Treatise on Language

    The amount synonyms may differ from one another is absolutely curious. It causes one to realize why it is necessary to have multiple words with a singular meaning. Not only was variation sought after, but there are some words which simply don’t fit into context.

    For example, by using the word “just” instead of “simply”, the amount of emphasis placed on the noun that the adverb is linked to may not be lessened, but it seems almost begging to not offend, while “simply” is not worried of its presence. “Merely” seems to fit somewhere in between, though leans toward “just”, as if one was attempting a modest and composed, yet discomforting statement. It seems as though the speaker did not want anyone to think anything of it.

    Everyone knows which one is best situationally in their own conversations and writing; this need not become a rule of language simply because it is the way that word usage within English has turned out. However, I feel as though it is something that should be taken into account.

    It is strange when one considers the reason behind this subtle differing of meanings. The reason must lie in the repeated use of these separate yet similar entities by certain peoples of certain areas and the slight implications made paired with the actual sound of the word; when listening to a conversation, the derivation which fits the best into a sentence or phrase in order to most closely achieve a desired effect is always chosen, or at least up to what the intelligence, memory, and knowledge of the one talking allows.

    In my own acknowledgement of the nature of language, it has immediately become clear to me that it is not flat in the sense that one sees it as — either on paper, screen, or other varied yet relatively flat surface. It is not a 2-d object that extends seemingly forever both outwards and upwards, mostly from right to left for English speakers. It is in fact more like a living organism, an amazing framework of structure that is constantly reworking itself from the inside. I don’t see it as disciform, but something bearing a likeness to bone, possibly cartilage. Something layered yet intricately web-like, where the assumed, unspoken, and almost always subconscious rules that form a base for all taught rules lay beneath and alter with the changing of times, regions, cultures, etc.

    On second thought, language does not exist at all in form before manifestation. Think of it as sunlight: as soon as it comes into contact with matter, or in this case, the will of a human focusing itself upon a thought and using the recognition of common words, phrases, etc. that were at one place — or several, really — decided upon, recorded, learned, spread, and relearned continuously (or, you know, with this language, the origins are infinitely scattered and somewhat undefined and continue to appear within the public, not just with the scholars) to search until an appropriate one is found to accurately describe or define whatever is necessary to the mind, then the light refracts off of the object and is suddenly existent in perceivable reality. In other words, by that time, a statement sensible to the one who composed it may be related either orally or physically on some surface.

    The whole of language is not brought into creation until we as individuals implement it, basically. Of course, this is an action very constantly taken up by the human race these days. It is our means of communication and expression.

Levels of Material Existence, Human-Material Interaction, and Where Language Comes Into Play

1st Level - Object*

Origin of Object: Existent within reality; known to exist because of senses

Possibility of Object: Unknown

Quality of Object: Perceptible from senses (may be tangible according to scientific law, first-hand experience, or trusted accounts of others’ first-hand experience, may be intangible “, may be visible “, may be capable of being smelt “, may be capable of being tasted “, may be capable of being heard “)

*I am including implications of thought under object because these manifest physically, are projected into the environment in several ways, and can be experienced directly through the senses with no extra thought necessary.

Presence of Language within Object: Not Possible, unless the substance of object is language

2nd Level - Recognition of Object** (Optional)

Origin of Recognition: Taken from perceptive centers

Possibility of Recognition: Dependent on focus of possible witness: If full attention is directed at object, sensations will be experienced in full. If there is no attention at all directed at object, or attention is completely obscured by other thoughts, no experience of the object will occur.

Quality of Recognition: Perceptible from senses (may be tangible according to scientific law, first-hand experience, or trusted accounts of others’ first-hand experience,  may be intangible “, may be visible “, may be capable of being smelt “, may be capable of being tasted “, may be capable of being heard “) and experienced as sensations or feelings (includes feeling of recognition)

Presence of Language within Recognition: Not possible, unless the substance of object is language

3rd Level - Comprehension of Object** (Optional)

Origin of Comprehension: Taken from sensations, feelings or “experiences” that the object gave rise to; images/qualities composed within brain

Possibility of Comprehension: Dependent upon original recognition of object: if there was no or little recognition of object, there will be no or little comprehension of object

Quality of Comprehension: Takes form as language or mental images; stored as memories in the likeness of original sensations, though may be altered based upon the experiencer’s original perception and preferences, including past experiences, environment, and created human persona, e.g. likes, dislikes, views, opinions, personal interests, beliefs, inclinations, etc. This may be expanded and reflected upon in any way.

Presence of Language within Comprehension: Possible; becomes the form of thought

4th Level – Expression of Object** (Optional)

Origin of Expression: Available, but depends upon awareness: if there was none at the previous two levels, there will be no expression now; taken from sensations, feelings or “experiences” that the object gave rise to; images/qualities composed within brain; based within the intrinsic need to release a direct relation of original object; comprehension not necessary

Possibility of Expression: Dependent upon awareness: if there was none at the previous two levels, there will be no expression now; taken from sensations, feelings or “experiences” that the object gave rise to; images/qualities composed within brain; based within the intrinsic need to release a direct relation of original object; comprehension of object not necessary

Quality of Expression: Takes any form humanly possible to produce; includes thoughts, mental images, physical productions in any medium (written language, art, constructed woodworks, food, clothing, shelter, governmental systems, humans, animals, etc.)

Presence of Language Within Expression: Possible; becomes the form of thought

**The amount of time between the second, third, and fourth level has a very broad range, from a mere instant to days, weeks, etc. later.