• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.26
• /
• pp.7-44
• /
• 2004

This paper proposed semiotic model to explain representation process of time in cinema. Limitations of cinematic narratology which explain representation process of time in cinema were indicated, then alternative explanations of Deleuzian philosophy of cinema were proposed. After discussion about articulations of cinematic code, Deleuzian concept of movement-image was suggested as semiotic minimal unit of cinema. In cinema, Movement-image is divided two different aspects ; "normal movement-image" and "abnormal movement-image". Therefore, two different semiotic representation process of time was reconstructed in accordance with Peircean semiosis theory. In this two different semiotic process, modern cinema emphasize the direct representation process of time with "abnormal movement-image". As Deleuze indicated, The "time-image" is presented in this semiotic process. The "time-image" makes it possible to consider "time itself" as philosophical fact which is laid between reality and cinema, This semiotic process more emphasizes pure expressionality than representationality. Deleuzian philosophical journey through cinema was started in this point.

• Journal of English Language & Literature
• /
• v.55 no.1
• /
• pp.199-213
• /
• 2009

From the perspective of pragmatics, language is a mode of act that works in the order of motive and performs human purpose. The function of language is then primarily performative rather than informational or significative. Pragmatics, however, encounters a tough question: what is the relation of the linguistic act to meaning? Many language theories including pragmatic theories admit the autonomy of meaning while defining language as act. But in Deleuze and Peirce we find examples of maximalist pragmatics that denies the autonomy of meaning. However, Deleuze and Peirce are different in their view on the function of meaning. For Deleuze, language is the transmission of act, what he calls 'order-word.' He rejects meaning except as the minimal condition for the transmission. But his theory turns out to be contradictory in that meaning as the minimal condition is actually the function of constants that he denies for order-words that are always variables. On the contrary, Peirce's pragmatism as a radical pragmatics does not exclude meaning. For him, language is interpretative act serving the purpose of understanding reality, which is performed through the function of meaning and 'habit.' This shows that meaning is indispensable to language even in maximalist pragmatics.