Let me try to clarify. The word 'only' signifies that such an example is insignificant and that it is a rare occurrence. This is why I tried to point out that Hayakawa found that it is not the case, as I also tried to point out in my example.
"But as we know from everyday experience, learning language is not simply a matter of learning words; it is a matter of correctly relating our words to the things and happenings for which they stand"
I do not think that Hayakawa is contradicting himself here. I think that he is trying to point out that sometimes we have to use words with different affective connotations in order to try to convey our feelings while not having to say them directly. For example, let's go back to the example about the person who helps the sports team. If I say, "look it's the errand boy!" my feelings of disrespect towards that person is portrayed. Also, the it is still separate from the symbolized because it also is a symbol of such feelings....? I think I'm starting to confuse myself.
Connecting this to Janet's note, I believe that the whole confusion of how the symbol is the symbolized is how the symbols are able to influence the reactions toward the symbolized. Once again, I am unsure if I am making any sense.
(Mary Quien)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I was thinking - does this all boil down to the way you think of words, or the power that you give them?
Those who don't think much of their semantic environment probably wouldn't realize that being an "errand boy" and a "manager" of a sports team is the same. At the moment, the latter carries a more positive connotation for this blithely oblivious person. Or they might even fail to notice your attempt at being accommodating and selecting, in your opinion, the term with more positive connotations.
On the other hand, someone more in tune to the usage of language would realize that in some respects, the term "manager" is simply a euphemism of sorts for "errand boy." He or she may realize that your intention is to make him/her feel better when you say "manager", but would they feel just as embarrassed in the end? It depends on how much - for lack of a better term at the moment - power they give that word.
I'm not sure if that's my complete train of thought.. Or even if that made any sense at all. I'll try and clarify if anyone finds it necessary.
(Tiffany Yuan)
Post a Comment