The Embodied Origin of Language

All words, at their inception, arise from an embodied nature. Words are symbols for the apprehension of experience. We may consider them to be a digital transmission of conditionality.

The word, “condition,” means to speak with. The true meaning of a word is not found in it’s definition, but in the experience it represents, and in turn a word is meaningless, absent it’s experiential conjugations.

Intonation is the vibratory signature of a state of being. Molecular compounds, symbolized by conceived, spoken, and written words, are the particle aspects of the wave forms of these states of being. Everything has a body and everybody has a name.

Every body has a vibratory signature. We name the animals.

The human animal is called homo sapiens. The word, “sapient,” is quoted in its plural form because in man it refers to two distinct aspects, “knowing,” and, “tasting.” Homo Sapiens: knowing and tasting man.

Vowels are the sonic expressions of being. The ”I am” announcement, the knowing part of sapiens. Vowels may be expressed in whole tones. That is, with an open throat, without the involvement of the tongue.

The tongue is the organ of taste. The tongue is the impli-mentor of consonants.

Consonants are the attendant tonal relationships, harmonious or discordant, to the vowel, the self aware expression of being.

Sonic expressions, according to frequency and duration, establish resonance. When you speak or listen to a word, the function establishes, maintains, or moderates a level of tension, relaxation, excitement, interest, etc., within the body. Tone comes from the Greek, tonos, meaning tension or stretching. This mentally focused articulation of tone, in turn establishes resonances with the environment. Very simply, when you are pissed off, you are likely to have angry engagements with your environment.

You can talk a man to sleep or, inspire him to give his life for a cause. My commitments to honesty and truthful characterizations do not come to me by way of moral sensibility, but the life and death considerations of practical expediency. It is by way of these observations that we come to the metaphysical notation, “by his words, a man is justified.”

 

I would like to suggest one slight addition. The word "spoken" to the title.

It seems to me, that "language" can be defined as the communication of a want, need, or desire from one life form to the next. A mating dance, a sign, a glance, at the appropriate time, can all fill that definition .
I definitely share a "language" with my dog.

On reflection, perhaps the spoken word really is the only thing that truly sets us apart from our fellow animals.

 

I omit spoken because the resonant effect occurs via the tension / conceptualization interface. You can be in a room with another and sense the tension without speaking.

 

Pure bourgeois idealism.

 

Just as I am aware of your presence and sensibilities in this moment.

 

I see,
you bourgeois idealist, you.

 

The spoken word is covered in the text of the statement as being particle aspect of the wave form of a state of being. True of conception, spoken, and written words.

True of conception.

If a man look at another with lust in his heart, he is guilty. That embodied sense of being administers a quantum level statement on at least five mutually embedded wave lengths.

True of spoken words.

Key tones or frequencies, transitionally expressed as, a, e, i, o, and U. What ever you ask in my name shall be done for you.

True of written words.

Particularly expressed as, touch, taste, seeing, hearing, and smell.
Particulate as, tension, speech, light, sound, and memory.
Works mightier than these you shall preform.

Thought, Word, and Deed. The "trinity" of creation.

 

What if a human grew up completly isolated?
Would it be nessacary for him to develop a language in order to descibe the world to himself?

 

Language is for communication. I wouldn't begin to know how to test for responses that might result from human isolation. We require too much nurture to reach any level of self sufficiency in isolation. I would say that yes, to some extent, representational symbols are used by every human regardless of social interactions. They are used by the mind in the form of memory and recall to navigate both familiar and unfamiliar terrain, identify food sources etc.. The form a particular word or symbol might take is not important. French is as adequate as Inuit. The human experience is ubiquitous to humans.

 

Well, this begs this question:

A resonable supposition is that only herding or pack type animals will develop verbal communication.
Yet all animals within (and to some extent without) a species communicate to a limited extent.
So, assuming that Intelligence is the goal of Evolution(so far), is it fair to say that herbivore pack animals are an evolutionary dead end?

 

Well verbal or some other sort of audio communications is already employed by most mammals. Intelligence and the use of language are not necessarily the same thing. Who assumes that intelligence is the goal of evolution? It is fair to say that all forms are subject to eventual dissolution.
Also we are going to get really tangled in our discussions of this subject if we do not comprehend that words are symbols. The generative process that I describe as thought, word, and deed may and does proceed without a single word being audibly expressed. It is a tension, interpretation, and expression process that occurs at a quantum level and appears at a macro level in the form of language.

 

Why would you assume that intelligence is the goal of evolution? Evolution does not have goals, natural selection is blind in that it is nothing more than a mathematical phenomenon. Natural selection isn't even a thing, it is a term we apply to the observation that genes which increase or reduce reproductive fitness will be increased or reduced in the population. Why evolve a big intelligent brain if you don't need one to attain higher fitness than your conspecifics? To the contrary intelligence, which gives humans an unprecedented ability to destroy our environment and ourselves, will probably cause humans to be an evolutionary dead end (as in extinct) within a short time, geologically speaking.

 

If evolution has no goal then there can be no evolutionary dead ends. The human capacity for computational thinking allows not for higher fitness than needed for established con-specifics but is perfectly attuned for emergent or novel conditions. This is what allows us to occupy every eco-zone on the planet.
However this thread was not established as a forum for debate on origins, but to examine the form and function of language as the generator of the conditions of human experience.
The human being can establish a resonance with the voice that will loosen the molecular bonds of glass, as well as some other materials. A human being may also make a sound that will mend every broken thing.

 

I believe that words as the meaningful reality, expression, suitably reflected upon conditions of consciousness are different from there and here existent symbols, feelings, and idealities of not being understood (we are definitely undersood and understanding at the encounter of Words).

I don't truly know the symbols without some sort of articulation for what I could or at last DO believe.

Symbols and articulations of immediacy are the Being beyond knowledge. Mind you all: knowledge is the reflective state of being.

But by whom? God would be great to support the Transcendence. :hat:

 

Knowledge is shared in all things. Belief is a barrier through which we refuse to look.

 

Like each of our personal movements of our body is the value of Things around.

Of course, what is ours is no longer either mine or theirs; I can believe it is MINE, and again we are at belief.

 

Why the addition of belief? Why not simply the recognition that we share in all things?

 

Is my localized experience truly mine, or is that illusion as well? It seems almost impossible by definition to be illusion, just as 'I think therefor I am." I guess what I mean is that fact that I have a localized experience seems to suggest that there is at least one thing which I do not share with everything else. But back to the original topic, it certainly seems that language is responsible for much of what we could call the human condition. Consider this, when a chimpanzee makes an utterance, that utterance is controlled by the emotional cortex and not by Broca's area which controls speech (loosely speaking of course for the sake of brevity) in humans, although chimpanzees have a homologue of Broca's area which they use for motor control. When a human hits his hand with a hammer and yells out an obscenity this utterance is controlled by the emotional cortex and not by Broca's area which controls ordinary speech. This does seem to suggest that language is distinctly human. It also seems to suggest that our biology is geared for existentialism in that our mental lives can be freed from preconceived realities arising from primitive emotional processes. ok now I'm rambling

 

I think that the self-actualized view of Nature is the view we never come to agreement about: unless WE turn to science. But then we find the necessity of (call it) invention to believe that They will think the immediate state of reflection is true to the Life (of this mediated Trust): really the philosophy of reflection is the abstract scientific WAY. Concretely, there is no reflection: It is; but that is really for the Nature as knowing the unknown, the unmediate. But science pushes ON: We believe there is something to agree about just as we already agreed about the Things we were offered up FOR belief for: the two tiered valued realities of Faith against Knowledge, knowledge against Faith.

 

How is your experience localized? There is no dividing line between you and everything. Your cognition is focused. We choose what slice of the panorama of the world we focus on. Although we identify with this corridor of refraction and feel that it represents a unique perspective that no one else really grasps, that sense of isolation is an illusion. Perception is by its' nature ignorant, form is defined by negative space.

You may be rambling but you are rambling down a super highway and you are right on track