Michael: I agree in general with your point re using different words to mean
the same thing. My little quibble: if we are able, in social discourse, to
employ different words for the same thing, it can help to demonstrate that
two speakers are sharing the same meaning. If a single word is used, both
speakers may believe (incorrectly, or not) that they share a common
understanding of the term. If a second term is introduced any difference in
interpretation or usage can be identified.
Geoff C
From: Michael Brady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: gift/talent/aptitude/skill/ etc
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 16:03:02 -0400
On Oct 17, 2008, at 3:15 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The list grows longer. After today's postings it's now:
gift
talent
aptitude
skill
capacity
craft
The question I was asking was, in effect, does any lister feel that he
could
"Could"? Does? Can? Why the note of probability or conditionality?
prescribe
"Prescribe"? Assign? Evoke?
different notions for each of these words?
Okay, Mister Smarty Notion: What does "different" summon up in your mind
in this context? Does any degree of differentiation constitute a
difference (or as the saying goes, can there be a mere "distinction
without a difference")? Does a generic difference between, say, "talent"
and "brick" denote a greater range or span than a difference within a
category, such as between "talent" and "aptitude"? If so, would you say
that one's linguistic faculty uses a sequential range of generalities,
within which related word-notions are grouped, some of which signify
nested relationships and other of which indicate equivalent terms?
(Notice: I claim only muddled thinking leads one to ask the questions in
the
form, "What IS talent?" "What IS craft?" etc. The very form of that
question
"reifies": It erroneously assumes it's not a question of language usage
("This
is what I call 'craft' etc") but of what it "really is", and now it's our
job
to go discover what craft "really is".)
Would you say there's overlap (for you) in some of the notions? Would you
say
you use some of them synonymously, interchangeably? In a fairly rigorous
philosophic discussion, it's wise to sacrifice the felicity of avoiding
repetition of the same word again and again. Banish one of any pair of
"synonymous"
words. Use the same word each time you want to occasion the same notion
in
your reader.
Why does anyone choose one word instead of another "of similar meaning"?
Doesn't this point to the crux of everything you've posted, namely, that
different words evoke different responses (notions, cherished feelings,
even 'meanings')?
And why stop with discrete words? Why not go to the full linguistic
expression, namely, sentences and larger utterances?
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Michael Brady
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
