Abstract
People communicate with each other in and by the signs around them. The sender might intentionally or unintentionally tell lies to the addressee through signs in order to achieve special effects or purposes which are contrary to fact or reality. These signs can thus be termed as sign lies. This interview with Prof. Hongwei Jia addresses the nature, property, classification, boundaries, and application of sign lies so as to improve the concept of sign lies proposed by Umberto Eco. Along with some new achievements in the understanding of sign lies, some problems or difficulties that scholars will confront in the coming years are also put forward.
About the authors
Suojun Zhang (b. 1984) is a PhD candidate at Shinawatra University and a lecturer in the Department of Foreign Languages at Hulunbuir University of China. His research interests are semiotics, translation and linguistics. His major publication include ‘‘Study on the translation of the Chinese character 'Si' based on a bilingual corpus’’ (2016), ‘‘A comparison of translations of Mongolian dish names into Chinese and English’’ (2017), and ‘‘An analysis of the Chinese elements in the cartoon movie Kung Fu Panda from a stylistic perspective’’ (2018).
Hongwei Jia (b. 1977) is an associate professor at Capital Normal University (PRC), executive director of Xu Yuanchong Institute for Translation and Comparative Culture (PRC), and supervisor of Organization Development (Doctoral Program) at Assumption University of Thailand and of Education Management and Semiotics (Doctoral Program) at Shinawatra University of Thailand. Among his research interests are translation semiotics and translation security. His most recent major publications are ‘‘Pragmaticism and translation semiotics’’ (2018) and ‘‘Foundations of the theory of signs: A critique’’ (2019).
Acknowledgements
My thanks go to my colleagues, friends, and even students who helped me in some way or the other in the process of writing, revising and proofreading this article.
References
Eco, Umberto. 1976. A theory of semiotics London: Indiana University Press.10.1007/978-1-349-15849-2Search in Google Scholar
Hartama-Heinonen, Ritva. 2012. Semiotico-translation-theoretical reverberations revisited. Sign Systems Studies 40(3/4). 299–318.10.12697/SSS.2012.3-4.03Search in Google Scholar
Lian, Fu. 1997. The signs around you: An introduction to semiotics Harbin: Heilongjiang People’s Publishing House.Search in Google Scholar
Jiang, Xiaohua. 2003. A semiotic approach to literary translation: With emphasis on motivations underlying literary language. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.Search in Google Scholar
Jia, Hongwei. 2016. Consideration concerning the concept of translation semiotics. Foreign Language Education 37(1). 94–97.Search in Google Scholar
Jia, Hongwei. 2016. A translation-semiotic perspective of Jakobson’s tripartite division of translation. Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages 39(6). 11–18.Search in Google Scholar
Jia, Hongwei. 2017. Roman Jakobson’s triadic division of translation revisited. Chinese Semiotic Studies 13(1). 31－46.10.1515/css-2017-0003Search in Google Scholar
Jia, Hongwei. 2018. On the classification and transformation of signs from the perspective of translation semiotics. Shandong Foreign Language Teaching 39(1). 111–118.Search in Google Scholar
Jiang, Xiaohua. 2004. A semiotic approach to literary translation – with emphasis on motivations underlying literary language Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, C. S. 1878. How to make our ideas clear. Popular Science Monthly 12(3). 286–302.Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, C. S. 1931–1958. Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. 8 vols. C. Hartshorne, P. Weiss & A. W. Burks (eds.). Cambridge, MA.: The Belknap Press, Harvard University Press. (References are to CP followed by volume and paragraph numbers).Search in Google Scholar
Petrilli, Susan. 2005. Translation as the doctrine of inter-genre and trans-genre communication: A semioethic perspective. TTR: traduction, termiologie, redaction 18(1). 221–250.10.7202/014374arSearch in Google Scholar
© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
