Icons and Icons: New Paradigms In Interface Design

Year 2015, Volume: 5 Issue: 4, 44 - 56, 23.07.2016

Elisabetta Zuanelli

https://izlik.org/JA36ZJ67YB

Abstract

The use of icons in the visual communication of computer languages has recently increased in quantity and complexity with the widespread proliferation of icons in mobile dispositives such as smart phones, ipads, etc. Icon designers and analysts, however, seem to underestimate the semiotic and rhetorical implications in the representation of icons, the subsumed syntax leading to easy or difficult dialogue in iconic communication, the need for an architectural representation of iconic contents. I shall analyse terminological phallacies and conceptual limitations of present interpretations in icons usability and provide a possible further interpretation on the basis of semiotic, linguistic, rhetorical assumptions and related syntax. In particular I shall propose a syntactic interpretation based on the relation between metaphors and metonymies in iconic representation needed to validate the results of comprehension tests

Keywords

metonymic and metaphoric icons , semiotic and rhetorical interface design , iconic

References

• Barr P., Khaled R., NobleJ. & Biddle R. (2005). A taxonomic analysis of user-interface metaphors in the Microsoft Office project gallery. In M. Billinghurst & A. Cockburn (Eds.). Conferences in Research and Practice in Information Technology, Vol. 40. Newcastle, Australia: Australian Computer Society, Inc.
• Dormann C. (1994). Self-explaining icons. In Digital creativity, 5, 81-85.
• Ferreira J. (2004). Semiotic explorations in user interface design. Retrieved from www.mcs.vuw.ac.nz/comp/pdf.
• Ferreira J., Noble J. and Biddle R. (2005).The semiotics of user centered design. Retrieved from www.mcs.vuw.ac.nz/~jennifer/chapter-iwos pdf.
• Ferreira J., Noble J. & Biddle R. (2006). A case for iconic icons. In W. Piekarsky (Ed.). Conferences in Research and Practice,Vol. 50. Hobart, Australia: Australian Computer Society, Inc.
• Gatsou C., Politis A. & Zevgolis D. (2012).The importance of mobile interface icons on user interaction. International journal of computer science and applications, Vol. 9 (3 ), 92 107.Technomathematics Research Foundation.
• Jakobson R. (1966 a). Aspetti linguistici della traduzione. In R. Jakobson., Saggi di linguistica generale (pp. 5676), transl.from English by L. Heilmann & L. Grassi. Milan: Feltrinelli.
• ____________ (1966 b). Due aspetti del linguaggio e due tipi di afasia. In R. Jakobson, Saggi di linguistica generale (pp. 22-45), transl. from English by L. Heilmann & L. Grassi. Milan: Feltrinelli.
• Lakoff G. & Johnson M. (1988). Metafora e vita quotidiana. Transl. from English 2007. Milan: Bompiani.
• Nadin M. (1988). Interface design: a semiotic paradigm. Semiotica, 69 (3-4), 269-302.
• Peirce C.S. (1998).The essential Peirce, Vol. 2. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, Peirce Edition Project.
• de Saussure F. (1972). Corso di linguistica generale (3rd ed.). Transl. From French by T. De Mauro. Rome: Laterza
• Zuanelli E. (2009). Comunicazione digitale. Un approccio semiologico linguistico. Rome: Colombo.
• Zuanelli E. (2012). Progettazione dei siti: la prospettiva semiologica. In E. Zuanelli (Ed.), Comunicazione digitale e comunicazione in Rete (pp. 211-242). Rome: Aracne.
• Zuanelli E. (2013). Elearning content 'usability': semiotic and didactic parameters in digital texts and textuality, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 106, 1039 1049.