Advice given to Dean on 10 research group applications

Over the last few weeks I have given advice to the Dean of the Faculty of social sciences at University of Stavanger regarding 10 research group applications, as a replacement for the Vice Dean for Research, over three meetings, the last of which today. The process results in the allocation of about 300.000 NOK divided between the research groups this year and the same amount in 2025.

News story on establishment of six research groups

The news story "Støtte til seks forskergrupper ved SV-fakultetet" has been published on the homepage of University of Stavanger.

See also:

Six research groups established at Faculty of social sciences

Six research groups established at Faculty of social sciences

Last week the Faculty of social sciences established six research groups. I have been involved in my capacity as Vice-Dean of Research. The research groups are organised around publishing projects and supplement the existing "program areas for research" (of which there are five at the faculty as of today). The research groups have a time perspective of two years each.

Research administration meeting

Yesterday I attended a faculty research administration meeting devoted to work on a hearing statement on the Research Council of Norways strategy for 2020-2024, and revision of our application form for establishing research groups at the faculty follow feedback and input from union representatives.

Three meetings; appointed member of work group to fix UIS quality system

Today I have attended three meetings in my capacity as Vice-Dean of research at University of Stavanger´s Faculty of social sciences: First a 3 hour work meeting on the faculty´s strategy with the faculty leadership group, next the monthly meeting of the doctoral committee for the ph.d. programme in social sciences, which I chaired, and finally a 2 hour meeting on the university´s follow-up work on NOKUT´s disallowance of the UIS´ quality system (I have been appointed to one of the five work groups that are established to geth things fixed).

A meeting and then some

Today I have attended another work meeting related to the soon to be established arrangement for research groups at our faculty. I have also had a work lunch with a colleague to explore potential for research collaboration.

Three-four meetings

Today I attended the faculty leadership meeting, which included a half hour meeting on the Research Council of Norway application process this Spring, a work meeting on the new arrangement for funds for research groups, and an appointments committee meeting for the position as Head of department of Department of media and social studies.

One meeting

Today I attended a meeting with a colleague where we made progress towards developing criteria etc. for publication project-based research groups as a new format at our faculty.

Two meetings and a work lunch

Today I attended the faculty leadership meeting, and a meeting in preparation of establishing an arrangement for funding of research groups at the faculty. I also had a work lunch with representatives of two research networks at the university to learn from their experiences.

Performance appraisal; PhD project on welfare highly uncertain

I have just attended the annual performance appraisal with my Head of department. Topics included next academic year´s work plan, research activities and plans, etc.

An important topic we discussed is my proposal for a PhD project on welfare and prosperity - now focused on socioeconomically vulnerable groups. After receiving negative feedback from a key colleague for a second time, the feasibility of the project is highly uncertain, if not definitively disproved.

Second Announcement: "From beak to tail – mechanisms underlying damaging behaviour in laying hens and pigs", ISAE 2017 Satellite Meeting

Second Announcement for the ISAE 2017 Satellite Meeting:

"From beak to tail – mechanisms underlying damaging  behaviour in laying hens and pigs"

Organized jointly by the FareWellDock Network and the GroupHouseNet COST Action.

By joining efforts on an interspecies level, we have the opportunity to greatly enhance the understanding of the mechanisms underlying tail biting and feather pecking. Both behaviours are challenging, from an animal welfare and from an economic point-of-view, while in several countries, as well as at the EU level, the ethical justification of tail docking and beak trimming is currently being debated. 

This full-day meeting will be held at the ISAE 2017 congress venue on August 7th , 2017, starting at 9am. The meeting will focus on two main themes: 'Mechanisms underlying the link between health and damaging behaviour' and 'Predisposing factors for damaging behaviour during early development'. Both themes will be introduced by invited experts, followed by short research presentations by participants, and then elaborated on in inter-species discussion groups. In addition, the program will include a networking session, with the aim to facilitate knowledge exchange and future cooperation between researchers working on damaging behaviour in pigs and poultry.

Registration for the meeting will be open until May 15th, 2017. The meeting participation is limited to 80 persons, so early registration is recommended. 

For further information on the programme and venue, and on how to register, please see the "Beak to Tail" homepage or contact: anna.valros@helsinki.fi.

The workshop is sponsored by Topigs Norsvin, RSPCA and COST.

Abstract for 3rd EMP151 research seminar: "Human Perceptions of Wolves and other Animals in Kristiansand, Kautokeino and Rendalen"

Paul Thibault and I have today composed the abstract below for the 3rd Norwegian research seminar in the Estonian-Norwegian research project "Animals in changing environments: Cultural mediation and semiotic analysis" (University of Stavanger, June 5th).

***

Human Perceptions of Wolves and other Animals in Kristiansand, Kautokeino and Rendalen 

Paul Thibault (University of Agder) and Morten Tønnessen (University of Stavanger) 

This paper presents fieldwork focused on people´s perception of wolves and selected animals which the wolf is often perceived as being in conflict with. The data analyzed in this paper consists of video-recordings of a series of semi-structured interviews conducted in Norway in Spring 2015 in three locations. During these interviews, participants were shown and asked to respond to display materials featuring wolves and other animals – particularly reindeer (Kautokeino, Finnmark) and sheep (Rendalen, Hedmark). Other study animals include hunting dogs, lynx and moose. Reindeer and sheep were selected for study due to their centrality in regional discourses on wolf management. At each of the interview locations (including the pilot study in Kristiansand, Vest-Agder), participants were recruited from relevant interest groups, including environmentalists, hunters, sheep farmers and reindeer herders. 11 interviews are included in the data presented here (4 in Kristiansand, 3 in Kautokeino, 4 in Rendalen). 

Using techniques derived from Multimodal Interaction Analysis (MIA), the study analyzes participants´ accounts of, attitudes to and reactions towards selected display materials. The term ´perception´ used in the title of this paper refers to participants´ experience with, ideas about and attitudes towards the study animals, as revealed in the interviews. Methodologically, display materials were used in order to elicit responses that provide information about the participants´ perceptions of the study animals. The display materials included video clips, audio recordings of animal vocalizations, and images. The semi-structured interviews also included a few standard questions.  

The techniques of MIA were deployed in order to analyze the full range of interviewees´ meaning-making resources, including vocal utterances, gesture, facial expressions and other relevant body movements. The purpose of the MIA was to identify salient cultural thematic patterns, evaluative stances and feelings experienced by the participants in their encounter with the display materials and their recounts of their experiences of the study animals. Furthermore, a comparative analysis was developed of relevant patterns in the data that showed differences and similarities in the perceptions of the different interest groups. Moreover, a comparative analysis was also undertaken based on the different geographical locations where the data was gathered. 

The paper will present preliminary findings concerning the different ways in which interviewees performed and enacted their experiences of the study animals through body dynamics, verbal patterns and orientation to cultural values. The display material included in the interviews were designed to elicit different responses and interpretations, without prompting from the interviewer. In particular the audio clips and images proved, in many instances, to be highly ambiguous and open to diverse interpretations.  

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). Laura Kiiroja contributed to cataloguing and coding the video-recordings as a valuable stage in the preparation of the analyses developed in this paper.

Abstract for "Animals in the Anthropocene" conference: "Proto-language in wolves"

On Friday this week I took part in composing and submitting the abstract below to the September 17-19th conference "Animals in the Anthropocene: Human-animal relations in a changing semiosphere".

***

Proto-language in wolves

Morten Tønnessen (University of Stavanger) and Paul Thibault (University of Agder)

Like several other animals (and human infants), wolves have proto-language. In human development, proto-language precedes and is the foundation of the child’s development of the adult language. In animals, proto-language forms an important part of their communicative repertoire. In animals and humans alike, proto-language is characterized by the absence of grammar, and is directly tied to internal bodily states and/or to aspects of situations. In other words, actual use of proto-language is often action-related, for instance by directing attention.

In terms of the tripartite Umwelt model (Tønnessen, based on Uexküll), animal interjections can be associated with the conceptual aspect of Umwelt, where in the human case linguistic practices are placed. In animals too, the conceptual Umwelt is characterized by predicative reasoning, i.e. the habitual, mental attribution of specific features to someone or something. However, the mediated aspect of Umwelt also comes into play as far as mediation, e.g. anticipation and memory, enters the picture, as is typically the case with emotions, which are often at the basis of interjections.

We will analyze a data set involving captive wolves, aiming to identify animal interjections performed in a range of situation types. We will be looking for patterns and variation, e.g. between different groups (packs), with a view to determining the range of meanings and situations in which different interjections occur. We hypothesize that since interjections are very likely to some extent conventionalized, there will be systematic, observable variations grounded in the lived experience of social relations, whether intra–pack, or human–animal. Of interest here is the extent to which these calls or interjections are not merely expressive of internal states but serve communicative and thus social functions such as coordinating relations between individuals in the group. Our assumption is that interjections are often learned through experience, in a social setting. By comparing instances of interjections in wolves, we will also consider how the individual and social agency of wolves is enacted through these vocalizations, and how it contributes to individual and group development. This implies that socialization is always in part self-socialization (i.e. that socialization always involves individuation).

Acknowledgement: 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).

Abstract for "Animals in the Anthropocene" conference: "Human Perceptions of Wolves and other Animals in Contemporary Norway"

On Friday this week I took part in composing and submitting the abstract below to the September 17-19th conference "Animals in the Anthropocene: Human-animal relations in a changing semiosphere".

***

Human Perceptions of Wolves and other Animals in Contemporary Norway

Paul Thibault (University of Agder) and Morten Tønnessen (University of Stavanger)

This paper presents fieldwork focused on people´s perception of wolves and selected animals the wolf is often perceived as being in conflict with. The data consists of video-recordings of a series of semi-structured interviews conducted in Norway in 2015, specifically at five locations. During these interviews, participants were shown and asked to respond to display materials featuring wolves and other animals. Study animals other than wolves include hunting dogs (particularly in Moss), reindeer (particularly in Kautekeino) and sheep (particularly in Rendalen). These animals were selected for study due to their centrality in regional discourses on wolf management. At each of the three main locations (excluding pilot study and control group), participants were recruited from relevant interest groups, which included hunters, sheep farmers, reindeer herders, mushroom gatherers, and hikers.

Using techniques derived from Multimodal Interaction Analysis (MIA), the study analysed participants´ accounts of, attitudes to and reactions towards selected display materials. The term ´perception´ used in the title of this paper refers to participants´ experience with, ideas about and attitudes towards the study animals, as revealed in the interviews. Methodologically, display materials were used in order to elicit responses that provide information about the participants´ perceptions of the study animals. The display materials included video clips, audio recordings of animal vocalizations, and images. The semi-structured interviews also included a few standard questions. 

The techniques of MIA were deployed in order to analyse the full range of interviewees´ meaning-making resources, including vocal utterances, gesture, facial expressions and other relevant body movements. The purpose of the MIA was to identify salient cultural thematic patterns, evaluative stances and feelings experiences by the participants in their encounter with the display materials and their recounts of their experiences of the study animals. Furthermore, a comparative analysis was developed of relevant patterns in the data that showed differences and similarities in the perceptions of the different interest groups. Moreover, a comparative analysis was also undertaken based on the different geographical locations where the data was gathered.

Acknowledgement: 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).

Google Group to discuss annual Nordic HAS conference

This email was distributed to some 20 people today:

Dear all,

it was a pleasure to see so many of you (us) at our Nordic Human-Animal Studies networking session in Utrecht, during the Minding Animals conference. First, here are some links:

* Nordic HAS Network: write to [Tora Holmberg] to join email list

* Dyreetikkonferansen (Oslo, September 21) (register here)

* The research seminar "Dyr, menneske og mat - dyreetikk i landbruket" (Oslo, September 22 - abstracts due 31/8)

* Nordic HAS portal (all suggestions welcome)

Most importantly, at the informal meeting in Utrecht we came up with the idea of initiating an annual, rotating Nordic Human-Animal Studies conference, perhaps starting in 2013. In order to facilitate the discussion about how this can be done, I have established a Google Group, "Nordic HAS conference". The group's email address is [...]. Inside Google Groups you can choose how often you want to receive emails. Questions for discussion include:

* Who are willing and able to organise the first conference, in 2013?

* How should choice of venue routinely be made? (cf. below)

* Do we need to organise a Nordic NGO, or a network of established national NGOs and networks?

* Is there so much interest in Dyreetikkonferansen and the associated research seminar event (see above) that we could hold a planning meeting in Oslo 21/9 or 22/9?

Feel free to pass this email on to others. The recipients of this initial email will be invited to join the Google Group, others can join as well.

My best,

Morten Tønnessen

Chair of Minding Animals Norway

Revised contents for my doctoral dissertation

Below is the revised table of contents for my doctoral dissertation Umwelt Transition: Uexküllian Phenomenology - An Ecosemiotic Analysis of Norwegian Wolf Management, on which I have been working intensely for the last few weeks. This compares with the contents as previously outlined in Semi-detailed table of contents (posted in March). That outline, however, presented only two of the three levels of numbering used previously. All in all I had some 660 subdivisions. Now I have 117. Much more manageable, but still so inter-disciplinary as to be really challenging, and of incredibly wide scope, if I dare say so myself.

Detailed table of contents

Contents at a glance

Detailed table of contents

Acknowledgements

Preface

Chapter 1 Making Sense of Nature

§1. Introduction

§2. Toward a phenomenology of environmental change

§3. From self to world

§4. The notion of integrated biological individualism

§5. On the levels of biosemiosis

§6. Earth - the natural (and absolute) setting for the human condition

§7 Husserl’s notion of the Lebenswelt

§8 The notion of Uexküllian phenomenology

§9 The notion of semiotics of being

§10 Research questions

§11 Methodology

§12. The Umwelt theory of Jakob von Uexküll

§13. Uexküll’s visual representations

§14. Uexküll’s metaphors: Bubble, web, melody

§15. How 'partner' is to be interpreted (whether social companions in general are to be included)

§16. How 'food' is to be interpreted (whether resources in general are to be included)

§17. On the forms of life

§18. Ontological and epistemological outlook

§19. An anecdote on the role of fiction in the natural sciences

§20. Implications for the scientific enterprise at large

§21. Uexküllian thought after Uexküll

§22. Problems in contemporary ethological approaches to nature

§23. Problems in contemporary semiotic approaches to nature

§24. Changing views on a changing nature

§25. The topic of change

§26. On the current ecological situation

§27. Umwelt typology – systematic outline

§28. What is subjective biology today?

Chapter 2 Uexküllian Phenomenology

§29. Introduction: Uexküll and phenomenology

§30. On the notion of phenomenology

§31. The phenomenology of Charles Sanders Peirce

§32. Remarks on contemporary eco-phenomenology

§33. Semiotics and phenomenology

§34. Introducing a universal, twofold notion of self: The explicit and the implicit self

§35. Problems of phenomenology

§36. Problems of ontology

§37. Existential universals

§38. Communal being and distinctive being

§39. On the forms of existence

§40. The notion of swarm Umwelten

§41. Development of a typology of Umwelt transitions

§42. Modern Umwelten

§43. The search image in social life

§44. Further theoretical developments

§45. Playful Umwelten

Chapter 3 The Semiotics of the Ecological Crisis

§46. Introduction: The trajectory of a crisis

§47. Fragment of a metalogue: On the transition from naïve animal to semiotic animal

§48. Semiosis and crisis

§49. On matters of diversity and extinction

§50. The semiotics of domestication and related phenomena

§51. Anthropocene studies: The global species

§52. Favoured vs. unfavoured species – a hypothesis

§53. On matters of ethics and economy

§54. Ecological alienation

§55. Developing the perspective of Umwelt alignment

§56. Simplified management models for human-animal relations: Integration, segregation (assimilation)

§57. The long-term goal for wildlife management: Independent viability?

§58. Characteristic developments in the modern era

§59. Current developments

Chapter 4 Umwelt Mapping

§60. Introduction: On mapping semiosis at the level of the organism, and higher levels

§61. On matters of quality and quantity

§62. The notion of semiotic causation

§63. Mapping human Umwelten

§64. Mapping human impact

§65. Distinguishing between formal and informal human impact

§66. Mapping status as (un)favoured

§67. First examples of ontological maps

§68. Introducing a tripartite model of the human Umwelt

§69. Methodological challenges

§70. Developing the notion of relational Umwelt maps

§71. Developing the notion of phenomenal fields

§72. Further models and visual representations

Chapter 5 Case study: Norwegian Wolf Management

§73. Introduction: Prelude to the Norwegian wolf wars

§74. Field trips

§75. Preliminary remarks on wolf hunting

§76. Remarks on Arne Næss’ philosophy of wolf management

§77. The cultural semiotic of wolves and sheep

§78. Contextual encircling of the topic matter of the case study

§79. Geographical treatment

§80. The situation for Norwegian sheep farmers and agriculture

§81. The symbolic construction of the Big Bad Wolf in contemporary Scandinavia

§82. Conflict areas in current wolf management

§83. Controversial questions in the current debate

§84. Conspiracy theories

§85. On matters of democracy, empowerment and knowledge regimes

§86. Management strategies

§87. Management methods

§88. On matters of legality

§89. Historical exposition – the era of extermination campaigns

§90. Historical exposition – the era of conservation efforts

§91. Contemporary exposition (2006-2011)

§92. Field trip interviews

§93. Summary of findings: The Umwelt of captive wolves in general and socialised wolves in particular

§94. Summary of findings: The nature view and worldview of people in Rendalen

§95. Mapping of the Umwelt of wolves in Norway

§96. Mapping of the Umwelt of sheep and other relevant animals in Norway

§97. Mapping of the Umwelt of selected groups of Norwegians

§98. Analysis: The wolf and other symbols

§99. Analysis of Norwegian wolf ecology in terms of the semiotic niche and ontological niche concepts

§100. Analysis: Matters of management philosophy, and further analysis

§101. To what extent are wolves a favoured species in contemporary Norway?

§102. To what extent are sheep a favoured species in contemporary Norway?

§103. Analysis: Umwelt transitions

§104. Future perspectives: Deep and shallow solutions

§105. Umwelt futurology: Three Umwelt scenarios

Chapter 6 Umwelt Transition

§106. Introduction: Theoretical findings

§107. To what extent can the case study findings be generalized?

§108. In search of the wolf’s perspective

§109. Evaluation of theoretical assumptions

§110. Evaluation of the methodology of Umwelt mapping

§111. On further methodological development

§112. Umwelt transition and animal migration

§113. On Umwelt transitions as habitual

§114. On recolonization as a habitual Umwelt transition

§115. On further theoretical development

§116. Towards an ethics of semiotics of being

§117. On the prospects of Umwelt futurology

Phenomenology research group confirmed

One of the looser affiliations I have in my academic work is one as a member of sorts of the research group for phenomenology and existentialism at the University of Bergen (forskningsgruppe for fenomenologi og eksistensfilosofi). The University of Bergen's Department of Philosophy has just evaluated all existing research groups, and confirmed the continued existence of the abovementioned research group - as well as the other four existing research groups. In addition, five new research groups have been established, including one in environmental philosophy. All research groups will be evaluated in a year's time, and will have to meet a number of criteria, including having an (inter)national network, having ongoing activities, and publishing academic work.

It is not clear whether I count as a regular member of the group, or rather as an associated contact.

Joining the DLG research cluster Language and Life

I have confirmed that I am joining the Distributed Language Group's new research cluster Language and Life, coordinated, as DLG itself, by Stephen Cowley.

Excerpts of initial description:

The DLG perspective suggests that, as part of action and perception – and especially as a mode of caring – language is central to both human lives and the world that we influence.
...
My first goal is to build a community who are interested in both the academic and practical implications of linking language with culture and the life sciences. I hope to link people from biosemiotics, ecological linguistics, enactivism, and other groups.
...
in 2012 or 2013 I hope that we can consolidate our concerns in some kind of academic meeting. In addition, I aim to construct a bibliography of materials, a set of links, and a discussion forum.

Titles - books I would like to have written (or read)

Some of these are good titles (others contain but one word of special interest). Others are good, or reputed, authors, or concern topics that interest me. Most of them will never be read by me. Some, perhaps, will – maybe even be influential in my thinking. Time will (perhaps) tell.

Ahonen, Pertti. 1989. The meaning of money: Comparing a Peircean and Saussurean perspective. In Kevelson, R., ed., 13-29.

Albone, Eric S. 1984. Mammalian Semiochemistry. Chichester: Wiley.

Anderson, Myrdene & Floyd Merrell, eds. 1991. On Semiotic Modeling. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Aschenberg, Heidi. 1978. Phänomenologische Philosophie und Sprache. Tübingen: Narr.

Balat, Michel & Janice Deledalle-Rhodes, eds. 1992. Signs of Humanity. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Bär, Eugen 1981. Die Zeichenlehre von Thomas A. Sebeok. In Krampen, M., et al., eds., 281-321.

Barnlund, Dean 1981. Toward an ecology of communication. In Mott, C. W. & J. H. Weakland, eds., 87-126.

Baudrillard, Jean. 1972. Pour une critique de l’économie politique du signe. Paris: Gallimard. – Port. s.d. Para uma crítica da economia política do signo. Lisboa: Martins Fontes.

———. 1976. L’échange symbolique et la mort. Paris: Gallimard.

Beck, Cave. 1657. The Universal Character, by Which All the Nations in the World May Understand One Another’s Conceptions. London.

Bentley, Arthur F. 1947. The new “semiotic”. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 8.1: 107-31.

Bernard-Donals, Michael F. 1994. Mikhail Bakhtin Between Phenomenology and Marxism. Cambridge: Univ. Press.

Bierman, Arthur K. 1962. That there are no iconic signs. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 23: 243-49.

Bonner, John Tyler. 1980. The Evolution of Culture in Animals. Princeton: Univ. Press.

Borsche, Tilman & Werner Stegmaier, eds. 1992. Zur Philosophie des Zeichens. Berlin: de Gruyter.

Böttner, Margueritte. 1980. Zeichensysteme der Tiere: Ein Versuch angewandter Semiotik. Stuttgart: Diss. Phil.

Bouissac, Paul. 1989. What is a human? Ecological semiotics and the new animism. Semiotica 77: 497-516.

Bright, Michael. 1984. Animal Language. Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press.

Brown, Jerram L. & Gordon H. Orians. 1970. Spacing patterns in mobile animals. Annual Review of Ecological Systems 1: 239-62.

Buczyńska-Garewicz, Hanna. 1984. The degenerate sign. In Borbé, T., ed., vol. 1, 43-50.

Bunn, James H. 1981. The Dimensionality of Signs, Tools, and Models. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press.

Burkhardt, Dietrich, et al., eds. 1966. Signale der Tierwelt. München: Moos.

Busnel, René-Guy & André Classe. 1976. Whistled Languages. Berlin: Springer.

Carnap, Rudolf. (1928) 1961. Der logische Aufbau der Welt. Hamburg: Meiner.

Carterette, Edward C. & Morton P. Friedman, eds. 1976. Handbook of Perception. New York: Academic Press.

Castañeda, Hector-Neri. 1990. Indicators: The semiotics of experience. In Jacobi, K. & H. Pape, 57-93.

Cheney, Dorothy & Robert M. Seyfarth. 1982. Recognition of individuals within and between groups of free-ranging vervet monkeys. American Zoologist 22: 519-529.

Classen, Constance, David Howes & Anthony Synnott. 1994. Aroma: The Cultural History of Smell. London: Routledge.

Coker, Wilson. 1972. Music and Meaning. New York: Free Press.

Colapietro, Vincent M. 1989. Peirce’s Approach to the Self. Albany: State Univ. of New York Press.

Costadeau, Alphonse. (1717) 1983. Traité des signes, vol. 1, ed. Le Guern-Forel, O. Bern: Lang.

Crystal, David 1980. Introduction to Language Pathology. London: Arnold.

Dascal, Marcelo. 1978. La sémiologie de Leibniz. Paris: Aubier-Montaigne.

Davidson, Donald 1978. What metaphors mean. Critical Inquiry 5: 31-47.

Dawkins, Richard & John R. Krebs. 1978. Animal signals: Information or manipulation. In Krebs, J. R. & N. B. Davies, eds., 282-309.

Deely, John N. 1974. The two approaches to language... Jean Poinsot’s semiotic. The Thomist 38: 856-907.

Dirven, René. 1993. Metonymy and metaphor. Leuvense Bijdragen 82: 1-28.

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1989. Semiotische Parameter einer textlinguistischen Natürlichkeitstheorie. Wien: Österr. Akad. der Wiss. (=Ö. A. d. W., Phil.-Hist. Kl., Sitzungsber., vol. 529).

Dutz, Klaus D. 1985. Historiographia Semioticae (= papmaks 18). Münster: MAkS.

Ebert, Theodor. 1987. The origin of the Stoic theory of signs in Sextus Empiricus. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 5: 83-126.

Eco, Umberto 1984b. Semiotics and the Philosophy of Language. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press.

———. 1985a. How culture conditions the colors we see. In Blonsky, M., ed., 157-75.

———. 1986. Travels in Hyperreality. New York: Harcourt.

Eimermacher, Karl, comp. 1974. Arbeiten sowjetischer Semiotiker der Moskauer und Tartuer Schule (Auswahlbibliographie). Kronberg: Scriptor.

Ekman, Paul, ed. 1973. Darwin and Facial Expression. New York: Academic Press.

Emanuele, Pietro. 1982. Präsemiotik und Semiotik in Heidegger. Semiosis 25/26: 140-44.

Fill, Alwin. 1993. Ökolinguistik. Tübingen: Narr.

Finlay, Marike. 1988. The Romantic Irony of Semiotics: Friedrich Schlegel and the Crisis of Representation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Fleischer, Michael. 1987. Hund und Mensch: Eine semiotische Analyse ihrer Kommunikation. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.

Fraasen, Bas C. van. 1985. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Time and Space. New York: Columbia Univ. Press.

Garvin, Harry R., ed. 1976. Phenomenology, Structuralism, Semiology (= Bucknell Review, April 1976). Lewisburg: Bucknell Univ. Press.

Gibson, James J. 1966. The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems. Boston: Mifflin.

———. 1979. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Mifflin.

Glidden, David. 1983. Skeptic semiotics. Phronesis 28: 213-55.

Harrison, P. A. 1983. Behaving Brazilian: A Comparison of Brazilian and North Anmerican Social Behavior. Rowley: Newbury House.

Havelock, Eric A. 1963. Preface to Plato. Oxford: Blackwell.

Holenstein, Elmar. 1975. Roman Jakobsons phänomenologischer Strukturalismus. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp. – Port. 1978. Introdução ao pensamento de Roman Jakobson. Rio de Janeiro: J. Zahar.

Jones, Roger S. 1982. Physics as Metaphor. New York: Meridian.

Kalinowski, Georges. 1985. Sémiotique et philosophie. Paris, Amsterdam: Hadès-Benjamins.

Katz, David. (1925) 1969. Der Aufbau der Tastwelt. Darmstadt: Wiss. Buchgesellschaft.

Kelemen, János 1991. Kant’s semiotics. In Sebeok, T. A. & J. Umiker-Sebeok, eds., 201-18.

Kiefer, Georg R. 1970. Zur Semiotisierung der Umwelt. Stuttgart: Diss. Phil.

Klaus, Georg. (1963) 1973. Semiotik und Erkenntnistheorie. München: Fink:

Klinck, Dennis. 1993. The semiotics of money. In Kevelson, R., ed., 229-250.

Koch, Walter A. 1986c. Philosophie der Philologie und Semiotik. Literatur und Welt: Versuche zur Interdisziplinarität der Philologie. Bochum: Brockmeyer.

———. 1989. The Well of Tears: A Biosemiotic Essay on the Roots of Horror, Comic, and Pathos. Bochum: Brockmeyer.

———. 1991b. Language in the Upper Pleistocene. Bochum: Brockmeyer.

———. 1992. Ecogenesis und echogenesis. In Sebeok, T. A. & J. Umiker-Sebeok, eds., 171-211.

Koch, Walter A., ed. 1982. Semiogenesis. Frankfurt/Main: Lang.

———. 1990d. Semiotics in the Individual Sciences. 2 vols. Bochum: Brockmeyer.

———. 1990f. Wissenschaftstheorie und Semiotik. Bochum: Brockmeyer.

Komar, Gerhard 1991. Geldzeichen. Zeitschrift für Semiotik 13: 345-365.

Krampen, Martin, et al., eds. 1981. Die Welt als Zeichen: Klassiker der modernen Semiotik. Berlin: Severin & Siedler.

Kruse, Felicia 1990. Nature and semiosis. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 26.2: 211-224.

Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.

Lanigan, Richard L. 1977. Speech Act Phenomenology. The Hague: Nijhoff.

Larsen, Hanne Hartvig, et al., eds. 1991. Marketing and Semiotics. Copenhagen: Handelshøjskolen Forlag.

Lewis, Philip E. 1974. Revolutionary semiotics. Diacritics 4 (Fall): 28-32.

Lindgren, J. Ralph. 1993. The emergence of signs: The seminal convention of money. In Kevelson, R., ed., 283-297.

Manning, Peter K. 1987. Semiotics and Fieldwork. Newbury Park: Sage.

Meier-Oeser, Stephan 1997a. Die Spur des Zeichens: Das Zeichen und seine Funktion in der Philosophie des Mittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit. Berlin: de Gruyter.

Merrell, Floyd 1996. Signs Grow: Semiosis and Life Processes. Toronto: Univ. Press.

Mick, David G. 1999. A global review of semiotic consumer research (= Working Paper, Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison, School of Business).

Montagu, Ashley. 1971. Touching: The Human Significance of the Skin. New York: Columbia Univ. Press.

Oehler, Klaus, ed. 1984. Zeichen und Realität. 3 vols. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.

Pittenger, Robert E., Charles F. Hockett & John J. Danehy. 1960. The First Five Minutes. Ithaca, N.Y.: P. Martineau.

Pogorzelski, H. A. & W. J. Ryan. 1982. Foundations of Semiological Theory of Numbers. Orono: Univ. of Maine Press.

Presnell, Michael. 1983. Sign, Image, and Desire: Semiotic Phenomenology and the Film Image. Ann Arbor: Univ. Microfilms Int.

Preziosi, Donald. 1979b. The Semiotics of the Built Environment. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press.

Reis, Carlos. 1993. Towards a Semiotics of Ideology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Romeo, Luigi. 1979d. Ecce Homo: A Lexicon of Man. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Rosenthal, Sandra B. 1998. Phenomenological semiotics. In Posner, R., et al., eds., vol. 2, 2096-2112.

Salthe, Stanley. 1998. Naturalizing semiotics. Semiotica 120: 381-394.

Santaella, Lucia. 1996c. Semiosphere: The growth of signs. Semiotica 109: 173-186.

Schiff, William & Emerson Foulke, eds. 1982. Tactual Perception: A Sourcebook. Cambridge: Univ. Press.

Simmel, Georg. (1900) 1922. Philosophie des Geldes. München: Duncker & Humblot.

Tembrock, Günter. 1971. Biokommunikation. 2 vols. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.

Thom, René. (1988) 1990. Esquisse d’une sémiophysique. – Ingl. 1990. Semiophysics: A Sketch. Redwood City, Cal.: Addision-Wesley.

Thompson, Michael. 1979. Rubbish Theory. Oxford: Univ. Press.

Trampe, Wilhelm. 1990. Ökologische Linguistik. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.

Trevarthen, Colwyn. 1994. Infant semiosis. In Nöth, W., ed., 219-252.

Valsiner, Jaan & Jüri Allik. 1982. General semiotic capabilities of the higher primates. In Key, M. R., ed., 245-57.

Vincent Ferrer. (ca. 1400) 1977. Tractatus de suppositionibus. Ed. Trentman, J. A. Stuttgart: Frommann.

Walther, Fritz R. 1984. Communication and Expression in Hooved Mammals. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press.

Wescott, Roger W. 1984. Semiogenesis and paleogenesis. Semiotica 48: 181-85.

Yaguello, Marina. 1991. Lunatic Lovers of Language: Imaginary Languages and their Inventors. London: Athlone.

Zarcadoolas, Christina. 1983. How to Do Things with Linguistics, Semiotics, Speech Acts, and Phenomenology. Ph. D. Thesis, Brown Univ. Ann Arbor: Univ. Microfilms Int.