言語認知物理学

第1話

“Principle of equivalence of words and things”

Now, if we assume that words and physical phenomena always match, as has been stated repeatedly up to now, and that words are a part of physical phenomena, then surely we do not need to think of words and physics separately. If I say I am a human, since this utterance matches the human existential form as a physical phenomenon, then in the case where I say I am a dog, there is ultimately no distinction and no problem between saying that the word side is incorrect and saying that on the physical phenomena side I am actually a dog but appear representationally as a human? I think that in many cases, the possibility of telling lies is on the word side. However, it is also possible that the word side is correct and the physical phenomena side violates the words. Put differently, it can be thought that the incorrect representation is not the words but the existential form of the thing. The reason for this is that, since physical phenomena and linguistic phenomena are broadly speaking the same overall, that is, they are all physical phenomena, if we remove only linguistic phenomena from physical phenomena and take only the content that means or acts on those words as the physical phenomena, it cannot be said that the physical phenomena on the side that is acted upon are correct and the linguistic phenomena are incorrect.

Furthermore, linguistic phenomena and physical phenomena are completely identical, and the things we call linguistic phenomena and physical phenomena operate on equivalent principles from the start (principle of equivalence of words and things). In many cases, it can be understood as the physical phenomena being the side that takes meaning and the linguistic phenomena being the side that gives meaning. However, if we understand these two as not being separate from the start but as physical phenomena that act based on the same laws of physics, then it is thought that linguistic phenomena should not violate physical phenomena but should always match. However, the occurrence of things different from facts in the representation of language is related to the ability to speak about possibilities contained in potential. Furthermore, in words spoken within denial of the possibility of potential, these belong to the zero-only world apart from the case where the linguistic phenomena and physical phenomena tangibly match. However, for words that have an equivalence relationship with 0, since the legal character of the act of speech is completely lost, the corresponding physical phenomena also do not exist. In other words, those utterances are the same as erasing the act of speech itself.