Eschatology. Eschatology i/ˌɛskəˈtɒlədʒi/ is a part of theology concerned with the final events of history, or the ultimate destiny of humanity. This concept is commonly referred to as the "end of the world" or "end time". The word arises from the Greek ἔσχατος eschatos meaning "last" and -logy meaning "the study of", first used in English around 1550.[1] The Oxford English Dictionary defines eschatology as "The department of theological science concerned with ‘the four last things: death, judgment, heaven and hell’. "[2] In the context of mysticism, the phrase refers metaphorically to the end of ordinary reality and reunion with the Divine. History is often divided into "ages" (aeons), which are time periods each with certain commonalities. Most modern eschatology and apocalypticism, both religious and secular, involve the violent disruption or destruction of the world; whereas Christian and Jewish eschatologies view the end times as the consummation or perfection of God's creation of the world.
Euphemism. A euphemism is a generally innocuous word or expression used in place of one that may be found offensive or suggest something unpleasant.[1] Some euphemisms are intended to amuse; while others use bland, inoffensive, and often misleading terms for things the user wishes to dissimulate or downplay. Euphemisms are used for dissimulation, to refer to taboo topics (such as disability, sex, excretion, and death) in a polite way, and to mask profanity.[2] The opposite of euphemism roughly equates to dysphemism.
Euphemisms may be used to avoid words considered rude, while still conveying their meaning; words may be replaced by similar-sounding words, gentler words, or placeholders. Some euphemisms have become accepted in certain societies for uncomfortable information; for example, in many English speaking countries, a doctor is likely to say "the patient passed away" rather than "the patient died". Etymology[edit] Formation[edit] Phonetic modification[edit] Figures of speech[edit] Rhetoric[edit] Semiotics. Semiotics frequently is seen as having important anthropological dimensions; for example, Umberto Eco proposes that every cultural phenomenon may be studied as communication.[2] Some semioticians focus on the logical dimensions of the science, however.
They examine areas belonging also to the life sciences – such as how organisms make predictions about, and adapt to, their semiotic niche in the world (see semiosis). In general, semiotic theories take signs or sign systems as their object of study: the communication of information in living organisms is covered in biosemiotics (including zoosemiotics). Syntactics is the branch of semiotics that deals with the formal properties of signs and symbols.[3] More precisely, syntactics deals with the "rules that govern how words are combined to form phrases and sentences".[4] Terminology[edit] Ferdinand de Saussure, however, founded his semiotics, which he called semiology, in the social sciences: History[edit] Formulations[edit] Branches[edit] Notes.
What is Semiotics? By Eugene Gorny When people find out that I am a specialist in semiotics and that I even give lectures in this subject at the University, they always say, "tell me, what is semiotics? " In the course of time, it became clear to me that this is the normal reaction of normal people to the word "semiotics" itself. Nobody knows what semiotics is and what it deals with. (It is notable, that nobody usually asks "what does mathematics deal with? " or "what is the subject matter in biology? " The object and purpose of these disciplines seem to be clear by intuition.) Every time as I tried to answer the question and to explain the point of the business I do, I have found that it is not easy at all. Three definitions Perhaps, the most widespread, canonical definition of semiotics is the definition by subject: "Semiotics is a science of signs and/or sign systems". Long ago St. Therefore, semiotics is a means of considering anything as signs and sign systems.
Three approaches Semiotics as a State of Mind. Charles Sanders Peirce. Charles Sanders Peirce (/ˈpɜrs/,[9] like "purse", September 10, 1839 – April 19, 1914) was an American philosopher, logician, mathematician, and scientist, sometimes known as "the father of pragmatism". He was educated as a chemist and employed as a scientist for 30 years. Today he is appreciated largely for his contributions to logic, mathematics, philosophy, scientific methodology, and semiotics, and for his founding of pragmatism. An innovator in mathematics, statistics, philosophy, research methodology, and various sciences, Peirce considered himself, first and foremost, a logician.
He made major contributions to logic, but logic for him encompassed much of that which is now called epistemology and philosophy of science. He saw logic as the formal branch of semiotics, of which he is a founder. Life[edit] Peirce's birthplace. Peirce suffered from his late teens onward from a nervous condition then known as "facial neuralgia", which would today be diagnosed as trigeminal neuralgia. Peirce's Theory of Signs. 1. Basic Sign Structure In one of his many definitions of a sign, Peirce writes: I define a sign as anything which is so determined by something else, called its Object, and so determines an effect upon a person, which effect I call its interpretant, that the later is thereby mediately determined by the former.
(EP2, 478) What we see here is Peirce's basic claim that signs consist of three inter-related parts: a sign, an object, and an interpretant. 1.1 The Signifying Element of Signs The very first thing to note is that there are some potential terminological difficulties here. Peirce's idea that a sign does not signify in all respects and has some particular signifying element is perhaps best made clear with an example. 1.2 The Object Just as with the sign, not every characteristic of the object is relevant to signification: only certain features of an object enable a sign to signify it.
The sign is the molehill, and the object of this sign is the mole. 1.3 The Interpretant 3. 3.2 Objects.
Semantic change. Examples[edit] Awful—Originally meant "inspiring wonder (or fear)". Used originally as a shortening for "full of awe", in contemporary usage the word usually has negative meaning.Demagogue—Originally meant "a popular leader". It is from the Greek dēmagōgós "leader of the people", from dēmos "people" + agōgós "leading, guiding". Now the word has strong connotations of a politician who panders to emotions and prejudice.Egregious—Originally described something that was remarkably good. (George Chauncey, in his book Gay New York, would put this shift as early as the late 19th century among a certain "in crowd" knowledgeable of gay night life.)
Types of semantic change[edit] A number of classification schemes have been suggested for semantic change. However, the categorization of Blank (1998) has gained increasing acceptance:[2] Blank considers it problematic, though, to include amelioration and pejoration of meaning as well as strengthening and weakening of meaning.
Practical studies[edit]