Have We Said Everything There Is To Say?

[Deepwater6]

Does it seem that any new written thought's, blog's, speech's, and stories must be coming to an end? It's hard to hear a bold or profound speech from a politician that has not already been heard from some other politician in the past. The best we can hope for is an inspiring orator to deliver the re-mixed words in a way that keeps our attention.

 

Yes there are still some combinations of words left I'm sure, but sooner or later won't we exhuast them all at some point? Think of all the thousands of romance novels, government documents and manuals, large company legal, insurance, HR protocols and the list goes on and on.

 

We could invent new words to keep our vocabulary from becoming stale, but not at the rate we currently do. At some point in the future anything anyone writes will be plagiarism will it not? I guess for a human lifetime there are plenty of words to keep it interesting. So maybe I'm making something out of nothing, thoughts?

Edited December 20, 2012 by Deepwater6

[belovelife]

interesting question

 

i ponder when there will be enough laws, there has to be some point right?

i understand in an age such as this, with all sorts of new things, we need new ways to keep everything safe,

but when does it end?

[Turtle]

Does it seem that any new written thought's, blog's, speech's, and stories must be coming to an end? It's hard to hear a bold or profound speech from a politican that has not already been heard from some other politican in the past. The best we can hope for is an inspiring orator to deliver the re-mixed words in a way that keeps our attention.

 

Yes there are still some combinations of words left I'm sure, but sooner or later won't we exhuast them all at some point? Think of all the thousands of romance novels, government documents and manuals, large company legal, insurance, HR protocols and the list goes on and on.

 

We could invent new words to keep our vocabulary from becoming stale, but not at the rate we currently do. At some point in the future anything anyone writes will be plagiarism will it not? I guess for a human lifetime there are plenty of words to keep it interesting. So maybe I'm making something out of nothing, thoughts?

 

it's not the words that matter, but the context in which words get used. as long as there are people -or is a person- , there is new context for words. shall we stop using "yes" because it's been done to death? do we owe compense to whomever first uttered it? certainly no. :lol: a rose by any other name would smell as sweet, but no one has the final word. :rose:

[lawcat]

interesting question

 

i ponder when there will be enough laws, there has to be some point right?

i understand in an age such as this, with all sorts of new things, we need new ways to keep everything safe,

but when does it end?

 

Contraction in number of governments is one way, either reducing the superior or inferior governments.

[Deepwater6]

it's not the words that matter, but the context in which words get used. as long as there are people -or is a person- , there is new context for words. shall we stop using "yes" because it's been done to death? do we owe compense to whomever first uttered it? certainly no. :lol: a rose by any other name would smell as sweet, but no one has the final word. :rose:

 

True to the last Turtle. the ambiguity of context can make it all worth while.

 

'All I ask is a tall ship and a star to sail her by"

Edited November 25, 2012 by Deepwater6

[Guest MacPhee]

Does it seem that any new written thought's, blog's, speech's, and stories must be coming to an end? It's hard to hear a bold or profound speech from a politican that has not already been heard from some other politican in the past. The best we can hope for is an inspiring orator to deliver the re-mixed words in a way that keeps our attention.

 

Yes there are still some combinations of words left I'm sure, but sooner or later won't we exhuast them all at some point? Think of all the thousands of romance novels, government documents and manuals, large company legal, insurance, HR protocols and the list goes on and on.

 

We could invent new words to keep our vocabulary from becoming stale, but not at the rate we currently do. At some point in the future anything anyone writes will be plagiarism will it not? I guess for a human lifetime there are plenty of words to keep it interesting. So maybe I'm making something out of nothing, thoughts?

 

Maybe the problem was caused by the invention of writing. And especially, by the invention of printed books.

These preserve, or "freeze" the words of dead people - in the form of a "cultural inheritance", such as the works of Shakespeare.

 

Shakespeare's thoughts and verbal expressions have been kept, or "frozen", in writing, instead of being forgotten. In a way, that's a good thing. But it makes it harder for new generations of writers. They can't write anything that Shakespeare has written already.

 

Modern writers face a constantly diminishing supply of new verbal material. Like they're at the shore of the language-lake. In the past, the lake contained fresh, fluid, lively liquid water. But now a freezing process has started. Ice is forming - at first close to the shore, then radiating rapidly away - expanding out in a printed wave-front across the lake. In 2050, it hits the furthest shore. The lake is then a solid Ice-9 style mass of frozen cliche. Only ducks still speak.

 

A frightful scenario! But humans may yet unfreeze the lake with new verbal additives.

 

For example, Turtle's #3 mentions the word "yes". This hackneyed word is already in process of replacement.

Don't you agree? "Absolutely!"

[Turtle]

True to the last Turtle. the ambiguity of context can make it all worth while.

 

'All I ask is a tall ship and a star to sail her by"

 

:steering: boy do i love a good quote!! thanks for that good quote deep. :thumbs_up of course there is no way to keep me from digging up something of good quotes' contexts. in this case, perhaps you got it from willy wonka as masefield wrote"...a star to steer her by, ..." and willy said it as you wrote it. perhaps some day, someone will write, "all i ask is a long starship and a nebula to steer her by." at any rate, good old dead masefield is alive and well here today.

 

Sea Fever

...

And all I ask is a merry yarn from a laughing fellow-rover

And quiet sleep and a sweet dream when the long trick's over.

...

 

mmmm...i don't like his meter! he gets you going then stumbles you like an off-sized step. :rant: allow me to have a go at it.

 

And all I ask is a merry yarn,

from a laughing fellow-rover;

And quiet sleep of treks' sweet dreams,

when the long trick last is over.

:bow_flowers:

 

here's a counterpoint to overuse that you may enjoy mr. deep & readers. (click blue arrow by pyro's name to go to the post & thread.)

 

I came across a new word (phrase) today on the NPR Website.

 

It is "hapax legomenon" -- or just "hapax" for short. It is: "an expression that only occurs in a single place in the language, like wardrobe malfunction, Corinthian leather or satisfactual."

 

Wikipedia defines hapax as "is a word which occurs only once in either the written record of a language, the works of an author, or in a single text."

...

[Guest MacPhee]

:steering: boy do i love a good quote!! thanks for that good quote deep. :thumbs_up of course there is no way to keep me from digging up something of good quotes' contexts. in this case, perhaps you got it from willy wonka as masefield wrote"...a star to steer her by, ..." and willy said it as you wrote it. perhaps some day, someone will write, "all i ask is a long starship and a nebula to steer her by." at any rate, good old dead masefield is alive and well here today.

 

Sea Fever

 

 

mmmm...i don't like his meter! he gets you going then stumbles you like an off-sized step. :rant: allow me to have a go at it.

 

And all I ask is a merry yarn,

from a laughing fellow-rover;

And quiet sleep of treks' sweet dreams,

when the long trick last is over.

:bow_flowers:

 

here's a counterpoint to overuse that you may enjoy mr. deep & readers. (click blue arrow by pyro's name to go to the post & thread.)

 

The linguistic sophistication of Turtle's post arouses my intense admiration. I see a true master at work, and am humbled.

[LaurieAG]

it's not the words that matter, but the context in which words get used.

Too right Turtle, messages become noise and noise becomes a message due to the context.

 

Thats why we must be careful as politicians can slowly redefine the meanings of words for political reasons to turn their original meanings on their heads.

Edited November 25, 2012 by LaurieAG

[Turtle]

The linguistic sophistication of Turtle's post arouses my intense admiration. I see a true master at work, and am humbled.

 

thank you macphee. :)

 

Too right Turtle, messages become noise and noise becomes a message due to the context.

 

Thats why we must be careful as politicians can slowly redefine the meanings of words for political reasons to turn their original meanings on their heads.

 

no less we must also be careful because marketers and corporations quickly obfuscate words for profit reasons. all natural my ***!! hells bells, we have to look out for every worder!! "you know what i'm saying; oppan gangnam style." now that... is dope fo shizzle. :phones:

[Deepwater6]

Stop that...reverse it, Yes Willie led me astray as I'm ignorant of Masefield. I shall follow the prime directive and remedy that soon :coffee_n_pc: .

 

Hapax huh, In my old high school there was a strange lead principle named Jay Smith. He and another english teacher were sent to prison for there involement in the murder of another teacher who worked at the school back in the early 80's. There was a book about it called 'Echoes in the Darkness". They also made a movie about it. Among a slew of oddities Smith carried out it is said when he had monthly staff meeting's with all the teachers present he would always use at least one word no one ever heard of before. It would send all the teachers (english teachers included) scambling to dictionaries to see what the new word meant.

 

Great analogy MacPhee!! Agreed once written or typed generation over generation the pool continues to dwindle.

[LaurieAG]

no less we must also be careful because marketers and corporations quickly obfuscate words for profit reasons. all natural my ***!! hells bells, we have to look out for every worder!! "you know what i'm saying; oppan gangnam style." now that... is dope fo shizzle. :phones:

Like profit and loss and equity and debt lol.

[Turtle]

Like profit and loss and equity and debt lol.

 

this has already been said: Caveat emptor... but this may not have been: ...quoniam exigo est a impono. :lol:

 

in that vein, and on the op, we have a lot to say still if we bother to say all that previously was only implied.

[blamski]

the great thing about words is that they never get used up. we'll never have a shortage of 'ifs' and 'buts' because as soon as i, or anyone else, say or write one, another one suddenly becomes available. just because shakespeare wrote "A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool" doesn't mean that this combination of words is unavailable to future authors. maybe if they do use it then issues of plagarism and originality will arise and need to be discussed but the context in which the words are said might change everything. likewise if we say "A strawberry thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a strawberry" the reference to shakespeare is explicit but a completely new thing is being said.

 

if we find a way to agree just how many words there are, and the rate at which new ones are being invented, we could do the math to work out just how long it would take to go through every possible permutation.

[Guest MacPhee]

the great thing about words is that they never get used up. we'll never have a shortage of 'ifs' and 'buts' because as soon as i, or anyone else, say or write one, another one suddenly becomes available. just because shakespeare wrote "A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool" doesn't mean that this combination of words is unavailable to future authors. maybe if they do use it then issues of plagarism and originality will arise and need to be discussed but the context in which the words are said might change everything. likewise if we say "A strawberry thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a strawberry" the reference to shakespeare is explicit but a completely new thing is being said.

 

if we find a way to agree just how many words there are, and the rate at which new ones are being invented, we could do the math to work out just how long it would take to go through every possible permutation.

 

On the Shakespeare point - surely many combinations of words he used do become unavailable to future authors. Except as "quotations".

One thinks of the famous, doubtless apocryphal, story of a modern theatre-goer's reaction, on first viewing a stage-production of "Hamlet":

 

"Why, it's nothing but a mass of quotations!" or: "I'm very dissappointed - I'd never realised how much Shakespeare relied on quotations for his effects!"

 

This reaction can arise because Shakespeare's words got written down and preserved for all time in print. Suppose they hadn't been - suppose we were living in a pre-literate society. His words would've been forgotten within, say 1,000 years. Then future dramatists would be free to re-invent the complete text of "Hamlet". And it would be a fresh new thing, for them and for their audiences.

 

So I think the invention of writing and print, must constantly narrow the range of opportunities available for future creative artistry.

The same goes for music and songs - consequent on the invention of written musical notation, and gramophone records and CD's.

 

Perhaps, for the sake of future generations, all plays, novels, poetry, CD's etc, should self-destruct after a certain time -

we'd just keep the science books?

[Turtle]

...if we find a way to agree just how many words there are, and the rate at which new ones are being invented, we could do the math to work out just how long it would take to go through every possible permutation.

 

we can look at a simple example using existing words. consider the following senetence.

 

There is no reason for delay when time constitutes the new essence.

 

so 12 different words. if we ignore whether or not sentences using just these 12 words make sense, then we can make 12! [twelve factorial] different sentences. 12*11*10*9*8*7*6*5*4*3*2*1=479,001,600. supposing we write 1 of these sentences every 30 seconds, then it would take contnuous writing of 30seconds * 479001600 sentences = 14370048000 seconds/60 seconds=239500800 minutes/60 minutes=3991680hours/24hours=166320days/365days=455.67 years.

 

i think this should put to rest any worry of running out of things to say.

Edited November 28, 2012 by Turtle

[CraigD]

Before throwing my pennies into this interesting thread, I feel compelled (and inspired by Turtles preceding exercise in systematic counting) to include a reference to Borges 1941 short story The Library of Babel. One of many full English translation and pretty illustration of it can be read and viewed here.

 

I imagine lot of us hypographers read this long ago, others more recently. Anybody who hasn’t, I urge to take 10 minutes and do so now. This is one of those stories that tends to lurk just below the surface of you conscious mind, to be dredged up by thoughts like those this thread invokes.

 

The Library – which, assuming the “general theory of the Library” is correct, is contained in a finite, shirtsleeve-comfortable space larger than our visible universe - is an intense thought experiment, with much to suggest on the subject of information.