How did language originate?

Interesting, so does this mean that language has an underlying purpose of being a classifier system on its own?
No, not in terms of languages at least. Language provides insight into the way people think, which is determined by their environment and experience. Learning a language, first your mother tongue, determines the way you think and perceive the world, which extends to a cultural level. When you learn a second language, this process of cognition is changed and opens your mind to a different mentality. It literally can change the way you think by rewiring your brain.

Kind of lost on this one I'm afraid. Parole/langue is unknown to my vocabulary, I'm afraid
Blame the French - or Swiss. It's just a classification for the sub-fields of linguistics.

It was just a thought experiment; to what extent to colorise a specific phrasing on an event by using different techniques (syntax, context, stress) on a phrase.

Divided in:

The cat got scared when a ball dropped in front of it. - Neutral

1. When the ball dropped in front of the cat, it got scared. - Syntax (placing action before emotion)
2. When the ball plunged in front of the mouser, it got frightened. -
Context (exaggeration of verbs / nouns)
3. As the projectile plunged right ahead of the mouser, it got frightened. -
Stress (adding stress to aggravate emotion)

1. How to place words within a sentence to imagine a specific action. (syntax) Creating a build-up of Action: the ball dropped to Reaction: the cat got scared
2. How replacing words (I took synonyms herem context) alters expression of these actions in a more aggressive way. Dropping becomes Plunging (aggressive action), Cat becomes Mouser (smaller), Scared becomes Frightened (a more extreme emotion)
3. How replacing words can create additional tension within a sentence by focusing on Stress within the sentence. As the projectile plunged right ahead of the mouser
I don't think it's exactly right the way you portray it, at least not in terms of how it would be done in linguistics. Syntax, context and stress have their own meaning in the field, so it's producing misunderstandings if you use them like this. In the "correct" use of the terms (correct within the realm of linguistics, that is), you could apply all the terms to an utterance with the same words and word order, and interpret them differently based on the focus. If you change the words, you change the meaning, without having to label it differently - because it's already different, you see?
 
Learning a language, first your mother tongue, determines the way you think and perceive the world, which extends to a cultural level. When you learn a second language, this process of cognition is changed and opens your mind to a different mentality. It literally can change the way you think by rewiring your brain.
Really?

I don't think it's exactly right the way you portray it, at least not in terms of how it would be done in linguistics. Syntax, context and stress have their own meaning in the field, so it's producing misunderstandings if you use them like this. In the "correct" use of the terms (correct within the realm of linguistics, that is), you could apply all the terms to an utterance with the same words and word order, and interpret them differently based on the focus. If you change the words, you change the meaning, without having to label it differently - because it's already different, you see?
Oh it was just my own experiment, I have zero knowledge on the actual field of linguistics. I just see each of these as a separate tool and used them as such on the sentences.
So it's the same words, but different grammatical use, hmm.
 
The more different the language, the bigger the impact.

So it's the same words, but different grammatical use, hmm.
Sometimes it's less grammatical use rather than pragmatical expression. Semantic meaning doesn't change if the words remain the same, because you used the same lexical input to your sentence. But if you utter the same sentence in a different situational context or stress a certain word that isn't in line with the natural rhythm of the language (a neutral stress), then you can change the pragmatical interpretation of the utterance. And grammar/syntax, semantics and pragmatics denote different fields in linguistics.
 
The more different the language, the bigger the impact.
So Ginny, interested in learning Flemish? :D

Sometimes it's less grammatical use rather than pragmatical expression. Semantic meaning doesn't change if the words remain the same, because you used the same lexical input to your sentence. But if you utter the same sentence in a different situational context or stress a certain word that isn't in line with the natural rhythm of the language (a neutral stress), then you can change the pragmatical interpretation of the utterance. And grammar/syntax, semantics and pragmatics denote different fields in linguistics.
I wonder, shouldn't vocal training be a must then with any language classes (middle school etc.)? Not just pronunciation but actual situational vocalisation. I don't recall I had to
do that when I was young.
 
So Ginny, interested in learning Flemish? :D
There is a list of languages in another thread :smile:

I wonder, shouldn't vocal training be a must then with any language classes (middle school etc.)? Not just pronunciation but actual situational vocalisation. I don't recall I had to
do that when I was young.
Some of it comes organically. Or all of it, really, through interaction. If it was attempted to be done academically, nobody would learn languages at all. It also would eradicate accents and dialects, thereby prohibiting an evolution of languages.
 
There is a list of languages in another thread :smile:
giphy.gif
 

I just read a bit where it was said the Hebrew root of 'fall' is n-p-l. Provides an entirely new view to this sketch.
 
Back
Top