Comparative semiotic analysis demonstrates dynamic semantic threshold shifting in ideographic Hanji and homoiconic Lisp, suggesting non-dualistic meaning creation across natural and formal languages.
This paper extends the framework of the "Heisenberg cut"—the necessary but arbitrary boundary separating the observing apparatus from the observed quantum system—to the field of linguistic semiotics, mapping it as the vital "Divided Line" where continuous semantic potentiality collapses into definite linguistic meaning. Building directly upon the realist ontological framework established in *Linguistic Measurement and the Impoverishment of Meaning* (Nortje & Coetzee, 2026) and expanded in *The Heisenberg Cut as Divided Line: Language, Measurement, and the Pre-Conceptual Real* (Nortje, 2026), this study investigates the profound theoretical implications of shifting this semantic threshold from standard Western, phonetic systems to two non-linear language structures: Hanji (Chinese characters) and the Lisp programming language. We demonstrate that Hanji shifts the semantic threshold from a temporal sequence to a spatial, multi-layered radical topology. By retaining an active etymological and visual historical context, Hanji allows a dense cloud of meaning to persist in a state of semantic superposition, defying absolute classical collapse. Conversely, Lisp disrupts the Cartesian dualism of language through its core property of homoiconicity. Because Lisp handles code and data within an identical structure, the Heisenberg cut becomes entirely fluid and algorithmic. The boundary between the observing instruction and the observed data matrix shifts dynamically during runtime, culminating in the eval function as a literal mechanism of functional wave-function collapse. Ultimately, this comparative analysis reveals that the linguistic Heisenberg cut is neither fixed nor universally binary. Instead, it is a dynamic structural property that can be internalised spatially within the ideographic sign, or manipulated recursively within an algorithmic matrix, offering a more unified, non-dualistic model for the creation of meaning in both natural and formal languages.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sandra Nortje (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: