that include 3 dimensions: representational, interactive, and compositional (“Visual Analysis: Representational”)
Representational: A spatial layout and sequencing pattern is considered either narrative or conceptual.
Narrative: things happening in the image
Transactive: “Actors” in image interact
Non Transactive: “Actors” in image do not interact
Conceptual: images that do not contain vectors
Purpose is to analyze, define or classify
Interactive: The interaction between viewers and “actors” in an image. Used to create relationships and suggest what attitude should be adopted by the viewer.
Three rules to remember include:
Contact: demand or offer
Distance: medium (social), close (intimate), long (unfamiliar)
Point of View: vertical (power), horizontal (engaged or detached)
Compositional: The way in which an image is made up. 3 important resources include: information value, framing, salience, and modality.
Information Value:
Left to Right: Information on the left is “given” and information on the right is “new”
Top to Bottom: Information on the top is “ideal” and information on the bottom is “real”
Center: Information in the center holds other information together
Framing: Either connects or disconnects
Salience: What is prominent
Modality: According to Robert Hodge and Gunther Kress, “modality refers to the status, authority and reliability of a message, to its ontological status, or to its value as truth or fact” (Chandler).
Example: Naturalistic (low/high) or Scientific (low/high)
Analyzing images via the Social Semiotics method
Image 1: They are interacting with each other so the representational is narrative. The interaction with the viewer through the gaze of the little girl on the right means the contact is a demand. It’s a long shot (distance), signifying the groups of actors are strangers. The salient features are the uniformity of the girls outfits and the white on blue contrast. There is image focus on the left and right, which means that the information value is both given and new, but there’s nothing in the middle, except maybe the viewer. I would say the space between them represents history and their positive interaction signals a desire to close the gap.
Image source: visuallooksee
Image 2: The representational is narrative and we see action from both actors. They are interactive with each other so it is transactional. The interactive meaning signifies that the contact is an offer. The distance is medium, signifying a social message. The compositional has a natural modality, the salient features are the bright colors and color contrasts. The image focus is to the right, which means that its information value is “new.” We are probably looking at an offer for new arrivals with a social message of “you too can be this cool if you buy these clothes.”
Image source: DXB402
Works Cited
Chandler, Daniel. Semiotics for Beginners: Modality and Representation. 23 Nov. 2021, visual-memory.co.uk/daniel/Documents/S4B/sem02a.html.
Harrison, Claire. “Visual Social Semiotics: Understanding How Still Images Make Meaning.”
Technical Communication, vol. 50, no. 1, 2003, pp. 46–60. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/43090531.
Morgan, Candia. “What Does Social Semiotics Have to Offer Mathematics Education Research?”
Educational Studies in Mathematics, vol. 61, no. 1/2, 2006, pp. 219–45. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25472066.
“Visual Analysis: Representational and Interactive Meanings in the Remarried Empress.” Transcultural Journal of Humanities and Social Science (Print), vol. 2, no. 3, Nov. 2021, pp. 15–37. https://doi.org/10.21608/tjhss.2021.206446.
Viscomsem. “Visual Social Semiotics Definition.” Viscomsem, 27 Aug. 2015, viscomsem2.wordpress.com/2015/08/20/visual-social-semiotics-definition.
Wilson, Amy Alexandra. “A Social Semiotics Framework for Conceptualizing Content Area Literacies.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, vol. 54, no. 6, 2011, pp. 435–44. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41203380.
Comments
Post a Comment