This document proposes a new discipline called "notational engineering" within the field of semiotics. It discusses how the scope of semiotic studies has expanded over time to include any patterned communication system. Notational systems are described as having distinctive features and mapping abstraction spaces. The document argues that a systematic study of notational systems, their development, strengths, limitations, and applications could lead to breakthroughs in representing complex ideas and solving problems. It outlines the goals and next steps for establishing notational engineering as a new cross-disciplinary field.

1. Cover Page
Notation Engineering:
A Proposed New Discipline
in Semiotics
Author: Jeffrey G. Long (jefflong@aol.com)
Date: October 25, 1997
Forum: Talk presented at the at the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Semiotic Society
of America.
Contents
Pages 1‐15: Slides (but no text) for presentation
License
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial
3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by‐nc/3.0/ or send a letter to Creative
Commons, 444 Castro Street, Suite 900, Mountain View, California, 94041, USA.
Uploaded June 22, 2011

2. Notational Engineering:
A Proposed New Discipline in Semiotics
Jeffrey G. Long
GWU Notational Engineering Laboratory
Copyright 1997 © Jeffrey G. Long

3. Objectives
Obj ti
 Discuss the evolving scope of semiotic studies
 Describe the distinctive features of notational
systems
 Propose a ‘notational turn’ in semiotics
 Describe the goals of notational engineering

4. The E l i S
Th Evolving Scope of Semiotic Studies
f S i ti St di
 1880’s: modern origins in Peirce and Saussure
 1940’s: applications in other social sciences
– anthropology (Levi-Strauss)
– literary criticism (Barthes)
– psychoanalysis (Lacan)
h l i (L )
 1960’s: any patterned communication systems
– not only human or animal but cellular also
– synchronic rather than evolutionary focus
– unit rather than comparative focus

5. Four G
F General Ki d of Si S t
l Kinds f Sign System

6. Examples of Notational Systems
E l f N t ti l S t

7. We Have Many Mistaken Assumptions
y p
About Notational Systems
 NS are sets of written marks, e.g. , , , ,  a,
,
b, c, 1, 2, 3...
NNotation is merely abbreviation, a minor
i i l bb i i i
communication convenience
 N t ti is i id t l t perception
Notation i incidental to ti
 “H2O” is a simple notation, as is “$3.50” or
“hello”
hello

8. Notational Engineering
g g
Involves Four Main Areas

9. Notational S t
N t ti l Systems Have Five Levels
H Fi L l

10. Notational S t
N t ti l Systems Map A-Spaces
M AS
 Each NS maps a different abstraction space
– Possible Identity, Group, Relation, Form , Quantity,
State, etc
State etc.
 A revolutionary NS arises from the discovery or
substantial extension of an abstraction space
 A useful notational system says something about
the nature of reality and the nature of cognition
 New media are critical to the degree they permit
new or improved tokenization
p

11. We Have So Far Settled Maybe
y
12 of 20 Major A-Spaces

12. Like Any Tool, Every Notation Has
y , y
Both Strengths and Limitations
 We don’t go sailing in automobiles; we shouldn’t
(e.g.) use English for complex rules
 U i the wrong, or too-limited, a NS is
Using h li i d i
inescapably self-defeating
CComplexity is a euphemism for perplexity
l it i h i f l it
– Many if not most problems today are fundamentally
representational in character
– They cannot be solved by working harder or using
faster computers
– We need fundamentally new abstractions (e.g. for rules)

13. But There is No Systematic Approach
y pp
to Notational Development
 We take what we have for granted; it is the cognitive
sea we swim in
NNew NS are hihistorically treated with derision
i ll d ihd i i
 NS are ad hoc, often developed over hundreds of
years
 There is no underlying theory of NS-as-maps
 Th
There is no test bed, approval process, or standards
i b d l d d
body for abstractions

14. Proposed ‘N t ti l Turn’ in Semiotics
P d ‘Notational T ’ i S i ti
Existence Communications

15. We Need A New Discipline of
p
Notational Engineering
 Cross-notational
 Cross-cultural
 Longitudinal, i.e. “historically” based
 Seeking explanatory hypotheses subject to
experimental verification
 Philosophically well-grounded and defensible
 Revolutionary new NS could be better
constructed, tested and utilized

16. Next Steps
N t St
 Clearinghouse for people, facts, theories,
references, methodologies
 F di for both basic and applied research
Funding f b h b i d li d h
– government
– foundations
– businesses
 Demonstration projects that make a real difference