Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton February 4, 2022

A Lotmanian semiotic interpretation of cultural memory in ritual

  • Cheng Kang and Hongbing Yu EMAIL logo
From the journal Semiotica

Abstract

This paper affords a Lotmanian cultural semiotic analysis of the inner workings of ritual embodying the mechanism of cultural memory. In this intersectional study, we propose treating ritual as an integral semiotic system in which the community follows a prescribed collective process to create religious or social meanings and to regulate the mechanism of cultural memory through concrete symbols in the forms of behavior, speech, gestures, objects, spatial structures, and so on. Three semiotic properties of ritual in relation to cultural memory are identified, namely, continuity, concreteness, and integrity, which are jointly responsible for the efficacy of ritual in cultural memory making, or to be specific, in the preservation, retrieval, and even reproduction of cultural memory. With these properties, ritual helps construct and maintain socio-cultural order and group identity in the community, by repeating itself and thus creating a sense of continuity through the preservation and retrieval of cultural memory. The key components in ritual are its diverse and polysemous symbols, which are seldom confined to a specific context, although they are indeed subject to the dominant symbol and the dominant meaning in a ritual when necessary. With an extraordinary degree of autonomy and not bound to any fixed context, ritual symbols can enter a ritual situation as its components but retain the freedom of leaving the ritual context at any time, like an unchained “spectator,” and permeating multiple contexts as self-contained units. It is precisely through these transferrable ritual symbols that the fragments of cultural memory are randomly dispersed in the semiosphere and carried to unexpected socio-cultural contexts, bridging the past, the present, and the future and creating new cultural memory.


Corresponding author: Hongbing Yu, Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada, E-mail:

Award Identifier / Grant number: 19CYY002

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their deep gratitude towards Marcel Danesi, Paul Cobley, and the three Editors-in-Chief of Semiotica for their insights and comments.

  1. Research funding: The writing of this paper was supported by the Significant National Social Science Fund of China (21&ZD284) and the National Social Science Fund of China (19CYY002).

References

Assmann, Jan. 1992. Semiosis and interpretation in ancient Egyptian ritual. In Shlomo Biderstein & Ben-Ami Scharfstein (eds.), Interpretation in religion, 87–109. Leiden: Brill.Search in Google Scholar

Assmann, Jan. 2008. Communicative and cultural memory. In Astrid Erll & Ansgar Nünning (eds.), Cultural memory studies: An international and interdisciplinary handbook, 109–118. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.10.1007/978-90-481-8945-8_2Search in Google Scholar

Assmann, Jan. 2011 [2007]. Cultural memory and early civilization: Writing, remembrance, and political imagination. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511996306Search in Google Scholar

Brück, Joanna. 1999. Ritual and rationality: Some problems of interpretation in European archaeology. European Journal of Archaeology 2(3). 313–344.10.1179/eja.1999.2.3.313Search in Google Scholar

Durkheim, Émile. 1995. The elementary forms of religious life, Karen E. Fields (trans.). New York: Free Press.Search in Google Scholar

Evans-Pritchard, Edward E. 1956. Nuer religion. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Search in Google Scholar

Gossen, Gary H. 1974. Chamulas in the world of the sun time and space in a Maya oral tradition. Long Grove, IL: Waveland.Search in Google Scholar

Harris, Roy. 2009. Rationality and the literate mind. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203879481Search in Google Scholar

Hanson, F. Allan. 1981. The semiotics of ritual. Semiotica 33(1/2). 169–178.Search in Google Scholar

Kang, Cheng. 2018a. 文化符号学中的“象征” (“Symbol” in cultural semiotics). Foreign Literatures 1. 1–8.Search in Google Scholar

Kang, Cheng. 2018b. 文化记忆的符号学阐释 (A semiotic perspective of cultural memory). Foreign Literatures 4. 11–18.Search in Google Scholar

Kreinath, Jens. 2006. Semiotics. In Jens Kreinath, Jan Snoek & Michael Stausberg (eds.), Theorizing rituals, volume 1: Issues, topics, approaches, concepts, 429–470. Leiden: Brill.10.1163/9789047410775_021Search in Google Scholar

Leone, Massimo. 2011. Rituals and routines: A semiotic inquiry. Chinese Semiotic Studies 5. 107–120. https://doi.org/10.1515/css-2011-0109.Search in Google Scholar

Lindgren, J. Ralph & Jay Knaak (eds.). 1997. Ritual and semiotics. New York: Lang.Search in Google Scholar

Lotman, Ju M. 1977 [1974]. The dynamic model of a semiotic system, Ann Shukman (trans.). Semiotica 21(3/4). 193–210. https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1977.21.3-4.193.Search in Google Scholar

Lotman, Ju M. 1990. Universe of the mind: A semiotic theory of culture, Ann Shukman (trans.). London: I. B. Tauris.Search in Google Scholar

Lotman, Ju M. 2010 [2001]. Семиосфера (Semiosphere). St. Petersburg: Art Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lotman, Ju M. 2019. Culture, memory and history: Essays in cultural semiotics, Marek Tamm (ed.), Brian James Baer (trans.). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1007/978-3-030-14710-5_10Search in Google Scholar

Lotman, Ju M. & Boris A. Uspensky. 1978 [1971]. On the semiotic mechanism of culture, George Mihaychuk (trans.). New Literary History 9(2). 211–232. https://doi.org/10.2307/468571.Search in Google Scholar

Needham, Rodney. 1967. Percussion and transition. Man 2(4). 606–614. https://doi.org/10.2307/2799343.Search in Google Scholar

Ortner, Sherry B. 1978. Sherpas through their rituals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511621796Search in Google Scholar

Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1959. Course in general linguistics. Charles Bally & Albert Séchehaye (eds.), Wade Baskin (trans.). New York: Philosophical Library.Search in Google Scholar

Sebeok, Thomas A. & Marcel Danesi. 2000. The forms of meaning: Modeling systems theory and semiotic analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110816143Search in Google Scholar

Stasch, Rupert. 2011. Ritual and oratory revisited: The semiotics of effective action. Annual Review of Anthropology 40. 159–174. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-081309-145623.Search in Google Scholar

Turner, Victor W. 1964. Symbols in Ndembu ritual. In Max Gluckman (ed.), Closed systems and open minds: The limits of naïvety in social anthropology, 20–51. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd.10.1007/978-1-349-15388-6_8Search in Google Scholar

Turner, Victor. 1967. The forest of symbols: Aspects of Ndembu ritual. London: Cornell University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Turner, Victor W. 1973. Symbol in African ritual. Science 179(4078). 1100–1105. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.179.4078.1100.Search in Google Scholar

Uspenskij, B. A., V. V. Ivanov, V. N. Toporov, A. M. Pjatigorskij & Ju. M. Lotman. 2018 [1973]. Theses on the semiotic study of cultures (as applied to Slavic texts). In Jan van der Eng & Monéir Grygar (eds.), Structure of texts and semiotics of culture, 1–28. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110802962-002Search in Google Scholar

Winter, Jay. 2008. Sites of memory and the shadow of war. In Astrid Erll & Ansgar Nünning (eds.), Cultural memory studies: An international and interdisciplinary handbook, 61–74. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110207262.1.61Search in Google Scholar

Yu, Hongbing. 2013.文化符号学视域中的文化遗忘机制 (The forgetting mechanism of culture in the cultural semiotic view). Russian Literature & Art 3. 84–89. https://doi.org/10.17265/2159-5836/2013.11.006.Search in Google Scholar

Yu, Hongbing. 2019. 文化记忆的符号机制初论 (Preliminary thoughts on the semiotic mechanism of cultural memory). Shandong Foreign Language Teaching 5. 73–82.Search in Google Scholar

Yu, Hongbing. 2020a. 文化记忆与文化遗忘的重新界定 (Redefining cultural memory and cultural oblivion). Russian Literature & Art 1. 133–140.Search in Google Scholar

Yu, Hongbing. 2020b. 文化记忆的符号机制深论 (Further thoughts on the semiotic mechanism of cultural memory). Foreign Literature 3. 173–181.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2019-07-26
Accepted: 2019-08-27
Published Online: 2022-02-04
Published in Print: 2022-03-28

© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 28.3.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/sem-2019-0085/html
Scroll to top button