Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Doctordick
I thought I would jump in here as I am quite disappointed with level of the discussion on a rather simple subject. ...As I have commented elsewhere, dictionaries can not be used to learn the meanings of words in a language as the meanings of the words used in the definition of a word must be known before the definition can be used to understand the word. We actually learn what words mean by guessing their meaning from usage and, for that reason, every language extant is vague and imprecise when examined carefully. ...And Pyrotex, your comments are perhaps the best in the thread but you also are misrepresenting some important issues. ...Dictionaries are a stabilizing factor in communications...Dick
|
I have read carefully. Twice. And I have to agree with 88.3% of everything you said. Approximately.
Seriously, yes, I posted without sufficient cogitation on the metaphor of Algebra as a "language". I rambled. Criticism well taken. Mea culpa.
As to the dictionary, though. Yes, it is an incredibly stabilizing factor, when well and thoughfully used. However, in several threads hereabouts, people have attempted to use a definition out of the dictionary that was soooo broad and general, that it included (at first glance) and number of non-too-related concepts. They then concluded that at least two of those concepts were "identical" since they both fit the definition.
This is not using the dictionary to stablize.
This is using the dictionary as artillery.
