Circular Definitions
Is it just me or is the logical concept of a dictionary circular? Words are described using other words which will eventually lead back to the original word being defined. Of course, there are specialized words that aren't really that circular but, for the most part, it has to be circular. I wish there was a language that was built from basic building blocks. The building blocks are basic tenets of verbs and nouns. In order to describe an object, you simply combine the basic building blocks.
posted by jprg4evr at 15:03
2 Comments:
But how else can we define anything without using other words that have their own separate definition? You can't define a word with ones and zeros because it wouldn't make any sense. Words only have temporal definitions anyway...yeah, think about that one for a bit!
I completely disagree. Dictionaries, by their very nature, CANNOT be circular in nature. While there may be certain subsets of definitions for synonyms that may be slightly circular, the definitions of words are built of other words, which are ultimately built on the actual items(nouns), actions(verbs), qualification(adjectives and adverbs) that they represent.
At worst, the definitions for words are more likely quasi-parabolic, where the "apex" of the parabola is located at the definition of the word in question, and the "feet" are planted firmly in reality.
Post a Comment
<< Home