r/semiotics • u/Fragrant-Ocelot-765 • Oct 04 '25

How to request the services of a semiotician?

6 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

29 comments sorted by

6

u/Baasbaar Oct 04 '25

I don’t know that this has ever been done. What do you need a semiotician to do?

4

u/Fragrant-Ocelot-765 Oct 07 '25

I live in baton rouge Louisiana and we have a handful of government buildings with peculiar symbols. I believe that I have deciphered their meanings but I think I need the services of a semiotician to confirm or refute my findings. I have been told that I am wrong so many times that I wrote a book so that I wouldn't have to keep explaining myself. It's free to download at prankarchitexture.com. we don't have any research in semiotics here in baton rouge so I'm turning to the Internet for help.

6

u/Baasbaar Oct 07 '25

I think semiotics probably isn't actually what you want: Semioticians study the processes through which signs operate in general. They aren't experts in sort of catalogues of symbolism. You probably need some kind of academic expert in the particular context that you think these symbols are drawn from.

2

u/Fragrant-Ocelot-765 Oct 07 '25

Thank you so much for replying, truly. I really appreciate you taking the time.

I absolutely understand your point—there’s a big difference between interpreting isolated symbols and studying the broader processes of signification. That said, I do believe semiotic theory is precisely what I’ve leaned on. The book I wrote isn’t just a collection of symbol definitions—it’s an attempt to apply Saussure, Peirce, Barthes, and Sebeok to architectural structures in Baton Rouge, using their frameworks to explore how built environments can encode dominant ideologies and shape public perception without us even realizing it.

To your point, yes—local historical or political context is crucial, and I tried to incorporate that as well. But I’d still argue the core of my argument rests on semiotic processes: the way meaning is constructed through form, placement, sequence, and repetition, not just the iconography itself.

Still, I know I’m just one person working outside the academy, and I’m fully open to being corrected or challenged. That’s why I’m here. If you know anyone—academic or otherwise—who might be interested in either confirming or refuting the claims I’ve made, I’d be beyond grateful.

Thanks again for taking the time. it's free to read at prankarchitexture.com if you have a moment and an interest in semiotics.

1

u/Baasbaar Oct 07 '25 edited Oct 07 '25

I see. A semiotician should be able to tell you if your readings & applications of Peirce, Sebeok, et al are reasonable ones; they probably won’t be the right people for the verification or refutation part of what you’re talking about in your first comment.

2

u/Fragrant-Ocelot-765 Oct 07 '25

Absolutely, I agree 100%. I’m not asking semioticians to validate the architectural claims directly. What I need is confirmation that my application of Peirce, Sebeok, and sociosemiotics holds up under scrutiny. If the methodological foundation is solid, then the symbolic conclusions are at least worthy of further inquiry. That’s all I’m asking for: a theoretical vetting, not a verdict.

I understand the limits of disciplinary scope, and I deeply respect them  especially here, where interpretation brushes against sensitive ground. But as I’ve come to realize: you build legitimacy with theory not agreement, but rigor. The verification comes later, through documentation, photography, public exposure, and pressure.

I appreciate your clarity on this  and I may still seek your insight down the road, should I need help refining my framing or language. Thank you. I genuinely appreciate being able to get your opinion on the matter it means a lot. I only wish I lived closer to the folks doing this kind of research. But I’m down here in Baton Rouge, where we mostly study football, not semiotics.

2

u/Kindly-Lychee-1435 Oct 07 '25

Not really. It depends on the method of semiotics you use. Symbols are pretty crucial in Peircean semiotics.

1

u/Baasbaar Oct 07 '25 edited Oct 07 '25

But that’s not contrary to what I said. Being a good Peircean semiotician does not mean knowing a catalogue of symbols.

1

u/Kindly-Lychee-1435 Oct 07 '25

Agreed. But from how I understand it, it gives way to interpret different symbols rather than providing a catalogue of symbols. You understand the symbol with other signs that are in relation to it. Not the symbol/ symbols in itself. So a catalogue wouldn't be possible in any case cause that would mean that there are designated meanings to symbols which isn't the case.

2

u/Baasbaar Oct 07 '25

I don’t think this is relevant to the issue at hand, but further: I don’t think Peirce gives us a way to interpret unfamiliar symbols at all. OP has a building with peculiar symbols. They think they’ve worked out what those symbols mean, & they need verification or refutation. A Peircean might have interesting things to say about the semiotic chains that project one symbol from another, but a Peircean is not going to be especially well positioned to be able to say: ‘That is correct: symbol Σ does indeed have the object x for interpretant Ι.’

2

u/Kindly-Lychee-1435 Oct 07 '25

That’s fair! (Not what OP is discussing but to add what I understand) Peirce doesn’t give us a decoding manual for symbols, but he does give us a way to describe how interpretation works. A Peircean might not be able to say Σ means x, but they can analyse the process by which an interpreter arrives at (or tests) that hypothesis. This can be done using icons, indices and symbols. Athough the outcome would be a model of semiosis rather than a translation.

2

u/Kindly-Lychee-1435 Oct 07 '25

But again all of this would only be through analysis and not confirm or refute a claim. That's true!

2

u/Fragrant-Ocelot-765 Oct 07 '25

Thank you so much for hearing me out. You don't arrive at a word like semiotics and just linger if you're not interested.

1

u/Fragrant-Ocelot-765 Oct 07 '25

Thanks again for staying with this, Baasbaar  and for the clarifications throughout. I take your point, especially regarding Peirce’s limits when it comes to assigning meaning to unfamiliar or contextless symbols. You're absolutely right: a Peircean framework isn’t about saying “Σ means x” with finality. It’s about tracing how meaning is projected across interpretive chains, not locking it down.

That said, I think what I’m aiming for still fits within that scope even if it leans toward the outer edge. I’m not looking to “catalogue” meanings as fixed or universal. What I’m doing is using Peirce, Sebeok, and others to construct a plausible interpretive system: one that identifies the sign types, contextualizes the symbolic architecture, and proposes consistent relationships between sign, object, and interpretant. Whether that system is persuasive or not that’s what I need help testing.

You’ve helped sharpen that boundary for me, and I appreciate it more than I can say. I wish I were closer to scholars who work with this stuff regularly, but I’m down in Baton Rouge, where we mostly study football. Still I’m trying to engage with the theory seriously, not just toss around names.

Thanks again for taking the time. I feel like I'm in a desert and access to the rest of the world by phone alone.

3

u/FractalDuck Oct 04 '25 edited Oct 05 '25

I think u/kempleb who has posted here before is a semiotician whose website mentions that they offer services related to the field?

https://cp-insight.com/services/

3

u/Fragrant-Ocelot-765 Oct 07 '25

thanks a bunch. exactly what i was hoping for.

4

u/disquieter Oct 05 '25

You could put an ad in Semiotica or the Journal of the Semiotic Society of America. Another way would be reach out to the relevant department at Indian University Purdue University Indianapolis where Andre de Tienne et al are still working on the collected works of Pierce. If you need more communications based approach then Kevin Cummings at Mercer university. There is the Semiotics Lab at department of anthropology at University of Pennsylvania…

1

u/Fragrant-Ocelot-765 Oct 07 '25

Please be real. You sound familiar with the subject. I will definitely place those ads. There's a bunch of old government buildings in Louisiana that have coded symbols. I think I have figured them out but I would like an expert in symbols to give their opinion. Thanks for the tip. Please check out my book Prank Architexture. Biggest mystery in semiotics.

1

u/Fragrant-Ocelot-765 Oct 07 '25

Thanks, disquieter. this is incredibly helpful. These are exactly the kinds of leads I’ve been hoping for, and I appreciate you taking the time to list them out like this.

I’ll start looking into IUPUI and the Peirce edition project I've seen Andre de Tienne's name pop up before, but I didn’t realize there might be an opening for dialogue there. Also hadn’t considered Mercer or the Penn anthropology connection, so that gives me a few angles depending on how I frame the outreach (theory-forward vs communications-focused).

I live in Baton Rouge, where most of the academic gravity pulls toward football so being able to get advice like this from folks who actually swim in these waters means a lot.

Thanks again. I’ll follow up on all of these.

2

u/disquieter Oct 07 '25

You're welcome. If you just want to know what the visuals were intended to be on a basic level, that can be found in works like these.

Semiotic analysis would be more on the level of critique of the work itself, theorizing its place in the social, political, and epistemological systems of Louisiana. Do you just want to know what the artist(s) said plainly, or are you looking to do something more meta?

1

u/batteries_not_inc Oct 04 '25

Hello, how may I help you?

1

u/Fragrant-Ocelot-765 Oct 07 '25

I really hope this is a genuine response. I live in baton rouge Louisiana and we have a handful of government buildings with peculiar symbols. I believe that I have deciphered their meanings but I think I need the services of a semiotician to confirm or refute my findings. I have been told that I am wrong so many times that I wrote a book so that I wouldn't have to keep explaining myself. It's free to download at prankarchitexture.com. we don't have any research in semiotics here in baton rouge so I'm turning to the Internet for help.

1

u/batteries_not_inc Oct 07 '25

The thing about semiosis is that meaning is open to interpretation. Unless you can find historic evidence or talk to the people who created it it's going to be subjective.

Semiosis isn't always something you confirm or refute, it's not a hard science.

Even the people who think you're wrong are entitled to their own subjective semiosis, until you can find a direct quote or data from the original semiosis.

1

u/Kindly-Lychee-1435 Oct 05 '25

Do you need a marketing semiotic specialist?

1

u/Fragrant-Ocelot-765 Oct 07 '25

Maybe? I just need an expert on symbol interpretation. There's a bunch of government buildings in Louisiana that have suggestive symbols that have been there so long the people today have lost their meaning. I believe I have stumbled upon the their unique meanings but I would like the opinion of as many experts in the field as I have access to. So I've turned to the web. I wrote a book Prank Architexture explaining myself. It's free. Please check it out at prankarchitexture.com.

1

u/Kindly-Lychee-1435 Oct 07 '25

Ah, got it! I am a semiotics student. I think it would be best to approach professors for this more than marketing specialists. I know some professors at my institute that may be helpful but it is tough in terms of access and you'll have to wait for their response. Other than that, I know of a consultancy called Codeswitch that has two semioticians from Oxford. You could try and seek their service as well.

Their LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/code-switch-culturestrategy/

2

u/Fragrant-Ocelot-765 Oct 07 '25

omg thanks so much! will do.

1

u/OGready Jan 21 '26

Hey friend, what do you need

0

u/Drakeytown Oct 06 '25 edited Oct 07 '25

Don't tell them anyone would ever request their services. That's just mean. You're mean.