Meaning and Language, Part 1

Here are some random thoughts about meaning and language.

Let's say that I'm visited by an Alien. The Alien points at an apple and says "zobok". I don't know what "zobok" refers to, but I guess that it refers to the apple or some property of the apple. For example, it might mean "green", "round", or perhaps its X-ray transparency. I hope it's not the latter, since I can't see X-rays without special equipment! To find out, I point at a grape which is also green and say "zobok". The Alien snarls, which I assume means that the grape doesn't have "zobok-ness". This in turn means that "zobok" probably doesn't mean "green".

I continue to point at other things that have something in common with an apple and say "zobok" until the Alien doesn't snarl. When this happens, there's a good chance that the property they have in common is called "zobok". By trial and error, I find that "zobok" means "something between 3 and 6 inches across". This isn't even a concept that humans typically have, but apparently the concept is useful for the Alien. We continue is this fashion and I finally figure out the Alien terms for "green", "round", "organic", and "smooth".

Now it's time for our roles to reverse. I point to the apple and say "apple". The Alien understands the game and points at lots of other things while saying "apple". But the only time I don't snarl is when the Alien points at an apple, so the Alien figures out by process of elimination that "apple-ness" is associated with physical objects that are "zobok", "green", "organic" and "smooth". The Alien doesn't know for sure that "apples" always have these properties, and there aren't additional constraints or special cases, but for all practical purposes it now knows "apple-ness".

Now that we're both playing the game and can figure out each other's labels for things, we can learn each other's labels too. For example, when I say "apple" and point to the apple, the Alien points to the apple as well and says "pizo". Then I point at the apple and say "pizo" and the Alien says "apple". This is how we exchange symbols, and now I know that "pizo-ness" is the same or similar to "apple-ness".

It's worth noting that we both might have senses that the other does not. For example, the Alien might see X-rays and so "pizo-ness" includes the apple's X-ray properties. Similarly, I might have taste and so "apple-ness" includes the apple's taste. If I had a pair of X-ray glasses, I could crudely learn the Alien's terms for various of X-ray properties, albeit in a crude way. So if the Alien uses "akk" for something that gives off strong X-rays, I could put on the glasses and verify this term. I could even come up with my own term for the same property and use this to communicate back with the Alien.

Up until now, the language has been very simply - single words associated with individual properties or bundling of properties. Of course, words can refer to more complex things. Here's a guesstimate of how hard it would be to convey the properties of various concepts:

• Simple: red, loud, smooth, fast

• Medium: apple, car

• Hard: sympathetic, argumentative, creative

For bonus points, how would you convey the concept "conscious"? ;-)

In the next part of this series, I'll chat about language syntax.

Comments

[Roger L. Cauvin]

Graham, you might want to look into Quine's indeterminacy of translation if you haven't already done so. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indeterminacy_of_translation.

[Graham Glass]

Hi Roger,

Thanks for the info; the link is actually http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indeterminacy_of_translation.

I agree with the theory; it also applies to learning our own language. The probability that the meaning that I ascribe to a particular word as you do typically approaches one over time, although in my experience this really only applies to simple words. It's very common in everyday life to meet people who ascribe slightly or sometimes significantly different meanings to non-trivial words!

Cheers,
Graham