Analysis of Semiotics and Archeology - Research Paper Example

 Analysis of Semiotics and Archeology Semiotics is the study of the capability that human beings have to understand different signs as well as come up with signs. These signs include ideas, images, and sounds that occur in the process of communication. The study of semiotics therefore involves the study of all the signs that are used in the process of communication to convey different messages about different situations. Semiotics is used to describe the different signs and phenomena which is also known as descriptive semiotics. It then goes ahead to systemize the signs and phenomena into different theories and models, and this is known as theoretic semiotics and finally tries to apply the knowledge gained to find practical solutions which is known as applied semiotics. The study of semiotics can therefore be applied in many contexts, one of which being in archeology. Archeology can be understood to be a science that carries out attempts to understand the past through the use of the physical evidence that is available. This evidence may include written material as well as other symbolic artifacts. In their work, it is important for archeologists to have an understanding of different symbolic behaviors and the different symbols that they come across in their work. According to Preucel (8) the field of semiotics has undergone a transformation in the recent past. This transformation means that semiotics has changed its traditional focus which was studying sign systems and classifying the signs to include the study of how these signs are produced and their meanings as they occur in a social context. The basic premise in semiotics is therefore that meaning can only be derived from the social context in which the symbols or interactions are occurring. This has become important in the application of semiotics to archeology as the different signs or symbols that are to be found within the archeological exploration and process. The knowledge of symbols, signs, codes, and cons can therefore be applied in archeology. The understanding of the arrangement or organization if the material objects that are found into codes to give them meaning is therefore an important process. It is important to realize that unlike in the linguistic sentences the interpretation of material culture is a more complex process. As such, there is need for archeologists to come up with a system that effectively structures and interprets the different aspects of material culture. This marks an important aspect of the relationship between semiotics and archeology. The relationship between semiotics and archeology is said to have begun in the 1960’s when the linguistic model was first applied to studying archeological data. This was however only applicable to the study of Paleolithic and historical archeology and was therefore limited in its scope and area of study. The introduction of a theoretical framework for the combination of linguistic structuralism and processual archeology by Ian Hodder however marked the beginning of a more formal and reliable use of semiotics in linguistic interpretation. The importance of semiotics in the study of archeology was emphasized by the fact that it is impossible for the material culture to produce meaning without the consideration of the context of this culture. In the understanding of the role that is played by semiotics in archeology, it is important that the concept of structuralism is explained. Structuralism refers to the approach that considers the world to consist of structures that ate composed of different single entities that are mutually dependent. The understanding of these structures is important to the study of archeology, and semiotics is important in the study of these structures, the analysis of the structures and the systemization of the structures to help in the creation of meaning. The knowledge about symbols and structure has played an important role to semiotic and structural analysts as they attempt to understand the layouts of different settlements or the decorations on the different artifacts. This is an important process in the understanding of various materials that are relevant to archeology (Meskell & Prucell 31). In archeology, structuralism is applied to investigate and understand the behavior of different groups in the past. It is important to understand that semiotics is concerned with the different communicative processes while paying attention to the common structures that are to be found within the process. This means that semiotics is able to go beyond cultural phenomena and incorporate the interactions of the living things as well as the stimulus and response processes of these living things. As such, semiotics is able to interact with archeology due to the shared concern on culture and the interpretation of the different aspects of culture. Semiotics is thus integrated into archeology to help in the exploration and interpretation of the different sign characters that are found within the context of archeology. The relationship between semiotics can be seen in the use of semiotics to provide a solution or framework through which archeologists can carry out their study on the evidence that they have available. The process of identifying the different symbols as they are relevant to different cultures and to different times is the most vital role that semiotics plays on the study of archeology. In the identification of artifacts which is an important practice in archeology, the artifacts are divided according to their properties (internal as well as external). The internal properties of the artifacts are used to give a general description of the artifact while the external properties are used to describe the context of the artifact which helps in identifying the artifact. Semiotics therefore becomes important in that it helps in the recognition of the symbolic meaning of the artifact which is important in its identification and classification. Semiotics is also important in the study of archeology as it helps in deciphering the content of the tablets and other forms of writing that are common in most ancient societies that later adopted writing systems. While it is sometimes difficult to study the tablets, the use of semiotic methods helps in the creation of meaning for the signs and content of the tablets. While it is semiotics that is used to give meaning to the ancient symbols, it is sometimes difficult for the semiotics to explain the process that led to the creation of the specific meaning. This therefore requires postprocessual archeology to help in gaining the understanding of the process through which a specific meaning was created (Thibault 23). The importance of semiotics can for example be seen in the interpretation of the religious artifacts and culture of the Asian society that has been found in the cast bronze that has been found in the study of archeological past of Asia. Semiotics has played an important role in understanding the figures which have been discovered to represent different mythical characters as well as other cultural aspects of Asia. Semiotics has also been important in the understanding of the cultural contexts in which the casts were developed. In Eastern Asia, the clay tokens have also been discovered. These tokens are from the Neolithic era and were used to make images. This have helped in the understanding of the pattern making forms as being the earliest forms of writing systems. The understanding of the symbols is important in the understanding of the pattern making forms and early systems of writing. According to Danesi (206) the essence of archeological method can be seen to be semiotic. This can be seen in the archeological processes that are followed before they come up with conclusions. The archeologists begin by reviewing the available date on the ancient texts and sites that they intend to study. The archeologists then look for undisturbed sites to help them in the establishment of the cultural system of society that they intend to study. They then use the artifacts to reconstruct the cultural systems of the societies that they are carrying out their studies on. In Asia and Africa for example, the study of the various artifacts which includes pot has revealed the cooking practices of the cultures during the earlier times. The role of semiotics in archeology can be seen in the establishment of the connection between Africa and the South West Asia. Through the use of semiotics to interpret the different symbols and place them in their context, archeologists have been able to establish the existence of prehistoric connections between the two continents. This connection was established in the Palaelothic period. The connection therefore led to some shared aspects of culture and similar cultural practices. The connection between Africa and Asia can also be seen in the clothing and garments that were worn by people from this culture. Danesi (186) asserts that though traditional garments have been displaced in other regions, the aspects of the traditional dress have survived in Africa and in some parts of Asia. One can therefore see the interconnection and relationship that exists between semiotics and archeology. There are no objects or artifacts that exist within any culture that are devoid of meaning. When put in the relevant cultures, the objects or artifacts that have been made by the people in the cultural context will evoke different reactions and have different meanings. The meaning of the different objects and artifacts is however coded in the same way that the language, dressing, or bodily presentation of the culture is coded. It is therefore important to have an understanding of this coding, and of the role that is played by different artifacts and objects in the society. This is an important aspect of semiotics that can be applied to the study of archeology. Works cited Danesi, Marcel. Messages, signs, and meanings: A basic textbook in semiotics and communication. Toronto: Canadian Scholars Press. 2004. Print Meskell, Lynn. Preucel, Robert. Companion to social archeology. New York: John Wiley and sons. 2008. Print. Preucel, Robert. Archeological semiotics. New York: John Wiley and Sons. 2010. Print. Thibault, Paul. Social Semiotics as Praxis: Text, Social Meaning Making, and Nabokov's Ada. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 1991. Print. Read More