Drawing, Design and Semiotics Author(s): Clive Ashwin Source: Design Issues, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Autumn, 1984), pp. 42-52 Published by: The MIT Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1511498 Accessed: 13/10/2008 01:20 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mitpress. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
The MIT Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Design Issues.
http://www.jstor.org
Clive Ashwin
Drawing, Design and Semiotics
Few designpractitioners,theoristsor educatorswould challenge the centralimportancedrawinghas in their professionaldiscipline; equallyfew would deny that at the sametime drawingis difficultto talkabout. Of course,a greatdealcan extraordinarily be said that is true and relevantaboutthe natureandpracticeof drawingincludingprovidingfactsaboutits materials,historyand usage;butmostof theconceptsandissuesthatarecentralandseminalto the essentialnatureof drawingremainstrangelyelusiveand inexpressiblein termsotherthanthoseof drawingitself. A partialexplanationof this problemis thatit is preciselythis inexpressibleelementthatmakesdrawingvaluableandirreplaceable:if everythingcouldbe convertedinto otherformsof expression therewould be no point in drawing.However,therearehistoricaland culturalreasonswhy verbaldiscourseaboutdrawing hasremainedin an unnecessarilyprimitiveandundevelopedstate comparedwith otherfieldssuchas law or medicine.In Britain,as in manyothercountries,artanddesigncontinueto occupya relatively marginalplacein advancededucation.They arerarelyrepresentedin the universitiesexceptas historyof art (not, usually, historyof design)andone or two cognateareassuchas architecture.Wecontinueto sufferfromthe culturallegacyof theRomantic Movementwhich often representedthe plasticarts,including drawing,as a matterof intuitionandinspirationsomehowabove andbeyondthe accessof rationalinquiryandunderstanding. This state of affairshas, in my view, seriouslyimpededthe developmentof drawing.The most rudimentaryconceptssurroundingissues such as style, content, meaningand expression defy articulationto such an extentthat termsand conceptshave beendevisedor borrowedfromotherdisciplinesin orderto forge a meansof appropriately discussinga theoryof drawing. This articlereviewssemiotics,the scienceof signs, as a possible intellectualgroundworkfor developing a theory of drawing. Drawingas a systemof signs has importnt culturaloriginsthat are reflectedin etymology.The GermanZeichen,meaningsign, givesus zeichnenfor the verbto draw,thatis to makesigns.Similar connectionscan be seen in the Italiansegno (sign), disegno (drawing,design)anddisegnatore(designer).The Englishdraw42
ingtakesits formfromtheactionof pulling,whichis characteristic of so muchdrawingactivity,buta similaretymologicallinkcanbe seenin the wordssignanddesign. Manyof the centralissuesof semioticsarehighlycontroversial, and, therefore,readerswith a backgroundin semioticsor communicationstheorymay takeissuewith positionsadoptedin this article.However,becauseof the needfor a forumfor continuing debateaboutpertinentareasof designtheory,thisarticlewaswritten intentionallyas an introductionto conceptsof semioticsthat areunderdiscussion.As such, muchof whatis saidin this article is derived from other sources; some of it, and its synthesis, is original.
1) Ferdinand deSaussure, Course In General Linguistics(McGraw Hill Book Co., New York, 1966), 16. 2) Charles Sanders Peirce, Philosophical Writingsof Peirce, Vol. II, 227.
3) Terrence Hawkes, Structuralism and Semiotics (University of California Press, 1977), 127.
Design Issues, Vol. I, No. 2
Semioticsemergedas an areaof theoreticalinquiryin the years immediatelyprecedingWorldWarI. Its principalprotagonists were Ferdinandde Saussure(1875-1913),the Swiss linguistic theorist and CharlesSandersPeirce (1839-1914),the American pragmaticphilosopher.Muchof Saussure'smost importantwork was actuallyassembledfrom notes made by his studentsat the Universityof Geneva. This is true of his influentialCoursein GeneralLinguisticsin whichhe argued,"Asciencethatstudiesthe life of signswithinsocietyis conceivable;it wouldbe apartof social psychologyandconsequentlyof generalpsychology;I shallcallit semiology(from the Greek semeion 'sign'). Semiology would show whatconstitutessigns,whatlawsgovernthem."1 At about the same time Peircewrote, "Logic, in its general sense,is, asI believeI haveshown,only anothernamefor semiotic the quasinecessary, or formaldoctrineof signs."2 The terms semioticsand semiologyare more or less synonymous, the formerbeing derivedfrom the Frenchsemiologieand the latteran Englishvariant.3It is possibleto disputethe truthof thisview, andarguethatthe two termsnow denotedifferentareas of theoreticalinquiry.In the decadessince the pioneerwork of Saussureand Peirce, semioticshas broadenedinto an international area of theoretical inquiry impinging on linguistics, social theory,film theory,culturalhistoryand communications. It has its own internationaljournalSemioticaand has attracted leadingintellectssuch as the ItalianUmberto Eco, the French RolandBarthes,andthe AmericanThomasSebeok. A signmaybe construedas composedof two ingredients,a signifieranda signified.Thefunctionof the signis to communicatea message,and in purposivecommunication,the processrequires two participants,an emitterand a receiver.The messageis embedded in a medium and subsists in a set of conventions or code. The sign is encodedby the emitter and decodedby the receiveror interpretant. FollowingPeirce'slead, signshavetraditionallybeenclassified into threegroups,eachwith numerouspossiblesubdivisions.The indexis a sign thatarisesas a resultof, or in contiguitywith, the thingthatit signifies.Classicexamplesarethe footprintas a sign 43
4) Charles SandersPeirce, Philosophical Writings of Peirce,Vol.II. 227.
of anearlierpresenceat a givenspot or smokeas a signof fire.The icon(fromthe Greekwordfor image)is a signthatbearsa similarity or resemblanceto the thingit signifies.Roadsignsthatpresent a schematicimageof, for example,animalsor vehiclesfallinto this category,as do more elaboratedepictivedrawings.Finally,the symbolis a signwhichbearsno apparentresemblanceto its related signified,but operateswithin an agreedset of conventions.For example,the word tree has no obvious similarityto the objectit denotes, and totally differentsignifiersareperfectlyadequatein otherlanguages(arbre,Baum,albero).4Othertypicalexamplesof symbolicsystemsarethe Morsecode andflagsemaphore.Because they manifesta deliberatedesire for resemblanceor similarity, icons aresometimesdescribedas motivatedsigns, whereassymbols areregardedas arbitraryor conventional. If this simple three-folddivision or trichotomyis appliedto drawing,the importanceof the conceptof iconicityis immediately obvious. Much drawingin relationto designis dedicatedto the recordingandtransmissionof resemblances.Thisprocessarisesas the result of an attempt at representation,the recordingof a phenomenonalreadypresentto the senses, or presentation,the processof makingmaterialan otherwiseimmaterialformor idea thatexistedonly as anideaor conceptin the designer'sminduntil its commitmentto paper.The iconic (image-like)natureof such drawingis interestinglyreflectedin the etymologicallinkbetween imageandimagine. However,furtherinvestigationrevealsthat iconicitydoes not providea comprehensiveaccountof drawingin relationto design. Drawingfor designis also deeplyinvolvedwith the creationand interpretationof signs as symbols. For examplethe designs of logogramsfor corporateidentityareoftensymbolicin two senses: they employalphabeticmotifssuchas companyinitials;andthey attemptto symbolizethe company'ssupposedcharacterby means of appropriatelydevisedforms, be they "robust,""refined,"or "sophisticated." Practices such as engineering design, architectural design and interior design have generated similarly hybrid sign systems. Although they normally make extensive use of iconic systems based on resemblance, employing such techniques as representational scale, perspective, tone, and texture, they often introduce purely conventional symbolic systems such as codes for the representation of cross sections, interruptions of form, or the depiction of materials, colors, and textures in black and white. This point can be argued further: that even the most unproblematic drawing from observation may contain conventional signs not explicable in terms of resemblance, such as a linear profile representing the boundary of a plastic form in space. A central task of the teacher of drawing is to alert the student to the distinction between the recording of empirical experience through the creation of resemblant equivalents and deploying of purely symbolic
44
codes. (Whethersucha cleardistinctioncanbe madeis one of the centralproblemsof semiotictheory.) An underlyingindexicalqualitycanalsobe detectedin drawing. Certainly,studyingthe drawingproceduresof youngchildrenand animalsshowsthatdeliberateattemptsto formiconsandsymbols is only a partialexplanationof the process.Youngchildrenmay continueto drawwithouteitherpreciseknowledgeof what they are drawingor self-consciouscontrolover the processof imagemaking.The psychomotoractivityof swinginga crayonin space may be enough, and the drawingchild may engage a friend in conversationand attendto somethingcompletelyremovedfrom the fieldof the drawingwhilethe handcontinuesto movefluently and energetically.The hierarchyof signs, from the footprinton the beachto the idletracingsof a fingerin wet sandto doodlingon a telephonepad to more deliberatedrawingsand to the most sophisticated and conscious processes of image-makingis not easilybrokeninto a seriesof discreterungs.It maywell be thatin the most deliberateandcontrolleddrawingstheresubsistsan indexicalelementthat cannot be explainedin iconic or symbolic terms. Havingintroducedthe tripartitedivisionof signsinto indexes, icons, andsymbols,thefunctionsof communicationvia sign systems can be discussedwith specialreferenceto theirrelevanceto drawingfor design.It has beenclaimedthatsign systemsserveat leastsix principalfunctions.A message(drawing)maybe referential in thatit attemptsto describeor communicatea formor idea in as objectiveand dispassionatea manneras possible.It may be emotive in that it attemptsto communicatecertainsubjective responsesof the emitterin terms of, for example,excitement, attractionor repulsionfor the thingdepicted.It may be conative
v-
Fig. 1)Sectionaldrawingof apulley assembly. Middlesex Polytechnic. The conventions of engineering drawing involve complex interrelationships of iconic and symbolic codes, such as the use of hatching to present cross-sections and wavy lines to indicate continuations of form. They are stictly monosemic in intention, that is capable of a finite set of correct interpretations.
Design Issues, Vol. I, No. 2
fW E+T f/
r
/
I
_
//
/
45
(or injunctive)in that it persuadesor exhorts the receiverto respondand behavein a certainway. It may be poeticin thatthe principal intention is not to communicatefacts or influence behavior,but to createan intrinsicallyadmirable(or beautiful) self-justifyingform.A phaticcommunicationis one thatdoes not attemptto recordor communicatefacts, views, or information, but serves as a meansof initiating,maintaining,or concluding communicationbetween the emitterand the receiver.(Expressions suchas "Hullo,canyou hearme?"arenot so muchrequests for informationas ways of maintainingdiscourse.)Communication mayalsobe metalinguistic,createdfor the expresspurposeof clarifyingother signs, which may be in the same or another medium.A good exampleis the key providedon a map. Beforelookingatthesesixcommunicationmodesin moredetail a usefultool that illuminatestheirindividualcharacterand their interrelationshouldbe introduced.Signsmay be characterized as three levels of Monosemic having possible systems specificity. offeronly one correctinterpretation; arenot otherinterpretations viable alternatives:they are consideredmistaken and wrong. Hence, cartographicalsigns and engineeringdrawingsare predominantlymonosemic.Polysemicsystemsoffer more thanone legitimateinterpretation.Hence a figurativedrawingof a carfor an advertisementmight evoke a varietyof acceptableresponses from interpreters,such as speed, power,reliability,andso forth. However, althoughthe rangeof permissibleresponsesmight be wide, it is not infinite,andmanywould be rejectedby the emitter (draughtsman)as wrong or unintended.Pansemicsystemsoffer apparently unlimited possiblities of interpretation, a good examplebeing much nonfigurativedrawingandpainting. It is impossiblein this caseto rejectanyreadingof the communication as unequivocallywrong or unacceptable.(Manyabstractartists would repudiatethis assertionandclaimthateventotallyabstract imagerycanpossessa highlevelof specificityin regardto theideas andemotionsit is intendedto convey.)Thedesigner-draughtsman operates predominantlywithin the range of monosemic and polysemicsystems,as thereis invariablya strivingfor a degreeof specificity,rangingfrom the mechanicalprecisionof engineering drawingto the moreallusiveuse of drawingfor book illustration andthe promotionof consumergoods. The six functions of communicationare as follows: * 1. The referential function Much drawing for design is essentiallyreferentialandmonosemic.Productiondrawingsfor industry,city plans and architecturaldrawingsare guidedby the constantimperativeto informthe receiveror interpretant (client,artisan,colleague)in a preciseandunequivocalmanner. Every effort is made to eradicatealternativereadingsand ambiguitiesin the encodedmessage.Thisperhapsexplainswhy there is such a pronouncedtendency to conventionalsym46
bolism, even in what are basicallyiconic drawings.Drawing codes usedfor engineering,for example,orthographic,axonoresemblance metric,or obliqueprojections,beara rudimentary to the objectof visualperceptionin termsof scale,perspective, andperhapsevenlightandshade;but they areat the sametime subjectto clearlystatedcodes and conventionsof representation. Thesemayprescribesuchfactorsas the thicknessof lines of differentviews, employed,anglesof projection,interrelation andevena code for colors. Drawingsthat are predominantlyreferentialin functionat the sametime may importemotiveor conativeelements.For example,architectural drawingsoftendepictincidentalssuchas trees, lawns, or figures. The plant life, although rendered schematically,is invariablyhealthy and well-tendedand the lawns are carefully trimmed. The figures are selected as to thesetting,for example,briskyoung stereotypesappropriate executivesemergingfroma proposedofficeblock.Thefactthat most executivesare neither brisk nor young or that office blocksarevisitedor surroundedby generalpedestrians,policemen or down-and-outsis not likelyto registerin the architect's speculativedrawing.It is, therefore,anidealizedimageappeal-
A/ \
Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Headquarters, Public Concourse and Banking Hall. Draughtsman:
n
BirkinHaward.PermissionFoster Associates, London. Although putatively referential in function, architect's presentation drawings . invariably entail a degree of idealisa-_ tion designed to arouse a favourable emotional response in the viewer.
Design Issues, Vol. I, No. 2
\
X
47
senseof orderandproprietyas ing asmuchto the interpretant's to the demandfor a truevisualaccountof how the completed buildingis likelyto appear.In similarfashion,a streetplanfor a city such as New Yorkwill providemuchusefulfactualinformation,butit is unlikelyto giveanindicationof thelocalcondition of streets, problemsof trafficcongestionor potentially dangerousareas,howevervaluablethisinformationmightbe to the plan'suser.Again, we see how the strivingfor monosemic precisionis consistentwith a tendencytowardsidealism. * 2. The emotive function Much drawing for design has an intentionallyemotivefunction.Especiallyin the advertisingof consumerproducts, graphicartistsare not only expectedto communicatea resemblanceof the commodity being promoted,perhapsclearlyenoughto enablethe receiverto identify it in a storewindow, but to presentthe commodityin a valuefavorablelight by meansof the content, style anddetailof the drawing. In a drawing of a shoe, for example, unique design features such as surface decoration and patterns are emphasized, whereas other equally important or visible characteristics, such as the creasing of the leather, may be suppressed or ignored. Drawing for fashion design is often emotively biased to conform to a current notion of preferredphysical type or body language. In much contemporary fashion drawing, the head is sharply reduced in scale relative to the body to suggest physical elegance, and shoulders may be broadened and legs lengthened. Potentially distracting features such as the nose or mouth may be omitted. Fashion drawing is also characterized by a high incidence of escapements: breaks in the profile of a form which generate a sense of fluidity and movement. The striking difference between contemporary and Victorian fashion drawing shows a great deal about the values of the cultures that created them. The code of Victorian fashion plates was highly referential and monosemic. The emiter wished to convey, and the interpretantto receive, precise information about the form and construction of the garment depicted, its decorative detail, and so forth. If Victorian fashion drawings have an emotive axis, it is articulated by means of preferred physical types (young, beautiful, wasp-waisted) and locations (women in parks and boudoirs, men in clubs and hunting scenes). This illustrative example shows that the function of the drawing as referentialor emotive is determined not only by the natureof the content, but also by the stylistic rendering. *3. The conative (or injunctive)function In contrast to drawing in the context of fine art activity, drawing for design is frequently conative in function; its purpose is to persuade the interpreter of some desired course of action, for example, to 48
__.,
Jr .
........'. ?....
Fig. 3) Robert Mason. Illustration for The Sunday Times on the theme of changing roles in the family. Fiction and magazine illustration normally has a referential function in that it alludes to the related text, but may be more importantly emotive, conative or poetic. While engineering drawings set out to provide complete information and eliminate alternative readings, this drawing is intended to arouse the curiousty of the viewer.
..
-::...
;...: :
!
..
.
..
...A..... . .7 4;?
buy a certain product in preference to others. Designers of buildings and interiors are simultaneously engaged in communicating the specific facts of a scheme and persuading clients and colleagues of the quality and attractivenessof their proposals, thereby creating a response favorable to acceptance. This is even more acutely true of drawing for advertisingdesign, where the whole purpose of a drawing is to persuade the interpretant to behave in a certain way, to buy the product, or at least to admire it and possibly recommend it to friends. In a nutshell, drawing for advertising is implicitly or explicitly persuasive (conative). It is more important to note that although the conative force of a drawing may be intended to be emotive with respect to the interpreter, known in advertising parlance as the prospect, it may well not be genuinely emotive with respect to the draughtsman. Draughtsmen might be required to serve as advocates in causes for which they have no particularfeelings, or even which they feel real repugnance. They may be required to invent graphic arguments in favor of products they regard as socially destructive and pernicious, just as lawyers might be required to defend clients they regard as complete villains. This analogy illustrates an important distinction between drawing for design and drawing in relation to fine art activity. The conative function must always harmonize with an artist's emotive aspirations: a fine artist who draws in a certain way not because it made his work saleable ratherthan because it reflected his emotional condition thereby moves into an areaof activity more akin to advertising design than fine art. The interplay between the referential, the emotive, and conative functions of all graphic imagery, including drawing, with its potential for willful deception and misrepresentation, has led to the creation of legal and professional codes of practice to govern the use of such imagery. The poetic or esthetic function It could be argued that the designer qua designer never creates a drawing for purely poetic
*4. Design Issues, Vol. I, No. 2
49
or estheticreasons.In suchcaseswheredesignersworkwith the sole motiveof self-expressionor a concentrationon theintrinsic beautyor qualityof images,the resultsarelikely to be fine art. Drawing for design always has an instrumentalpurpose. Its ultimatejustificationis not pleasurablecontemplationby the executantor the spectator,but the communicationof some importantpiece of informationor value that will influence attitudesandfutureaction.Thisactionmayrangefromtheprecise manufactureof a machinepartto the purchaseof a commodity. Designers'work may, of course, be pleasurablycontemplatedby interpreters,but that is not its raisond'etre or criterionof success. The statusof designers'drawingmaychangewiththepassage of timeandchangeof circumstances. ToulouseLautrec'sdrawn advertisementsfor the cabaretsand artistesof the 1890s no longerservean instrumentalfunction,becausethe cabaretsand artistesthey depictedno longerexist.If suchdrawingshaveany continuingvalueit is for theirpoeticor aestheticfunction.This is admittedlya problematicissue.It is impossibleto separatethe poetic functionof a drawingfromits otherpossiblefunctions. Eventhe mostobjectiveanddispassionatedrawingof engineering design, intended as totally referentialin function, can neverthelessgeneratea sense of delight in the spectatorand serveas a quasi-poeticcommunication.Similarly,manydrawconativeor injunctive ingsby fine artistshaveanunmistakeable function. KatheKollwitz'sdrawingsof the Germanworking class areintendedto persuadethe interpretersof certainsocial and politicaltruthsand move him in the directionof certain kindsof behavior,aswell asbeingfinepiecesof poeticdrawing. * 5. ThephaticfunctionPhaticcommunicationsareeasyenough to find in speech.Expressionssuchas "Ah, well"andinterjections suchas "sortof" or "ofcourse"serveprincipallyassignals to maintaindiscourseor dialogueandhavelittle or no intrinsic meaning.Muchmorecomplexstatementsmightnevethelessbe essentiallyphatic in function. Opening a public speech with "Unaccustomedas I am to public speaking"or closing a travelogwith "andso we sayfarewellto" areexamplesof phatic utterances masquerading as referential communications. Althoughphaticutteranceseasilydegenerateto clichesandcan become a sourceof humorand an objectof ridicule,they do servean importantpurposein initiating,maintaining,redirecting, concludingcommunication.Anyonewho hasevertriedto eliminateeverythingredundantfromhis speechwill appreciate whata strainit placeson the speakerandwhatcuriouslanguage it canproduce. Phaticcommunicationsplay an importantrolein manyareas of drawingfor design. The presence(or absence)of framing devicessuch as lines and rulesand the deploymentof graphic 50
motifssuchas arrowsareextensivelyusedto captureanddirect the attention of spectators. Drawing for comic papers has generatedanimmenselycomplicatedsemioticcode richin phatic devicesandsigns.Thesesignsincludespecialways of framing drawingsto indicatethe relationbetweenseparateframes, and devicessuch as lines, arrows,andescapementsareused to maintainmovement, change location, shift focus, and direct the narrative. From a purely semiotic point of view, comic papers constitute one of the most complex and sophisticated areas of drawn communication.
Fig. 4) David Penny. Line drawing of a grasshopper escapement. Courtesy Mr. A. King. Even the most objective and dispassionate drawing of a piece of engineering design can nevertheless generate a sense of delight in the spectator and serve as a quasi-poetic communication.
6. The metalinguistic function The purpose of metalinguistic communication is to comment upon, explain, clarify, or qualify other communications. Quotation marks or commas around a word indicate that it has a special meaning in the context in which it is used, just as a frame signals the special kind of relationship a painting has with its environment. Metalinguistic communication has a prominent role in areasof drawing (common examples include maps, plans, statisticaldisplays and technical illustrations) that depend heavily upon conventionalized codes. To achieve a high level of specifity, the code must establish a close and unequivocal correspondence between signifier and signified, with the elimination of ambiguities. Sometimes the code may be represented as a metalinguistic display in the field of the actual drawing, as may be the case with the key of a map or the explanatory key of a statistical display. In other cases, whole areas of drawing practice may be governed by well-known codes of representation that are not included with every example but are published separately and assumed to be known to everyone practicing in the area. An example is the phamphlet entitled "EngineeringDrawing and Practice",published by the British StandardsInstitution and recognized as the professional code of practice by engineering draughtsmen in Great Britain. Running right through the range of communicative modes are the semiotic concepts of denotation and connotation. The denotation of a sign is its commonsense meaning, what it might be taken to represent in its most fundamental and obvious interpretation. Its connotations are the association and ideas that it may evoke in individual interpretants. The denotation of a road sign showing a horse is the animaland the likelihood that a horse might be encountered on the stretch of road ahead. Its connotations, however, will be different for different travellers. One might welcome it as evidence of the great outdoors; another may see it as an unwelcome source of hazard; yet another might be reminded of a childhood spent on a ranch. The distinction between denotation and connotation is not always easy to make. One may question whether there is ever a straightforward unequivocal "common
Design Issues, Vol. I, No. 2
51
sense" reading of a graphic sign that is the same for all spectators. Conversely, some connotations are so universal that they constitute invariate associations of the sign, and therefore, are akin to denotation. As mentioned previously, semiotics grew out of linguistic theory and philosophy, and its content and procedures have been much influenced by its origins. Many characteristicsof verbal language are not easily transferableto pictorial or other systems of communication. In verbal language, individual signs (words) are combined in a linear sequence that permits analysis in terms of both the meaning of each sign and its position within the syntax of the sequence. For this reason, verbal communication has been described as a discursivesystem. Pictorial communication usually presents interpreterswith manifold ensembles of signs ratherthan sequences, and the interpretersmust make their own order of the presentation, perhaps attending first to the whole and then its parts, or vice versa. For this reason pictorial systems have been described as presentational, as opposed to discursive, systems. The syntax of verbal language provides its rules of combination and sequence, governing such issues as the position of verbs and the order of clauses within a sentence. The concept of syntactical relations can be easily transferredto other areasof representation. For example, clothing is governed by syntactical rules of combination, that is, inclusion and exclusion, which are dictated by social practices and expectations. Attire that departsfrom these syntactical rules may be regarded as bizarre, outlandish or even indecent. The eating habits of a culture are similarly governed by a syntax that dictates what may be eaten (inclusion and exclusion), the number and sequence of dishes, and rules of substitution. These rules may be codified in the form of a restaurantmenu. Although applying the concept of syntax to pictorial imagery may be difficult, it makes a useful analytical tool for the study of drawings, and this is true of the whole areaof semiotic theory.
Bibliography Ashwin, Clive, "The ingredients of style in contemporary illustration: a case study" Information Design Journal. Vol. 1, No. 1., 1979, pp. 51-67. Barthes, Roland, Elements ofSemiology, Hill and Wang, New York, 1977. Barthes, Roland, Mythologies, Hill and Wang, New York, 1972. Barthes, Roland, Image, Music, Text, Hill and Wang, New York, 1978.
52
Eco, Umberto, A Theory of Semiotics, Indiana University, Bloomington, 1979.
Peters, J.M., Pictorial Communication, David Philip, Cape Town, 1977.
Guiraud, Pierre, Semiology, Routledge, London, 1975.
deSaussure, Ferdinand, Course in General Linguistics, McGraw Hill, New York, 1966.
Hawkes, Terrence, Structuralism and Semiotics, University of California, 1977.
Williamson, Judith, Decoding Advertisements, Merrimack,Bridgeport, 1978.
Peirce, Charles Sanders, Philosophical Writings of Peirce, Dover, New York, 1940.
Wollen, Peter, Signs and Meaning in the Cinema, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, 1973.
