It is all well and good that when I see a picture of a cloud, or read or hear the word cloud, I get a mental picture of a cloud. This only goes part of the way to explaining MEANING.
Barthes says that the SIGN in de Saussure's model is itself part of a process of SIGNIFICATION.
Once I have understood, when you say the word cloud, that what you mean is in fact a cloud, I have to work out what the context is of your talking about the cloud. Are you discussing the weather ("The clouds are coming in / moving off.")? Or your mood ("I'm feeling under a cloud today. / I feel like a cloud has lifted.")?
What you intend, what you MEAN, by using the word cloud is in what Barthes called the SECOND ORDER OF SIGNIFICATION.
Now, whereas, with de Saussure's model, when you say dog, and you know I speak your language, you can pretty much guarantee I'm going to get a mental picture of a dog, (although you can't control what kind of dog), in contrast, with Barthes' model, you can never be quite sure how I'm going to respond to the mental picture of a dog.
But you can predict, and you can restrict my responses to what you say by choosing your words and pictures carefully and by knowing something about me, and this is what producers of media products do.
Here is the magazine front page that inspired Barthes to come up with this theory. The picture is of a young black man wearing a French military uniform. The year is 1955 and France is still a colonial power with a strong presence in Africa.
What do you think the picture is meant to SIGNIFY to its readers?

Find an example of a media product that signifies more than what it simply seems to show. Describe it in a reply to this post.
Related posts: Media Key Concept - Signification; Media Key Cocept - Denotation/Connotation



