# Kulvicki's Framework Applied to Typography [[John Kulvicki]]'s *Modeling the Meanings of Pictures* (2020) provides tools for understanding typography's distinctive structure. ## Key Concepts from Kulvicki **Character and Content**: Pictures have non-constant character—the same surface can represent different things in context. The rule linking surface to content involves finding "recognizable manifestations" of bare-bones content. **Separable vs. Inseparable Parts**: - Linguistic representations have *separable* parts (words recombine freely) - Imagistic representations have *inseparable* parts (can't peel red from scarlet) **The Determinable/Determinate Structure**: In pictures, inseparable parts are nested—scarlet is a determinate of red. Abstraction moves along a single dimension from specific to general. ## Typography's Distinctive Structure Typography doesn't fit either category cleanly: **Separable dimension**: Letters recombine freely (C-A-T → A-C-T). This is notational/linguistic. **Inseparable dimension**: Typographic qualities (weight, contrast, style) can't be extracted from letters. Every inscription necessarily has some visual character. **The Key Difference**: Typography's inseparable dimensions are *orthogonal*, not *nested*. Bold is not a way of being an 'A'—they vary independently but must co-occur. This is structurally different from Kulvicki's red/scarlet case. ## Semantic Mode Typography's visual properties are meaningful by *convention*, not *recognition*: - [[Blackletter]] → "German" is learned, not perceived - This differs from pictures (where you recognize depicted content) - And from language (where meaning is compositional) This might constitute a third semantic mode: **visual-convention**. ## Implications An aesthetics of typography must handle: 1. Notational structure (separable letters) 2. Inseparable visual quality 3. Conventional (not recognitional) meaning of style **Related**: [[Functional Beauty and Typography - The Circularity Problem]]