University of Tabriz Journal of Philosophical Investigations 2251-7960 Articles in Press 2026 04 08 Mapping Intellectual Genealogy in Semiotics: Investigating Indian Analogues of Peirce’s Icon, Index, and Symbol in Classical Philosophy Mapping Intellectual Genealogy in Semiotics: Investigating Indian Analogues of Peirce’s Icon, Index, and Symbol in Classical Philosophy 21375 10.22034/jpiut.2026.71621.4448 FA Sumanta Sarathi Sharma School of Philosophy & Culture Shri Mata Vaishno Devi University, Jammu, India. Satish Kumar Tiwari Head of Department, Department of Philosophy, Government P.G. College, Agasyamuni, Rudraprayag , Uttarakhand Journal Article 2026 02 20 This paper undertakes a comparative investigation into the semiotic architectures of Charles Sanders Peirce and classical Indian linguistic philosophy to trace the conceptual affinities and divergences underlying their theories of signification. Peirce’s trichotomy of Icon, Index, and Symbol, grounded in the metaphysical categories of Firstness, Secondness, and Thirdness, establishes meaning as a triadic and mediational process dependent on convention and interpretation. In contrast, Indian semantics articulated through the theories of Abhidhā (denotation), Lakṣaṇā (indication), Gauṇī (metaphor), Dhvani (suggestion), and Sphoṭa (linguistic totality) developed intricate analyses of linguistic relation (saṃbandha) and expressive power (śakti), yet operated within a fundamentally dyadic model of signification grounded in eternal, natural relations between word and meaning. The study argues that Indian theories anticipated Peirce’s lower dyad of Icon and Index through Gauṇī and Lakṣaṇā, which correspond to relations of likeness and contiguity, respectively. However, the emergence of the Symbol, representing Peirce’s Thirdness convention, mediation, and social law was metaphysically precluded by the Mīmāṃsā doctrine of the Veda’s authorlessness (apauruṣeyatva) and the inherent word–meaning relation (svābhāvika śakti). Later innovations such as Dhvani and Sphoṭa attempted to reintroduce the missing interpretive dimension but did so within a naturalized rather than conventional framework. By mapping these correspondences and constraints, the paper situates Peirce within a broader intercultural genealogy of semiotic thought and reinterprets Indian linguistic philosophy as a profound yet metaphysically distinct precursor to modern semiotics. This paper undertakes a comparative investigation into the semiotic architectures of Charles Sanders Peirce and classical Indian linguistic philosophy to trace the conceptual affinities and divergences underlying their theories of signification. Peirce’s trichotomy of Icon, Index, and Symbol, grounded in the metaphysical categories of Firstness, Secondness, and Thirdness, establishes meaning as a triadic and mediational process dependent on convention and interpretation. In contrast, Indian semantics articulated through the theories of Abhidhā (denotation), Lakṣaṇā (indication), Gauṇī (metaphor), Dhvani (suggestion), and Sphoṭa (linguistic totality) developed intricate analyses of linguistic relation (saṃbandha) and expressive power (śakti), yet operated within a fundamentally dyadic model of signification grounded in eternal, natural relations between word and meaning. The study argues that Indian theories anticipated Peirce’s lower dyad of Icon and Index through Gauṇī and Lakṣaṇā, which correspond to relations of likeness and contiguity, respectively. However, the emergence of the Symbol, representing Peirce’s Thirdness convention, mediation, and social law was metaphysically precluded by the Mīmāṃsā doctrine of the Veda’s authorlessness (apauruṣeyatva) and the inherent word–meaning relation (svābhāvika śakti). Later innovations such as Dhvani and Sphoṭa attempted to reintroduce the missing interpretive dimension but did so within a naturalized rather than conventional framework. By mapping these correspondences and constraints, the paper situates Peirce within a broader intercultural genealogy of semiotic thought and reinterprets Indian linguistic philosophy as a profound yet metaphysically distinct precursor to modern semiotics.