This document discusses the different functions of language and how words can have both literal and emotive meanings. It identifies three main functions of language: informative, which communicates information; expressive, which expresses emotions; and directive, which aims to cause or prevent actions. Almost all communication serves multiple functions. The document also notes that words can have both a literal descriptive meaning and an emotive meaning that expresses feelings. It argues that for assessing arguments logically, it is best to use language in an emotionally neutral way to avoid distraction from determining what is true.
This document discusses the different functions of language and how words can have both literal and emotive meanings. It identifies three main functions of language: informative, which communicates information; expressive, which expresses emotions; and directive, which aims to cause or prevent actions. Almost all communication serves multiple functions. The document also notes that words can have both a literal descriptive meaning and an emotive meaning that expresses feelings. It argues that for assessing arguments logically, it is best to use language in an emotionally neutral way to avoid distraction from determining what is true.
This document discusses the different functions of language and how words can have both literal and emotive meanings. It identifies three main functions of language: informative, which communicates information; expressive, which expresses emotions; and directive, which aims to cause or prevent actions. Almost all communication serves multiple functions. The document also notes that words can have both a literal descriptive meaning and an emotive meaning that expresses feelings. It argues that for assessing arguments logically, it is best to use language in an emotionally neutral way to avoid distraction from determining what is true.
This document discusses the different functions of language and how words can have both literal and emotive meanings. It identifies three main functions of language: informative, which communicates information; expressive, which expresses emotions; and directive, which aims to cause or prevent actions. Almost all communication serves multiple functions. The document also notes that words can have both a literal descriptive meaning and an emotive meaning that expresses feelings. It argues that for assessing arguments logically, it is best to use language in an emotionally neutral way to avoid distraction from determining what is true.
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as doc, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 6
At a glance
Powered by AI
The key takeaways are that language can serve informative, expressive and directive functions, and that words can have both literal and emotive meanings.
The three main functions of language are the informative use, the expressive use, and the directive use.
The four kinds of relations are: agreeing in belief and attitude, agreeing in belief but disagreeing in attitude, agreeing in attitude but disagreeing in belief, and complete disharmony by disagreeing in both belief and attitude.
Argument by Emotive Language
(also known as: loaded words, loaded language, euphemisms)
Description: Substituting facts and evidence with words that stir up emotion, with the attempt to manipulate others into accepting the truth of the argument. Logical Form: Person A claims that X is true. Person A uses ver powerful and emotive language in the claim. !herefore, X is true. Example #1: " re#ecting $od, ou are re#ecting goodness, kindness, and love itself. Explanation: %nstead of #ust ¬ believing' in $od, we are &re#ecting' $od, which is a much stronger term (( especiall when $od is associated with &goodness'. Example #2: % don)t see what)s wrong with engaging the services of a professional escort. Explanation: !hat)s #ust a nice wa of saing, &soliciting a hooker'. *o matter what ou call it, unless ou live in certain parts of *evada (or other parts of the world), it is still illegal. Exception: +anguage is powerful and should be used to draw in emotions, but never at the e,pense of valid reasoning and evidence. Language and Logic Functions of Language !he formal patterns of correct reasoning can all be conveed through ordinar language, but then so can a lot of other things. %n fact, we use language in man different was, some of which are irrelevant to an attempt to provide reasons for what we believe. %t is helpful to identif at least three distinct uses of language: -. !he informative use of language involves an effort to communicate some content. .hen % tell a child, /!he fifth of 0a is a 0e,ican holida,/ or write to ou that /+ogic is the stud of correct reasoning,/ or #ot a note to mself, /1ennifer2333(4567,/ % am using language informativel. !his kind of use presumes that the content of what is being communicated is actuall true, so it will be our central focus in the stud of logic. 8. An e,pressive use of language, on the other hand, intends onl to vent some feeling, or perhaps to evoke some feeling from other people. .hen % sa, /9rida afternoons are drear,/ or ell /:uch;/ % am using language e,pressivel. Although such uses don<t conve an information, the do serve an important function in everda life, since how we feel sometimes matters as much as2or more than2what we hold to be true. 4. 9inall, directive uses of language aim to cause or to prevent some overt action b a human agent. .hen % sa /Shut the door,/ or write /=ead the te,tbook,/ or memo mself, />on<t rel so heavil on the passive voice,/ % am using language directivel. !he point in each of these cases is to make someone perform (or forswear) a particular action. !his is a significant linguistic function, too, but like the e,pressive use, it doesn<t alwas relate logicall to the truth of our beliefs. *otice that the intended use in a particular instance often depends more on the specific conte,t and tone of voice than it does on the grammatical form or vocabular of what is said. !he simple declarative sentence, /%<m hungr,/ for e,ample, could be used to report on a phsiological condition, or to e,press a feeling, or implicitl to re?uest that someone feed me. %n fact, uses of two or more varieties ma be mi,ed together in a single utterance@ /Stop that,/ for e,ample, usuall involves both e,pressive and directive functions #ointl. %n man cases, however, it is possible to identif a single use of language that is probabl intended to be the primar function of a particular linguistic unit. "ritish philosopher 1. +. Austin developed a similar, though much more detailed and sophisticated, nomenclature for the variet of actions we commonl perform in emploing ordinar language. Aou<re welcome to e,amine his theor of speech acts in association with the discussion in our te,tbook. .hile the specifics ma var, some portion of the point remains the same: since we do in fact emplo language for man distinct purposes, we can minimiBe confusion b keeping in mind what we<re up to on an particular occasion. Literal and Emotive Meaning Cven single words or short phrases can e,hibit the distinction between purel informative and partiall e,pressive uses of language. 0an of the most common words and phrases of an language have both a literal or descriptive meaning that refers to the wa things are and an emotive meaning that e,presses some (positive or negative) feeling about them. !hus, the choice of which word to use in making a statement can be used in hopes of evoking a particular emotional response. !his is a natural function of ordinar language, of course. .e often do wish to conve some portion of our feelings along with information. !here is a good deal of poetr in everda communication, and poetr without emotive meaning is prett dull. "ut when we are primaril interested in establishing the truth2as we are when assessing the logical merits of an argument2the use of words laden with emotive meaning can easil distract us from our purpose. inds of Agreement and Disagreement %n fact, an e,cessive reliance on emotivel charged language can create the appearance of disagreement between parties who do not differ on the facts at all, and it can #ust as easil disguise substantive disputes under a veneer of emotive agreement. Since the degrees of agreement in belief and attitude are independent of each other, there are four possible combinations at work here: -. Agreement in belief and agreement in attitude: !here aren<t an problems in this instance, since both parties hold the same positions and have the same feelings about them. 8. Agreement in belief but disagreement in attitude: !his case, if unnoticed, ma become the cause of endless (but pointless) shouting between people whose feelings differ sharpl about some fact upon which the are in total agreement. 4. >isagreement in belief but agreement in attitude: %n this situation, parties ma never recogniBe, much less resolve, their fundamental difference of opinion, since the are lulled b their shared feelings into supposing themselves allied. D. >isagreement in belief and disagreement in attitude: Eere the parties have so little in common that communication between them often breaks down entirel. %t is often valuable, then, to recogniBe the levels of agreement or disagreement at work in an e,change of views. !hat won<t alwas resolve the dispute between two parties, of course, but it will ensure that the don<t waste their time on an inappropriate method of argument or persuasion. Emotively !eutral Language 9or our purposes in assessing the validit of deductive arguments and the reliabilit of inductive reasoning, it will be most directl helpful to eliminate emotive meaning entirel whenever we can. Although it isn<t alwas eas to achieve emotivel neutral language in ever instance, and the result often lacks the colorful character of our usual public discourse, it is worth the trouble and insipidit because it makes it much easier to arrive at a settled understanding of what is true. %n man instances, the informal fallacies we will consider ne,t result from an improper use of emotionall charged language in the effort to persuade someone to accept a proposition at an emotional level, without becoming convinced that there are legitimate grounds for believing it to be true. http:FFwww.philosophpages.comFlgFeGD.htm The Philosophy Pages b $arth Hemerling are licensed under a Ireative Iommons Attribution(ShareAlike 4.G Jnported +icense. Permissions beond the scope of this license ma be available at http:FFwww.philosophpages.comFreferralFcontact.htm. K-775, 8G-- $arth Hemerling. +ast modified -8 *ovember 8G--. Luestions, comments, and suggestions ma be sent to: the Iontact Page. "#apter $ %#e &se of Language $'1 %#ree (asic Functions of Language .%nformative: !he first of these uses of language is to communicate information. +anguage used to affirm or den propositions, or to present arguments, is serving the informative function. .C,pressive: +anguage that serves an expressive function is not intended to inform us of an facts or theories concerning the world@ it is not presenting information. %t is used to e,press emotions felt b the writer or speaker and to evoke similar feelings in the reader or listener. .>irective: C,pressive discourse as expressive focuses on neither true nor false. !o appl onl the criteria of truth or falsehood, correctness or incorrectness, to a piece of e,pressive discourse, such as, a love poem, is to miss the point and to lose much of its value. !he clearest e,amples are commands and re?uests. $'2 Discourse )erving Multiple Functions Almost an ordinar communication will probabl e,hibit all three uses of language. !hus a poem, which ma be primaril expressive, also ma have a moral and thus also be directive. And, of course, a poem ma contain a certain amount of information as well. Cffective communication often demands that language serve multiple functions. $'$ %#e Forms of Discourse Sentences are commonl divided into four grammatical forms: declarative, interrogative, imperative, and exclamatory. 0uch discourse is intended to serve two or possibl all three functions of language2informative, e,pressive, directive2at once. %n such cases each aspect or function of a given passage is sub#ect to its own proper criteria. +ogicians are most concerned with truth and falsehood and the related notions of the correctness and incorrectness of arguments. !hus, to stud logic we must be able to differentiate discourse that functions informativel from discourse that does not. Summar !able C,amples of Sentence 9orm and 9unction:
$'* Emotive +ords !he informative function derives from the literal meaning of the words in the sentence2the ob#ects, events, or attributes the refer to2and the relationship among them asserted b the sentence. !he e,pressive content emerges because some of the words in the sentence ma also have emotional suggestiveness or impact. .ords, then, can have both a literal meaning and an emotive meaning. !he literal meanings and the emotive meanings of a word are largel independent of one another. +anguage has a life of its own, independent of the facts it is used to describe. !he game confirms what common e,perience teaches: :ne and the same thing can be referred to b words that have ver different emotive impacts. A disagreement in belief is a disagreement about the facts of the matter at hand2for e,ample, whether or not an event has taken place. A disagreement in attitude is a disagreement in the wa the parties involved feel about the matter at hand2for e,ample, whether or not the approve or disapprove of it. $', Four -inds of relations between two people discussing some event or other matter of fact: -. !he ma agree in their beliefs regarding the occurrence of the event and in their attitude toward it. 8. !he ma agree in their beliefs about the event, but disagree in their attitudes toward it. 4. !he ma agree in attitude, et disagree in their beliefs about facts giving rise to that attitude. D. !he ma be in complete disharmon, disagreeing about the facts as well as in their attitudes toward what the think the facts to be. >etermining whether a given disagreement is one of belief, or of attitude, or of both, is sometimes difficult. %t ma depend on some interpretation of the words of the disputants. !he distinction between disagreements of attitude and disagreements of belief is ver useful@ awareness of the different uses of language helps us to understand the kinds of disagreements we ma be confronting. $'. Emotively !eutral Language *eutral language is to be preferred when factual truth is our ob#ective. .hen we are tring to learn what reall is the case, or tring to follow an argument, distractions will be frustrating@ and emotion is a powerful distraction. !herefore, when we are tring to reason about facts, referring to them in emotive language is a hindrance. +anguage that is altogether neutral ma not be available when we deal with some ver controversial matters. +anguage that is heavil charged with emotional meaning is unlikel to advance the ?uest for truth. %f our aim is to communicate information, and if we wish to avoid being misunderstood, we should use language with the least possible emotive impact. http:FFpuffin.creighton.eduFuanFlogicF:utlineF+ogicIh8.htm