Words Are More Treacherous And Powerful Than We Think

Title: "Words are more treacherous and powerful than we think" Evaluate the extent to which the characteristics Sartre claims for words affect - negatively or positively - different Areas of Knowledge.

The limits of knowledge that the topic implies are the limits of language and how well it approaches truth. There are a number of definitions of language. Everybody has there own term of what language stands for. For example, Chomsky says that language is a system of sounds put together to form phrases, which are then translated into a person's mind. Adler says that language is a system of sounds that are created to form a way of communication, which can be translated in the human mind. What I found is that language shows the proof of words through thoughts. feelings, and a system of arbitrary signals, such as voice sounds, gestures, or written symbols. Images are also a way of understanding language, which connects to what Adler and Chomsky had said. Because the world's vocabulary is so limited to the meaning of a word, images are replaced in their meaning. By showing the thoughts of what Chomsky and Adler said, I will show how many others have a different idea about language. Words have been given a belief to have a true meaning to them, but in reality not so many words have a true meaning. In order to find their true meaning we have to look at how they are used and then come up with the true meaning. "Therefore it was necessary that he should be able to use these sounds as signs of internal conceptions; and to make them stand as marks for the ideas within his own mind, whereby they might be made known to others, and to others, and the thoughts of men's minds be conveyed from one to another." What sometimes ends up happening is that the word can mean so many things in many situations, which gets confusing. Rather they have many different meanings, which can only be found through text that can be found through knowledge. Sometimes the meaning of words is so vague it is difficult to understand their meaning at all. Unless we are aware of the exact context in which it is being used, we would probably not agree on the subtle differences. Language is what we humans use as a symbol of communication. ds or language in general were designed by man in to fit articulate sounds, which we call words. Language is considered to be a communication of thoughts and feelings through a system of arbitrary signals, such as voice sounds, gestures, or written symbols. It is also said to be such a system as used by a nation, people, or other distinct community; often contrasted with dialect. Because every person has a different meaning for a word, there can never be a true meaning. " Therefore it was necessary that he should be able to use these sounds as signs of internal conceptions; and to make them stand as marks for the ideas within his own mind, whereby they might be made known to others, and the others, and the thoughts of men's minds be conveyed from one to another." Having words be interpreted by mere sounds is not enough because even like that, it wouldn't be enough for the perfection of language. Because words have a multiple range of meanings, it could be confusing to a person that didn't understand the idea of sound in the word. "It may also lead us a little towards the original of all our notions and knowledge, if we remark how great a dependence our words have on common sensible ideas; and how those which are made use of to stand for actions and notions quite removed from sense, have their rise from thence, and from obvious sensible ideas are transferred to more abstruse significations, and made to stand for ideas that come not under the cognizance of our senses; to imagine, apprehend, comprehend, adhere, conceive, instill, disgust, disturbance, tranquility, etc., are all words taken from the operations of sensible things, and applied to certain modes of thinking. Spirit, in its primary signification, is breath; angel, a messenger: and I doubt not but, if we could trace them to their sources, we should find, in all languages, the names which stand for things that fall not under our senses to have had their first rise from sensible ideas." By which we may give some kind of guess what kind of notions they were, and whence derived, which filled their minds who were the first beginners of languages, and how nature, even in the naming of things, unawares suggested to men the originals and principles of all their knowledge: whilst, to give names that might make known