Print

Print


I must say that you fail to have a good grasp on what the logical grammar of
language means. You should refer to my second response to cris. Logical
grammar is indifferent to which language. It is the foundation
"intelligence" (so to speak). The logical grammar of language is the
"reflection" or mirror that displays the order of affairs within events (the
world) in language. It is indiscriminate and not subject to whims or even
intention, therefore it is not something received from history but it is
regardless of history.

On Mon, 12 Feb 2001 12:23:40 -0500, Poetryetc provides a venue for a
dialogue relating to poetry and              poetics wrote:

>  Useage in a language develops--and shifts--on the basis of its use.
Grammar
>  isn't general in that sense (i.e., the "philosophical nature of
language"),
>  but rather specific a A language or language group. Germanic and Romance
>  languages, for example, handle gender differently, and the logic of those
>  grammatical developments can be traced to the history of the languages
>  themselves, including the politics at play among the various tribes and
>  burgeoning nations whose relationships shaped and were shaped by their
>  languages. If "thought" and the "grammar" proceeding from it and feeding
>  back into it were received whole and intact, as you seem to think, it
would
>  have had to happen three times in the case of English alone ("o gawd," as
>  cris cheek says!).
>
>  Candice
>
>
>  ----------
>  > We are talking at cross-purposes here. My statements were referring
more to
>  > philosophical nature of language. How it stands in itself, not how it
used.
>  > There is a big difference. The use of language, that is, the intention
of
>  > the user, acquires all sorts of ends and means but this has nothing to
do
>  > with the logical grammar of language as it is. It is similar to the
>  > different uses one can get out of a baseball. One can play baseball
with it
>  > or one can throw it at someone.
>  >
>  >
>  > On Mon, 12 Feb 2001 07:59:20 -0500, John Kinsella
<[log in to unmask]>
>  > wrote:
>  >
>  >> language is made by the use of language, therefore, if the use is
>  >> political then so is the language...
>  >>
>  >> best,
>  >> jk
>  >





_______________________________________________________
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/