Quote:
Originally Posted by cardboard adolescent
big topics... the relation of language to reality... the meaning of meaning... is language innate? is the subconscious structured as language? those sorts of things. it's an old topic, but the 'linguistic turn' in philosophy is fairly recent... circa 1950's
|
And I'd argue that linguistics and post-modernist thought cover more about language than a direct topic of philosophy.
I'd argue that the philosophy of language is almost an impossible mountain to grapple with. Its the vehicle we use to convey ideas. In some ways the car defines itself but not really because its not sentient. So people subconciously build the car, and the the car determines through second hand creation, what it is not.
Again that brings it back to deconstructionalist thought. Studying the limitations of language is probably a very dry topic. And by your own discoveries you'd create your own shortcomings.
If you want my advice the outterspace of language (what it can't do) is less facinating than its innerspace (what you can do inside of a language). And seeing as you speak English, you're sitting at the top of an ever evolving, darwinian language that refuses to define itself, even as top scholars attempt to pin rules to it.
Join the "Death to the Apostrophe" movement, get drunk, and throw it into overdrive.