Index “Corona”: Symbolic Employment of COVID-19 in the Public Discourse in Serbia




semiology, “corona”, pandemic, index, metonymy, metaphor, inversion


In this paper we analyze the different ways in which COVID-19 is used as a carrier of cultural communication, whereupon it appears as a signifier of other socio-cultural phenomena and as a conveyer of messages of such communication. Accordingly, this paper will not observe health plan of COVID-19, nor the accompanying sociological phenomena of the epidemic in the strict sense of the word, but will focus instead on the cultural dimension of the infection. As a cultural phenomenon, the process of the planetary spread of COVID-19 infection – and hence the virus itself – can be viewed as an ambiguous symbol through which the collective experience of reality is constructed and communicated, perceived and interpreted. By relying on the decades-long tradition of Serbian ethnology and anthropology in the modified application of structural-semantic analysis, we define the use of COVID-19 as a symbolic means of cultural communication, here seen as indexical. This means that the said communication is organized on the principle that “A indicates B”, where the signifying A refers to the metaphorical and metonymic use of the disease, and B refers to various social phenomena related to it. As a metonymy, the considered phenomenon can be seen in the light of the classical binary division of purity and danger, whereupon the virus, in the cultural sense, divides the whole social reality into pure (still unpolluted) and impure aspects, one corresponding to the “normal” condition of things, and the other indicating a sense of explicit danger – not only from infection, but from the collapse of the social system and the disintegration of public health and community as well. As a metaphor, we observe the virus in relation to the official political instrumentalization of the discourse of warfare, which – depending on who employs it, and why – generates different notions on the “invisible enemy”, war victims (deceased as a consequence of infection) and “(super) heroes” (primarily, health workers, but also state officials and other public figures). COVID-19 is, however, peculiar because it can also play the role of an inverse sign, by which common cultural concepts and representations are perverted, destabilizing the shared sense of “real” and “normal”.


Download data is not yet available.


Antonijević, Dragana. 1991. Značenje srpskih bajki. Beograd: Etnografski institut SANU, posebna izdanja, knj. 33.

Bandić, Dušan. 2004. Narodna religija Srba u 100 pojmova. Beograd: Nolit.

Bauman, Zigmunt. 2010. Fluidni strah. Novi Sad: Mediterran publishing.

Carroll, Noël. 1990. The Philosophy of Horror, or Paradoxes of the Heart. New York: Routledge.

D’Andrade. Roy. 1995. The Development of Cognitive Anthropology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Unviersity Press.

Daglas, Meri. 2001. Čisto i opasno. Beograd: XX vek.

Dragić, Milorad. 1991. Etnomedicina. Beograd: Etnoantropološki problemi – monografije, knj. 16 (1).

Dey Samrat K, Rahman Md. Mahbubur, Siddiqi Umme R., Howlader Arpita. 2020. “Analyzing the epidemiological outbreak of COVID-19: A visual exploratory data analysis approach”. Journal of Medical Virology.

Gellner, Ernest. 2000. Postmodernizam, razum i religija. Zagreb: Naklada Jesenski i Turk.

Đorđević, Tihomir R. 1953. Veštica i vila u našem narodnom predanju. Beograd: Srpska

akademija nauka.

Halpern, Džoel. 2006. Srpsko selo. Društvene i kulturne promene u seoskoj zajednici 1952–1987. Beograd: Srpski genealoški centar.

Habermas, Jürgen. 1970. Towards a Rational Society. Boston: Beacon.

Heider, Karl G. 1988. “The Rashomon Effect: When Ethnographers Disagree”. American Anthropologist 90: 73–81.

Kovač, Senka. 2014. „Novi državni praznici u Srbiji: kulturni identitet i politika“. U „Etnos“, religija i identitet, uredile Lidija Radulović i Ildiko Erdei, 81–91. Beograd: Filozofski fakultet, Odeljenje za etnologiju i antropologiju i Službeni glasnik.

Kovačević, Ivan. 1985. Semiologija rituala. Beograd: Prosveta i XX vek.

Kovačević, Ivan. 2001a. Istorija srpske etnologije I. Prosvetiteljstvo. Beograd: Srpski genealoški centar.

Kovačević, Ivan. 2001b. Semiologija mita i rituala II. Savremeno društvo. Beograd: Srpski genealoški centar.

Kulenović, Nina i Ana Banić-Grubišić. 2019. „’Cepaće se neki narodnjaci!’: nova čitanja turbo-folka.“ Etnoantropološki problemi 14 (1): 47–78.

Ilić, Vladimira. 2014. „Empatija kao strategija premošćavanja jaza između političara i stanovništva Srbije”. Etnoantropološki problemi 9 (4): 955–976,

Jeremić Molnar, Dragana i Aleksandar Molnar. 2017. „Poreklo i smisao evharistije. Sociološki aspekt“. Sociološki pregled 51 (2): 276–299.

Laclau, Ernesto. 2007. Emancipation(s). London: Verso Books.

Lič, Edmund. 1983. Kultura i komunikacija. Logika povezivanja simbola. Uvod u primenu strukturalističke analize u socijalnoj antropologiji. Beograd: Prosveta i XX vek.

Petrović, Duško. 2011. „Analiza političkih aspekata studentske blokade Filozofskoga fakulteta u Zagrebu: metoda i strategija studentske blokade“ Studia ethnologica Croatica 23: 327–347.

Pišev, Marko i Mladen Stajić. 2016. „Provlačenje kroz ’rupu’: magijski obred zaštite zdravlja dece.“ Antropologija 16 (3): 83–107.

Somily, Ali M. and Ahmed S. BaHammam. 2020. “Coronavirus Disease 19 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2) is not Just Simple Influenza: What have we Learned so Far?” Journal of Nature and Science of Medicine 20 (20): 1–4, 10.4103/JNSM.JNSM_22_20

Vučinić, Vesna. 2013. Metodologija terenskog istraživanja u antropologiji. Od normativnog do iskustvenog. Beograd: Odeljenje za etnologiju i antropologiju Filozofskog fakulteta – Srpski genealoški centar.

Zhou, Min. 2020. “Co-infection of SARS-CoV-2 and HIV in a patient in Wuhan city, China”. Journal of Medical Virology. https://DOI: 10.1002/jmv.25732

Žikić, Bojan. 2002. Antropologija gesta II. Savremeno društvo. Beograd. Filozofski fakultet i Sprski genealoški centar.




How to Cite

Pišev, Marko, Bojan Žikić, and Mladen Stajić. 2020. “Index ‘Corona’: Symbolic Employment of COVID-19 in the Public Discourse in Serbia”. Etnoantropološki Problemi Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology 15 (3):845–877.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 > >>