Ideas

My brother, Nate, is not only shy, but it’s difficult for him to speak when he chooses to do so. Sometimes it will take him a full minute to formulate a sentence and project his thoughts through language. Writing is no different. He’ll sit at the computer and stare at the keys. We’ve talked about pre-writing beforehand, and he said this isn’t the biggest problem. It’s actually connecting his words to form complete thoughts. He gets so caught up with contemplating grammar, word choice, punctuation, articles and prepositions that finishing a sentence is a separate task itself. He’s always insisted that mind-reading is the only way to go. He believes that if everyone knew each other’s unadulterated (by language) thoughts, it would create peace in humanity. Without all of the blockades surrounding the communication of the “vague, uncharted nebula” of thought, a deeper understanding could be obtained on communication levels (Saussure, 856). This would create harmony of thought between humans.

While reading Saussure, I often thought of Nate’s difficulties with language. Saussure describes language as “a system of signs that express ideas” (851). I couldn’t help but wonder, is Nate right? If signs only express ideas, there is room for misinterpretation, inaccuracy and lack of talent in the area of expression. This secondary need to express ideas reminds me of the game ‘telephone’ that I played as a child. The more the phrase was whispered from person to person, the funnier (or more inaccurate/skewed) the phrase became. Since ideas are the purest form of intended communication, I can see how eliminating expression through language would create clearer understanding among people. Although Saussure believes that even ideas as concrete as the external world are “nebulous until language articulates [them],” language still has it’s obvious limitations. For instance, Saussure describes how an auditory signifier “represents a span” and how “the span is measurable in a single dimension; it is a line” (855). Ideas can occur simultaneously and incongruent with one another. Language does not have this luxury. Have you ever been in the middle of a sentence, only to have someone cut you off and ask an assumptive question or inaccurately finish your sentence? If thoughts were conveyed as open nebulae, this would not happen since complete ideas would be projected instead of as an expression of ideas “presented in succession” (855). I like language. The chess analogy works for me; language is a game to be played and enjoyed. It offers infinite possibilities and combinations. But perhaps Nate’s on to something.