It is difficult to find a good analogy
to language. But the closest might be money. Economic activities—
in the broad sense of people exchanging goods and services with one
another—antedate the invention of money by many millennia, and economic
activities do not absolutely require money. But the invention of
money as a symbol for exchanges, and its historical development into
more complexforms such as paper and electronic money, is clearly responsible
for some new forms of economic activity. Certainly, modern
economies could not exist as they do without something resembling the
monetary symbol systems currently in use.
Let’s try another, more cognitive analogy. Basic quantitative skills
are possessed by all mammals and even some bird species, and so they
assuredly do not rely on written symbols and notations. But when human
beings invented written symbols and notations to help them count
and calculate, all of a sudden they began to count and calculate in some
new and more complexways. And it is well known that some notation
systems enable certain kinds of calculations that others do not. For example,
it is basically impossible to imagine doing algebra or calculus (not
to mention long division) with Roman numerals; something like Arabic
numerals, based on the place value system (and with a zero), is required
for modern mathematics.
The way human beings behave and think thus changes when symbols,
including linguistic symbols, become involved. Money and mathematics
are two good examples, but the analogy to language is not perfect.Spoken language is more basic than these. In many ways, minted
money and Arabic numerals are more like written language than spoken
language—and indeed, historically the invention of written symbols for
speech, mathematical activities, and economic activities were closely
intertwined. Ontogenetically, human beings acquire competence with
a spoken language much earlier than with written symbols, and this
happens in close concert with their earliest understandings of many
aspects of their physical and social worlds.
to language. But the closest might be money. Economic activities—
in the broad sense of people exchanging goods and services with one
another—antedate the invention of money by many millennia, and economic
activities do not absolutely require money. But the invention of
money as a symbol for exchanges, and its historical development into
more complexforms such as paper and electronic money, is clearly responsible
for some new forms of economic activity. Certainly, modern
economies could not exist as they do without something resembling the
monetary symbol systems currently in use.
Let’s try another, more cognitive analogy. Basic quantitative skills
are possessed by all mammals and even some bird species, and so they
assuredly do not rely on written symbols and notations. But when human
beings invented written symbols and notations to help them count
and calculate, all of a sudden they began to count and calculate in some
new and more complexways. And it is well known that some notation
systems enable certain kinds of calculations that others do not. For example,
it is basically impossible to imagine doing algebra or calculus (not
to mention long division) with Roman numerals; something like Arabic
numerals, based on the place value system (and with a zero), is required
for modern mathematics.
The way human beings behave and think thus changes when symbols,
including linguistic symbols, become involved. Money and mathematics
are two good examples, but the analogy to language is not perfect.Spoken language is more basic than these. In many ways, minted
money and Arabic numerals are more like written language than spoken
language—and indeed, historically the invention of written symbols for
speech, mathematical activities, and economic activities were closely
intertwined. Ontogenetically, human beings acquire competence with
a spoken language much earlier than with written symbols, and this
happens in close concert with their earliest understandings of many
aspects of their physical and social worlds.
No comments:
Post a Comment