Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
In contrast to the empiric layer, the syntactic layer is not concerned with any empirical or sta-
tistical properties of information; concerned with the form and shape of this information, the syn-
tactic layer is mainly concerned with the structure and form of tokens. This structure and form
are generally expressed as syntax, and require generally agreed upon rules and formulations for
consistency.
Human Level
Designers who limit themselves to technical considerations are capable of understanding the
importance of each technical layer and how the layers interact with each other. However, these layers
generally disregard any human considerations. As a result, any designer who confines his attention
to these layers alone typically will not address the business requirements and human considera-
tions of an information system. As a result, information systems that are designed solely based on
technical requirements generally fail (Dhillon and Backhouse, 1996). Hence, understanding the
human-level layers of the semiotic ladder is paramount to the success of any information system
design.
As shown in Table 13.1, the semantic layer lies at the interface of the technical and human lev-
els of the semiotic ladder. The semantic layer is mainly concerned with meanings and is not con-
cerned with what language is used, how the message is encoded, or by what medium any message
is transmitted. Meaning can be interpreted by two very different semantic principles (Falkenberg
et al., 1998). The first principle, known as the objectivistic principle, assumes that meanings are
mappings from syntactic structures onto objective features of a real world. The objectivistic prin-
ciple assumes a perfect world scenario because it considers the real world to be the same for
everyone and one that everyone knows independently of language. The second principle, the con-
structivist principle, has a more realistic orientation. It assumes that meanings are constructed and
continuously tested and repaired. These repairs are made by the actions of people when using any
syntactic structure. This involves an evaluation of language-action relationships. Of course, a well-
thought-out semantic analysis would attempt to address and correct any potential failures before
implementing any type of information system, thus limiting the repair work that would need to
be done after implementation. Semantic analysis would then consider various concepts such as
propositions, validity, truth, signification, and denotation to uncover a rich understanding of meaning
to all concerned with a particular information system.
In contrast to the semantic layer, the pragmatic layer is not concerned with semantic meaning;
pragmatics are concerned with placing the intentions of both the sender and receiver in context.
In other words, the pragmatic layer recognizes that meanings do not provide accurate or intended
actions or reactions when taken out of context. At the pragmatic level, communication is studied
intensively and is considered to be successful when a meaningful utterance is passed by a sender
with a certain intention and is interpreted by the receiver of this utterance with the same intention.
As a result, pragmatic analysis tends to deal with conversations, negotiations, and intentions of the
social arena of an information system. Pragmatic analysis also helps in interpreting the patterns
of behavior and obligation afforded by different stakeholders.
In contrast to the pragmatic layer, the social layer of the semiotic ladder deals with the conse-
quences or outcomes of pragmatic communication. When a meaningful utterance has occurred,
the social layer would identify the social norms that would be changed, altered, or affected in
some way. As shown in Table 13.1, some examples of these cultural norms might include beliefs,
expectations, functions, commitments, law, culture, contracts, values, shared models of reality,
and attitudes.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search