Critically evaluate the view that Language is a contingent system of symbols which accidentally develops in the human community

Q: Critically evaluate the view that Language is a contingent system of symbols which accidentally develops in the human community

Get the full solved assignment PDF of MPYE-014 of 2024-25 session now by clicking on above button.

The view that language is a contingent system of symbols that develops accidentally within human communities is a significant perspective in the study of linguistics, semiotics, and philosophy of language. This view emphasizes the arbitrary nature of linguistic signs, as proposed by theorists like Ferdinand de Saussure, who argued that the relationship between the signifier (the form of the word) and the signified (the concept it represents) is not inherently connected but rather established through social convention. Below is a critical evaluation of this view, considering both its strengths and limitations.

Strengths of the Contingent View of Language

1. Arbitrariness of Signs: One of the core tenets of this view is the arbitrary nature of linguistic signs. For instance, there is no inherent reason why a particular sound or sequence of letters (like “dog”) should represent the concept of a four-legged canine. This arbitrariness underscores how different languages can have entirely different terms for the same object or concept, highlighting the role of social consensus in the development of language.
2. Cultural Variability: Language is deeply embedded in culture, and its evolution is influenced by the specific historical, social, and environmental contexts of communities. The contingent view acknowledges that languages can change over time due to cultural shifts, technological advancements, and social interactions, reinforcing the idea that language is a product of contingent historical processes.
3. Emergence and Change: The idea that language is a contingent system aligns with the observation of how new words, phrases, and linguistic structures emerge and fade away. Slang, jargon, and neologisms demonstrate that language is not static but rather evolves organically within communities based on social needs and interactions.

Limitations of the Contingent View of Language

1. Innate Language Capacity: Critics argue that the contingent view underestimates the innate capacity of humans for language acquisition. Noam Chomsky’s theory of Universal Grammar posits that humans are born with an inherent ability to learn language, suggesting that certain grammatical structures are hardwired into the brain. This challenges the idea that language is purely a contingent product of social development.
2. Non-Arbitrariness and Iconicity: While many aspects of language are arbitrary, some linguistic elements display non-arbitrary features or iconicity, where the form of a word bears a resemblance to its meaning (e.g., onomatopoeic words like “buzz”). This indicates that not all linguistic signs are purely contingent, as some may reflect intrinsic connections to the concepts they represent.
3. Language and Thought: The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis posits that the structure of a language can shape thought and perception. This challenges the view that language is merely a contingent symbol system by suggesting that linguistic categories can influence how individuals experience and understand the world, indicating a deeper interplay between language, thought, and culture.
4. Collective Intentionality: Language is also seen as a collective social achievement that involves intentionality among speakers. The notion that language develops accidentally may overlook the conscious efforts of communities to communicate, establish norms, and create meanings that are significant for their social interactions.

Conclusion

The view of language as a contingent system of symbols that develops accidentally in human communities offers valuable insights into the arbitrary and social nature of linguistic signs. However, it may not fully account for the innate aspects of language, the iconicity present in some linguistic elements, the influence of language on thought, and the intentionality behind language use. A comprehensive understanding of language likely requires a synthesis of these perspectives, acknowledging both the contingent and structured dimensions of linguistic development. Recognizing this complexity allows for a richer exploration of how language functions as a tool for communication and a medium of culture within human societies.