Denotation and connotation (1843)

Distinction drawn by the English philosopher John Stuart Mill (1806-1873).

A word denotes the class of entities to which it may be used to refer; it connotes the qualities usually associated with those entities.

See also the non-equivalent distinction sense and reference.

Source:
J Lyons, Semantics (Cambridge, 1977) ch. 7

Connotation

Jump to navigationJump to search

connotation is a commonly understood cultural or emotional association that any given word or phrase carries, in addition to its explicit or literal meaning, which is its denotation.

A connotation is frequently described as either positive or negative, with regard to its pleasing or displeasing emotional connection.[1] For example, a stubborn person may be described as being either strong-willed or pig-headed; although these have the same literal meaning (stubborn), strong-willed connotes admiration for the level of someone’s will (a positive connotation), while pig-headed connotes frustration in dealing with someone (a negative connotation).

Discussion

Drawing from the original word or definition proposed by Saussure (1857-1913), a sign has two parts:

  • as a signifier, i.e. it will have a form that a person can see, touch, smell, and/or hear, and
  • as the signified, i.e. it will represent an idea or mental construct of a thing rather than the thing itself.

To transmit information, both the addresser and the addressee must use the same code, whether in the literal sense, e.g. Morse Code or in the form of a language. The denotative meaning of a signifier is intended to communicate the objective semantic content of the represented thing. So, in the case of a lexical word, say “book”, the intention is to do no more than describe the physical object. Any other meanings or implications will be connotative meanings.

The distinction between denotation and connotation can be made in textual analysis and the existence of dictionaries is used to support the argument that the sign system begins with a simple meaning that is then glossed as new usages are developed. But this argument equally means that no sign can be separated from both its denotational and connotational meanings, and, since the addresser is always using the sign for a particular purpose in a context, no sign can be divorced from the values of the addresser. Louis Hjelmslev (1899-1965) therefore proposes that although the function of signification may be a single process, denotation is the first step, and connotation the second. Roland Barthes (1915-1980) added a third possible step in world view or Weltanschauung in which metacognitive schema such as libertysexualityautonomy, etc. create a framework of reference from which more abstract meanings may be attributed to the signs, depending on the context.

Barthes and others have argued that it is more difficult to make a clear distinction when analysing images. For example, how is one to interpret a photograph? In the real world, a human observer has binocular vision, but the two-dimensional picture must be analysed to determine depth and the relative size of objects depicted by applying rules of perspective, the operation of which can be confused by focus and composition. One view might be that the picture as interpreted is evidence of what it depicts and, since the technology collects and stores data from the real world, the resulting picture is a definition of what the camera was pointed at, and so denotational. Adopting the classification of Charles Sanders Peirce, this would be considered an indexical sign, i.e. there is a direct connection between the signifier and the signified. While it is true that an unedited photograph may be an index, digital technology is eroding the viewer’s confidence that the image is an objective representation of reality. Further, the photographer made conscious decisions about the composition of the image, how to light it, whether to take a close-up or long shot, etc. All of these decisions represent both the intention and the values of the photographer in wishing to preserve this image. This led John Fiske to suggest that, “denotation is what is photographed, connotation is how it is photographed”. Such problems become even more difficult to resolve once the audience knows that the photograph or moving image has been edited or staged. (See also modality)

References

  • Barthes, Roland. Elements of Semiology (trans. Annette Lavers & Colin Smith). London: Jonathan Cape. (1967).
  • Chandler, Daniel. (2001/2007). Semiotics: The Basics. London: Routledge.
  • Fiske, John. Introduction to Communication Studies. London: Routledge. (1982)

Further reading

  • Georgij Yu. Somov, Semiotic systemity of visual artworks: Case study of The Holy Trinity by Rublev. Semiotica 166 (1/4), 1-79, 2007 [1].
  • Somov, Georgij Yu. (2008). “The role of structures in semiotic systems: Analysis of some ideas of Leonardo da Vinci and the portrait Lady with an Ermine”

5 thoughts on “Denotation and connotation (1843)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.