LINGUISTIC CLOSURE 2)3)5)
← Back
L. LÖFGREN emphasizes the closure character of our languages of all kinds, even mathematical or formal. He writes "The systemic wholeness, or the complementaristic nature, of the language implies a closure, or circumscription, of our linguistic abilities- be they "pure thoughts"communicable in a formal mathematical language, or constructive directions for an experimental interpretation- domain of a physics language. The nature of this closure is not that of a classical boundary of a capacity, like describability, or interpretability. It is a tensioned and hereditary boundary of the systemic capacity of describability- and- interpretability"(2000, p. 17-18)
He explains closure tension as the interactive complementarity between both capacities, where a better describability somehow limits interpretability.
As to the closure as hereditary, he observes that "… at each time we try to communicate… we are confined to a shared language", i.e. the language that we received in its present state (as much as we did receive it) (p. 18)
An excellent example is this very Encyclopedia: Interpretability can be obtained only by multiple interconnections between description terms. This is why so many cross-references are introduced.
As to the "hereditary"aspects, the users of the 2. edition inherit still a closed linguistic system, but whose domain has been much widened.
Categories
- 1) General information
- 2) Methodology or model
- 3) Epistemology, ontology and semantics
- 4) Human sciences
- 5) Discipline oriented
Publisher
Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science(2020).
To cite this page, please use the following information:
Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science (2020). Title of the entry. In Charles François (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of Systems and Cybernetics (2). Retrieved from www.systemspedia.org/[full/url]
We thank the following partners for making the open access of this volume possible: