Friday, January 21, 2011

Meaning, to me, is the word used to refer to the relationship between an entity and a framework that perceived to exist because of the way it can describe the tangible manifestation of an arbitrary phenomena.

This in no way implies that there is a causative relationship between the substance of the framework and the manifestation of the said phenomena, but the perception of such a framework is essentially what gives birth to meaning, which in turn validates the belief in the existence of the framework.

For example, words have meaning because we perceive the existence of language, which in turn is a description of how people string symbols/sounds together toward a certain end. In effect, words are not used because of the particular meanings they have; instead, words have their particular meanings because of the ways they are perceived to be used. That to me describes perfectly how the process of compiling a dictionary is basically a process of documenting how words are used in society.

If we do not perceive that there is a valid order in the way words are used, such as in the case of a community of learners new to a language - then there is no perceived language for the community to validate. But if the community is perceived to speak a particular creole of a language, then whatever original usage of words by the community, defines the creole.

So if the framework is virtual and exists only as an abstraction of a different reality, then the framework does not in a real sense exist - and cannot form a reference point from which entities can derive a relationship. Which means that there is no meaning.

Thus, meaningless, meaningless, everything is meaningless!

No comments: