Is Witty's private language argument sound? What's the problem with having a language spoken by only one person?
who cares lol :-P
>>7743476
Welcome friend, I hope you enjoy your stay here at /lit/ and I wish you many more (You)s.
>>7743457
I think it's pretty sound.
Language is a tool primarily to transfer information.
Since a single person would have nobody to transfer to, the language would be very restricted to the point of being completely useless.
>>7743457
>What's the problem with having a language spoken by only one person?
Because you are already restricted by language by learning it. And not having language isn't an option for 'privacy' either. For example in your childhood If you don't learn a language then you become an empty shell of a person. There is a famous case of an 11 year old girl who was kept in solitary confinement by her family since birth. When rescued, she was such a black slate that when she came out of the room she spent the next few weeks leaning against the wall in what ever room she was put in. Only when she was able to grasp basic language was she able to grow, but then was restricted by said language.
Oh but now you will say "I will just make my own language, and then I will be able to have freedom of communication." Well sorry anon, but you are already infected by your native tongue or the tongue of another language. Thus your "new language" really is just built off of previous experience, or is simply a complex code. Regardless both are not really allowing you a private language.
I have a private 'language' that I verbally communicate to myself through audio scraps accumulated through life.
The verbal portion is mostly irrelevant and largely interchangeable.
