Algirdas Julius Greimas: the perfection of imperfection

Understanding semiotics has never been an easy endeavour, partly due to the number of semiotic schools of thought and partly due to the missing links and connections between the theories. What also hinders the quest for understanding is that semioticians themselves tend to simplify and reduce the theories to their most distinctive features. This is mainly manifested through branding the leading figures with their most memorable tools or concepts: Juri Lotman with semiosphere, Charles Sanders Peirce with sign typology, Umberto Eco with codes, and Algirdas Julius Greimas with the semiotic square. Lastly, semiotic affinities among the different schools have primarily been expressed through antagonistic relationships, i.e. through denouncing other approaches in favour of a central one. Seen from such a reductionist perspective, the hope of reconciling them, or at least starting semiotic discussions between them seems to be a hopeless pursuit. And we know that connections and links resurface when semiotic thinking is revealed in its full scope, not when it is reduced to a few stereotypical fundamentals. 2017 marks the 100th anniversary of Algirdas Julius Greimas (1917–1992). For the very first time, the journal Sign Systems Studies dedicates a special issue entirely to such an outstanding scholar. In the field of semiotics and even beyond it, the name of Greimas has become associated with a number of concepts such as semes and semic analysis, figure and figurative, narrative grammar, isotopy and – evidently – the semiotic square. The anniversary of Greimas provides a perfect excuse for taking a more extensive look at the Greimassian semiotic heritage and the paths of investigation that his work has opened up or inspired. It also presents an opportunity to discuss the main themes that resonate across his varied semiotic work and main features that have consistently been surfacing across his investigations and theoretical constructs