Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Rejected Thesis's avatar

Well said. I used to hang out in a small cafe which was open from morning to midnight. I'd spend a day from breakfast into the late evening eating light meals, drinking too much coffee and reading weighty thick books like Sartre's Being and Nothingness and Philosophies of Art & Beauty: Selected Readings in Aesthetics from Plato to Heidegger.

Because those type of books require sustained attention, I would be in some sort of quasi meditative state while reading, occasionally punctured by the server coming up to the table asking if I wanted a refill, or occasionally someone who sat next to me who just talked way too f&*king loud. This happened frequently because a) its cafe b) some healthy number of people came in and out while I was sitting there reading for hours and c) people sometimes can be incredibly unmindful about how loud they can be.

After several times of this completely understandable unintended interruption, I decided that whenever it happened I would just categorize in one word whatever they were talking about, and then go back to my reading. Primarily the intent was to put the interruption out of my mind. However, it grew to a curiosity to just to understand , in some general way, what is it that people are talking about so enthusiastically.

And the empirical results of the Interruption While Reading study, is that people speak in terms of "directives". People gave each directions to get somewhere, what to order on the menu, how to better buy useless $h*t on the Internet, how to get lower interest rates. I can only think of a singular incident when anyone blurted out something about an emotion, let alone expressed one. Nothing about art or how one feels about it (as a subject), you might hear "I love so and so" song.

I cant be too upset; the sharing of practical information, is why I would be handed a cup of coffee without cream. And my day-to-day practical observation that servers aren't paid a living wage, I left a tip equal to the cost of the coffee, scrambled eggs and toast.

So yeah there are very good evolutionary reasons why we share useful practical information. And, sadly (ahem ...searches thesaurus...) tragically perhaps, our practical sharing is usually only short term. I could share all kinds of useful information about climate change - and even though that information would meet a real test of practicality - it wouldn't be immediate in terms of impact but would be immediate in terms of the cost you might have to pay - and so it somehow goes out of our practical cafe lexicon window.

So I would say the title is a bit of a misnomer, (though effective click bait in my case) there is nothing fundamentally wrong with our languages (if one accepts their basic reflexive limit and as you point out their ultimate inexplicability) but rather what we choose to individually and collectively focus on and express. If there is any technique one could do themselves, I wouldn't suggest one. It would be too practical. Share an experience of something that makes someone else enjoy life more....and stay there with it, and (maybe) talk about it with them if they want to, and you'll come up with your own shared language. How about something "political"? Use that useful practical language to organize with a community a piece of public art that everyone can enjoy. They might not have much to say about the piece or art itself, but they will say "I know it is art because I know it when I see it," and maybe "You see that guy over there....he gives good tips."

Expand full comment
Elena / Joyful Moments's avatar

Also, I think it’s mostly European languages that are so “limited”, beautiful as they are (every time I hear Spanish, it’s music for my ears). If you look at Hindi and Marathi, for example. These languages can express so many states of mind, body, emotions, etc., that many of us would struggle to understand what it is exactly that word is trying to pinpoint 😊

Expand full comment
9 more comments...

No posts