What do we know about the nature of language?

Philosophy of Language

The Limits of Objectification

Martin Heidegger

Martin Heidegger (1971) questions the nature of language in his book titled On the Way to Language and makes the following observation, "the essential nature of language flatly refuses to express itself in words—in the language, that is, in which we make statements about language. If language everywhere withholds its nature in this sense, then such withholding is in the very nature of language" (p. 81)

Heidegger’s critique of the philosophy of language lies in the fact that, as philosophers, we objectify the nature of language through the use of reason and insight, and use language to represent what we have learned about language.  Language that we use to speak about language is called metalanguage, and, resonating with my marginal background in applied linguistics, philosophers use metalanguage such as semantics, syntax, pragmatics, speech acts, assertion, proposition, and truth-value to describe language.  We objectify language through the use of metalanguage, but rarely do philosophers consider the limits with which we are confined when examining language ontologically, that is, from the perspective of its nature.  If language can only reveal itself to us through words, then we must make language the fundamental foundation upon which we can learn anything about language.  We are confined by language when describing the nature of language, and therefore cannot discover its nature beyond the use of  words themselves.  In essence, language turns in on itself and reveals to us that it is in hiding.  It is a mystery that cannot be known by humans.

As an experienced ESL teacher who is getting her Master’s degree in teaching English to speakers of other languages (TESOL), I am constantly objectifying language and discovering the regularities and patterns within language, using the aforementioned metalanguage to describe my objectifications.  But can I truthfully say that I have knowledge of the nature of what I am teaching?  On the contrary, I study language for a purpose that derives its criterion from utility, namely, to extract the regularities in language and develop means for conveying those regularities to students.  Surely we use language to construct meaning, but the meaning of language can only be revealed to us by language itself.  We cannot know its nature beyond the system within which it reveals itself to us.  Although the study of the nature of language rightly belongs to philosophy, and not research in language acquisition or applied linguistics, it behooves us to take time to think about the wonder that is language.   

References

Heidegger, M. (1971). On the way to language. New York, NY: Harper & Row.

Credits

1. Picture of Martin Heidegger:
 http://unlockyourmind.wordpress.com/2010/01/29/heidegger-and-sartre-on-death-and-authenticity/ 

2. Picture of book titled On the Way to Language
 http://gandhi.com.mx/index.cfm/id/Busqueda/source/SearchResults/categoria/libros/criteria/MARTIN%2HEIDEGGER