Abel Questions #2, The Functions of Language

1. What are the functions of language? Just provide the main ones Abel describes.
The functions of language are: cognitive (“language transmits information”), expressively (“when we attend to the words themselves and to their atmosphere”), performatory (“[the words] themselves are the sole instrument of the action”). Abel also says that “Language also functions to tell a story, to declaim, to hypnotize, to play a part, to imagine, to soothe, to ask, to deceive, to demonstrate one’s feelings, and in endless other ways.”

2. What is significant about the story of the tribal boys and the table?
The significance of the story about the tribal boys and the table is that the visitor did not ask specifically for what he wanted so he was given many answers. What he did not realize was that only one of the answers he was given was the only true answer to what he was asking. He assumed that the language of the tribe had five words for "table." In that particular language however, thy only had one word for table, because it was only needed in a cognitive form.

3. What is the “inscrutability of reference?” (p. 228)
The “inscrutability of reference” is when the only “way of learning what words mean” is not able to be understood through “being shown the objects [the words] denote.” An example of this is given: “can you point to air?” The answer is you cannot, because it cannot be seen. The” inscrutability of reference” is understanding what words mean even if you cannot see the meaning.

4. What does Abel mean when he says that “Words are mere breaths of air, or scribbled pencil marks, but as used in a ‘language game’ by a speech community they are not arbitrary? “( p. 228)
Abel means that words are random, you can have a string of words, and not have it mean anything, but at the same time, there can be another string of words that has a perfectly clear meaning. The ‘language game’ he mentions, he means when exploring the way the words work, in our lives. That is why a speech community would be studying words. Also, a speaking community does not make up arbitrary sentences that have no meaning. When a person speaks, they speak to make sense, or more importantly make a point. If a person was to just use random words, it would be impossible to understand them, because speech is a very large part of how we communicate.

5. What is the difference between Animal and Human Language?
The radical difference between Animal and Human Language is that Human language “is always learned; it is not mechanically controlled by specific external stimuli or internal states; it is not restricted to communication of information; it is innovative and creative.”

6. What is Chomsky’s argument on how humans learn language? Be specific about linguistic competence.
Chomsky’s argument on how humans learn language is “a special ability must be posited to account for language learning.” His argument is also know as linguistic competence. This means that he believes that language is a learned skill, not something that comes naturally to humans. It must be instilled in a person; they are not genetically and mentally programmed to automatically speak.

7. What does Abel think about Chomsky’s argument?
Abel thinks that Chomsky’s argument has no necessity. He says: “I believe it is not warranted to postulate a specific human attribute called linguistic competence.” This means he does not find it important to confirm that there is a human skill need to learn language. He believes that “knowing how to use language is no more mysterious than other instances of knowing how.”

8. How would you answer Abel’s question: “Would an infant learn to speak, although isolated from adults, if he were constantly within earshot of a radio?” (p. 231)
I would answer Abel’s question by saying, yes, a child would learn to speak, if isolated form adults, yet always in earshot of a radio. The constant stream of words, which would usually be repeated (if you listen to a radio host, they often use many of the same words), would prompt the child to speak, but I think that just because someone has words, does not mean they have language, and I don’t think the radio, would help the child understand the words s/he was hearing. Without an adult to personally explain the words and their meanings to the child, the child would be simply a parrot, with no real understanding.

9. Why does Abel believe that “language is not in fact unique in the spectrum of human capacities?” (p. 231)
Abel believes that “language is not unique in the spectrum of human capacities” because the “human species has evolved certain physiological capacities and certain neurological dispositions to learn; no one can now say how specific these learning mechanisms are.” What Abel means by that is that the human linguistic capacity is not the only special capacity which humans have, and that all the other special capacities are just a mysterious as the linguistic one, so it is not necessary to find out if there is a special linguistic skill humans have the capacity to learn, instead of just possessing it.

10. What does Abel mean when he says: “We all learn these codes of stance, mannerism, gesture, tactility, interpersonal behavior…yet we are equally unable to state them fully”? (p. 232)
Abel means that according to Plato, we have no actual knowledge of all these “impersonal behaviors” because we are unable to explain them. Also that, all of these “codes” we have learned, are not always the same everywhere in the world. Abel gives examples of how the US version of an straight, honest man, how he stand up straight and looks others in the eye, is a “gangster, or barbarian” to the Vietnamese.