|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
the worthless word for the day is: syncategorem
[ad. L. syncategorema, a. Gk.]
Logic
a word which cannot be used by itself as a term, but
only in conjunction with another word or words: e.g.
a sign of quantity (as all, some, no), or an adverb,
preposition, or conjunction; hence syncategorematic,
of the nature of a syncategorem, also in extended uses
in linguistic analysis
"In another sense, "sign" means that which makes us
know something else, and either is able itself to
stand for it, or can be added in a proposition to what
is able to stand for something -- such are the
syncategorematic words and the verbs and the other
parts of a proposition which have no definite
signfication -- or is such at to be composed of things
of this sort, e.g., a sentence."
- P. Boehner, Philosophical Writings (of Occam)
"Syncategorematic words are, roughly, those which give
the sentence its form, or logical constants -- but, if,
and, every, some, however, etc." - Cosma Shalizi
contrast categorematic
can someone give a semiotician's view of the significance of this, in layman's terms (if that's even possible)?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511 |
Er... that's the guy who prescribes monocles?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 508
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 508 |
Anna:  
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
>the guy who prescribes monocles?
yeah, Cosma Shalizi.. that guy.
:Þ~
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511 |
Interesting fellow! (Yes, I had to LHU) He's got quite a list of links on his home page: http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/links.htmlfrom which I unearthed this pearl, written by a colleague of his: How to talk postmodern
. . . First, you need to remember that plainly expressed language is out of the question. It is too realist, modernist and obvious. Postmodern language requires that one uses play, parody and indeterminacy as critical techniques to point this out. Often this is quite a difficult requirement, so obscurity is a well-acknowledged substitute. For example, let's imagine you want to say something like, "We should listen to the views of people outside of Western society in order to learn about the cultural biases that affect us". This is honest but dull. Take the word "views". Postmodernspeak would change that to "voices", or better, "vocalities", or even better, "multivocalities". Add an adjective like "intertextual", and you're covered. "People outside" is also too plain. How about "postcolonial others"? To speak postmodern properly one must master a bevy of biases besides the familiar racism, sexism, ageism, etc. For example, phallogocentricism (male-centredness combined with rationalistic forms of binary logic). Finally "affect us" sounds like plaid pajamas. Use more obscure verbs and phrases, like "mediate our identities". So, the final statement should say, "We should listen to the intertextual, multivocalities of postcolonial others outside of Western culture in order to learn about the phallogocentric biases that mediate our identities". Now you're talking postmodern!
. . . He goes on to give specific guidelines: http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/how-to-talk-postmodern.html
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,331
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
802
guests, and
1
robot. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
