These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
Do you really need clarification or are you merely being difficult? J.G. On Jun 7, 2011, at 2:11 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote:
On 7 June 2011 21:31, Joseph Gilbert <joeg4us@roadrunner.com> wrote:Do you hold that vocal sounds affect us emotionally/feeling-wise?Hi Jospeh, I'm assuming this question is directed at me?They are capable of emotional influence. Though this a function of the person, rather than the sound. For example, deaf people aren't influencedthat much.It's not clear to me how this relates to your usage of "are" in "words arevocal sounds". Will let you mull it over. HuwJoseph Gilbert On Jun 7, 2011, at 10:25 AM, Huw Lloyd wrote: On 7 June 2011 16:27, Joseph Gilbert <joeg4us@roadrunner.com> wrote:Words are vocal sounds. Vocal sounds are meaningful.I think you have an elision here, Joseph. If you take "are" as the plural of "is", you're effectively saying: "A word is a sound, sound is meaningful." Hence you appear to be conflating the relation of equivalence with aggregation: (Spoken) Words are (composed of) vocal sounds.Just as you might say "Pyramids are (composed of) stone" rather than"Pyramids are buildings". HuwJoseph Gilbert On Jun 6, 2011, at 9:15 PM, Tony Whitson wrote:Peirce explicitly contended that the meaning of any sign (includingwords,thoughts, arguments, feelings, or whatever), _qua_ signs, lies in the virtuality of potential future interpretations (just by virtue of the fundamental nature of what it is to be a sign, i.e., in the activity ofsign-relations).Also, notice that I'm using "meaning" as something that we -- and our words, thoughts, etc. -- DO, not something they contain, convey, etc. Irecently noticed similar usage in the title of Jay's MCA review of Sfard's book, which speaks of "Meaning Mathematically," not "mathematical meaning."The latter locution could mean the same as Jay's, but it also wouldallowthe more familiar reading of "meaning" as a noun. If we need to begin meaning differently than how we might be heard to mean in positivistdiscourse, I think we need to begin choosing speaking that resists assimilation to that discourse. On Mon, 6 Jun 2011, mike cole wrote: The poem is neat and your explication brings to mind a recurrent thoughtwhen I encounter the core idea of "the thought is completed in theword." I(think I) know what LSV and Mandelshtam are saying, but I always havethisthought that the thought is not yet completed, not in so far as it istakenup, perhaps transformed, and comes back again at a later time, in somenew, albeit related, form, to begin that side of the cycle over again. mike On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Tony Whitson <twhitson@udel.edu> wrote:I clipped the wrong line from Martin's post in that last message. Imeantthe Dickinson verse in reponse to the line that now appears below fromMartin.In Dickinson's verse, what's not timeless is not merely the meaningthat aword does as a lexical unit in a language (i.e., in the philologicalsense),but even in a specific utterance the word spoken continues meaning, asit continues living, non-timelessly. On Sun, 1 May 2011, Tony Whitson wrote: On Tue, 26 Apr 2011, Martin Packer wrote:For LSV word-meaning is not timeless. It changes over time; hedidn'tstudy philology for nothing!A word is dead When it is saidSome say. I say it just Begins to live That day. --Emily DickinsonI find it helpful to think of meaning as something that words do --not something they contain, convey, etc. Tony WhitsonUD School of Education NEWARK DE 19716 twhitson@udel.edu _______________________________ "those who fail to reread are obliged to read the same story everywhere" -- Roland Barthes, S/Z (1970) __________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca _______________________________________________ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca Tony WhitsonUD School of Education NEWARK DE 19716 twhitson@udel.edu _______________________________ "those who fail to reread are obliged to read the same story everywhere" -- Roland Barthes, S/Z (1970) __________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca__________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca _______________________________________________ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca__________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca__________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
__________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca