Axioms and Definitions

[Diane Frances Lesley-Neuman]

Shannon,

Funknet has a tradition, in spurts, of proposing very lively debate with frequent postings.  Keep on!  We are all on islands in our own way, which is why we have Funknet.
  One problem with linguistic axioms, is that we are still determining what language is in terms of mind, and as a stand-alone definition itself.  AS we continue to propose and research, we get more information that gives us possibilities of improving these definitions.  The process shares some of the same types of pitfalls as the process of internal reconstruction within historical linguistics--that of researching from within and try to get at the big picture, even though the important information may be hidden or lost. Many of the initial axioms are found to be quite limited, but who has the authority of officially recognizing that this is such?
     One other problem that we have is the explosion of knowledge of so many sub-fields working, that enough people are not getting together to gather this information together  and provide updates and new definitions.  This is because the careful practice within each subfield is an all-consuming effort.  Even the philosophy of science folk are bogged down in philosophy of science as a sub-field.  Many of us wish we were on that tropical island with you so that we have time to ponder these issues.  Then, there are the other political problems I mentioned in my previous post. Relevant people doing relevant work are not communicating with each other, or, for political survival, talking past each other.  We often realize that we have a partial perspective only, given the way we spend our energies.  This is why people clam up rather than offer what may be a certainly incomplete definition in public.
   I don't have the time right now to try to offer a complete one, but will do my little-bitty part in a communal effort:

Language is a mechanism for autonomously constructed communication, which simultaneously structures the mind and offers a window into it, in both its conscious and unconscious processes.  

   Readings: Vygotsky's  Thought and Language.  Update: Fields of speech perception and production, lexical access, and sentence processing. Tom's /Biolinguistics and the /Chomskyian counterparts.  

     A good way to zero in on the issue is with the literature pertaining to models of speech perception and production, which are based on well-executed, experimental literature.  the problem with this, is that you have very polished scientific experimental evidence defending well-argued models, a good portion of which contradict one another, so our definition of language with have to be a kind of Ubermodel that can take all the evidence into account.
______________________________
Diane Lesley-Neuman
Linguistics Program
Wells A-614
Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI 48824