What's some good introductory reading on Semiotics?

Semiotics: the Basics, by David Chandler

Charles S Peirce's Philosophy of Signs

If you like BioSemiotics:
Signs of Meaning in the Universe - Jesper Hoffmeyer
Signs of Life (forgot author on this one, sorry).

The Torah

Semiotics is old-fashioned and out of date bullshit.

Learn the distinction between syntax and semantics (via formal systems or logical systems or formal semantics) and you're set.

Your trash day schedule to be frank next of kin

>>7624203
>Semiotics is old-fashioned and out of date bullshit.

>Learn the distinction between [branch of Semiotics] and [different branch of Semiotics] (via [Semiotic theories]) and you're set.

Aight

>>7624220
Wow! Look at you! Looking up Wikipedia and thinking you know it all!

That hierarchy is, again, absolutely arbitrary bullshit. Literally no one makes mention of semiotics in theoretical linguistics, formal language theory, analytic philosophy, formal semantics, etc. these days.

It's stuff of the old times. Antiqued. Irrelevant. But some of its concepts still tend to be used by some continental philosophers. Something like formal semantics, among other things, is the stuff of contemporary times, babe; stuff based on actual math--Mathematical Logic--and which has grown to dominate semiotics in each and every respect. It's the current, dominant framework. And it has been, for many decades now.

>>7624266
>not used today

found the idiot

every writer worth their salt and every director that's noteworthy uses all of semiotics along with mathematics form in order to create value to manifested ideas and its a huge part of social studies to include psychology and religion (to name a few aspects) merged again with math logic. Finding the golden ratio mathmatically is by its nature a form of semiosis. It's not outdated you're just a retard

>>7624220
this guy gets it