I was lying on my bed the other night and played around with my head (you'll get it later) and came up with this:
The Second Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary contains full entries for 171,476 words in current use, and 47,156 obsolete words.
If so, how many of those words should we know to be able to accurately express ourselves?
How can we know for certain that there exists words which can properly do so?
I believe that every individual is in danger of being led into saying something which either doesn't correctly convey his thoughts or give a wholly different nature to the meaning of what he really intended to say.
Example: John felt... what was that word... sad and disappointed. He was actually a bit flustered (who came up with that?) but couldn't find the words. That feeling he told his wife, his colleagues, his parents, and they throw a nice dinner at The Westin.
Another: Jane felt... something close to jovial. But actually there might not even be a word to what she really felt so she stuck to the word and made herself believe that she felt jolly.
It may seem trivial to stray a bit but what if it comes to full sentences? If we can't be certain that every word exists for everything, a whole sentence may even deviate from its course.
Because... there are things which I know I feel and want to say, but have the shortcomings to put them into words. Maybe it's the fear of not being able to be precise and articulate and later those words override the meaning of origin.
Edited: typo
Are we kidding ourselves? Part 2
------------------------------------
I thought of another situation where "Are we kidding ourselves?" applies.
Jack was full of admiration for his male neighbor. He wasn't exactly sure what he felt but it never crossed his mind that they were normal feelings to have for a person. Instead he finally figured he was gay though he wasn't really comfortable with a homosexual lifestyle. As soon as he made himself believe that he was, he thought, I'm gay anyway so what the hell. Three months later, he discovered he contracted AIDS from another male (since his neighbor started chasing him with a broom whenever Jack came near). Jack, feeling like his world has come to an end, sat on the ledge of a building twenty storeys high, contemplating. Thinking again hard, he realized that he wasn't gay, and feeling totally depressed (he's sure about this one), threw himself off the building.
No offense, gay folks.
Originally posted by mikelomThat was funny!
Yeah. It's important to get the correct word.
A gnome was sitting at the bottom of his garden with his head held deeply betwen his knees. A pixie came along and said, "are you a Goblin?"
"No," he said." just a nose bleed!" 😉
Not too long ago I was heading out for a doctors appt. and was running late and my mom said..
"Well don't be rushin"
To which I replied.."Dang mom...I am not even European"
I know...sad...but it got a laugh out of her...which is hard since she hit 60.
Dave
Originally posted by OuermyhteWhat, no "Structure, Sign, and Play"?
May I recommend some reading?
Start with a summary of Saussure's work on signs, then find 'Differance' by Jacques Derrida and 'Simulacra and Simulations' by Jean Baudrillard. Quite heavy but very interesting stuff about the inadequacy of words that you're talking about.
Originally posted by Papyn Chase1. Read the User Guide to the OED. Therein you will discover that the OED purports to be a descriptive dictionary, rather than a prescriptive dictionary. In other words, it describes words that people are known to use or to have used.
I was lying on my bed the other night and played around with my head (you'll get it later) and came up with this:
The Second Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary contains full entries for 171,476 words in current use, and 47,156 obsolete words.
If so, how many of those words should we know to be able to accurately express ourselves?
How can ...[text shortened]... recise and articulate and later those words override the meaning of origin.
Edited: typo
2. If you take your cues from #1, you can skip the horribly translated French theory (assuming you are not fluent in French). The rub is this: words mean what they mean only in the context of a group of people communicating. Words only mean what we take them to mean. That's not a failing, which is to some extent the secondary claim of that theory -- it's just a fact of how language works.