Wyniki wyszukiwania - BazTech

Ograniczanie wyników

2 Polski Przegląd Kartograficzny

Znaleziono wyników: 2

Liczba wyników na stronie

Wyniki wyszukiwania

Wyszukiwano:
w słowach kluczowych: język mapy

Sortuj według:

Ogranicz wyniki do:

Relacje semiotyczne w odniesieniu do kartografii

Ostrowski W.

Polski Przegląd Kartograficzny

2013

T. 45, nr 1

5--14

W artykule podjęto próbę spojrzenia na najważniejsze problemy kartografii z punktu widzenia trzech działów semiotyki kartograficznej: semantyki, pragmatyki i syntaktyki. Wskazano też na podstawową różnicę, niedocenianą w pełni przez przedstawicieli kierunku badawczego określanego jako teoria języka mapy, między pismem, którego struktura podporządkowana jest semantycznym aspektom wyrazów, zdań i tekstów, a prezentacją kartograficzną będącą przede wszystkim przestrzennym modelem i obrazem. Ta specyfika mapy powinna być uwzględniana przy określaniu zakresu zainteresowań semiotyki kartograficznej, w szczególności semantyki i syntaktyki.

Semiotics is a science dealing with ways in which signs and sign systems function as tools of communication. It has developed on the basis of linguistics, treated by its author F. Saussure as the most important part of semiotics. Semiotics can be divided into three branches: semantics, dealing with relations between signs and reality (especially the meaning of signs), pragmatics, which explores relations between signs and their users, and syntactics, which analyzes formal relations among signs within the system. Cartographic semiotics, whose acknowledged author is J. Bertin (1967), treats the map as both a special sign system and a model, whose aim is to visually and realistically present geographical space. Mirroring the three branches of semiotics, the cartographic semiotics includes: cartographic semantics (relations between signs and the objects they represent), cartographic pragmatics (map functions and relations between the map and its author and user) and cartographic syntactics (structure and rules of creating cartographic signs). There has evolved in cartographic semiotics a trend named theory of map language. It draws attention to the fact that there are many similarities between natural language and cartographic presentation. That is why its representatives use linguistic terminology to analyze cartographic sign systems. However, there exists one main structural difference between natural language (writing) and cartographic presentation. The map is not only a system of signs, but it is mainly a spatial model and a specialized image in measurable and clear characterization of space. This special character of cartographic presentation in comparison to natural language causes the object of interest of cartographic semantics (also of syntactics to a lesser degree) to be a lot different from the nature of semantics and syntactics in linguistic semiotics. The object of interest of cartographic semantics is the qualities of the map as a spatial model of geographic reality, whose main aim is to show various kinds of space features and relations. That is why map spatial structure should be the main object of interest of cartographic semantics along with the semantic scope of notions represented by the signs used on the map. Cartographic syntactics, as opposed to syntactics of natural language, mainly deals with the graphic form of the map. Taking into consideration these basic differences between cartographic presentation and natural language it is easier to decide which problems of scientific cartography can be included in the three already mentioned branches of cartographic semiotics. The object of interest of cartographic semantics is firstly the modeling of geographic space through transforming it into map space (defined by scale, mapping and way of shadowing), and secondly the modeling of object and phenomena attributes (creating a notion model). Kinds of attributes (quality, quantity) as well as the spatial reference of presented objects (point, line or area) became the basis for classifying and defining particular methods of cartographic presentation. That is why cartographic methodology can be included within the interest range of cartographic semantics. So can generalization, which is the essence of modeling both space and attributes of presented objects. Cartographic pragmatics is mainly interested in the research of map and its graphic elements perception within the scope of a research trend known as cognitive cartography. There appear more and more often research and analyses, in which maps are seen in a wider historical context as products of civilization progress as well as an image of the knowledge level and mentality of the epoch in which they were created. Cartographic pragmatics also includes works which analyze the functions played by maps, including expressive functions used in advertising and propaganda. Appropriate construction of map legend can be included in both cartographic pragmatics and semantics. With relation to authors of maps, cartographic pragmatics deals with such issues as copyright, the organization and technology of map production and educating map editors. The object of study of cartographic syntactics is the graphic form of maps, while the best known and most discussed issue here is visual variables created by J. Bertin. Cartographic syntactics should not only deal with visual variables, which show attributes of presented objects, but also with spatial variables, whose scope of application depends on whether the signs are points, lines or area. This branch of cartographic semiotics also includes rules of map graphic design. Semiotic approach is of special significance in the analysis of presentations, because comparison of different means of expression and the way they interact calls for a wider semiotic approach. This approach is especially important in the organization of inter-operational spatial data bases, which requires their comprehensive semantic analysis.

Struktura mapy w ujęciu pragmatycznym

Zarycki T.

Polski Przegląd Kartograficzny

2004

T. 36, nr 2

75-81

Autor rozwija wcześniej zarysowaną próbę reinterpretacji teorii przekazu kartograficznego z punktu widzenia pragmatyki językoznawczej. Porównanie mapy z językiem naturalnym rozszerzone zostaje na obszar wewnętrznej struktury obu form komunikacji.

The article develops a previously outlined attempt to reinterpret the theory of cartographic presentation from the point of view of linguistic pragmatism. A comparison of a map and natural language in deep sense, which corresponds to pragmatic analysis ie extended to include the inner structure of both forms of communication. For this purpose the term of Macrostructure is adapted which describes representations of texts on higher levels of abstraction. Macrostructure is in other words a hierarchy of more and more generalized summaries of the text. Summarizing is compared to map generalization. Macro-operations described by T. van Dijk's theory: deletions, generalizations and constructions used for generating the macrostructure of the text are referred to the process of creation of a generalized map, which represents the macrostructure of the map proper, Reading a map always implies generalization, similar as reading a text implies its summary. Considerations of map macrostructure are also related to a cartographic term of "levels of map reading", and especially S. Bonin's division into "maps to be read" and "maps to be perceived". In the final section of the article it is suggested , that from a theoretical point of view the macrostructure of a map and text can both be subjective in similar way. Their creation can also have an aspect of "acting through maps", i.e. changing social reality rather than only describing it. If so, they would resemble pragmatically described "speech acts".