Timeline for Can one ever say for certain a word does not exist?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 11, 2015 at 19:58 | comment | added | Edwin Ashworth | Most semioticians? You don't agree with ...? In maths, I've seen 'mathematical word' to mean white-space-bounded unhyphenated string'. Permutation of letters. Obviously, that's not a definition for general use. Collins has, for 'word': 1. (Linguistics) one of the units of speech or writing that native speakers of a language usually regard as the smallest isolable meaningful element of the language... But who defines 'meaningful' and who determines which subset of native speakers? | |
| Jan 11, 2015 at 19:31 | comment | added | John Dahle | The arbitrary nature of relationship between signifier and signified is a cornerstone for most all of modern literary criticism. Some, Deconstructionists for example, would argue that the "two or more" is actually an unnecessary qualification as well. I don't agree with that extreme of a view, but the fact is that most of modern communications studies begins with this model. TRomano is definition of a "word" (i.e. something that is blessed as a word by a governing body) is one that most semioticians would disagree with. | |
| Dec 21, 2014 at 8:13 | comment | added | Edwin Ashworth | Can you find an authority saying that there is no need for 'the qualification that it be in general use or in use in a specific discipline or by a specific group' as TRomano puts it? By 'specific group' I'm pretty sure he doesn't just mean 'you and someone else'. And discussion in this whole thread is meaningless if people are using different senses of 'word'. | |
| Dec 20, 2014 at 21:30 | history | answered | John Dahle | CC BY-SA 3.0 |