Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Semantic coherence could be imposed by direct human semantic inter-
vention in the selection of specific characters from messages for selection
for combination into a linear message, consisting of semantically cohesive
sequences of messages as well as lexically acceptable units.
Messages for selection are analogous to the paradigm, particularly in
its second sense of the collection of units or members of an associative
group from which selection can be made to form a syntagma. Again, the
paradigm has a semantic connotation when the messages for selection
are syntactically conceived units. Reservations about the analogy arise in
three respects:
r
the assumption of preexisting messages for selection to the message,
r
the level of granularity at which they are conceived, and
r
the comprehensiveness of the messages for selection compared to the
selective nature of the paradigm.
First, messages for selection are explicitly regarded as preexisting their
combination in the message for transmission, in a further objectification
of communication. In contrast, particularly for the interpretation here, the
paradigm derived from the syntagma and existed partly
in absentia
and as
an analytic construct. Therefore, information theory receives the products
of human semiotic labor as objective existents. A real historical analogue
to the independent existence of messages for selection can be found in
a printer's font of separate metal types, where ligatures and the relative
number of tokens in each category anticipated probable combinations
and distributions in the message to be composed. Second, the messages
for selection in information theory are conceived primarily at the level of
granularity of the individual character; the character is regarded as a unit
of an alphabet of characters that includes all characters admissible to the
message. The constituents of the paradigm, understood as a collection of
associated units, are primarily words—limited in number compared to
the full vocabulary of the language. Finally, in contradistinction to the
inclusiveness of the messages for selection, selection into the paradigm,
based on associations in meaning or grammatical variations of a word or
multiword sequence, is implied. Therefore, the analogy between the mes-
sages for selection and the paradigm must be qualified.
The concern here will be with the messages for selection, understood
in an acceptable simplification as the individual and separate characters
