These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,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These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,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.
Gilbert -- I assume the "Our" you start with is a statement about homo sapiens sapiens? I am uncertain of the temporal sequence in your account of language. My stomach grumbles, a bodily sound. Do I use this sound to represent something outside of myself? How i react to something presumably is conditional on what I am doing and where i am but hard to see that in your account. The part about a fearful environment of evolutionary adaptation certainly seems plausible....... and for most of humanity a lot of the time, remains true to this day. mike On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 12:08 PM, Joseph Gilbert <joeg4us@roadrunner.com>wrote: > Our culture is based upon a fearful world view. It was instituted with the > roots of human language. What were the living conditions for humans at the > time that the roots of our current language were established? > > It is very curious that we use sounds of our bodies to represent > things outside of us. The sounds of our bodies represent goings-on of our > bodies, physically and emotionally. We use the bodily sounds which come from > the way we are affected by a thing to represent that thing It is the effect > on us that is represented by our bodily sounds, not the thing. The thing is > indirectly represented by our body sounds as a consequence of how we are > affected by the thing. There is the THING, the EFFECT and the BODY SOUND. > Without the effect, there would be no sound. Without the sound, there would > be no word. We cannot take our reactions to things out of the picture of how > language works and expect to understand it. Language is primarily all about > how we react to things. It conveys how we react to each other. The > how-we-react about any particular thing is the what-that-thing-means. What a > thing means can only come from our experience with it and we experience our > reaction. > > Joseph Gilbert > _______________________________________________ > 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