5. Propuesta de Indicadores y elementos de línea base
5.2 Recurso Hídrico:
Except for those IAC articles which deal with media presentation (e.g., RA02, RA04, RA06, RA10, RA25), it is hard to find obvious applications of semiotic concepts in IAC articles.
Yet, many semiotic concepts are indeed the invisible guiding rule which influences the making of IAC articles, even though those analysts were probably unaware of their following the semiotic disciplines. It cannot be said that IAC articles obviously apply
semiotics to analyse their research. It can only be said that IAC analysts imperceptibly followed the semiotic rules to conduct their analysis. Hence, this section is more about theoretically explaining how IAC analysts unintentionally followed the rule of semiotics to undertake their analysis instead of explaining how they practicably adopt semiotics.
This section still first introduced the concept of semiotics and then provides examples related to empirical analysis. Although the theoretical review may seem long-winded, these semiotic concepts are the foundation of Procedure 3, connoting certain meanings, which needs to be explained at this stage. Moreover, since this thesis has the ambition to establish the methodology for ideological analysis/critique, semiotics is an indispensable method to analyse/criticise ideology.
Theoretical Review
In section 6.3, this thesis has discussed Althusser’s concept of ideology as having a “material existence” (1971, p. 165), which is a key point to making ideology analysable. In order to further understand why ideology has a material existence, an easy way is to investigate humans’ signification systems (such as gestures, facial expressions, languages, etc.) that construct ideology. Ideology, to a great extent, is the outcome of a specific language.
Understanding the construction of language is a way to discover how an ideology is made.
Saussure (as cited in Sturrock, 2003), divided language into “parole” and “langue” (p.
30). The former is a platform for language to demonstrate/perform itself, while the latter is the set of rules or, in Saussure’s term, “the grammar of the language” (p. 30). For instance, this English article (a style of displaying language) can be finished only if, first, I understand English grammar and vocabularies (langue—the rules of English writing), and, second, I write (parole—performance) it down.
The rules, grammar, and structure of language not only make the use of a language possible but also dictate how language should be used. Langue is composed of three elements: signs, syntagms, and paradigms (Fiske, 1990). Concepts of syntagms and paradigms will be discussed later. What Saussure is truly interested in is nothing but signs.
Saussure (as cited in Fiske, 1990) declared that signs are composed of two parts: a
“signifier” and a “signified” (see Figure 6-1). The former is a sign’s “sound” or “image”
(Berger, 2000, p. 37), which is the form or the figure of an object without any meaning. The
Procedure 2: Applying Theoretical Foundation latter (signified) refers to the “concept” or the meaning of an object that is embedded inside people’s minds when they think of such an object. In short, ‘signified’ means that people can recognise the meaning of one object without even practically seeing this object (Berger, 2000;
Fiske, 1990).
Figure 6-1: Saussure’s Concept of Sign
Source: Fiske, J. (1990, p. 44)
To Saussure (in Fiske, 1990), the relationship between signifier and signified is arbitrary. It means that there is no absolute cause to link the word, such as ‘justice’ (signifier) to the
‘meaning’ of justice (signified). One thing’s meaning must receive the answer from what this thing does not mean—why A is A is because A is not B. The meaning of ‘justice’ is not generated by itself; differently, justice receives its meaning from what is not justice. In other words, it is the positional difference of a thing (e.g., one concept) within the system of language that determines its meaning, but not the natural existence of such a thing (e.g., the
‘word’ justice per se).
Thus, the question ‘what does this sign mean?’ can only be answered with ‘what does this sign not mean?’ This special relation between signs, which generates the meaning of signs, is what Levi-Strauss (as cited in Fiske, 1990) called “binary oppositions” (p. 116).
Levi-Strauss argued, “A binary opposition is a system of two related categories that […]
comprises the universe” (in Fiske, p. 116). Fiske (1990) described that when a binary opposition functions perfectly, one thing that does not belong to category A must belong to category B. Although binary oppositions are not the best way to define everything humans experience, people understand the world most easily through them (p. 118).
Accordingly, the making of ideology is not to pick up one phenomenon referring it to a specific meaning, and then claim ‘this is an ideology I found’. Instead, it is through the notion of binary opposition that the meaning of a thing is defined by what it is not.
The concept of binary opposition helps to understand the meaning of a sign (of course, by what the sign does not mean); yet to understand the meaning of the whole context (i.e., to understand the ideology of such a context), it has to reply on the other two aforementioned semiotic concepts, that is, the syntagms and paradigms.
Syntagm refers to a combination of diverse signs in which the meaning of language (e.g., an oral or written sentence) is generated (Fiske, 1990; Robert & Kress, 1988). As Figure 6-2 shows, the sentence is composed of diverse signs (e.g., the subject I, the noun suit, and the location school). Through this way, meaning of this sentence can be confirmed. Most importantly, the composing of signs in this syntagm structure has to obey the grammar—that is, what Saussure called the ‘langue’; in this way, readers are able to make sense of this sentence.
In addition, paradigm is a selection pool where a sign (e.g., suit) can be substituted for another similar set of signs (e.g., set of clothing; Fiske, 1990; Robert & Kress, 1988). As Figure 6-2 shows, sign I (representing the subject) could be replaced with you, he, or even a name, like Tom or Mary. According to the notion of binary opposition, a diverse selection of sets of signs (e.g., I instead of he; school instead of church) will create different meanings of the sentence. For example, the meaning of ‘I wear a coat’ to school is different from that of wearing a ‘T-shirt’, which implies seasonal differences.
Figure 6-2: Relation of Signs, the Syntagmatic Structure, and the Paradigmatic Choices
I You
Binary opposition wear a suit to
T-Shirt
school.
jacket He
She coat
church.
station.
Paradigmatic choice
Syntagmatic structure
Paradigmatic choice Binary opposition
Procedure 2: Applying Theoretical Foundation In Chapter 5, this thesis claimed that it is able to identify the Primary Class and its corresponding Secondary Class in all IAC articles (of course, in some cases, the Secondary Class is not obvious). They are in a binary oppositional relationship. They define each other.
It is reasonable to say that any ideologies are all constructed by many signs. Except the Primary Class (sign), there must exist many subordinate signs that stand for the same position with the Primary Class. Together they all contribute to the making of one ideology.
This thesis simply named these signs as Sub-Primary Classes (henceforth, Sub-PCs). Surely, the corresponding Sub-Secondary Classes (henceforth, Sub-SCs) do exist as well.
Thus, based on semiotic concepts—signs (with a binary oppositional relationship, i.e., the Primary Class v.s. Secondary Class, the Sub-PCs v.s. Sub-SCs), syntagmatic structure, and paradigmatic choices—the map of how one ideology is recognised could be drawn as in Figure 6-3 (How Reality is Constructed). (Of course, the making of ideology is very complex, which will be detailed in Procedure 3: Connoting Certain Meanings, displayed as Figure 7-3.)
Figure 6-3: How Reality is Constructed (from the Semiotic Perspective)
The following discussion will provide two examples. The first one theoretically explains how the basic semiotic notions can be applied to illustrate the making of ideology which is based on the model of Figure 6-3. Another example practically shows how IAC analyst, Bishop, undertook his research via the dimension of semiotics.
Empirical Analysis
Example 6-8 (theoretical dimension): The quotations below cited from RA02 (Abbas, 2001) have explained how the IAC analyst, Abbas, described (presented/created) the reality of his
Sub-Prim. Class A
Sub-Sec. Class A
Primary Class
Secondary Class
Sub-PC B
Sub-SC B
Paradigm
Syntagm
Sub-PC C
Sub-SC C Syntagm
Paradigm Paradigm
Sub-PC D
Sub-SC D
Sub-PC E
Sub-SC E Binary Opposition
research, which can be analysed through the semiotic analytical pathway. This quotation says:
This paper is a theoretical attempt to explain the ideological nature of anti-Muslim discourse found in the British press. It is argued that dominant media capital, that is held in ever fewer hands, seeks to subvert South Asian Muslims by endeavouring to define an explicitly negative view of Islam. (p. 245)
From the first sentence, British press can be seen as the Primary Class. This shows that the analyst of RA02 tried to show how the British press describes Muslims94. The second sentence reveals several of the Sub-Primary Classes, such as the terms dominant media capital, subvert, South Asian Muslims, endeavouring to define, etc. Based on these two sentences, a reality,95 represented ideologically, which the analyst of RA02 tried to present/create, can be simply drawn as in Figure 6-4 (see syntagmatic structure 1).
94 Of course, Muslims could be the Primary Class as well; if so, the discourse becomes how Muslims are described by the British press. The selection of an ‘active’ or ‘passive voice’ could influence the feeling when people read (which will be further discussed in the next chapter). The former style could create a dominant and arbitrary image to the British press while the latter (passive) expresses a suffering image to Muslims. Based on this thesis’s analysis of this article, the author of RA02 is closer to arguing how the British press actively constructs a negative image on Islam. Thus, in this example, the British press is seen as the Primary Class.
95 Whether it is a presented-reality or a constructed-reality depends on how readers, i.e., you and me, interpret it. Please refer to discussion in the previous chapter.
Procedure 2: Applying Theoretical Foundation
Figure 6-4: How the British Press Describes Muslims from the Semiotics Perspective
Invisible Binary Oppositional Signs (Secondary Class + sub-SCs) Syntagmatic Structure 2 (Simulated Example)
Syntagmatic Structure 1 (Example of RA02) Visible Signs in Context (Primary Class + sub-PRs)
British
press, seeks to subvert
Syntagmatic Structure 1
Paradigmatic choice held by dominant media capital,
despite its
media capital owner, tries to integrate
by endeavouring to define
by endeavouring to present X
press,
South Asian Muslims
Y with local community
Syntagmatic Structure 2
Paradigmatic choice
negative view of Islam.
fair view of Y.
Although it is difficult to exactly detect the corresponding Secondary Class (and the Sub-SCs), the binary oppositional relationship between the Primary and the Secondary Classes does exist. Let us consider some word switches, as shown in Figure 6-4 (see simulated example of syntagmatic structure 2). In the syntagmatic structure 2, the word/sign integrate replaces subvert (from syntagmatic structure 1). Y (i.e., other paradigmatic choices:
religions like Buddhism or Hinduism) replaces the term Muslims. In short, all signs (e.g., subvert or Muslims) in the structure of language are changeable; once any sign in a sentence is changed, the meaning of such sentence will be different. As the syntagmatic structure 2 in Figure 6-4 indicates: media X is described to adopt a ‘positive’ or at least a ‘neutral’ position to present its object Y, in which media X helps society’s integration instead of distinction.
Namely, what semiotic analysis does is to determine what signs the analysts use (e.g., British press, subvert, Muslims) and compare with other possible signs that the analysts do not use (e.g., X press, integrate, Y religion). In so analysing, the meaning of one sentence emerges. A sentence is composed of signs; a paragraph is composed of sentences; an article is composed of paragraphs. While this relationship is recognised, how (the analyst’s) reality96
Figure 6-4 theoretically shows how this thesis analysed RA02 in terms of semiotics, which revealed how the analyst of RA02 unintentionally followed the semiotic rules to conduct his IAC work. The following example takes RA04 to ascertain how analyst, Ronald Bishop, undertook his analysis via semiotics.
of such an article is presented/created and what it is could be delineated.
Example 6-9 (practical dimension): Bishop in RA04 explained how a diet company’s product, Ultra Slim-Fast, conveys a professional and scientific image. His application of semiotics was revealed in his analysis in relation to a TV commercial. He wrote:
In 1996, the company introduced the “Slim-Fast Institute.” One Institute commercial began with white-coated characters scurrying around behind a pair of imposing glass doors, which open, allowing the viewer to pass through. Would-be scientists are shown eyeing test tubes and convening to discuss complex figures on a wall chart. (p. 343; emphasis added)
Boldface is added to reveal the track of semiotic analysis. In this example, the diet company’s
96 The discussion of semiotics so far can only explain how reality is constructed. Of course, the term reality, to a great degree, could refer to ideology, as the previous chapter has discussed how reality represents ideology. Yet, regarding the making of ideology, the notion of connotation should be considered in order to provide a complete explanation which will be explained in Procedure 3:
Connoting certain meanings.
Procedure 2: Applying Theoretical Foundation
‘Slim-Fast Institute’ is the Primary Class, which is what the commercial tries to highlight.
Through Bishop’s description, several Sub-Primary Classes could be identified (as shown in boldface) which are applied to promote reliability of the Slim-Fast Institute. Based on semiotic analysis, Bishop revealed how the TV commercial applied specific signs to create certain meanings. (This example will be further explained later)
Yet, what meanings (i.e., connotation) the signs bring to readers (explaining why ideology emerges) is impossible to detect simply by the basic semiotic notions suggested above. It requires extra analytical work, which will be explained in the next SWPs procedure (procedure 3: connoting certain meanings). The purpose of suggesting semiotics as an analytical pathway is not only to echo Althusser’s concept of ideology as having a “material existence” (1971, p. 165). It is also that since all IAC articles employ signs, there is no reason to ignore the most basic elements, which always carry the possibility to create ideologies.
Again, in order to provide a better understanding of how the semiotic analytical pathway was applied, Table 6-8 is a reference showing the application of semiotics in the collected 33 IAC articles. The original IAC articles could be found in the disk attached in Appendix 1.
Table 6-8. Reference of IAC Articles Which Apply Semiotic Analytical Pathway SWPs Code: P2-S (Semiotic Analytical Pathway)
Articles Found References/Examples
RA02 p.249(5);
RA03 p.143(7); p.149(13); p.150(14);
RA04 p.341(8); p.342(9); p.343(10); p.344(11); p.345(12); p.346(13); p.347(14); p.348(15); p.350(17);
RA05 p.3(1); p.4(2); pp.6-7(4-5); pp.7-9(5-7); pp.9-11(7-9);
RA06 p.446(2); p.447(3); p.448(4); p.449(5); p.450(6); p.451(7); p.452(8); p.453(9); p.454(10);
RA07 p.108(2); p.110(4); p.113(7); p.115(9); p.118(12); p.119(13);
RA08 p.262(2); p.263(3); p.272(12); p.273(13);
RA09 p.591(5); p.592(6);
RA10 p.418(2); p.419(3); p.420(4); p.421(5); p.422(6); p.423(7); p.425(9); p.427(11);
RA11 p.102(4);
RA12 p.1032(8); p.1034(10); p.1036(12); p.1037(13);
RA14 p.100(1);
RA16 p.145(9); p.146(10); p.147(11);
RA17 p.355(7); p.356(8); p.359(11); p.360(12); p.361(13); p.364(16); p.365(17); p.367(19); p.368(20);
RA18 p.159(6);
RA19 p.167(6);
RA20 p.356(4); p.362(10); p.364(12); p.367(15);
RA21 p.414(4); p.415(5); p.419(9); p.420(10); p.421(11); p.422(12); p.425(15); p.427(17);
RA22 p.72(3); p.73(4); p.75(6); p.76(7); p.79(10); p.82(13); p.83(14);
RA23 p.391(6); p.392(7);
RA24 p.489(3); p.490(4); p.491(5); p.496(10); p.497(11); p.499(13);
RA25 p.469(4); p.472(7); p.474(9); p.477(12); p.480(15); p.480-1(15-6);
RA27 p.180(1); p.181(2); p.184(5); p.197(18); p.198(19);
RA28 p.167(11); p.170(14); p.171(15); p.174(18);
RA29 p.919(6);
RA30 p.466(2); p.468(4); p.470(6); p.471(7); p.473(9);
RA31 p.222(5); p.224(7); p.226(9); p.229(12); p.231(14); p.233(16); p.235(18); p.236(19); p.240(23);
RA32 p.18(2);
RA33 p.657(17); p.662(22);
Application of the Semiotic Analytical Pathway
The following Table 6-9 provides guidance for future IAC analysts to analyse/criticise ideology if they plan to adopt a semiotic analytical pathway. Yet many semiotic notions, such as language, parole, langue, signifier, signified, etc., are simply the theoretical concepts.
There are only a few concepts (such as signs with binary oppositional relationships, syntagmatic structures, and paradigmatic choices) that can be applied to practical analysis.
Thus, the following Table 6-9 only displays the application of these concepts.
Table 6-9. Application of Semiotic Analytical Pathway
Concept of Ideology The Applicable Discourse Condition
Signs (Binary Opposition)
First, future IAC analysts have to find out the main subject of their research, i.e., the Primary Class (sign) and its other subordinate signs. This is a basic and essential step for ideological analysis. Then, although it is not always detectable, analysts have to detect the secondary sign and its companies based on the notion of binary opposition. The meaning of the Primary Class emerges from its binary oppositional relationship with the Secondary Class. Hence, the more signs of contexts are recognised, the better the analysts can obtain the skeleton of such contexts.
Syntagmatic Structure
In this axis of the syntagmatic structure, diverse signs join together to create meaning. Thus, analysts have to investigate how signs are applied as well as to detect what extra specific signs are included in this axis. One more or one less sign in the axis changes the meaning. The more the analysts can realise the structure of a sentence, a paragraph, a section (a chapter), or a whole context, the better they understand the meaning of texts.
Paradigmatic Choices
Paradigmatic choices mean the different selections within a set of similar signs. Thus, analysts have to detect what sign is selected in the similar sets of signs, because whenever a single composed sign on this axis changes, the meaning of reference changes (e.g., like and dislike). The more analysts understand what sign is selected, the better they can detect the differences of signification.
Procedure 2: Applying Theoretical Foundation