0134 What about language?

In order to approach the topic of language, I must provide a little background in natural signs.

According to Peirce, there are three types on natural sign.  They are distinguished by the categorical qualities of their sign object.  

Here is a picture.

0135 The icon refers to the whole by depicting a part.  The part may represent the whole.  The hand-talk word, [SNAKE], is a wiggling hand moving forward.  The image should be fairly recognizable.  Pantomime exercises icons.

The index points in the direction of the reference.  The hand-talk word, [THERE], can also be [ME] or [YOU].  The referent is real, but may depend on the ongoing situation.

The symbol is real in so far as it is supported by convention and habit. The implication?  As iconic and indexal manual-brachial gestures are routinized, they become more and more distinct from one another.  They become more and more as symbols.  Symbols are real when they are easily distinguished from one another and readily interpreted by convention and habit.

0136 Now, I ask, “Do symbols constitute language?”

Yes, symbols are responsible because each symbol in a finite order is distinct from any other symbol.  A finite set of symbols constitutes a symbolic order (from one point of view) or a system of differences (from another point of view). 

The term, “symbolic order”, emphasizes the order within the set.  Order allows symbolic operations among distinct members, sort of like the formalization of conventions. Formalization allows the construction of complex concepts.  The three-level interscope is an example of a purely relational structure that formalizes a symbolic construction. For language, these operations are called “grammar”.  

The term, “system of differences”, emphasizes the fact that each symbol is different from any other symbol.  Difference speeds up the recognition of each symbol.  At the turn of the last century, a scientific linguist, Ferdinand de Saussure, recognizes this trait in spoken languages.  He technically defines spoken language as two arbitrarily related systems of differences, parole (speech) and langue (the mental processing that occurs in response to talk).

This is sort of confusing.

Who would imagine that language consists in two systems of differences, composed of symbols?

0137 Symbols, by themselves, do not necessarily represent anything real.  What do I mean by the term, “real”?  The scholastics use the Latin term, “ens reale“, meaning mind-independent being.  Icons and indexes picture and point to ens reale.  Symbols are ens rationis, or mind-dependent beings.  Symbols are testimonials to conventions, laws and traditions.  In short, symbols are ens rationis, even though they may conventionalize very real habits of action.

Icons and indexes are natural signs.  They touch base with ens reale.

Symbols are natural signs that facilitate ens rationis.

0138 Perhaps, “language” smells like… well… a funky, yet fragrant, perfume named, “Symbolize My Icons and Indexes”.

One cannot picture or point to the smell.

But, the scent clings to every icon and index.

Language evolves in the milieu of hand talk.

Language evolves as the icons and indexes of hand talk operate as symbols in a system of differences.