Since this book is about language, we should establish a definition of it at the outset. You may already know that experts do not agree on what language is. But we are not linguists, so, like Humpty Dumpty, we can proclaim, "When I use a word it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor less." Actually, we will be concurring with the majority of language experts if we adhere to the following definition:
Language is a systematic means of communicating ideas and feelings by the use of conventional symbols.(2)The term systematic refers to the rules for combining the elements of the language--the grammar. The word symbols in the definition conveys another critical aspect of language: it is referential. Symbols refer to something that need not be present to be discussed. Symbols allow us to communicate about events in the past or future and at a distance or hidden from the sender or the receiver. The symbols may be of any kind: auditory, visual, tactual, or whatever, so long as they can be transmitted by one person and received by another. Conventional implies prior agreement about the meaning of the symbols between two or more people.
Our definition of language avoids some of the controversial issues, though not all. It tells what language can do--communicate thoughts and emotions--not what it must do. It makes clear that a set of symbols, a collection of signs, does not make a language if there are no rules for putting the symbols together. The concept of language expressed here is a social one; it requires that others (at least one other) share an understanding of the language elements (grammar and vocabulary) before the system achieves linguistic status. Sender and receiver may not be able to explicate the rules, but they demonstrate their internalization of them by their consistent behavior in relation to them.
Some linguists require that the symbols be arbitrary rather than iconic (representations of the form of that which is being described, like a picture of an object, an icon). An arbitrary symbol could not be understood by someone unfamiliar with the language. An iconic symbol could. Our definition of language does not address this point, but our discussion of sign language will.
We do not include the dynamics of languages in the definition--the fact that as languages are transmitted they tend to alter somewhat, usually in predictable ways. For instance, the original word for a flying machine that carries passengers was aeroplane; now plane means the same thing. The tendency to shorten or to prune words is one predictable feature of most languages, including sign languages. We will take up this latter point in the second chapter, when we discuss the structure of sign language.
Having said that, it should be noted that communication by pointing, pantomiming, drawing, and other nonlinguistic means is limited. For wide-ranging communication, especially for discussions about things not present and events not experienced in common, language is essential. We conclude that you can have communication without language, but the communication you will have will be thin gruel compared to the rich stew that comes with language.
Return to book and ordering information