On Dec 7, 2012, at 11:13 AM, [email protected] wrote:

> Someone in, say, remote western China, however innately intelligent, who
> had never heard or read a thing before now about Cleopatra (or heard or read
> the English 'designate', etc) could conjure effectively no notion at all
(and
> certainly nothing "informational") now if exposed solely to the sound or
> scription 'Cleopatra'.

Not precisely. Your remote listener could easily conjure a notion upon hearing
"Cleopatra." But it probably wouldn't be congruent with your notion: it won't
be the Queen of the Nile, or Elizabeth Taylor, or a Shakespearean character.

Perhaps hearing someone speaking in a foreign language conjures no
notions--i.e., "meanings"--just the response that the language sounds pretty,
or guttural, or melodic, or whatever. Perhaps something said in a foreign
language sounds like it "means" something, which you try to infer by context
and gestures. Or it sounds like another word you know, so you produce the
notion of that, not what the speaker had in mind.

Even in English, someone may misunderstand or incorrectly parse the sounds
being spoken (or often, sung) and think it "means" something else. These
misunderstood words are called "Mondegreens," from the experience described by
Sylvia Wright, who didn't understand the last lines of Percy's Reliquaries and
thought it read "They ha[v]e slain the Earl O'Moray / And Lady Mondegreen."
The correct line is "and laid him on the green."

BTW, there is a comparable effect in writing. It is quite common to misread
someone's poor handwriting, which the writer has no problem reading. But even
in printed English, there are instances of misreadings. The "long s" is a form
of the letter "s" that resembles a lowercase f without a full crossbar. It was
often used in printing up until the 19th century, and then fell out of favor
and familiarity. Now it often confuses people, who do not understand what a
man speaks of his oldest "fon," or the like. Also, it is nowadays an accepted
"antiquarian" touch to write "ye olde XYZ shoppe," pronounced /yee/ (and often
/shop-pee/). The "y" is actually a misread middle-English thorn, representing
the voiceless consonant we now write with "th." The original letter closely
resembled a lowercase y, and as the early fonts often didn't include the
thorn, printers used a "y" (sometimes from a blackletter font). That came to
be read and understood as a /y/, not as a /th/, and so we have our modern
faux-archaic "ye olde" term.

Long story short: just because the listener or reader has no knowledge of the
referent does not mean he or she cannot produce a notion in response to the
word.





| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Michael Brady

Reply via email to