Meaning has both a logical and psychological aspect.
It must be employed as a sign or a
symbol to someone and it must be
capable of conveying a meaningful purpose. These two aspects, the logical and
the psychological can be confused by the use of the ambiguous verb “to
mean.” At times it is proper to say “it means,” and other times “I mean.” For example, the word “London” does not “mean”
a city in the same sense that a person “means” the place. (When I speak of London, I mean the city). (London means many things to many people).
Both aspects; the logic and the psychological are always present and their
interplay produces a great variety of meanings.
There are two distinct functions of terms which have
a right to the name “meaning.” They may
be either a sign or a symbol.
A sign indicates the existence of a past, present or
future of a thing, event or condition. Wet streets are a sign that it has
rained. A patter on the roof is a sign
that it is raining. A change in the readings
of the barometer or a ring round the moon is a sign that it is going to rain.
The smell of smoke signifies the presence of fire. They are all natural signs of a greater event. It is a symptom
of a state of affairs.
The logical relation between a sign and its object
is that they are associated to form a pair. Each sign corresponds with one
definite item which is its object (event) signified. All the rest of the
function and signals involves a third term, the subject, which uses the pair of items; and the
relationship of the subject to the other two terms. The subject is related to
the other two terms as a pair. What
characterizes them is the fact that they are paired. For example, a scratch on a persons’ arm would
probably not be interesting enough to even have a name, but such a datum in its relation to the past is noted and
called a “scar.” Note, however, although
the subject’s relationship is to the pair
of other terms, the person also has a relationship with each one of them
individually, which makes one of them the sign and the other the object. The
difference between a sign and its object is that they are not interchangeable.
The difference is that the subject for which they
constitute a pair must find one more interesting than the other,
and the latter more easily available than the former. If we are interested
in tomorrow’s weather for example, the present events coupled with tomorrow’s
weather phenomena, are signs for us. A
ring around the moon is not important in itself; but as a visible item coupled
with something not yet present has meaning. If it were not for the subject, the sign and
object would be interchangeable.
In nature certain events are correlated so that the
less important may be taken as signs of the more important. We may also produce arbitrary events purposely
correlated with important ones that are to be their meaning. A whistle means
the end of a shift at work, or something is about to start or end. A siren from
an ambulance means an emergency. These are artificial signs that are not natural
signals. Their logical relation to their objects however, is the same as that
of natural signs.
The interpretation of signs is the basis of
intelligence in all animals. In humans both
kinds of signals are used to guide practical activities. We do the same thing all day long. We answer
bells, watch the clock, obey warning signals, follow arrows, come at the baby’s
cry, and close the window when it rains. The logical basis of all these
interpretations show there is no limit to what a sign may mean.
Because a sign may mean so many things we may also
misinterpret it. The misinterpretation of signs is the simplest form of mistake. A mistake is the most important form for a purpose because it creates
disappointment, which is the simplest form of error and its correlate, the
simplest form of knowledge. This is the truest interpretation of signs. It is
the most elementary and the most tangible kind of intellect. It has obvious
biological uses and equally obvious criteria of truth and falsehood.
In regards to signs and symbols, there is a famous
passage in the autobiography of Helen Keller which describes the dawn of
language upon her mind. She had used signs before, formed associations, learned
to expect things and identify people or places; but there was a great day when
the meaning of signs was eclipsed and dwarfed by the discovery that a certain
datum in her limited world of sense had explicit meaning that a particular act
of her fingers constituted a word.
This event had required a long preparation; the child had learned many acts
with her fingers, but they were meaningless play. Then one day her teacher took
her out to walk - and there the great
advent of language occurred.
“She brought me my hat,” the memoir reads, “and I
knew I was going out into the warm sunshine. This thought, if a wordless
sensation may be called a thought, made me hop and skip with pleasure.
“We walked down the path to the well-house,
attracted by the fragrance of the honeysuckle with which it was covered. Someone
was drawing water and my teacher placed my hand under the spout. As the cool stream gushed over my hand she spelled
into the other the word water, first
slowly, then rapidly, I stood still, my whole attention fixed upon the motion
of her fingers. Suddenly I felt a misty consciousness as of something forgotten
– a thrill of returning thought; and somehow the mystery of language was revealed
to me. I knew then that w-a-t-e-r meant the wonderful cool something that was
flowing over my hand. That living word awakened my soul, gave it light, hope,
joy, set it free. There were barriers still, it is true, but barriers in time could
be swept away.
I left the well-house eager to learn. Everything had
a name, and each name gave birth to a new thought. As we returned to the house
every object which I touched seemed to quiver with life. That was because I saw
everything with the strange, new sight that had come to me.”
This passage is the best testimony anyone can give for
finding the genuine difference between sign and symbol.
No comments:
Post a Comment