0

I wonder about the different schools of thought in recursive language. See for example the case of Pirahã/Avram Noah Chomski/Daniel Leonard Everett reflections.

It seems to me [pardon me because I have a minuscule IQ...] that complex (and by the way complicated) AND large structures NEED "no-recursive language" or language which is recursive but can be used as if would be "no-recursive language". It needs so the communication from the top to down and/or from center to periphery, for example generates more followers if it is not using in full the potential of recursive language.

I share a few examples:

  • The two commands from Jesus to his followers.
  • Logos of organizations.
  • Twitter messages of 140 characters.

The picture tries to capture the easiness that "no recursive language" (if it exists) can bring.

enter image description here

|improve this question
  • 2
    You seem to mix up recursive language (i.e. triadic symbols referring to and making up propositions about triadic symbols, e.g. words referring to concepts), which indeed allows for complexity and detachment from concrete situations in the first place, and a "recursive" use of language (which in itself is always recursive in the descriptive sense above - otherwise it would not be a language in the full sense) in communicative acts. Other people deeper into the philosophy of language may be more definite about that, but that is what I think is a huge problem with this question. – Philip Klöcking♦ May 2 '18 at 10:58
  • 1
    For arguments about why humans live in a triadically structured world, see e.g. Krüger, Hans-Peter (2014): 'The Nascence of Modern Man: Two Approaches to the Problem – Biological Evolutionary Theory and Philosophical Anthropology' in J. de Mul (ed.) Plessner's Philosophical Anthropology: Perspectives and Prospects. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, pp. 57–77. – Philip Klöcking♦ May 2 '18 at 11:02
  • It's not really clear what is meant by 'no-recursive language'. Can you say more? – possibleWorld May 2 '18 at 12:47
  • @PhilipKlöcking. Thank you for points you mentioned. Are you familiar with [case of Pirahã/Avram Noah Chomski/Daniel Leonard Everett]? Regarding the books I will check them and maybe I will add them to the list of books to read. – KwanzaKymi May 25 '18 at 3:37
  • @possibleWorld. I mean opposite to "recursive", I mean absence of "recursive". The second one I mentioned just in case you like the thinking of Jacques Derrida. – KwanzaKymi May 25 '18 at 3:40

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.