Another's Take on Language

According to “The Writer's Almanac” today, William H. Gass, an essayist and novelist born 30 July 1924, once wrote, "[Language] is not the lowborn, gawky servant of thought and feeling; it is need, thought, feeling, and perception itself. The shape of sentences, the song in its syllables, the rhythm of its movement, is the movement of the imagination." Just think of the power language has for the speaker or writer, all of that before meaning is even considered.

Semiotic Linguistic Stuff

As I try to wade through some of Derrida, I begin to wonder if we might not be going at this language thing from the wrong end (no suggested pun). Observing my 2 year old granddaughter Maeve communicate, I appreciate the simplicity of getting meaning across: "M'poop in da pot," speaks volumes, especially when expressed proudly via telephone. Someone might comment that I don't get it, but I fully discern the grammar, logic, and rhetoric of that sentence; the meaning is crystal clear.

Definition

I looked up both found and foundation in the Oxford English Dictionay, a Christmas gift from Bridgett a couple of years ago, and now I am thoroughly confused. It may be the font size (less than 6 point and requiring a magnifying glass), but I think I have probably confused myself by trying too hard. I can now throw "melting metal," as in foundery, and some obsolete meanings into the mix. I did go to "find" and one of the definitions said "to come across." That is pretty much what I expect when I refer to finding myself: I will be looking for that other brown shoe in the bottom of the closet one day and there my self will be. I only hope the surprise will be pleasant and not disappointing.

Foundation

Every once in a while, I will hear a word used and realize some connection anew. That may not exactly be the way to describe the experience. The connection was always there, but I was unaware. Today, during a sermon at College Church, Father Fleming, who happens to remind me of my dad but that is for another blog, said that we have to be found, that we have to have a foundation. Isn't it correct to say an organizaton was founded by someone? If there were a venn diagram or some kind of set theory of words that fit together, it would not be much of a leap to place foundation in that same set. But "found" often connotes the result of a different kind of effort. "I found my watch." or "He found his uncle in the census of 1900." even "She found herself." As the past tense of find, "found" never fit comfortably into the word set containing foundation, until today. Now that I am trying to put this on paper, so to speak (What would Derrida have to say about that phrase and preceeding clause?), I feel clumsy. What made sense at 11 a.m, this morning has become foggy. But I will attempt my mental acrobatics anyway: when I have a foundation to my life, that means that I found (did find) something. By finding my center, a beginning, the course to follow, I laid a foundation. I then choose to build on what I find. Maybe others' "finding" me builds on that foundation as well. God finds each of us, no matter where we are or what we do. Then we find ourselves and each other? Now I am getting tired of my own rambling.

Do I gotta?

I emailed my daughter Bridgett (far left with Bevin) that I have begun a blog and she replied that if I keep it up for a while, she would link to my blog froms hers. That's just what I fear: the obligatory diary, the dishes that must be washed, the plants that must be watered. How different then is the monitor from the TV screen? Am I replacing one kind of mindlessness with another? Now I have mixed my metaphors. Is it a chore or is it a mindless passtime? hmmm. I would tell my students that writing is never a waste of time, and this particular experience is anything but mindless. Actually, the more I write, the more I have to consider.

Derrida, Derrido

So, like I was readin' this stuff by this dude named Derrida and he says, "To be what it is, all writing must, therefore, be capable of functioning in the radical absence of every empirically determined receiver in general. And this absence is not a continuous modification of presence, it is a rupture in presence, the "death" or the possibility of the "death" of the receiver inscribed in the structure of the mark. . ." And I like thought about it for a minute and my head exploded.

I am strangely drawn to him. But is it only nonsense wrapped in a pretty French package? What would Woody Allen have to say about Derridas? So much thinking to do and so little available brain space.

Defining

I am not keen on putting my every emotion out there for anyone to analyze. I also promised myself that I would not make this a whiners' anonymous kind of site. Having defined those parameters, I'm not sure what will be appropriate. Maybe I could come up with some anarchist's manifesto or spearhead a religious cult. I hear Tom Cruise commissioned some Scientologist specialists to clear his newly purchased home of bad vibes. I see lucrative possibilities in the religious angle.

beginnings

Having just force fed myself the exclamation pointed rantings of a distant but listserv connected coworker, I decided it was time to succumb to the technology of self-disclosure. The next decision will be how discreet I will remain.

On a much lighter note, Colleen looks happy about this college graduation thing, doesn't she?