afjkndghkjfghasjzxcnbbnlkp
N O T I C E : : m e m o r y _ s t r e a m _ l o c a t e d
I D : : C o m m u n i c a t i o n
T Y P E: : R E C O L L E C T I V E
Attempts to convey complex or nuanced information to other people are
immensely frustrating. There's a saying that someone once told me - that language is violence against meaning - and I've never heard something I so thoroughly agreed with in my life.
The problems with language start with the difference between linguistic prescriptivism, and descriptivism. There are so many people that still hold to the idea that 'words have meanings', and those meanings are whatever the dictionary says they mean. They conceive of language as this concretely defined thing that some authority figure sat down and produced at a point in history, rather than what it actually is; which is a case of people starting to use certain sounds in ways that meant things, and somebody eventually writing that down. It is very, very rare for anyone to have ever woken up one day and gone "I want to invent a word that refers to this specific thing," as opposed to just incidentally creating one on the fly.
What this means is that, in practise, one word can mean something entirely different to two different people. If someone calls something 'sick' in an approving way, a person unfamiliar with that usage of the term might completely fail to understand what they mean. Inversely, younger generations frequently invent entirely new words that anyone not part of that group has never heard of, sometimes getting to the point where they've practically invented their own language to talk in that has barely any similarities to standard Saltiltomeyin.
The fact that you can use a word and have it not necessarily mean what it means to you to someone else is already incredibly frustrating, and renders traditional prose ineffective at communicating concepts with a sufficient level of nuance. Poetry is sort of an alternate solution, but it has its own problems in how you trade specificity for general emotional conveyance.
It's annoying, particularly for someone like me for whom accurately conveying information is a matter of life and death. I frequently wish that humans could talk to each other the way I used to talk to
████████: We were able to communicate with each other through what amounted to raw intent, a coalescence of emotion and direct, unprocessed intentionality. She could tell me that she wanted me to go outside, and it'd come just in the form of the emotional backing of the thought, then a wordless urge to 'go outside'; either with or without a 'please' attached. That method also lacks some specificity, but it's immune to misinterpretation, because you're literally getting the untranslated intention direct from the source.
If I could find a way to do that with other people, it would make my life so much easier. As is, I say things and people constantly interpret them in the way that other people who aren't me would mean them, and it leads to misconceptions in even the most trivial and unimportant conversations; let alone actually important ones.
afjkndghkjfgvhxasjzxcnbbnlkp
N O T I C E : : m e m o r y _ s t r e a m _ t e r m i n a t e d
