Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Abstract

Terrorism is a notoriously plastic word, depending on user, audience, and political context. This paper focuses on shifts in its meanings since the early 1970s. As federal statutes made terrorism a criminal offense, common usage changed from a broad meaning to one that specified terrorism as a political crime. The argument is that the state shapes meaning and public discourse through law. Peircean semiotics and the semiotic philosophy of Russian linguist Vološinov provide a framework to explore relationships among politics, law, and civil life. Applied to the events of September 11, 2001 such an analysis further allows better understanding of certain interpreters of the September 11 attacks, notably Jean Baudrillard, Jacques Derrida, and Jürgen Habermas.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Geoffrey R. Skoll.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Skoll, G.R. Meanings of terrorism. Int J Semiot Law 20, 107–127 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-006-9038-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-006-9038-5

Keywords

Navigation