Two most important traditions have empowered the study of language in their separate and very different ways; however, the
two topics of the study of language are hotly debated by linguists like the
sort of synthesis of philosophical grammar and structural linguistics begins to
develop. The two most important traditions of study and assumption that I might
use as point of reference taking into
account the problems of mind, as each evolved under specific category of
psychology during its time, to which contributed uniquely and distinctly.
It may look or feel a little paradoxical to talk of structural linguistics in this manner,
given its belligerent anti-psychologism. However, the inconsistency is reduced as when one
postulates the fact that belligerent anti-psychologism is no less veritable of
much modern psychology itself, in particular of those categories that only a
decade ago monopolized the study of use and acquisition of language.
It is so easy to get hooked into the analysis of how terminology is evolving, but we can’t take the
importance of behavioural science for granted as it provides evidence of its
work. But it has been up to this date
interpreting behavior in a way that is unsatisfactorily.
Behavioural scientists have focused solely on the data and how it is organized, and it
would seem that behavioural science acting as the technology of control of
Linguistics and philosophers of language seem pre-occupied with this kind or orientation toward
anti-mentalism. Indeed, modern
structural linguistics surfaced from its victory in providing assumptions of an
anti-mentalistic, using behavioural model to the Anti-mentalism in linguistics
and in philosophy of language, systematically workable and behaviourist to the
occurrence of language, by expanding this model to its natural limits, it
furnished the foundation of an interesting conclusive revelation of the
meagerness of any such model to the problem of mind.
Like Wittgenstein saw that if language was to represent reality, if sentences were
to represent its state of affairs, then it had to be something in common
between the sentence and the state of affairs. He saw a way to describe that on
the analogy with the way pictures represent state of affairs. He thought it had
to be some structural similarities, that just as a sentence was made of
sequence of words that stood for things ‘names’ so the arrangement of words in
a sentence mirrored the arrangement of objects in a fact. This gave him a kind
of lever of metaphysical crutch, where he could then retract the structure of
reality from the structure of language, because he envisaged that the structure
of reality has to determine the structure of language. Unless language mirrored
reality in some way, it would be impossible for sentence to mean anything.
To reiterate the point here is that we are able to speak of reality not just in a way we use
words that stands for things, but because those words have a relationship to each other within the sentence that correspond
to the relationship to things that
have to each other in the world. That’s what Wittgenstein thought about
the logical structure, and the words and sentences have that structure in
common. But bear in mind, he is not talking about our common language we use
every day, which he thought obscure the logical structure. He thought if we
take an ordinary sentence and did some analysis of how they mean, we will get
down to the elementary sentences as he calls them, and then there will be the
strict picturing of the relationship between the structure of the sentences and
the structure of the fact. Wittgenstein inherited this from Frege. Gottlob Frege is highly recognized today for
his contributions to mathematical logic and the philosophy of language.
Wittgenstein saw the fundamental unit of meaning isn’t the word, the word only function, the
name, only mean in the context of a sentence that is itself a fact that enables
the sentence to picture the structure of facts in the world. I think we can
easily see what we mean by picturing when we say, ‘there is a cat on the mat’ this
structure is easily understandable, but suppose, we say ‘ there is no cat on
the mat’ so how the hell could we picture something we say in correspondence to
something that is not there?
Wittgenstein thought that words like the so called logical constant such as ‘not’ if’
‘and’ ‘or’ are not part of the picturing
structure. It is not hard to believe this, take for example, the ‘non smoking sign’
there is a line drawn through the picture of a cigarette to mean no smoking.
The line that is drawn through the cigarette is the negation, but does not form
part of the picturing relationship. The ‘not’ is the operating on the picture
but it isn’t itself part of the picture.
The reason I am discussing this is to allow people to understand that positive statement of
affirmation do have impact on our lives. The way the sentence is structured,
described and pictured can affect the world in a way that mirrors the picturing
of the speaker of that affirmation. Of
course Wittgenstein did not have this in mind; he was more concerned about the
language of ethics, religion, and the sciences. But for our daily use of
language, I think it is prudent to attempt to demarcate talk that makes sense
from talk that doesn’t make sense.
I am the pioneer of N.V.L.S.E which stands for Neuro Visual and Linguistic Syntax Encoding I
created carefully crafted sentences for particular solution to problems people
are having when they are unconsciously engaged in self-talk or talk with others.
This will help them to use their language that is coherent with the universal
order so that it supports them in the fulfillment and achievement of their
Here is an example of a picturing sentence affirmation structure
PHYSICAL GOAL: To race with superior strength, speed and agility
"I DEVOTE TIME AND EFFORT TO MAINTAINING MY PHYSICAL EDGE THROUGHOUT THE
Andre Zizi is a philosopher, qualified teacher, NLP facilitator, trained in the educational psychology. His specialty
is in the area of mental toughness and emotional mastery, stress, the
psychology and process of business start ups, relationship conflict, how to
prevent or overcome an illness and or how to achieve dream goals. His Skype ID