Communications on a National Project
John (Sowa):
We can parse the sentence, "I have solved my problem with vectors."
But what is a
"vector". [*]
A physicist thinks its a
representation with magnitude and direction, a mathematician thinks its an
ordered tuple, and a biologist thinks it an biological agent most likely
carrying some disease. On the basis of predicate calculus, which one is right!
And which one of these meanings is "my problem".
If you start with Peirce, you start
by assuming that semantics' main purpose is to align syntax with logical form.
My assumptions run more to the
structuralist semantics of de Saussure.
These do not presume that semantics
are resolved or resolvable without distinguishing also the semantic differences
in "subject understanding".
Medical coding, retail coding, and
all the rest are quite precise in distinguishing "subject content",
because there are great economic and legal costs for getting the grammar right,
but the subject wrong. [*]
I would hold that this exchange and
the difference between Peirce's semantics and de Saussure's are precisely the
point I made in my quote.
"Language successfully communicates agreements between individuals both of whom have already a shared understanding of the concept description -- semantic meaning match ups. Language does not create these match ups, which are completely dependent upon shared levels of education and successful mutual assumptions of purpose and intent, things nowhere guaranteed by any linguistic source document taken alone."
Dick (Ballard)