JF/AS/JM:
I still detect some terminological confusion. What makes linguistics
(and semantics in particular) so exasperating is that we must use
language to discuss and explain language. We use words to define words,
and inevitably risk creating cyclic loops: W means X; X means Y; Y
means Z; Z means W — and we’ve gone round in a circle. The miracle is
that ANY meaningful human discourse takes place at all!
This is why some branches of linguistics resort to pictures, diagrams,
and mathematical symbols in an attempt to avoid (or reduce) this
dependence on fuzzy verbiage.
Let’s try to clarify this signifier-to-signified mapping by writing
s1 -> S1 [Noise of Nabokovian feet rushing for the EXIT! Wait. Ti
postoi, krasavista moya!]
Acting like an Edenic Adam, I assign (map) an s1 (“dog”) to an object
S1 (<tail-wagging-fido>). We call this type of mapping ARBITRARY
in the sense that any number of s1’s could have served the purpose. You
may prefer “woof-woof” or “bow-wow” or “chien” or “gi-gli” -- whatever
— there’s no UNIQUELY CORRECT god-given, apodeictic choice for s1.
Naturally, shorter names like “dog” or “chien” are more convenient than
“squazzlebumpsahokeypokeydaisy,” (yet you would be surprised how crazy
some of the world’s languages actually are). Language is a
social-contract activity so that each of us adopting a private s1 is
NOT A USEFUL OPTION (though it does happen among small groups and
families). Each speech community agrees on its “standard” s1 (or maybe
several s1’s emerge as synonyms.) ONCE “fixed,” a PARTICULAR mapping s1
-> S1 TAKES ON A NEW ASPECT. It has become part of the potential
INPUT in the LANGUAGE ACQUISITION PROCESS. Children hearing (and later
reading) s1 = “dog” form an increasingly-reinforced mental association
with S1 <tail-wagging-fido>. (We can skip the details since the
mechanism is not yet understood! Ask Chomsky and Pinker.) THIS fixed
associative mapping, which we can write as
s1 => S1 in contrast to s1 -> S1
s1 => S1 Is a totally different kettle of worms from the Saussurean,
arbitrary s1 -> S1 mapping. I hope AS can see the significance of
these two DISTINCT maps. I have a feeling that he may have confused the
two. In a real sense, the brain’s s1 => S1 mapping (which covers
hugely complex sequences of perceptual-sensory, neuron-synaptic
activity sequences) DOES endow “dog” with actual canine images. The
arbitrariness of the signifier choice HAS disappeared. We can now all
agree that for Anglophones “dog” (for Francophones, “chien,” etc)
inevitably carries the very smell’n’feel of our flea-ridden canines. A
future lecture could address the related problem of how we go from
“that individual dog” to “dogs in general.”
There are plausible neurocognitive reasons why rhymes and puns are so
appealing. Briefly: as we scan/parse incoming text-streams (written or
spoken) we are continually (subconsciously) forming hypotheses, anticipating,
filling gaps — triggering myriad migdet-swarms in adjacent clusters of
neurons — hearing “Am I my brother’s ...” has already triggered
“keeper” before the arrival of KIPPER; one imagines a resulting minor
fire-storm of synaptic giggles. Rhymes, too, probably generate pleasant
resonances, which may explain the number of reduplicate words in our
vocabulary (helter-skelter; mumbo-jumbo; incy-wincy; etc.)
BUT, with Jerry, I still urge caution against VN’s “proof-by-wordplay.”
Which reminds me that PROVE used to rhyme with LOVE back when Bill the
Quill was barding.
I can well agree, Jerry, that people pronounce it “mischEEVious” under
the influence (consciously or otherwise) of accidental rhymes. If it’s
any consolation, that middle stress is not confined to damned Yanquies;
we Liverpool scousers use the same intonation. I don’t think
onomatopoeia comes into it. There we are aping all kinds of animal and
natural sounds. And it is worth noting how even these VARY amusingly
between languages — French cats don’t PURR; they go RON-RON ;=) -- a
further blow to AS’s innate signifier agenda!
Another nice example of “erroneous” word generation: HOT SLAW
(assuming Coleslaw is COLD slaw!) Bill Bryson also notes CHEESE BURGER
— wrongly replacing the HAM in Hamburger.
Then again, we once heard someone asking the waitress for “More AU JUS,
please.”
Stan Kelly-Bootle
“Dog-eared” I gave (“dogged by injury,” “dog rose,”