Dickensian Fictional Names in Verbal and Non-verbal Signifying Systems 1 Nadia Nicoleta MORĂRAŞU “Vasile Alecsandri” University of Bacau, ROMANIA n.morarasu@yahoo.com 2 Abstract Considering that the interpretation of proper names as verbal signs in terms of John Lyons’s “triangle of signification” (1968) is open to criticism, the first part of this paper brings to attention an improved model of the semiotic triangle, designed by Norbert Poruciuc (2005). We further apply his model of the shadow triangle in identifying the appellative usage behind a series of denominative signs selected from Dickens's novels. In the tradition imposed by Umberto Eco (1982) and Roland Barthes (1964, 1967), we shall examine the relationship between linguistic and iconic signifiers in the semiotic system of characters, by decomposing texts and illustrations from Martin Chuzzlewit into different layers of signification. Key words: fictional name, signifying system, name-sign, naming, sign-character, iconic representation, compositional analysis. I. Proper names as verbal signs Our interpretation of proper names as linguistic signs has been greatly influenced by the triadic model proposed by the pragmatist philosopher and logician Charles Sanders Pierce, in contrast to Saussure’s “self-contained dyad”(Cmeciu, 2003:26). The three terms used by Pierce for the form of the sign (representamen), the sense made of the sign (interpretant) and the object to which the sign refers to, have been changed in other semiotic triangles into “symbol”, “thought or reference” and “referent” (Ogden & Richards, 1924:14). Going along the same line, John Lyons is of the opinion that the distinction of form, meaning and referent can be represented diagrammatically with a dotted line between form and referent, “which indicates that the relationship between them is indirect: the form is related to its referent through the conceptual meaning associated with both independently” (Lyons, 1968: 405). The semiotic triangle represented by Lyons (1968) has been further developed by Norbert Poruciuc, who considers that we could interpret the proper name as a sign, whose “conceptual meaning is that of denominated human individual, the referent being the unique historical individual the name refers to” (Poruciuc, 2005:102-104). And yet, Poruciuc himself rightfully observes the limited applicability of the semiotic triangle to names originally derived from appellatives, or to charactonyms that “do not have a unique referent, but a class of equivalent objects marked by corresponding invariable features.” The solution he found was that of creating a “shadow triangle looming behind the triangle that renders the name as a verbal sign” (Poruciuc, 2005). 1 Nadia Morăraşu: “Dickensian Fictional Names in Verbal and Nonverbal Signifying Systems”, paper published in Proceedings of the 1 st ROASS Conference Semiotics beyond Limits, Ed. Alma Mater, Bacău, 2006, pp. 625-642. 2 Please ask for the original version of the paper and send details of your work (article, book) in case you consider using this material as a bibliographical resource.