Re: The Myth of Arbitrariness
- From: "Dr. Jamshid Ibrahim" <Jdibrahim@xxxxxxx>
- Date: 30 Oct 2005 03:21:44 -0800
benlizross wrote:
> No, I do not agree with you. Arbitrariness is not "so-called", it's not
> "reluctantly accepted", and it's not a "mystery". And you still have not
> succeeded in giving the slightest clue as to what you might imagine as a
> "solution".
Afraid you seem not to have understood my point. I am not offering a
"solution" here but questioning the validity of arbitrariness which has
been naively taken so far at face value. It is simply not convincing.
In addition there is no need for a solution. What we need is a new
interdisciplinary approach to language. We still don't understand much
(many unresolved linguistic issues exist because they are seen from a
pure linguistic point of view) to make black and white statements and I
am well aware of the difficulties involved in this matter. Now it is
time people from other disciplines joined such discussions to gain more
insight.
.
- References:
- Re: The Myth of Arbitrariness
- From: benlizross
- Re: The Myth of Arbitrariness
- From: Dr. Jamshid Ibrahim
- Re: The Myth of Arbitrariness
- From: benlizro
- Re: The Myth of Arbitrariness
- From: Dr. Jamshid Ibrahim
- Re: The Myth of Arbitrariness
- From: benlizross
- Re: The Myth of Arbitrariness
- From: benlizross
- Re: The Myth of Arbitrariness
- Prev by Date: Re: Language-based humor
- Next by Date: Re: The Myth of Arbitrariness
- Previous by thread: Re: The Myth of Arbitrariness
- Next by thread: Re: The Myth of Arbitrariness
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|