Comment: Wow! But ambiguity is the nature of language.

(See in situ)


Wow! But ambiguity is the nature of language.

Michael, has Pinker weighed in on this?

English can be used to admit something yet provide plausible deniability in a crowd. Especially in a hostile crowd. Meaning is conveyed to friendlies and not to hostiles.

The word 'religion' has ambiguous roots. Perhaps an indication of a need felt for ambiguity. Religions and government are hostile and friendly entities.

One theory is that lig is akin to ligament; something that ties or binds.

Religion re-ties beings to their past; their physiology, psychology and history. Questions of origin, process, intent and will are meaningful.

Another theory is that lig is a declination of the verb legere (lecture)

Now religion can be scorned by focusing on the banality of lecturing again and again ad nauseum. The secret joke is told in the open.

"To live or to die,
I ask myself this."

My first reaction was scorn as I read the wiki.

Hah! I thought; English for autistics.

Although in contracts it could have utility. To be voluntary a contract lacking ambiguity would benefit both parties.

However, I can see that journalism benefits from a lack of ambiguity.

"I am, who I shall prove to be." This was God's answer to Moses when Moses wanted a name to blame for these commandments when he showed them to the crowd. Was God saying, Hey Moses, stand on your own two feet. People will know you by your fruits.

Still it feels to me at first blush like the difference between driving the roads and taking a skilift or following a track.

Maybe I should try to color in the lines. I suspect Samuel Clemens would rebel.

This is food for thought. I will withhold judgement. This deserve some consideration.

To be continued...

Free includes debt-free!