ABSTRACT Over the past few decades, numerous prominent authors in various spheres of design discourse have discussed the rhetorical potency of type “icons” and how they come to embody cultural connotation. As icons, typefaces offer a universal language system—an expansive visual vocabulary that immediately references what we already know of their context. Iconic typefaces and their letterforms are subject to a process of narrative interpretation where what we “already know of them” is in a constant process of resignification. Here, critics tend to follow a Barthesian view that, as mythic structures, letterforms’ narratives are continuously used and reused as signification in different contexts. This widely regarded view presumes that iconic meaning develops as a chain of signification, where one narrative builds onto the next. This, however, leaves little explanation for instances where symbolism embedded in iconic typefaces develops in unexpected ways. In this article, I therefore investigate and unpack other means by which iconic typefaces evolve rhetorical meaning. By referring to examples throughout, I explore typical perspectives on iconic type in the Barthesian sense, but also trace different processes of signification. In doing so, I aim to offer alternative insights into ideological type as a more fluid rhetorical entity.

中文翻译：

---

类型转换？对标志性类型修辞流动性的洞察

摘要在过去的几十年里，设计领域各个领域的众多杰出作家都讨论了类型“图标”的修辞效力以及它们如何体现文化内涵。作为图标，字体提供了一个通用的语言系统——一个广泛的视觉词汇，可以立即引用我们已经知道的上下文。标志性字体及其字母形式要经过叙事解释的过程，在这个过程中，我们“已经知道的”处于不断的重新定义过程中。在这里，批评家倾向于遵循巴特的观点，即作为神话结构，字形的叙事在不同的语境中被不断地用作和重用作为意义。这种被广泛接受的观点假定标志性意义是作为一个意义链发展起来的，其中一个叙述建立在下一个叙述之上。然而，这 对于嵌入在标志性字体中的象征意义以意想不到的方式发展的情况，几乎没有任何解释。因此，在本文中，我调查并解开标志性字体演变修辞意义的其他方式。通过自始至终参考例子，我探索了巴尔特意义上的标志性类型的典型观点，但也追踪了不同的意义过程。在这样做的过程中，我的目标是提供对意识形态类型的替代见解，作为一种更流畅的修辞实体。但也追踪不同的意义过程。在这样做的过程中，我的目标是提供对意识形态类型的替代见解，作为一种更流畅的修辞实体。但也追踪不同的意义过程。在这样做的过程中，我的目标是提供对意识形态类型的替代见解，作为一种更流畅的修辞实体。