Language is something we have become so accustomed to using everyday. It is our
primary, if not only way of communication in this world and although it may appear in many different forms and ways, we as humans are connected by the languages we make use of. It also gives us an identity in this world and is the reason for which we understand and relate to the things from this world that we encounter in our everyday lives. Looking deeper however into this, we can see that there are three features that tower above the rest when it comes to our relationship with language itself. The three features of our relationship with language begins with the feature of self- forgetfulness. Self-forgetfulness is described as when we as everyday functioning human beings tend to make language disappear, and in one sense, forget that we belong to it. We have become masters in our own way of the language that we use everyday that we often forget the language itselfits complexity, its rules, its whole essence. One can say that he takes it for granted as it is the most natural, convenient, and unobstructive medium of communication and expression in his everyday activities. He has no consciousness over how he executes language, for he just speaks, perhaps except when he finds himself hesitating to say something because it might lead to a conflict with the other person, or because it might be misinterpreted. In this sense it can be understood that the mark of language is what is said, the content of what has been relayed, transmitted, and conveyed. The second feature would be the I-less ness of our relationship with language. I-less pertains to the language being shared and not belonging to a single individual alone but belongs to a whole community. The presence of language highlights an existence of others, for language is used as a medium of expression, a medium for the transmission of ones ideas to another. This feature can be said to contradict the Cartesian cogito, which understands that the proof of ones existence is in the individual capacity to think, deliberate, and doubt. In this sense, language being something of a shared existence means that anyone who speaks a language that nobody else uses doesnt really speak at all. The analogy of the game is also presented here as it compares the rules which are present in games to the rules that are to be followed when it comes to the discussion and use of language. As you start and are new to the game, the rules are very obvious and easily perceived which creates a constant awareness for the user but as we get more acquainted and familiar with it, we eventually get used to it and automatically abide by the rules given. This does not mean however that over time, the rules cannot be changed and revised to suit new contexts. Just like in certain games, modifications are made to make the game better and more efficient. This is typically done because these rules are first and foremost, not ours but are universally applied. Which means that the language that we share in using is very much shared and socialised among the community. This modification is what makes the game change and in the long run makes it more interesting and fun to play or in terms of language, use everyday. The third feature of our relationship with language is universality. This feature is not very formal or by no means perfect but in this feature we understand further that everything is encased by language. The limit of the language we are familiar with also is somehow inherently related to the limit of the world we know. This is because in our everyday lives, everything whether big or small has a word for it and that one cannot turn off language from our activities in life. In this sense everything is within language, not in the sense everything can be understood through, lets say, Nihongo or Sanskrit, but that for ideas and concepts to be understood, these things have to go through our means of reaching those concepts, which is through language. As a crude example, an English speaker can only make sense of the world through English, but given enough time, everything in the world and about the world can be defined and explored in English, like the physical laws and manifestations of the world, the experiences of people, and everything else. Our grasp of the world maybe limited, but what our language can reach is unlimited as is the world. As has been explored in these features, language is the real mark of our finitude for as human beings who use it, we are bound by it and to it. Yet language is beyond the collective understanding and experience of all those who use it; the scope of its growing existence is the unlimited world itself. And if language is the only true means of engaging the world, then we are indeed only capable of getting to know the world to the extent of our mastery of language. When one is born and has grown up in the Philippines, this person can only encounter the world within how the language and culture of her fellow Filipinos have grasped the world. This can be very different when compared to a person who was born in Japan, or in China. Because as has been explored, we are only able to mark our existence in the world and our existence to other people through language, and that if this means we are enveloped by these biases from the language with which we grew up, then we can only engage in the world in a limited way. In this sense the speaker is held back by language, from the possibilities of engaging with the world and even more, its yet-to-be discovered possibilities. But language will always grow, infinitely as long as it is executed and continually used. It will touch more and more elements. It will grow beyond its individual users and speakersit only has the infinite world to limit it.
(NATO ASI Series 151) Emanuel a. Schegloff (Auth.), Eduard H. Hovy, Donia R. Scott (Eds.) - Computational and Conversational Discourse_ Burning Issues — an Interdisciplinary Account-Springer-Verlag Be