Auditory semiotic

We never has taught a question the is absolutely marginal, but that can assume some importance in the studio of semiotic; a category of semiotic that is auditory, that isn’t never considered but that is the integral part of semiotic; when we hearing a CD, musical CD, we can author , classic  or not because we have read on the packet, but if we are in competition and the question is : “Who is the author of this music?”, we can manage of choose the author for the style of the music; and it is the auditory semiotic, as a discourse or a voice that we are hearing, we can choose who is the author that has pronounced the discourse from the style and the voice, and it is the auditory semiotic, because we can recognize the author from the words that are expressed, hence from the sound of voice, ton and the words, but above for the sound; hence it is the auditory semiotic. The written we can  identify the author through the style, but the written is mute, same difficult for the auditory semiotic, that using  the categories of Peirce, this is the Firstness , this is the essence, or better the style, that is a peculiarity of human gender, of artists particularly; inasmuch the auditory semiotic, is a category that can be considered, because it is brings directly to the author, that we haven’t know before. A language is other motive for to identify somebody if don’t know somebody, hence if he is Dutch we may identify him for the language, or netter some compatriot we can identify his origin for the language, or better his town from determined expression or inflexion, that he is from the north, south or other; it is the auditory semiotic; a discourse is the auditory semiotic because the Firstness is the meaning of this discourse, therefore from the decode the sound, we can consider the essence, hence we can think that the object of our interest is changed, because from the sound we now consider the essence, but the essence of sound is the style, because the composer lavish his style in the music, and in his composition; but the change is present because from the sound we now consider now the meaning, thence the style for this  we can we can consider the author of discourse, also without know who pronounce it; in this case the different object of interest is evident, but the method is similar, because we are hearing always and the object is same , the discourse, therefore the auditory semiotic, that consider the meaning of a discourse that is the style; in classical concert the words aren’t , but the style is evident  for the ears, in fact we must hear alone , it is the style of somebody, in this case alone auditory but the style is always present, whereby the auditory semiotic is our.

Alessandro Lusana