John, (01)
> No. You cannot do pragmatics without having syntax and semantics.
>
> It's impossible to say anything without syntax. It's impossible
> to refer to anything without semantics. And it's impossible to
> do anything pragmatically without being able to make statements
> (syntax) that refer to something (semantics). (02)
Syntax is about how symbols combine, so atomic symbols can have
semantics without syntax. For example, a red flag with a white
diagonal means there's a scuba diver below. That's its semantics.
But neither the red background nor the white diagonal mean anything by
itself (just as the d, o, and g of "dog" mean nothing by
themselves); so there's no syntax. There can also be pragmatics; the
symbol is often used, e.g., as bumper stickers, to announce oneself as
a scuba diver. (03)
A more elaborate example is protolanguage, where there is simply a
sequence of symbols and it's up to the hearer to figure out what the
relations between their meanings are. An example is the language of
panic: "Help! Collapsed! Alex! 911! Quick!" There's no syntax;
any order would convey the same thing. (04)
Is music an example of syntax and pragmatics without semantics? (05)
-- Jerry (06)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (07)
|