--- title: 'Language is both arbitrary and non-arbitrary' url: 'https://rethunk.englishup.me/arbitrary' markdown: 'https://rethunk.englishup.me/arbitrary.md' date: '2020-07-13' description: 'Language is both arbitrary and non-arbitrary Wittgenstein, as reported by Baker & Hacker (2009), writing about colour noted that although our colour system does not lie in the nature of colours, nevertheless the system cannot simply be said to be arbitrary. "It is akin to what is arbitray and t…' --- # Language is both arbitrary and non-arbitrary Wittgenstein, as reported by Baker & Hacker (2009), writing about colour noted that although our colour system does not lie in the nature of colours, nevertheless the system cannot simply be said to be arbitrary. **"It is akin to what is arbitray and to what is non-arbitrary".** An objection to cognitive linguistics is grounded in the claim that language is arbitrary. Wittgenstein argued that by arbitrary we mean that language is **not answerable to reality**. But language can be **responsive to reality**. If the world were different then certain features of our language would no longer be **useful** (rather than being no longer true). Similarly if human nature were different then parts of our language might no longer be **usable**. Further because language is arbitrary in this sense it does not follow that there are no reasons for using the language we use. Factors involved in giving reasons include - the promptings of experience, practical needs, theoretical needs and aesthetic considerations. Cognitive linguistics can be said to attempt to give reasons derived from our experiences in the world (although Wittgenstien talks about very general truths about the world which could be contrasted with cognitive linguistics' more particular truths about the world). One analogy used by a cognitive linguist drew a comparison to the real world behavior of ants going to a food source with that of language formation (). The ants are not directed to the goal by a master ant, instead a path to the food is formed spontaneously due to pheromonal interactivity in local groups. Although this analogy was for a certain purpose there is a temptation in using such real world biological behavior to think that language is correspondingly answerable to empirical facts. Consider cooking - this is defined by a goal - making something tasty. The rules for cooking a dish depends on the empirical properties of your ingredients, e.g. beef takes longer to roast than lamb. If you don't follow the rules for cooking a dish, you will make a poor dish but you are still cooking. > "In *this* sense, the rules of grammar *are* arbitrary. Unlike cooking, language is not *defined* by its goals or ends, and the rules of grammar are not determined or justified by reference to any independently specifiable ends of language, any more than the rules of chess are determined or justified by any independently specifiable ends of chess." Baker & Hacker, 2009:335 > Grammar is autonomous, but many reasons guide our concept-formation, e.g. in mathematics, and many reasons can be given why certain concepts are *useful*. But such reasons will not have the form ‘Because there really are . . .’ Baker & Hacker, 2009:343 Language is both arbitrary and non-arbitrary. **References:** Baker, G. P., & Hacker, P. M. S. (2009). *Wittgenstein: Rules, Grammar and Necessity: Volume 2 of an Analytical Commentary on the Philosophical Investigations, Essays and Exegesis §§ 185-242* (Vol. 2). John Wiley & Sons. --- ## Navigation - Previous: [Acquisition and development](https://rethunk.englishup.me/acquisition-development.md) - Next: [Certainty and the threat of scepticism](https://rethunk.englishup.me/certainty.md)