🚀 go-pugleaf

newhov@my-dejanews.com wrote...
>  James Harvey Stout <james@james-harvey-stout.com> wrote:

>> The idea of "influencing others' behavior" is rather weak. When I say, "Hello," I
>> am not trying to influence the other person, except to respond with "Hello."
>
>  That IS an influence.  Not a big, earth-shattering influence (like yelling
>"Fire!" in a crowded theater), but an "influence" all the same, i.e., part of
>the stimulus package that resulted in the other person's saying "hello" back.


Hmm, consider this. Far from being an expert in psychology, I have nevertheless studied the basics. 
The basics claim that the majority of communication is non-verbal and subconscious. The conclusion thus appears (to me) to be that the communication part of language cannot be studied without considering the subconscious messages that are included with the words. 
Further, there is a non-verbal and conscious part. This must definitely be included in the study of language. After all, irony is a part of language, isn't it?
Now, since we do not have a good understanding of the subconscious mind, it seems to me rather impossible to find a useful definition of language. 
However, the lack of a good definition is nothing to worry about. Definitions are but words and words can seldom convey the full truth about reality.
/Kent Eriksson