I confront arbitrariness of the sign to a criterion assessing the quality of language, logical system, psychometrics and art

Brada, Miroslav

English

PhilPapers

      Miro BRADA, « Psychological and other aspects of the sign arbitrariness »  Communication donnée dans l’atelier de Jean-Yves Beziau, The Arbitrariness of the Sign, au colloque Le Cours de Linguistique Générale, 1916-2016. L’émergence, Genève, 9-13 janvier 2017.     CERCLE FERDINAND DE SAUSSURE     Psychological and Other Aspects of the Sign's Arbitrariness  2     N° D’ISBN : 978-2-8399-2282-1    Pour consulter le programme complet de l’atelier de Jean-Yves Beziau,  The Arbitrariness of the Sign :  https://www.clg2016.org/geneve/programme/ateliers-libres/the-arbitrariness-of-the-sign/          Psychological and Other Aspects of the Sign's Arbitrariness  3  Psychological and Other Aspects of the Sign's Arbitrariness MIRO BRADA  ABSTRACT. I confront arbitrariness of the sign to a criterion assessing the  quality of language, logical system, psychometrics and art.  1. Why is arbitrariness impossible The random process is independent of any forces, without any cause. In this sense the sign isn't 100% random, as it has various references to reality.    1.1 External reference Americas speak English, Spanish, Portuguese, French  since colonization. Mao simplified Mandarin. Atatürk released Turkish from Arabic... While Esperanto , artificial international language (Latin + German vocabulary, Slavic grammar), hasn't spread much. The usage of languages (their signifiers) depends on the political or economic power, while the quality of language seems secondary (e.g. some extinct indigenous languages could be more efficient), although speculatively the efficiency of European languages (which I'll explain later) could have helped them to spread (along with colonization).   1.2 Inner dependence Psychology explains why dog is a response to something (=signified), not why dog is dog (=signifier). Signifier in its origin was a response to signified, and so isn't entirely random. Mama is a mother in very different languages (Russian, English, Italian, Mandarin...), probably due to baby's limited ability to speak - when wanting to suck, mama is one of the few words he can pronounce (so associated with mother), increasing the probability that mama is mama. Then mama is mama  in geographically distant languages, as incest  or cannibalism  is taboo in geographically distant societies.   2. Utility of arbitrariness The efficiency of the higher abstraction, resulting from arbitrariness of the sign, can be a criterion to assess the utility of the language, or other fields.    2.1 The higher the arbitrariness, the higher the efficiency The sign (signifier) cannot be entirely arbitrary, but the more arbitrary (abstract) it is, the higher its efficiency. Chinese signs directly or indirectly refer to reality, e.g. home is 家 (jiā) - pig under roof. The sign language of the deaf also refers to reality (shown signs "describe" their meaning), being so less abstract: the signifier and the signified overlap. Unlike spoken languages, such sign is hard to re-use. Abstract signs - letters a, b, c, ... (referring to nothing), and their combinations express all cases of reality more economically. Just 26 letters of English alphabet give, for 5 letters' words: 26*26*26*26*26 (=11 881 376) potential signs, far more than circa 50,000 Chinese characters (dictionaries rarely list over 20,000. An educated Chinese know about 8,000,    Psychological and Other Aspects of the Sign's Arbitrariness  4  while 2-3,000 signs are enough to read a newspaper).    2.2 The more unique the signs, the higher the divergence Few letters (a, b, c...) in European alphabets, in contrast to thousands of Chinese signs, create a bigger set of potential signs (with repeated letters). The Chinese characters are less efficient, as they are hard to re-use. They must be unique to express (without a combination of letters) different meanings. That's why the Chinese need more unique characters than Europeans to reflect reality. More unique characters increase deviation. So, the differences between Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, Cantonese, Vietnamese (all rooted in Chinese) are bigger than between European languages e.g. Latin (Spanish, Italians, French, Portuguese, Romanian) or Slavic (Russian, Polish, Serbian, Slovak, Czech, Croatian, Slovenian, Bulgarian, Ukrainian). Likewise, the deaf language (in spite of its limited vocabulary) has high divergence, Wikipedia says: "It is not clear how many sign languages there are. A common misconception is that all sign languages are the same worldwide or that sign language is international. Aside from the pidgin International Sign, each country generally has its own, native sign language, and some have more than one (although there are also substantial similarities among all sign languages)."   Sign language, English, Chinese, Japanese, Hindi:   I built a program to analyse the re-usage of the signs in text. I took a random text from a British newspaper and then translated by google translator. As is visible below: English reuses signs more than Arabic and Arabic more than Mandarin. If diacritics are counted, the Slavic and Latin languages have more letters in their alphabets than English, so they reuse the signs a bit less than English but more than Arabic, Hindi. The languages using    Psychological and Other Aspects of the Sign's Arbitrariness  5  abstract paired characters (Arabic, Hindu..) are more efficient than Chinese / Japanese, but less efficient than European 1-letter languages. It is because the paired letters are less repeatable than the 1 letter. More advanced analysis would be possible.    2.3 The higher the divergence, the simpler the grammar  With zero re-usage, language would be too inefficient to exist. The "radicals" are the special Chinese signs variously re-used to express something more or less similar. E.g. person 人 (rén), when repeated 人人, means everyone, or preceding mouth 口 (kǒu), e.g. 人口, means population (rén kǒu). The higher divergence of Chinese / Japanese is related to simpler grammar (no plurals / tenses or just few simply created...). A more advanced grammar would be too difficult to express by unique signs (multiple of other unique signs would be needed). To compensate the simple grammar and answer the necessity to specify cases, Chinese / Japanese use 'measure words', specific for persons, animals, flat objects etc, which MUST be used in counting (1 bă chair, 2 bă chairs, 1 gè person, 2 gè persons...). It doesn't exist in European languages, nor Arabic, whose grammar is sufficiently complex to specify.    2.4 Grammatical structures produce similarities Set of possible signs (signifiers) for European (or non-Chinese) languages is: N*N*N*... (N being the number of letters in a specific alphabet). It is huge, but final, further reduced by clearing non-senses like 'aaaaa', 'bcbld'..., etc. Grammar excludes 'crazy' signs, with    Psychological and Other Aspects of the Sign's Arbitrariness  6  rules to reuse letters in a certain way. In Arabic the words (of similar things, activities) arise by entering vowels among 'root letters'. E.g. words related to writing contain ktb: باتك (kitab) book  بتك (kutib) he wrote بتكي (yaktub) he writes  بتا (kaatib) writer  بتكم (maktab) office  ةبتكم (maktaba) library ... Even if ktb is arbitrary, derived words are a lot less random. Behind signs may be other "super" or "parent" signs determining likelihood of (derived) signs to occur. Grammar’s function to reuse signs leads to a hypothesis: the verbs (or words with more similar cases) are more similar than words with simpler structure. E.g. 'to be' (or other verbs) in Spanish, Italian, French... should be more similar than words like 'very', 'too', 'low' - as it costs more to replace words with more grammatical cases. It can be tested by algorithms.  3. Sign in psychology / psychiatry Psychology is a set of notions (signifiers) reflecting cognition or personality. Neurosis,  psychopathy, psychosis, IQ, originality etc... manifest themselves via certain signs, which are named associations of psyche and reality, explored by psychometric methods that should be valid and reliable. Antipsychiatry challenged the validity of psychiatric diagnosis. Foucault claimed that seemingly independent psychiatry (and other sciences)    Psychological and Other Aspects of the Sign's Arbitrariness  7  serves upper class to exclude lower one. Like colonizers of Latin America coerced to use Spanish, the diagnosis (signifiers) is enforced from above.  3. 1 Reliable psychometry needs abstract / arbitrary sign The sign, in order to distinguish quality in psychometrics, must be abstract enough to be reliable. Torrance Creativity Test (1974) assesses distinct answers (=flexibility), their frequencies (=originality), details (=elaboration), total answers (=fluency). Figure 1 shows the first pattern, which people complete and name, “as nobody would do”1.    Boat is frequent, while submarine is an original answer. The pictured submarine and boat have the same 5 circles' hull. Are they identical, slightly or entirely distinct? According to pictographs, they can be classified as the same class (object of 5 circles' hull). But the abstract signifiers 'submarine' and 'knife' make a difference, because they can be represented by various pictographs: similar or very different (e.g. submarines without circles). As languages need abstract (arbitrary) signs to be efficient, so do psychometrics.                                                             1 'As nobody would do' is an instruction in the creativity tests to encourage persons to invent the most original answer. Normally the first association is usually banal / ordinary (the same or similar as other people have).So, the instruction 'complete the shape as you think nobody else would do it (the same way)' emphasizes to avoid most likely answers. Then the originality is calculated by the frequencies of the answers - the less frequent, the more original / unique. However there are classification problems, when signifier seems to be more reliable to assess originality, than drawn figures, because there are many ways how to draw e.g. knife, boat, and some drawn parts may overlap (although the objects may be very different). It is a general problem also with projective tests (like Rorschach) how to reliably classify / evaluate the answers...     Psychological and Other Aspects of the Sign's Arbitrariness  8     Rorschach (1921) reveals unconscious emotions projected (=associated) to the inkblots. 'Oligophrenic detail' shows it may reflect IQ: children or mentally handicapped more often interpret inkblot as a part of something (human, animal). The abstract sign is more efficient, and needs higher IQ to be invented. The sign isn't arbitrary because the sample of reality (depending on IQ) determines what is signified (set of all signified objects), affecting the signifier itself. E.g. Piaget showed in his experiments that the same ball at distinct places isn't the same ball for the child of certain age. For this child, the same ball under bed is 'ball A', while the same ball on the table is 'ball B'. It multiples the signifiers, while there should be just one: ball.      Rorschach's inkblot. Sexual Imagery: Breasts, primarily the rounded areas at the top of the image. Good/Common Answers: "Bat, butterfly, female figure (in the centre), moth"     Psychological and Other Aspects of the Sign's Arbitrariness  9  You may be a little paranoid if you see: "Mask, animal face, jack o lantern"  Bad Answer: "Anything insulting about the female figure (it is an indicator of your own body image)"....  The right answer in IQ tests is a correct sign (out of all signs). In my Master thesis in psychology (1998), I made a test to assess logical series drawn on 4 patterns. Instead of selecting the right sign (classic IQ test), people were creating series. So, the IQ and creativity (originality, flexibility...) or personality traits could be observed altogether. To be valid, series must contain repeated signs e.g. rotation, diminishing, adding... which may be combined. The repetition of the sign is like a grammatical rule defining series. Practice patterns shows 2 examples of series: adding and alternating.   I used 4 different patterns. The first pattern to draw series:   Testing 600 people, I identified 24 distinct series. Below are 2 examples.    Psychological and Other Aspects of the Sign's Arbitrariness  10   This test is much harder than classic IQ tests. Some people weren't even able to create series, or used the same logic (adding) for all patterns. Series needs signifier (rotation, increasing & sum, etc) and signified (drawing) together. If both are present at the same time, how can new sign e.g. invention arise? From where originated the name (signifier) for e.g. PC, bulb, train, phone, alternator...? Tsiolkovsky, the father of astronautics, was inspired by Verne's fictions. The rocket hadn't existed, when Verne signified it. So, the signifier (name of rocket) preceded the signified (object launched to space)? Or the signifier could somehow be "calculated" post facto? Or is it individual for every case (once signifier first, at another time signified)? Anyhow, the birth to previous inventions which influence its name and construction. My research showed some other findings, e.g. type of series can depend on profession, when technicians overused 'decomposing', because in technical fields the problems are broken down, in order to be resolved like integration by parts: Riemann–Stieltjes integral. So, the frequency of the sign doesn't always indicate originality (decomposing is a rare logic in general, but in technical fields it is common).     Psychological and Other Aspects of the Sign's Arbitrariness  11    4. Art and sign The artistic value increases by the uniqueness against the criterion via which the art is evaluated. This criterion is a sign - abstract enough to be repeated. E.g. cubism shows the same object from different angles causing a 'plastic' effect, impressionism blurs points / lines of the objects, so the colors become more appealing. The 'different angle', 'blurring' are signs re-used to compose the art. There are qualitative differences in the uniqueness. E.g. to make a striptease ('a performance') is more unique than not to make striptease. But anybody is able to do striptease, while only few can jump a pirouette like a figure skater. This way, it's harder to do cubistic art (according to its definition) than 'abstract' 'art' (e.g. Pollock) without clear sign. That abstract 'art' "reflects" the mood / psyche is too vague a sign to allow distinction. After all, cubism reflects mood / psyche too, but in addition it satisfies its more abstract criterion (sign). The figure skater can be naked, but a stripper can hardly jump a pirouette. New technology leads to a new sign: new art. More options to generate sound, picture, video, application need a new sign to define the art (image is too easy to create now). But the new sign can arise without new technology, like Mannerism, Cubism... So, the new art primarily depends on a society that can ignore, deny, punish or promote it, while the technology is secondary. Today, the only sign has become the market controlled by ad. Anything advertised can be 'art'. Duchamp's Fountain 1917 (urinal), wasn't just a satire, but an omen of coming times... Maybe the decadency must precede the period of the new art defined by more abstract sign promoted by society altering economic system to prevent (incompetent) monopolization of art. Critic Dave Hickey lamented (2012) the incompetent rich art buyers greatly overrating contemporary artists, adding: "At the moment it feels like the Paris salon of the 19th century, where bureaucrats and conservatives combined to stifle the field of work. It was the Impressionists who forced a new system, led by the artists themselves. It created modern art and a whole new way of looking at things. ...Lord    Psychological and Other Aspects of the Sign's Arbitrariness  12  knows we need that now more than anything. We need artists to work outside the establishment and start looking at the world in a different way - to start challenging preconceptions instead of reinforcing them." Or, as art historian Harvard Benjamin complained (2016), the market is an exclusive criterion, distorting a real contribution.    RÉFÉRENCES Benjamin, H. (2016). La crítica de arte ha perdido totalmente su función, El País Hickey, D. (2012). Nasty, stupid' world of modern art, The Guardian Foucault M. (1971). Justice vs. Power, Debate on human nature (with Chomsky) Rorschach, H. (1927). Rorschach Test – Psychodiagnostic Plates. Cambridge, MA: Hogrefe Publishing Corp. ISBN 3-456-82605-2.  Torrance, E.P., (1974). Torrance tests of creative thinking, Scholastic Testing Service, ISBN 0663310393, 9780663310395  Miro Brada  Computer Programmer EACH (Estate Agents Clearing House), UK E-mail: miro.brada@yahoo.co.uk 

Psychological and other aspects of the sign arbitrariness

https://philpapers.org/archive/BRAPAO-5.pdf

Psychological and other aspects of the sign arbitrariness

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

PhilPapers