GHASSAN ALSERAYHI
 MSc. Arch, M. Arch, B. Arch, Assoc. SCE

ARCHITECT + EDUCATOR + RESEARCHER

The Urban Canvas and Architecture as Mediated Language
Exploring the Conduits of Semiotics in Urban Structures from the 20th Century


  Numerous theories today address the creation and interpretation of architecture. These theories are deeply rooted in the humanities. In the realm of art, linguistic studies have found their niche, with semiotics emerging as a linguistic offshoot for critiquing and interpreting art during the 1970s. Architecture, seen as a textual entity, conveys a myriad of design concepts and principles to its audience, containing its own language to communicate. From the dawn of architectural evolution, elements such as religious beliefs, myths, nature, and various forms, symbols, and representations have been integral, each embodying distinct notions. Over the past thirty years, architectural expressions have undergone significant transformations, influenced not only by evolving human perspectives on art and architecture but also by technological advancements. Each artistic creation can be seen as a textual entity, encapsulating a tapestry of values, beliefs, and traditions reflective of society. As Daniel Chandler (2009) posited, any independent communicative text consists of signs crafted by its creator, which the audience then deciphers based on societal norms and mediated connections. Any textual creation, like architecture, results from the interplay of the creator's ideas, values, expertise, and environment. Consequently, the audience engages with and interprets this text through their own cognitive frameworks. Semiotics, as a discipline, seeks to unearth the implicit ideas woven within artistic expressions, including architecture. This reading is guided by methodologies and theories specific to architectural semiotics.

The study of architecture is increasingly being viewed in terms of its parallels with language systems. Ferdinand de Saussure (1997) was among the pioneers in drawing comparisons between urban layout and linguistic structures. Delving into this analogy, elements such as syntax, morphology, pragmatics, and sign arrangements emerge. Discussions have taken place about architectural dialects, individual styles, and even sociolects unique to architectural expressions. In contemporary architecture, the issue of understanding "language barriers" has become more pronounced. The structuralist aspects of language are used to differentiate between syntagmatic and paradigmatic levels of meaning. While the historical and cultural relevance of a structure is undoubtedly crucial – forming the foundation for classifying a structure as an architectural monument – the manner in which an architectural piece influences human actions is equally significant. The behavioral approach to architectural semiotics, rooted in Edward Hall's (1966) concept of proxemics, examines how individuals perceive, become aware of, and act within social spaces. However, the meaning behind proxemic signs, as opposed to those identified in the behavioral model, remains relatively unexplored. This opens up the possibility of distinguishing distant meanings that categorize spaces as either comfortable or challenging for exploration.

Drawing parallels with linguistic functions has given rise to the functional model, as described by Roman Jakobson in 1958. The application of linguistic semiotic techniques to architecture, as mentioned by Herman in 1982, spurred significant debate among art theorists, practicing architects, and even linguists. Umberto Eco (1980) also contributed to this discussion by distinguishing between seme, sign, and figure within architectural symbols. Postmodernist dialogue, as indicated by thinkers like Peter Eisenman (2003) and Mark Wigley (1995), underscores the vast communicative potential in architecture, introducing concepts like quotations, allusions, and reminiscences. Recent explorations in cultural studies have shown a keen interest in uncovering the ontological underpinnings of art, perceived as a distinct information system brimming with a rich structure of imagery. The Russian art critique holds the perspective that the purpose of artistic endeavors is to produce an imagery system using unique tools that encapsulate the essence of the artwork.

Contemporary architecture often displays a discord between its expressive intent and how it's perceived by the public. Innovative designs frequently challenge societal norms, becoming "marvels" that captivate tourists with their distinctiveness. Postmodernist thinkers have unearthed vast discursive potential in architectural archetypes, symbolism, and contextual references. Consequently, modern architectural works propose unique frameworks for interpretation. This could explain why many modern structures come across as lacking coherence or seeming eclectic. Traditional architectural language, which is notably absent from standard curricula, classified structures based on their significance, purpose, and design elements, such as height, solidity, columns, broad window designs, and material preferences like stone over wood or vice versa. However, evolving views on sustainability, advancements in construction materials and methods, and the transformative roles of social institutions have fundamentally altered our spatial perceptions.

Architectural semiotics views buildings as sign systems, bifurcated into two components: (a) denotation and (b) connotation. The primary or fundamental functions of structures are labeled as denotations, whereas their secondary roles are termed connotations. This results in the formation of both primary and secondary interpretations. The primary meaning stems from the initial intention of the architect or planner, while the secondary understanding emerges post-construction and is not a direct result of the architect's planning. The inception of architectural semiotics can be attributed to Ferdinand de Saussure's exploration of sign systems that eventually positioned him within the scientific domain. He split his theory into two dominant segments: the signifier and the signified. Charles Jenks elaborated on these concepts using the Odgen-Richards triangle (1923), coining it the triangle of architectural semiotics. Jenks introduced the term "actual function" to describe the genuine purposes and meanings represented. This triangle also delineates the interplay among three elements: the signifier, representing the tangible form of the architecture; the signified, embodying the conceptual thought behind the architecture; and the actual function, denoting the conveyed meaning. The interactions among these components can manifest as an index, an icon, or a symbol, and the triangular relationship aids in discerning the nature of the resulting sign.

Semiotics delves into the realm of signs, symbols, and their processes, focusing on how meaning is constructed and interpreted (Chandler, 2007). Charles Ogden and Ivor Richards proposed the semantic triangle in 1989, encompassing symbol, reference, and referent. In contrast, Charles Pierce categorized signs into three distinct classes: icon, index, and symbol. From an architectural perspective, the icon represents the structure's tangible form, the index showcases its significance, and the symbol embodies its associated ideas or concepts. A structure's iconic representation is intrinsically tied to its physical appearance and purpose. The indexical nature emerges from the structure's historical, geographical, and cultural placement. Lastly, its symbolic nature emanates from the abstract ideas it seeks to convey, representing societal values, principles, or beliefs. The entire process of architectural semiotics becomes crucial for both the architect and the viewer. While the architect designs with certain ideas in mind, seeking to convey specific messages or emotions, the viewer deciphers the space based on their background, experiences, and societal frameworks. This dynamic interplay results in multifaceted interpretations, with each viewer extracting unique insights from a single piece of architecture. Literature Review

Researchers have long sought to understand local human identities through their language and linguistic attributes, and this endeavor has deep implications. In certain contexts, "language" encapsulates the core essence of communities. In others, the intricate relationship among "language," "thought," and "truth" is probed. Scholars, including have explored the intersections between linguistics and specific societal events that shape human interactions with their environment. The field of linguistics experienced a paradigm shift with the advent of thinkers like Noam Chomsky, who introduced the concept of generative grammar. Chomsky postulated that the foundation of language is an intrinsic human attribute present from birth, and he approached language from a logical standpoint. The 1970s marked a pivotal moment in linguistics with the rise of discourse semantics, firmly grounded in sociological studies, and placing a heightened emphasis on the cultural contexts accompanying language. Within this framework, context is accentuated as being paramount to semantics, where a sentence is seen as a contingent entity, best understood within its broader textual environment.

Contemporary linguists, as mentioned by Richard Hudson in "Sociolinguistics," have embarked on journeys to unravel the essence and semantics of language. With the interweaving of linguistic principles into various disciplines, a pressing question arises: "Can architecture, similar to language, be viewed as a product of internal linguistic agreements and associations?" The works "Semiotics and Architecture" by Diana Agrest and Mario Gandelsonas (1995) contend that architecture does not possess an inherent meaning. Instead, it is molded by societal and cultural conventions that attribute significance. Symbols, in this realm, are not isolated constructs but are deeply entwined with their context. Thus, architectural semiotics is not merely a linear domain defined by the creator's intention and objective. Esteemed semioticians, such as Roland Barthes and Umberto Eco, argue within the sphere of architectural semiotics that architecture is layered textually and is intrinsically intertwined with its socio-cultural milieu. Architecture Reading Between Structuralism and Post-Structuralism Semiotics

In architectural studies, structuralist semiotics delves into the relationship between a space's symbolic elements and the fundamental structures that underpin it. Through this lens, a building is perceived as a textual entity, decipherable primarily through its inherent structure and the linguistic norms shaping it. Each architectural feature serves as a symbol, making sense only within the larger linguistic system in which it is situated. Thus, architectural designs emerge as an intricate tapestry of symbols. Every symbol functions on dual levels: the signifier (its physical representation) and the signified (its embedded meaning or concept). Saussure posited that individual architectural elements converge to create a coherent whole, drawing on adjacent elements for context. Here, the signifier relates to the design's physical framework, while the signified taps into its deeper ideological roots. The interaction between a design's form and its fundamental essence becomes paramount.

Peirce argued that the bond between the signifier (elements, form, and other representational facets) and the signified (the undercurrents of ideas, meanings, and values) is deeply rooted in the cultural foundation of the architectural piece. Symbols, therefore, are interpreted against the backdrop of cultural and societal dynamics. As articulated by Jonathan Culler, “Semiotics treats cultural entities and actions as symbolic, seeking to unveil the norms, both overt and implicit, that culture members use to ascribe meaning.” Barthes suggested that architecture becomes a medium reflecting subtle cultural intricacies. The structuralist lens prompts one to match architectural symbols with specific meanings in scholarly dialogue, often pointing towards a singular interpretation and sidelining the potential for diverse understandings. To unearth architecture's more nuanced layers, a post-structuralist stance is invaluable. Post-structuralism in architectural semiotics emphasizes elements that defy singular interpretations. It critically assesses traditionally held beliefs, hinting that they may not be as clear-cut as previously thought. Derrida, conversing with Julia Kristeva, underscored the significance of notions like signs and structures. He championed the evolution of these ideas, urging their recontextualization, challenging their foundational premises, and thereby fostering novel insights. Derrida advocated a deeper exploration of signs to truly grasp diverse phenomena.

For a holistic grasp of architectural designs, one must account for its aesthetic, semantic, and functional dimensions specific to its setting. While a designer molds architectural narratives based on societal cues and trends, audiences decode these narratives through multiple prisms: functional, economic, aesthetic, socio-cultural, and hermeneutic. Within the hermeneutic dimension, designs are interpreted based on both overt and covert signals, as well as the depth of comprehension. These interpretations consist of layered meanings, moving seamlessly from one to the next. In such a dynamic landscape, architectural design interpretation becomes an interplay of deriving meanings from adjacent contexts, often leading to deferred understandings. Meaning, in this paradigm, is perpetually elusive, continually evading the audience and urging them to deepen their quest for clarity. As a consequence, the meaning ascribed to any design symbol frequently underscores what the symbol isn't, paving the way for the art of deconstruction.





Bibliography
  1. Chandler, Daniel. "Semiotics: The Basics." 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2009.
  2. de Saussure, Ferdinand. "Course in General Linguistics." Translated by Wade Baskin. Edited by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1997.
  3. Hall, Edward T. "The Hidden Dimension." New York: Doubleday, 1966.
  4. Jakobson, Roman. "Linguistics and Poetics." In "Style in Language," edited by Thomas A. Sebeok, 350-377. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1958.
  5. Herman, Luc. "Architectural Semiotics." Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1982.
  6. Eco, Umberto. "The Role of the Reader: Explorations in the Semiotics of Texts." Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1980.
  7. Eisenman, Peter. "Blurred Zones: Investigations of the Interstitial: Eisenman Architects 1988-1998." New York: Monacelli Press, 2003.
  8. Wigley, Mark. "The Architecture of Deconstruction: Derrida's Haunt." Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995.
  9. Jencks, Charles. "The Language of Post-Modern Architecture." 6th ed. New York: Rizzoli, 1991.
  10. Ogden, C.K., and I.A. Richards. "The Meaning of Meaning: A Study of the Influence of Language upon Thought and of the Science of Symbolism." New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1923.
  11. Chomsky, Noam. "Syntactic Structures." 2nd ed. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1971.
  12. Hudson, Richard A. "Sociolinguistics." 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
  13. Agrest, Diana, and Mario Gandelsonas. "Semiotics and Architecture." In "The Sex of Architecture," edited by Diana Agrest, Patricia Conway, and Leslie Kanes Weisman, 57-71. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1995.
  14. Barthes, Roland. "Elements of Semiology." Translated by Annette Lavers and Colin Smith. New York: Hill and Wang, 1967.
  15. Kristeva, Julia. "Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art." Translated by Thomas Gora, Alice Jardine, and Leon S. Roudiez. New York: Columbia University Press, 1980.
  16. Derrida, Jacques. "Of Grammatology." Translated by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997.