Comparative Analysis of Modern Directions and Tendencies of European and Chinese Semiotic Research
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21780022 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Maksym Kryvonis (0000-0003-3255-430X, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Issue | 37 |
| Pages | 129-139 |
| Publication date | 2025-01-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv Literary Studies Linguistics Folklore Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1728-2659 • E-ISSN: 2709-8494 |
| Publisher | Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv (PUBLISHER • UA) |
| DOI | 10.17721/1728-2659.2025.37.22 |
| OpenAlex | W4410237178 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 15 |
Background. The article investigates the directions and tendencies of modern semiotic research conducted by European and Chinese scientists to identify prospects for further semiotic research. The author made a brief historical analysis and highlighted modern tendencies in English and Chinese semiotic research as well as topical directions and trends in European and Chinese semiology and outlined the perspectives of semiotic research. Special attention is paid to the leading scientists of the semiotic field and the spheres of their scientific interests. Methods. In preparing this publication, a descriptive method was used to analyze directions and tendencies. The contrastive explanatory approach was used to single out the standard and distinctive features in the semiotic studies of Europe and China. While comparing the views of scientists, the author outlined modern perspective directions in the field of semiotics. Results. Therefore, after conducting a comparative analysis, the author demonstrated distinctive ethnosemiotic and biosemiotic interests of the researchers in Chinese-language semiotic scientific discourse; common directions of Chinese and European semiotic research include digital semiotics, narrative structures of sense-making and iconicity in social networks, research on reputational discourse, and issues of ecosemiotics. The scientific interests of leading Western and Chinese semiologists were compared with those of Ukrainian researchers, outlining common and distinct research areas. Conclusions. The research has proven the topicality of conducting the ethnosemiotic and linguosemiotic research in the field of interdisciplinary semiotic systems, the study of Chinese and European, in particular Ukrainian linguistic culture, religious studies, works of visual art, verbal and non-verbal iconic signs, and the semiotics of literary and artistic discourses. It may be considered a perspective to conduct the studies of the semiotic features of post-digital education, localization, law, the global influence of social networks, and the study of the functioning of iconic units in diachrony, in particular, in the integration of diachronic and synchronic typology perspectives, supplemented by cognitive-linguistic and cultural aspects
Comparative research · Linguistics · Semiotics · Social science · Sociology · Philosophy · Translation Studies and Practices
Annual Report of Chinese Semiotic Studies
The Challenge of Postdigital Literacy
Unravelling semiotics in 2022
Journals of semiotics in the world
Semiotics 2021
Journals of semiotics in the world revisited – and proposing a new list anno 2023
Fifty volumes of Sign Systems Studies
The fate of semiotics in China
| Highly cited | No |
|---|