Agency review article proof-read

A couple of weeks ago I proof-read my review article for Biosemiotics "The biosemiotic glossary project: Agent, agency".

"The Biosemiotic Glossary Project: Agent, agency" published online; reference

My review article "The Biosemiotic Glossary Project: Agent, agency", the first in the Biosemiotic Glossary Project, was published online in Biosemiotics on January 21st. 

Reference:

Tønnessen, Morten (2015). The Biosemiotic Glossary Project: Agent, agency. Biosemiotics 8(1). Published online January 21st 2015 (doi: 10.1007/s12304-015-9229-0), with Appendix (Supplementary Material available online).

"The biosemiotic glossary project: Agent, agency" accepted for publication

My review article "The biosemiotic glossary project: Agent, agency" has some days ago been accepted for publication in Biosemiotics. It will appear in print in Biosemiotics 8(1), due in April.

First biosemiotic glossary review article finished; revised; sent for feedback; abstract

On May 8th I finished the review article "The biosemiotic glossary project: Agent, agency", which is the first article in the biosemiotic glossary project of the journal Biosemiotics. Following feedback from my fellow editors Alexei Sharov and Timo Maran I then revised it by June 2nd. Yesterday the article draft was distributed to members of the editorial and advisory board of Biosemiotics and to those cited (biosemioticians) for feedback. In its current version the article comes with a 6-page Appendix (Electronic Supplementary Material).

The article will appear in Biosemiotics issue 3 2014 (December).

Abstract The current article is the first in a series of review articles addressing biosemiotic terminology, and is meant to establish the format of the series. In contrast to the five existing biosemiotic glossaries compiled by individual authors (one or a few), this project is inclusive and designed to integrate views of a representative group of members within the biosemiotic community based on a standard survey and related publications. The methodology section describes the format of the survey conducted in November–December 2013 in preparation of the current review and targeted on the two terms ‘agent’ and ‘agency’. Next, I summarize denotation, synonyms and antonyms, with special emphasis on the denotation of these terms in current biosemiotic usage. On this point the survey findings include ratings of nine citations defining or making use of the two terms. I provide a summary of respondents’ own definitions of the terms and suggested usage. Further sections address etymology, connotations, and related terms in English and other languages. A section on the notions’ mainstream meaning vs. their meaning in biosemiotics is then followed by attempt at synthesis and conclusions.

While some other fields, such as medical and veterinary science, has a pragmatic interest in the notion of agency qua causal, biosemiotics has an ontological interest in the occurrence of agency in the living realm at large. Although there is currently no consensus in the biosemiotic community on what constitutes a semiotic agent, i.e. an agent in the context of semiosis (the action of signs), most respondents agree that core attributes of an agent include goal-directedness, self-governed activity, processing of semiosis and choice of action, with these features being vital for the functioning of the living system in question. I agree that these four features are constitutive of biosemiotic agents, and further suggest to define ‘semiotic agency’ as the capacity a living system has of affecting the course of events in which it is involved by relating to sign relationships. Finally, I stipulate that biosemiotic agents fall within three major categories, namely 1) sub-organismic biosemiotic agents, 2) organismic biosemiotic agents and 3) super-organismic biosemiotic agents.

See also:

The biosemiotic glossary project announced and started - first terms to be reviewed 'agent', 'agency'

Abstract for cognitive semiotics conference: "Will the agents of nature please rise: What is agency?"

Some days ago I composed and submitted the abstract below to the organizers of the First International Association for Cognitive Semiotics (IACS) Conference (to be held in Lund, Sweden, September 25-27, 2014).

• 
  

***

Will the agents of nature please rise: What is agency?

Morten Tønnessen

Associate professor at Department of health studies, University of Stavanger

 

What is agency? And who (sic) qualify as agents? In this talk I will present findings from a survey conducted in the biosemiotic community. The survey in question is the first of a series of surveys to be conducted in relation to the Biosemiotic Glossary Project, which is carried out by the journal Biosemiotics. Each survey is done in preparation of a review article which investigates one or a few terms – cf. Tønnessen, forthcoming. 

The questionnaire for the first review article was distributed November 16th 2013, with December 15th as deadline for replies (in practice late responses were accepted). It was sent as email attachment to the members of the editorial board and advisory board of Biosemiotics, the board members of the International Society for Biosemiotic Studies (ISBS) and of the International Society of Code Biology (ISCB), and via the biosemiotics email list (biosemiotics@lists.ut.ee). The questionnaire was furthermore made available online (on Academia.edu), and the same message as had been sent by email was posted in the Biosemiosis blog (http://biosemiosis.blogspot.com). 18 scholars returned questionnaires that were fully or partially filled-in, most of whom have given their permission to be cited in the review article. 

As part of the analysis of survey material, I will give an overview of various differing definitions of agency, and in conclusion I will attempt to arrive at a synthesis of existing definitions. In the survey, respondents were asked to state whether each of 5 citations involving the term ‘agent’ and 4 citations involving the term ‘agency’ were (A) perfectly suitable, (B) generally suitable, (C) somewhat suitable, or (D) not at all suitable. They were furthermore asked to define the terms, and to refer to their own work or that of others in doing so. Respondents were also asked to delimit relevant contexts of use, to mention related terms in English and other languages, and to point out the difference, if any, between the mainstream meaning of ‘agent’ and ‘agency’ and the meaning of these terms in biosemiotic usage.

 

Acknowledgements

This work has been carried out thanks to the support of the research project Animals in Changing Environments: Cultural Mediation and Semiotic Analysis (EEA Norway Grants/Norway Financial Mechanism 2009-2014 under project contract no EMP151).

 

Reference

Tønnessen, Morten, forthcoming. The biosemiotic glossary project: Agent, agency. To appear in Biosemiotics 7(3), December 2014.

The biosemiotic glossary project announced and started - first terms to be reviewed 'agent', 'agency'

Yesterday I posted "Questionnaire from Biosemiotics - and info about the biosemiotic glossary project" in the Biosemiosis blog. The text, which I also distributed on an email list and by email, reads like this:

Dear all,

on behalf of the journal Biosemiotics, I refer you to a questionnaire which we now distribute in the biosemiotic community in preparation of the biosemiotic glossary project. The editorial team of Biosemiotics, which counts Alexei Sharov, Timo Maran and myself (note that in parallel Marcello is finishing the final issues he is responsible for the next few months), has decided to go through with this project, and that I will be its handling editor.

The genre for the resulting publications will be invited review articles. The first, standard-setting review article, on the notions ‘agent’ and ‘agency’, will be written by me personally. One review will be published in each regular issue of Biosemiotics – in other words, usually there will be two review articles per year. The first article will appear in no. 3/2014. Each article will review one or more terms.

While I am the handling editor for these review articles, all three of us will be involved in decision making. We will routinely discuss and decide on what term(s) to review next, what author(s) to invite to write each review, etc. As part of the editorial process, each review article will, when submitted, be distributed to the members of the editorial board of Biosemiotics and further to those cited in the article, for feedback. This will be part of the basis for our editorial decision concerning whether the review is ready to be published or needs revisions.

A survey in the biosemiotic community will be conducted in preparation of each review article. The associated questionnaire, which is to be returned to me as handling editor, will be distributed to a wide range of biosemioticians, including but not necessarily restricted to/via the members of the editorial board and advisory board of Biosemiotics, the biosemiotics email list (biosemiotics@lists.ut.ee), the board members of the International Society for Biosemiotic Studies (ISBS), the board members of the International Society of Code Biology (ISCB), and the Biosemiosis blog (http://biosemiosis.blogspot.com/).

The invited author(s) will in each case be tasked with describing the outcomes of the survey associated with their review article, and to do so systematically and in an unbiased manner. However, when it comes to synthesis and suggestions, they will have the freedom to propose their own view even if it contradicts the general/popular understanding. In the writing process, all assigned authors are expected to conduct an extensive literature review on their own as well.

All respondents to the first survey in the biosemiotic community are, as part of the survey, invited to propose specific terms to review. Suitable terms should be quite concisely used by several biosemioticians, and if the terms are in more general usage as well, the biosemiotic usage of the terms should somehow stand out from general usage.

The deadline for returning the attached questionnaire is December 15^th. It should be sent to my email address (mortentoennessen AT gmail.com or alternatively morten.tonnessen AT uis.no).

My best,

Morten Tønnessen

Co-Editor-in-Chief of Biosemiotics

PS: The questionnaire is available via my Academia.edu page, here.