Zeichentheorie und BWL : Zur Anwendung semiotischer Erkentnisse im wirtschaftlichen Diskurs

Semiotics is hardly known in German business literature and management practice, despite the fact that its methodological approaches to discourse analysis have already been broadly absorbed by management theory in France and the United States. The present contribution points out why the general echo of semiotic theory and its numerous applications to business administration has remained limited so far, especially when compared with its potential for describing and explaining management problems. It is important, then, to show what the object of semiotic research is, independent of any semiotic orientation or school. What tools have been developed so far, and which discourses in business administration were chosen to apply these tools? The problems limiting a broader use of semiotic instruments in business administration are explained in detail, and the research perspectives are illustrated. Die in der deutschsprachigen Betriebswirtschaftslehre (BWL) noch wenig bekannte Semiotik und die in ihrem Rahmen entwickelten methodologischen Ansätze zur Analyse von Diskursen haben insbesondere in Frankreich und in den USA schon eine weite Verbreitung gefunden. Das Echo, auf welches die Semiotik trifft, bleibt im Vergleich zum Beitrag, den sie hinsichtlich der Beschreibung und Erklärung betriebswirtschaftlicher Tatbestände leisten könnte, noch sehr beschränkt - und dies, obwohl ihre grundsätzliche wissenschaftliche Leistungsfähigkeit inzwischen an Hand zahlreicher Beispiele aus dem betriebswirtschaftlichen Bereich belegt werden konnte. Es ist deshalb wichtig und interessant zu zeigen, was der Forschungsgegenstand der Semiotik ist - und zwar unabhängig von den verschiedenen Schulen der Semiotik. Welche Instrumente hat sie entwickelt? Auf welche betriebswirtschaftlichen Diskurse sind diese Instrumente bereits angewandt worden? Zum Schluss werden die Probleme dargestellt, die einen breiteren Einsatz semiotischer Instrumente in der Betriebswirtschaftslehre behindern und dabei auch die verschiedenen Forschungsrichtungen erläutert.

Lire l'oral : pour une typologie linguistique des représentations écrites de l'oralité (le cas du français)

Cette thèse propose de passer en revue les modalités de la représentation écrite de l'oralité en français. La pratique littéraire constitue le matériau et l'horizon de la théorisation. La problématique - comment l'écrit représente-t-il l'oral ? - est d'abord située et reformulée dans le cadre de la linguistique de la parole (I). Les rapports entre oralité et scripturalité sont ensuite étudiés sous trois angles. L'angle biotechnologique compare la matérialité et l'affordance des signaux graphiques et des signaux acoustiques (II 1). L'examen sémiotique reconnaît dans le français écrit un système dit phonographique dont la fonction est de représenter l'expression des signes du français oral. Sont analysées alors les relations entre les systèmes de signes impliqués, la diversité des actualisations possibles du système phonographique (effets d'écoute), ainsi que diverses sémiotiques analogiques (II 2). On étudie ensuite le rôle de la prosodie dans la lecture. La position adoptée est la suivante : bien qu'elle soit facultative dans l'activité de lecture, la prosodie est spécialement sollicitée par des écrits qu'on peut caractériser linguistiquement. L'interprétation prosodique apporte à ces écrits un surcroît de signification en même temps qu'il produit un mode spécifique de représentation de l'oral appelé effet prosodique (II 3). L'angle sémantique est esquissé finalement : il conduit à dégager deux modalités de représentation supplémentaire. Pour la première, l'oral se situe sur le plan sémantico-référentiel de l'expression écrite (écrire à propos d'oral) ; pour la seconde, l'oral est un extérieur discursif modalisant le dire écrit : l'écrit est reconnu comme énoncé à la manière de l'oral (effet de style oral). - This PhD thesis attempts to review the modalities of orality in written representation. Literary writings act as the material for theorization. First of all, the thesis statement - how does writing represent oral - is situated and then, reformulated within the frame of linguistique de la parole (the linguistic field of speech) (I). The connections between orality and writing are then studied under three angles. The biotechnological angle compares the materiality and the affordance of graphic signs and acoustic signals (II 1). A semiotic examination acknowledges, in French, a phonographical system whose function is to represent the expression of French oral signs. Thus, the relationships between the systems of implicated signs, the diversity of possible actualisations of the phonographic system (voice effects), as well as various analogical semiotics are analysed (II 2). Furthermore, the role of prosody is studied within reading. The stand taken is the following : even though it is optional during a reading activity, prosody is especially sought-after by linguistically characterised writings. The prosodie interpretation brings to these writings a surge of signification while producing a specific mode of oral representation called the prosodie effects (II 3). The semantic angle is finally drawn : it leads to two additional modalities of representation. For the first part, speech is located on the semantic and referential plan of the written expression (writing about speech); as for the second part, spoken language is a discursive exteriority : writing is recognised as an oral-like utterance {oral-like effect).

The establishment of communication systems depends on the scale of competition

How communication systems emerge and remain stable is an important question in both cognitive science and evolutionary biology. For communication to arise, not only must individuals cooperate by signaling reliable information, but they must also coordinate and perpetuate signals. Most studies on the emergence of communication in humans typically consider scenarios where individuals implicitly share the same interests. Likewise, most studies on human cooperation consider scenarios where shared conventions of signals and meanings cannot be developed de novo. Here, we combined both approaches with an economic experiment where participants could develop a common language, but under different conditions fostering or hindering cooperation. Participants endeavored to acquire a resource through a learning task in a computer-based environment. After this task, participants had the option to transmit a signal (a color) to a fellow group member, who would subsequently play the same learning task. We varied the way participants competed with each other (either global scale or local scale) and the cost of transmitting a signal (either costly or noncostly) and tracked the way in which signals were used as communication among players. Under global competition, players signaled more often and more consistently, scored higher individual payoffs, and established shared associations of signals and meanings. In addition, costly signals were also more likely to be used under global competition; whereas under local competition, fewer signals were sent and no effective communication system was developed. Our results demonstrate that communication involves both a coordination and a cooperative dilemma and show the importance of studying language evolution under different conditions influencing human cooperation.