First Language & Biosemiotics
Garnet Dupuis
March 7, 2020 • Amended August 9, 2021
The Basic Message
The central premise of this article is that living organisms appear to develop according to an underlying organizational template. Rather than being assembled through isolated mechanical processes alone, living systems may follow a biological blueprint that allows "codemakers" to generate codes, conventions, and meaningful signals throughout every level of life.
According to this perspective, the sensory First Language of Light and Sound, the motor Second Language of Movement, and the cognitive Third Language of Ideation all preserve the same fundamental organizational principles that exist at the earliest stages of life.
Organic codes → Sensory codes → Motor codes → Cognitive codes
About First Language
The First Language proposes that because every living organism evolved on the same planet under shared environmental conditions, all life also developed a common foundational form of communication.
William James referred to a related principle as homeomorphism, suggesting that similar organizational patterns appear repeatedly throughout living systems.
The First Language proposes that this earliest communication is carried primarily through two physical forms:
- Electromagnetic radiation (Light)
- Mechanical vibration (Sound)
As evolution progresses, these sensory interactions expand into movement and eventually into higher cognition. Rather than replacing one another, all three languages continue to coexist within complex organisms.
Introducing Biosemiotics
Biosemiotics is an emerging field that views life through the lens of communication, meaning, and biological coding. Rather than seeing organisms purely as biochemical machines, biosemiotics proposes that living systems continually create and interpret meaningful signs.
Its supporters describe biosemiotics as offering an entirely new understanding of life, challenging several long-standing assumptions within traditional biology.
The Foundations of Biosemiotics
At its simplest level, biosemiotics studies how living systems use:
- Signs
- Codes
- Meaning
- Communication
While modern biology recognizes genetic coding within DNA, biosemiotics argues that genetic code is only the first of many biological coding systems that have shaped life.
Rather than relying solely on copying genetic information, living organisms also develop through coding processes that establish meaningful relationships throughout biology.
The Main Goals of Biosemiotics
According to the article, biosemiotics aims to demonstrate that:
- The living cell is fundamentally a semiotic system.
- The genetic code is a true biological code rather than a simple molecular assembly.
- Evolution involves both Natural Selection and Natural Conventions.
- Organic codes are responsible for many major evolutionary innovations.
Three Challenges to Conventional Biology
The article outlines three major concepts within contemporary biology that biosemiotics questions.
1. The Computer Model
Traditional biology often compares the cell to a computer, where genes function as software and proteins function as hardware. Biosemiotics argues that living systems generate their own coding internally, rather than relying upon externally programmed instructions.
2. Physicalism
Physicalism holds that all biological processes can ultimately be explained entirely through physical mechanisms. From this perspective, concepts such as signs, codes, and meanings are considered convenient metaphors rather than genuine biological realities.
3. Natural Selection Alone
Conventional evolutionary theory generally attributes biological novelty exclusively to Natural Selection. Biosemiotics proposes that Natural Conventions and biological coding also contribute to evolutionary change.
Understanding Signs, Meanings, and Codes
The word "semiotics" originates from the Greek word semeion, meaning sign.
Every sign points toward something beyond itself. A sign only functions because it carries meaning, and meaning exists because there are rules connecting the two.
These rules are known as codes.
A code provides the agreed convention that keeps signs consistently connected to their meanings, allowing reliable communication despite changing circumstances.
Sign → Meaning → Code
The Role of the Codemaker
Biosemiotics expands this relationship further by introducing a fourth essential element: the codemaker.
A codemaker is not necessarily an individual or physical object, but the process that generates the rules connecting signs and meanings.
This creates the complete semiotic system:
- Sign
- Meaning
- Code
- Codemaker
Together these four components form the foundation of biological communication.
From Energy to Information
The discovery of DNA transformed biology from primarily an energy-based science into an information-based science. Protein synthesis demonstrated that biological processes involve the transfer of organized information rather than energy alone.
Although many scientists accept biological information, there remains debate over whether information, coding, and meaning represent genuine biological realities or simply useful metaphors.
Biosemiotics in Human Language
Human language provides a familiar example of a complete semiotic system.
| Element | Example |
|---|---|
| Signs | Words or written symbols |
| Meanings | Ideas associated with those words |
| Codes | Grammar and language rules |
| Codemakers | The language community that develops and maintains those rules |
The article suggests that biological systems may operate according to remarkably similar principles, raising the possibility that organic communication shares structural similarities with human language.
Performative and Symbolic Signals
Within the First Language framework, not all signs function in the same way. The article distinguishes between two fundamental categories of communication.
Performative Signals
Performative signals embody their own meaning. Their effect is immediate because the experience itself is the message. For example, the color blue evokes a particular experience through its intrinsic qualities rather than through learned interpretation.
Symbolic Signals
Symbolic signals receive their meaning through social agreement or convention. Words, written language, and many cultural symbols communicate because communities collectively assign meaning to them.
This distinction parallels Augustine's classical categories:
- Natural Signs (Signa Naturalia)
- Conventional Signs (Signa Data)
Natural signs possess a direct relationship between signal and meaning, whereas conventional signs depend upon agreed rules.
Information as Change
The article argues that information should not be understood as a static object. Instead, information is fundamentally dynamic.
Drawing on Gregory Bateson's work, information is described as:
- "A difference that makes a difference."
- "News of change."
Rather than existing independently, information emerges through relationships and processes that create meaningful differences.
Organic Meaning
Biosemiotics proposes that meaning exists not only within human thought but also throughout biological organization.
A familiar example is Morse Code, where patterns of dots and dashes correspond to letters according to agreed rules. Similarly, DNA contains codons that correspond to specific amino acids according to biological coding conventions.
The article therefore suggests that biological coding contains genuine organic meaning rather than functioning merely as metaphor.
Operative Definitions
The Biosemiotic Manifesto summarized in the article proposes several working definitions:
- Sequences used during copying processes represent organic information.
- Sequences used during coding processes function as organic signs or signals.
- Products generated through coding become organic meanings.
- Information, signs, and meanings represent a distinct class of natural entities.
- These entities are objective and reproducible despite not being conventional physical quantities.
- They deserve the same scientific consideration as other fundamental biological phenomena.
Do Culture and Nature Share the Same Codes?
The article explores whether human culture may reflect the same organizational principles found throughout biology.
Language, grammar, laws, rituals, myths, and religious traditions may not simply be cultural inventions but could share structural similarities with deeper biological coding systems.
Rather than existing independently, mental codes may have evolved from more fundamental organic codes.
Rethinking "Junk DNA"
Only a small percentage of human DNA directly codes for proteins. Historically, much of the remaining DNA was labeled "junk DNA" because its function was not understood.
The article questions whether such a large portion of the genome is truly functionless, suggesting instead that it may perform important communication and organizational roles.
DNA as a Biological Communication System
Drawing upon biophoton research and work by Russian biophysicist Pjotr Garjajev, the article discusses the possibility that DNA functions as more than a molecular storage system.
According to this perspective, DNA may operate as:
- A resonant harmonic oscillator.
- A source of biophotons.
- A receiver and transmitter of information.
- A fractal antenna capable of simultaneous communication.
The article also notes proposals that DNA coding patterns may share structural similarities with human language, including grammar, syntax, and semantics.
Homeomorphism Revisited
Returning to William James's concept of homeomorphism, the article proposes that a common organizational template may exist throughout living systems.
This template allows codemakers to establish codes that consistently connect signs with meanings across every level of biological organization.
Organic Codes → Sensory Codes → Motor Codes → Cognitive Codes
In this framework, each successive language builds upon earlier forms without replacing them, creating continuity from primitive biological communication to higher cognition.
Potential Implications
If shared biological coding exists throughout living systems, the article suggests several possible implications:
- First Language Light and Sound signaling may have the potential to communicate at the DNA level.
- Movement and motor activity may communicate through the same underlying coding systems.
- Spoken and written language may influence biological communication beyond conscious cognition.
- Mantras and prayers may interact with underlying organic communication systems.
- Traditional healing practices may involve meaningful biological signaling rather than symbolic activity alone.
- Movement practices such as ritual and dance may influence multiple levels of biological organization simultaneously.
Conclusion
The article presents biosemiotics as a complementary framework for understanding the First Language by viewing life as an organized network of signs, meanings, codes, and codemakers. Within this perspective, communication extends beyond spoken language or conscious thought and may operate throughout the biological organization of living systems.
From the earliest sensory interactions of Light and Sound through Movement and higher Cognition, the First, Second, and Third Languages are presented as continuous expressions of a common organizational principle. Rather than functioning as isolated biological mechanisms, living organisms are described as dynamic systems whose communication, adaptation, and development emerge through shared patterns of meaningful information.