4 ms·

It's neutral. As per de Saussure, just like pretty much any feature of the language besides onomatopoeia, they're arbitrary. You could call a computer 'a spedhl

by jhgb 5y ago

It's neutral. As per de Saussure, just like pretty much any feature of the language besides onomatopoeia, they're arbitrary. You could call a computer 'a spedhlurf" and it would be neither better nor worse.

beepbooptheory 5y ago
This is not quite the right thing to take away from Saussure! In the absence of true signifieds, signifiers are "arbitrary" in the sense of the classical model, but that very thing opens up a huge number of questions about how these relations are formed and enforced, in the absence of substantial nodes. In the absence of signifieds, there can only be, in a broad sense, enforcement, or "rules" to language games that form and disform as society changes, in a more Wittgenstein/Cavell sense. Saussure would absolutely be on the side of questioning our use of language because the effects it has, he is probably the biggest early intellectual source for these discussions. Saussure would laugh quite a bit at everyone's extreme defensiveness in this thread. So many people scared of losing their signifieds that never really existed in the first place. Consider precisely what everyone is so angry about, such that GP is being downvoted so much, it is a faith in a ground that is only a illusion, at the cost of discussions and progress that only aspire to help people. Sad!
- jhgb 5y ago
  Why isn't it "the right thing to take away"? The fact that a computer is called "Rechner" in German and "ordinateur" in French and "počítač" in Czech shows that it's arbitrary and all three options work equally well -- neither a Frenchman or a German or a Czech will have a misconception of what is being talked about when seeing their respective native words instead of "computer". The fact that "I" in French is "Je" and in German it's "Ich" and in Czech it's "já" shows that that is arbitrary as well and all three options work equally well, too. Or are you saying that one of these language is better or worse than the others? "So many people scared of losing their signifieds" Are you saying that someone is about to steal my computer?
  - beepbooptheory 5y ago
    I mean just think it through though: you are right, but if they are all arbitrary, then it is up to people/us to care about how language is used. If it was otherwise, than all those who resist modifying their language could just appeal to the universal/set-in-stone structures of a language mapping onto a reality. Rather, what we have is language as a kind of spontaneous activity, where we can inquire and question about it, perhaps try to change some things to more closely map onto a better world. Also more historically: structuralism is very much the intellectual tradition from which this kind of discourse ultimately comes from, whether you like it or not. And Saussure is widely considered the "founder" of it. People arent trying to steal your computer, but people on here are very worried about someone stealing their manhood or whatever, and that is silly.

by jhgb 5y ago

beepbooptheory 5y ago

This is not quite the right thing to take away from Saussure! In the absence of true signifieds, signifiers are "arbitrary" in the sense of the classical model, but that very thing opens up a huge number of questions about how these relations are formed and enforced, in the absence of substantial nodes. In the absence of signifieds, there can only be, in a broad sense, enforcement, or "rules" to language games that form and disform as society changes, in a more Wittgenstein/Cavell sense. Saussure would absolutely be on the side of questioning our use of language because the effects it has, he is probably the biggest early intellectual source for these discussions. Saussure would laugh quite a bit at everyone's extreme defensiveness in this thread. So many people scared of losing their signifieds that never really existed in the first place. Consider precisely what everyone is so angry about, such that GP is being downvoted so much, it is a faith in a ground that is only a illusion, at the cost of discussions and progress that only aspire to help people. Sad!

jhgb 5y ago
Why isn't it "the right thing to take away"? The fact that a computer is called "Rechner" in German and "ordinateur" in French and "počítač" in Czech shows that it's arbitrary and all three options work equally well -- neither a Frenchman or a German or a Czech will have a misconception of what is being talked about when seeing their respective native words instead of "computer". The fact that "I" in French is "Je" and in German it's "Ich" and in Czech it's "já" shows that that is arbitrary as well and all three options work equally well, too. Or are you saying that one of these language is better or worse than the others? "So many people scared of losing their signifieds" Are you saying that someone is about to steal my computer?
- beepbooptheory 5y ago
  I mean just think it through though: you are right, but if they are all arbitrary, then it is up to people/us to care about how language is used. If it was otherwise, than all those who resist modifying their language could just appeal to the universal/set-in-stone structures of a language mapping onto a reality. Rather, what we have is language as a kind of spontaneous activity, where we can inquire and question about it, perhaps try to change some things to more closely map onto a better world. Also more historically: structuralism is very much the intellectual tradition from which this kind of discourse ultimately comes from, whether you like it or not. And Saussure is widely considered the "founder" of it. People arent trying to steal your computer, but people on here are very worried about someone stealing their manhood or whatever, and that is silly.