Analysis of Semiotics and Archeology Research Paper

Analysis of Semiotics and Archeology - Research Paper sheathIt then goes ahead to systemize the signs and phenomena into different theories and models, and this is known as theoretic semiology and finally tries to employ the knowledge gained to find practical solutions which are known as applied semiotics. The claim of semiotics can, therefore, be applied in many contexts, one of which being in archeology. Archeology can be dumb to be a science that carries out attempts to understand the past through the use of the physical curtilage that is available. This evidence may include written material as well as other exemplary artifacts. In their work, it is important for archeologists to have an understanding of different symbolic behaviors and the different symbols that they incur 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 whi ch was take ining 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 are, therefore, an important process. It is important to realize that unlike in the linguistic sentences the reading material of material culture is a more than complex process. As such, there is a need for archeologists to come up with a system that effectively structures and inter prets the different aspects of material culture. This marks an important aspect of the kind between semiotics and archeology. The relationship between semiotics and archeology is said to have begun in the mid-sixties 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 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 favor of the context of this culture. In the understanding of the role that is played by semiotics in archeology, it is important that the archetype of struct uralism 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.