The subtle tie between experience and language cannot be denied. The larger a vocabulary one has in a given subject, the more in-depth and intricate one can experience that subject. Vice-versa, the more experience one has with a certain subject the more language he will have to communicate it. Consider, for example, a food critic. But to make my point more sticking, make it a reviewer of chocolate. Imagining tasting 50 different brands of milk chocolate and then proceeding to write up a comparison and evaluation between them. I, for one, would barely be able to explain in any depth the difference between three types, let alone 50. Thus, a vocabulary and diction says a lot about the person who possesses it (and how they must experience life... Imagine how sensual and how much deeper the experience of eating chocolate would be for such a chocolate critic.)
______________________________________________________________________
Above the line is my intended post. However, this site won't allow me to post something so short, so I'm including a few quotes that are quite relative and fruitful (if you bother with the extra effort of exploring the relations):
"Almost no phrase wherein profundity and playfulness do not tenderly hold hands"
-Nietzsche (of The Gay Science)
"I live by tangible experience and not by logical explanation. I have of the divine an experience so mad that one will laugh at me if I speak of it"
"Inner experience is led by discursive reason"
-Bataille (Inner Experience)
"Do you expect someone who can write to worship ink? Ink is dead. Words dead. How can I help but notice that?"
-Michael Greene (Bataille's Wound)
That was really cool how you described language. Ironically, it seems like when I try to say whta you just said, I can't think of the right words.
When you think about all the words that exist in other languages that aren't in English, it really is an odd feeling. Do other cultures feel different things than we do, or do we just lack the terms to describe what we feel?
Language is a pretty cool thing :)
That's a good introduction to the subject, but it could use a little more depth on what YOU think that means for cultures/societies/individuals.
I've got a few examples of my own:
The eskimo are supposed to have almost 50 different words and definitions for different kinds of snow, something which was necessary in their lives.
The Gnostics had 2 words for knowledge, one of which was gnosis. Gnosis was the experiential knowledge, knowledge that you "know" at the core of your being, as opposed to the abstract knowledge that you are able to study, rationalize and conclude in your head. Sometimes I think if we clarified our meaning of the word "know" in this way, it might lead us to understand others and other realities in a "gnosis" sort of way. There's a pretty stark difference between having a knowledge discrimination and having a "gnosis" of discrimination.
I've also met a few Hindu's and Sikh's in Nepal who had no knowledge or understanding of the word Atheist. No matter how many times of trying to explain to them the meaning of the word, they simply couldn't. Being without god and without religion was not a part of their reality and could not be understood by mere words and explanations.
~~Every human heartbeat is a universe of possibilites.~~
Gregory David Roberts
How about the extremely vast amount of technical terms our own society has pertaining to the subjects of finance and economics? The numbers reflect the value we place in, and our dedication to, the science of gaining money and material wealth.
Contrast these numbers with those of technical terms concerning happiness, for instance. The huge deficit reflects our culture's (almost complete) lack of science for being happy. Or how about the technical terms we possess regarding vitality, how it feels to live? Quite evident we don't place much value in improving out lot in these two areas. Real healthy lifestyle, huh.
I like what you said but let me give this food for though. In 1994 I went to Belem Brazil (a small town on the mouth of the amazon river) and I was a missionary for several weeks. I went knowing no portuguese. But through the determination of one american and three brazilians and a portuguese english dictionary we were able to get along, laugh and joke as if there was no language barrier.
We had our struggles but we learned so much from one another that we were ablr to bring that very large gap.
I believe we should all learn multiple languages and understand the cultures of those languages as well....
I agree completely with your closing point. What I was really driving at was the way that not only does language grow out of experience- experience also grows out of language. Other cultures DO experience life differently, and this experience is tied intimately with their language, ingrained deep within. The value of this comes in when we judge the quality of their experience, whether or not we should like to share in their range of experience as well.
The Spanish language is extremely sensual, it plays on taste, sound, touch, sight, and smell in ways English never could. English, in comparison, is objective, good for getting logical points across or discussing abstract matters. Experience of the sensual, experience of the abstract: both are valuable in their own right, though not at all times. Thus, English and Spanish each have their pros and cons. Would would not want to command both?