Okay, I mean to title this post as “I have a hypothesis” but I figured that a random non-sensible title would attract more attention.
I am an avid user of common phrases and often do not take the time to think about what the individual words that make up the phrases truly mean. “I have a theory” is one such phrase that I would use when there is something I wish to test. The focus of this phrase is the word “theory”, and when given some thought, the word doesn't make much sense when used in this manner.
Our textbook, New Keywords, defines a theory as an hypothesis that has been confirmed by experiment. It also describes a theory to hold some sort of conformed acceptance and technical authority. During class, we've discussed that a criteria for being a theory is having an opposing side of skepticism. When the phrase “I have a theory” is used, the word “theory” often doesn't hold any confirmation, authority, nor the existence of an opposing resistance. A more accurate way of stating the phrase would be “I have a hypothesis”.
This lead me to think about common phrases I use on a regular basis. One thing I commonly say is “can you open the lights?” with the intention of asking someone to turn the lights on. The grammatical misuse of the word “open” is obvious here, though the intended meaning is still easily understood. As an experiment, I tried to go through Thursday without misusing any words in my casual speech. This experiment was short lived after I stubbed my toe on my friend's bed after waking up. “Son of a bitch that hurt!” I exclaimed, and the misuse of several words followed immediately after. Though grammatically incorrect, the statement I made is generally understood to express the extent of my pain through colorful vocabulary.
After extensive pondering on this topic, I've come to the conclusion that these words are not misused as long as the public accepts and understands the meaning of them when used in such a manner. It seems almost unnecessary to force every word to follow its Oxford dictionary definition strictly. Perhaps words can be even be defined through their common use. As long as a certain use of a word in a phrase is accepted by society, then it should be grammatically allowed. That's my theory anyways.
Finals week...
14 years ago
2 comments:
I love the humor in your writing! I like that you introduced the topic of theory then transitioned into well executed account regarding a theory of your own. Although, at the end I was expecting you to say “That’s my hypothesis anyways.” I, as do many linguists, agree that “improper speech” is consider correct, when the message the speaker is trying to conveys gets across to his/her audience. Many professors and professionals, who try to uphold a higher standard of language, believe that language has strict rules, which should be followed. If this was a longer post/an essay, I would suggest discussing or even introducing the other side of the argument (or the other theory).
But your title is not quite random, and certainly not non-sensible: "hypotenuse" has the same number of syllables as "hypothesis," and several of the same phonemes. Also, we know what a "hypotenuse" is—that's what makes it even more funny, right? You are taking the longest line between points, as it were. (Lesson: be precise with your humor; it is all too easy to invoke the idea of randomness as a way to not explain things in detail.) This is an excellent discussion of the word 'theory', and it gets to the crux of the slipperiness of language: meaning always splinters into meanings, and meanings are dependent on workable contexts. Keep up the good posts, Truman.
Post a Comment