Ideogram: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Citation bot Removed parameters. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | #UCB_CommandLine |
imported>W.andrea |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Symbol that represents an idea or concept}} | {{Short description|Symbol that represents an idea or concept}} | ||
{{about||the image generator|Ideogram (text-to-image model)|the sculpture by James Rosati|Ideogram (sculpture)}} | {{about||the image generator|Ideogram (text-to-image model)|the sculpture by James Rosati|Ideogram (sculpture)}} | ||
{{Redirect2|Ideograph|Ideography|the rhetorical device|Ideograph (rhetoric)|ideographic dictionaries|Conceptual dictionary}} | {{Redirect2|Ideograph|Ideography|the rhetorical device|Ideograph (rhetoric)|ideographic dictionaries|Conceptual dictionary}} | ||
{{pp|small=yes}} | {{pp|small=yes}} | ||
{{Use Oxford English|date=March 2024}} | |||
An '''ideogram''' or '''ideograph''' (from [[Ancient Greek|Greek]] {{tlit|grc|idéa}} | An '''ideogram''' or '''ideograph''' (from [[Ancient Greek|Greek]] {{tlit|grc|idéa}} {{gloss|idea}} + {{tlit|grc|gráphō}} {{gloss|to write}}) is a [[symbol]] that is used within a given [[writing system]] to represent an [[idea]] or concept in a given language.<ref>{{cite dictionary |last=Hornby |first=Albert Sydney |title=Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English |editor-last=Cowie |editor-first=Anthony Paul |dictionary=Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary |date=1989 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=0-19-431136-8 |page=616 |entry=ideograph}}</ref> (Ideograms are contrasted with [[phonogram (linguistics)|phonogram]]s, which indicate sounds of speech and thus are independent of any particular language.{{sfnp|Robertson|2004|pp=25–27, 38}}) Some ideograms are more arbitrary than others: some are only meaningful assuming preexisting familiarity with some convention; others more directly resemble their [[signified]]s. Ideograms that represent physical objects by visually illustrating them are called ''[[pictogram]]s''.{{sfnp|Robertson|2004|pp=25–27}}<ref name="EBpictography">{{Britannica|459568|pictography}}</ref> | ||
* [[Numeral system|Numerals]] and [[List of mathematical symbols|mathematical symbols]] are ideograms, for example ⟨1⟩ 'one', ⟨2⟩ 'two', ⟨+⟩ 'plus', and ⟨=⟩ 'equals'. | * [[Numeral system|Numerals]] and [[List of mathematical symbols|mathematical symbols]] are ideograms, for example ⟨1⟩ 'one', ⟨2⟩ 'two', ⟨+⟩ 'plus', and ⟨=⟩ 'equals'. | ||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
=== Pictograms and indicatives === | === Pictograms and indicatives === | ||
''[[Pictogram]]s'', depending on the definition, are ideograms that represent an idea either through a direct [[iconicity|iconic]] resemblance to what is being referenced,{{sfnp|Robertson|2004|pp=25–27}} or otherwise more broadly visually represent or illustrate it.<ref name="EBpictography" /> In [[proto-writing]] systems, pictograms generally comprised most of the available symbols. Their use could also be extended via the [[rebus]] | ''[[Pictogram]]s'', depending on the definition, are ideograms that represent an idea either through a direct [[iconicity|iconic]] resemblance to what is being referenced,{{sfnp|Robertson|2004|pp=25–27}} or otherwise more broadly visually represent or illustrate it.<ref name="EBpictography" /> In [[proto-writing]] systems, pictograms generally comprised most of the available symbols. Their use could also be extended via the [[rebus principle]]: for example, the pictorial [[Dongba symbols]] without [[Geba syllabary|Geba]] annotation cannot represent the [[Naxi language]], but are used as a [[mnemonic]] for the recitation of oral literature. Some systems also use ''indicatives'', which denote abstract concepts. Sometimes, the word ''ideogram'' is used to refer exclusively to indicatives, contrasting them with pictograms.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Ramsey |first=S. Robert |author-link=S. Robert Ramsey |title=The Languages of China |publisher=Princeton University Press |year=1987 |isbn=978-0-691-01468-5 |page=266}}</ref> | ||
[[File:Naxi manuscript (right) 2088.jpg|thumb|[[Dongba symbols]], used by the [[Nakhi people]] as a mnemonic in reciting oral literature]] | [[File:Naxi manuscript (right) 2088.jpg|thumb|[[Dongba symbols]], used by the [[Nakhi people]] as a mnemonic in reciting oral literature]] | ||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
As true [[writing system]]s emerged from systems of pure ideograms, later societies with phonetic writing were often compelled by the intuitive connection between pictures, diagrams and [[logogram]]s—though ultimately ignorant of the latter's necessary phonetic dimension. Greek speakers began regularly visiting Egypt during the 7th century BC.{{sfnp|Westerfeld|2019|p=23}} [[Ancient Greek]] writers generally mistook the Egyptian writing system to be purely ideographic. According to tradition, the Greeks had acquired the ability to write, among other things, from the Egyptians through [[Pythagoras]] ({{circa|570|495 BC}}), who had been directly taught their silent form of "symbolic teaching".{{sfnp|O'Neill|2016|pp=43–45}} Beginning with [[Plato]] (428–347 BC), the conception of hieroglyphs as ideograms was rooted in a broader [[Philosophical language|philosophical]] conception of most language as an imperfect and obfuscatory image of reality. The [[views of Plato]] involved an [[ontologically]] separate [[world of forms]], but those of his student [[Aristotle]] (384–322 BC) instead saw the forms as abstracts, identical in the mind of every person.{{sfnp|O'Neill|2016|pp=32–34}} For both, ideography was a more perfect representation of the forms possessed by the Egyptians. The Aristotelian framework would be the foundation for the conception of language in the Mediterranean world into the medieval era.{{sfnmp|Westerfeld|2019|1p=18|O'Neill|2016|2pp=18–20}} | As true [[writing system]]s emerged from systems of pure ideograms, later societies with phonetic writing were often compelled by the intuitive connection between pictures, diagrams and [[logogram]]s—though ultimately ignorant of the latter's necessary phonetic dimension. Greek speakers began regularly visiting Egypt during the 7th century BC.{{sfnp|Westerfeld|2019|p=23}} [[Ancient Greek]] writers generally mistook the Egyptian writing system to be purely ideographic. According to tradition, the Greeks had acquired the ability to write, among other things, from the Egyptians through [[Pythagoras]] ({{circa|570|495 BC}}), who had been directly taught their silent form of "symbolic teaching".{{sfnp|O'Neill|2016|pp=43–45}} Beginning with [[Plato]] (428–347 BC), the conception of hieroglyphs as ideograms was rooted in a broader [[Philosophical language|philosophical]] conception of most language as an imperfect and obfuscatory image of reality. The [[views of Plato]] involved an [[ontologically]] separate [[world of forms]], but those of his student [[Aristotle]] (384–322 BC) instead saw the forms as abstracts, identical in the mind of every person.{{sfnp|O'Neill|2016|pp=32–34}} For both, ideography was a more perfect representation of the forms possessed by the Egyptians. The Aristotelian framework would be the foundation for the conception of language in the Mediterranean world into the medieval era.{{sfnmp|Westerfeld|2019|1p=18|O'Neill|2016|2pp=18–20}} | ||
According to the classical theory, because ideographs directly reflected the forms, they were the only "true language",{{sfnp|O'Neill|2016|pp=38–40}} and had the unique ability to communicate arcane wisdom to readers.{{sfnp|O'Neill|2016|pp=18–20, 32–34, 46–50}} The ability to read Egyptian hieroglyphs had been lost during late antiquity, in the context of the country's Hellenization and Christianization. However, the traditional notion that the latter trends compelled the abandonment of hieroglyphic writing has been rejected by recent scholarship.{{sfnp|Westerfeld|2019|p=32}}<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Houston |first1=Stephen |last2=Baines |first2=John |last3=Cooper |first3=Jerrold |title=Last Writing: Script Obsolescence in Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Mesoamerica |journal=Comparative Studies in Society and History |publisher=Cambridge University Press |volume=45 |issue=3 |year=2003 |issn=0010-4175 |jstor=3879458 |pages=441–444 |doi=10.1017/S0010417503000227 }}</ref> | According to the classical theory, because ideographs directly reflected the forms, they were the only "true language",{{sfnp|O'Neill|2016|pp=38–40}} and had the unique ability to communicate arcane wisdom to readers.{{sfnp|O'Neill|2016|pp=18–20, 32–34, 46–50}} The ability to read Egyptian hieroglyphs had been lost during late antiquity, in the context of the country's Hellenization and Christianization. However, the traditional notion that the latter trends compelled the abandonment of hieroglyphic writing has been rejected{{Why|date=October 2025}} by recent{{When|date=October 2025}} scholarship.{{sfnp|Westerfeld|2019|p=32}}<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Houston |first1=Stephen |last2=Baines |first2=John |last3=Cooper |first3=Jerrold |title=Last Writing: Script Obsolescence in Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Mesoamerica |journal=Comparative Studies in Society and History |publisher=Cambridge University Press |volume=45 |issue=3 |year=2003 |issn=0010-4175 |jstor=3879458 |pages=441–444 |doi=10.1017/S0010417503000227 }}</ref> | ||
Europe only became fully acquainted with [[written Chinese]] near the end of the 16th century, and initially related the system to their existing framework of ideography as partially informed by Egyptian hieroglyphs.{{sfnp|O'Neill|2016|p=1}} Ultimately, [[Jean-François Champollion]]'s successful [[decipherment of ancient Egyptian scripts|decipherment of hieroglyphs]] in 1823 stemmed from an understanding that they did represent spoken [[Egyptian language]], as opposed to being purely ideographic. Champollion's insight in part stemmed from his familiarity with the work of French sinologist [[Jean-Pierre Abel-Rémusat]] regarding ''[[fanqie]]'', which demonstrated that Chinese characters were often used to write sounds, and not just ideas.{{sfnp|O'Neill|2016|pp=5–6}} | Europe only became fully acquainted with [[written Chinese]] near the end of the 16th century, and initially related the system to their existing framework of ideography as partially informed by Egyptian hieroglyphs.{{sfnp|O'Neill|2016|p=1}} Ultimately, [[Jean-François Champollion]]'s successful [[decipherment of ancient Egyptian scripts|decipherment of hieroglyphs]] in 1823 stemmed from an understanding that they did represent spoken [[Egyptian language]], as opposed to being purely ideographic. Champollion's insight in part stemmed from his familiarity with the work of French sinologist [[Jean-Pierre Abel-Rémusat]] regarding ''[[fanqie]]'', which demonstrated that Chinese characters were often used to write sounds, and not just ideas.{{sfnp|O'Neill|2016|pp=5–6}} | ||