[Wittrs] Re: Wittgenstein and "Brain Scripts"
- From: "iro3isdx" <xznwrjnk-evca@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 15:06:11 -0000
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "seanwilsonorg" <whoooo26505@...> wrote:
> I want to say this: language is as language does. And how language
> does this is a function of grammar. And grammar entails social
> learning and cognition.
It's that word "grammar" that puzzles me. It seems to me that when you
say "And how language does this is a function of grammar", what you
really mean is "we haven't a clue as to how language does this, so let's
attach the label 'grammar' so that we can pretend that we do understand
it."
> And grammar entails social learning and cognition.
I can agree that social learning is involved with natural language,
though it seems strange to describe that as an entailment of grammar.
But I don't know about the entails cognition part.What does that even
mean? To me, cognition is a rather vague word. I use that word from
time to time, and its vagueness suits my use well. But if it is vague,
I'm wondering how it can be an entailment.
Perhaps I am just confused by the use of the word "grammar" by
Wittgensteinians. We have these things called computer languages, of
which C++ is one, and Kirby's favorite appears to be python. These
computer languages have something associated with them that is called
"grammar". And that grammar is actually describable in specific terms.
Moreover, the compilers for that computer language seem to be able to
use the computer language while having no social learning skills and no
cognition. Moreover, it seems to me that Chomskyans are often using the
term "grammar" in very much the same way that it is used with respect to
computer languages.
I guess I need some clarification about what is grammar.
Regards,
Neil
Other related posts:
