Wittgensteinians
Life in the Post-Analytic World, Given by the Man Who Ended Philosophy As History Knew It

Home » Concerning Wittgenstein's Ideas » Wittgenstein and Language » [Wittrs] Rejecting a Language Arrangement
[Wittrs] Rejecting a Language Arrangement [message #509] Thu, 27 August 2009 21:17 Go to next message
Sean Wilson is currently offline  Sean Wilson
Messages: 793
Registered: August 2009
Location: Form of Life
Senior Member

... upon what conditions is it that one rejects a language frame? In one case, it would seem clear that you would reject a facile language set. If one sincerely spoke, for example, with the language sets of a child, one would only be able to accord a child's understanding to the matters therein. But it isn't necessarily the case that this should be true of all such accounts. For in those instances where the child language frame facilitated a simple sort of discussion -- doing the simple things the lexicon was designed for -- one would have absolutely no objection to its deployment.

And so one would never criticize another's language use where it was "home to its purposes," one might say.

The only time one gets into trouble in how they language is when their use of the lexicon cannot facilitate the same sort of brain tasks or cognitive functions that appear in certain segments or eschelons of the culture's lexicon, when referring to or about the same sorts of things. And the trouble only happens when the one form of language tries to say things about something, or at a level, that the other cannot allow. All that language is, is a level of  brain instruction. Facile language sets can perform equally well facile things. And in the language game, whatever gets the job done is never deprecated.  But where language goes "south," it happens like this: one translates or conjugates another's confusion into a more facilitative set of expressions. And in the process, one shows the person where the trouble is based upon their own way of speaking -- where the traffic accident is, so to speak.

Here is what I want to say. One cannot speak of something in a language that both can be shown in quarters of the wider lexicon to be better accounted for, and that itself runs into collision with its own conditions of assertability (its own ways of speaking).

Anything short of this is fair play.

Regards.

Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
Assistant Professor
Wright State University
Redesigned Website: http://seanwilson.org
SSRN papers: http://ssrn.com/author=596860
Twitter: http://twitter.com/seanwilsonorg
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/seanwilsonorg
New Discussion Group: http://seanwilson.org/wittgenstein.discussion.html




[Wittrs] Re: Rejecting a Language Arrangement [message #513 is a reply to message #509] Thu, 27 August 2009 21:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
SWMirsky is currently offline  SWMirsky
Messages: 188
Registered: August 2009
Senior Member
--- In Wittrs@yahoogroups.com, Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@...> wrote:
>

"Here is what I want to say. One cannot speak of something in a language that both can be shown in quarters of the wider lexicon to be better accounted for, and that itself runs into collision with its own conditions of assertability (its own ways of speaking).

"Anything short of this is fair play."


Sean, can you offer some concrete examples of what you have in mind here? Thanks. -- SWM



[Wittrs] Re: Rejecting a Language Arrangement [message #524 is a reply to message #509] Thu, 27 August 2009 23:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jrstern is currently offline  jrstern
Messages: 159
Registered: August 2009
Senior Member
--- In Wittrs@yahoogroups.com, Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@...> wrote:
>
> ... upon what conditions is it that one rejects a language frame?

Well, we have an interesting example of it over in the Hawkins
thread, in and about the use of the word "intentional".

I'm not sure how to answer your question directly.

Maybe somebody can give a lovely explanation of something in
Spanish and a worse one in French. Would that be a reason to
"reject a language frame", or are these "language frames" as
you mean them?

I suspect if they are what you mean at all, these are still
rather broader frames than you were thinking of.

But at the other end of things, if someone says,
"The cat is on the mat", and the cat's tail is brushing the
mat but that's the only contact, or where you look all over
and see only a dog on the mat, and the speaker says, "Yes, that's
what I saw and that's why I said what I said", are we dealing
with "language frames"?

Josh





[Wittrs] Re: Rejecting a Language Arrangement [message #527 is a reply to message #524] Fri, 28 August 2009 02:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Rajasekhar is currently offline  Rajasekhar
Messages: 52
Registered: August 2009
Member
--- In Wittrs@yahoogroups.com, "jrstern" <jrstern@...> wrote:
>
> --- In Wittrs@yahoogroups.com, Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@> wrote:
> >
> > ... upon what conditions is it that one rejects a language frame?
>
> Well, we have an interesting example of it over in the Hawkins
> thread, in and about the use of the word "intentional".
>
> I'm not sure how to answer your question directly.
>
> Maybe somebody can give a lovely explanation of something in
> Spanish and a worse one in French. Would that be a reason to
> "reject a language frame", or are these "language frames" as
> you mean them?
>
> I suspect if they are what you mean at all, these are still
> rather broader frames than you were thinking of.
>
> But at the other end of things, if someone says,
> "The cat is on the mat", and the cat's tail is brushing the
> mat but that's the only contact, or where you look all over
> and see only a dog on the mat, and the speaker says, "Yes, that's
> what I saw and that's why I said what I said", are we dealing
> with "language frames"?
>
> Josh
>As I see any frame of language can only denote verb in any context.So confusion arises when some one could not get a clear picture of said word.Words like consciousness,mind, Atman,God,etc may not be able to represent a clear picture without proper description but description may not be described in all its sense.
thank you
sekhar




Re: [Wittrs] Rejecting a Language Arrangement [message #1094 is a reply to message #509] Thu, 17 September 2009 22:06 Go to previous message
nobul savage is currently offline  nobul savage
Messages: 21
Registered: September 2009
Location: Australia
Junior Member
do metaphors serve this purpose? say a dead metaphor that we are so acustomed with it, it becomes part of the lexicon e.g Chair leg?

Regards Brendan
Next Topic: [Wittrs] Language games
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Apr 26 17:28:37 EDT 2018

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01618 seconds