Talk:Language game
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I'm not convinced that fanqie, the language game listed for Mandarin, counts as a game. Looking at the Wikipedia entry for it, it's more of a method of spelling things out phonetically than obscuring speech. I don't know too much about Fanqie, so if someone qualified on it can take a look, it'd help.
---
What about theme based games? For example, discussing any single given topic (e.g., sunflowers) using automotive terminology in each sentence. How about the bad prose competition?
Is useless language the proper term? It seems that there is a use for such "languages": to conceal conversation. -- Stephen Gilbert
I agree, if pig latin was used by the African American slaves, then it should not be called useless!
swiped this from wikipedia "Useless language" which is now redirected to this plural-named (sorry) page(s)
I don't think "language game" is the right place for this article, either--it is a technical term in philosophy, due to Wittgenstein. --LMS
- I agree. When I came to this article I was seeking what communication theorists and philosopher's mean by it, not funny things one can do to speech. The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy has a nice little [definition]. Reagle 21:49, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
Again, I'm thinking that "language game" isn't the right name for this concept--can someone research this? The term is has a well-established meaning in philosophy, due to Wittgenstein, and I think in critical theory too. --LMS
Hi, I removed "as a weak form of cryptography" because a) it didn't make the text easier to read and b) I mostly think of cryptography as written (digital or analog, words, letters or bits), not spoken (that's just the connotation "-graphy" has in my brain). Please don't think of this as vandalism. I added some swedish language games as well. -- Anon. newbie (I'll get a real name someday...)
Contents |
[edit] speech disguise?
My phonology textbook (Kenstowicz 1994) uses the term "speech disguise" for the second sense of "language game" on this page. I got a bunch of google results with similar uses. We could move the stuff on Pig Latin and such to Speech disguise and reserve this page for the Wittgensteinian concept (with a pointer to the other page, of course). --Chris 21:24, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Er... I think we all agree, this article is way off.
Wittgenstein was saying that all languages were language games (1), and actually making a claim about truth, logic and language in general. It's a behaviorist's account of meaning that dodges some of the problems Frege and Russell ran into when they revised Aristotelian logic. These specialized accounts of games with language kinda miss all the relevance of his theory. I don't have time for an article tonight, nor am I really enough of an authority here, but I'll see if I can't get someone to write/help me write a wholesale replacement here.
(1) In the IEP's entry on Wittgenstein, language games are first introduced with a definition in a parenthetical, like so: "Wittgenstein wants his reader not to think (too much) but to look at the "language games" (any practices that involve language) that give rise to philosophical (personal, existential, spiritual) problems."
I moved the linguistics portion to language game (linguistics), changed language game to a disambiguation page, and redirected language game (philosophy) to language-game to make room for a longer article on Wittgenstein's concept of a language-game (the article is in progress). I'm not qualified to judge the linguistics portion of the article, so I've left that alone. The majority of the changes to the page appear to be to that section of it, so someone should probably revert language game to its pre-disambiguation changes, rename it to language game (linguistics) and add back the disambiguation text to language game. --Michael Esveldt
Surely "Anytwo up five elevenis?" (instead of "Anytwo up for elevenis?") I don't know this language game though, so I don't feel authorized to make the change.
[edit] Isn't language game a type of word game?
If so, this article and this category could be recategorized in accordance. Adam78 00:15, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
- I don't think so, language games are really more like spoken ciphers than games. They aren't really played, they're spoken. –Benjamin (talk) 17:00, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Classification
IMO the Classification section is somewhat weak - surely more patterns are discernible among the vast list of examples than this discussion has brought to light? Also, I seem to recall (but cannot verify) that language games (aka secret speech) with more complex rules than any of those listed do exist. For example, a variant of Dong, which might be called Ding Dong Dang (but I haven't heard it named), goes like this:
- English - Ding Dong Dang - Spelling out words, using plain vowel sounds and '-ing', '-ong', '-ang' alternating in strict rotation after each consonant. "Let's go" = "Ling ee tong sang, ging oh." yoyo 06:09, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
I wonder whether the term cant covers this sense of the phrase language game? It's used in the article to describe one form of secret speech as a butcher's cant. At any rate, I suggest cant as an alternative name for this page. yoyo 15:57, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Remove Info
Yardle Bardle isn't followed up by anything, it may exsist but theres no point if it has no information to give. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Biggofwi (talk • contribs) 03:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC).
[edit] List of Common Language Games
I'm new at editing, and would like to add a language to the list of examples. First of all, is this allowed? If so, I can't figure out how to get my addition into the table format shown in the article. Anybody have any tips? Alphadalpha 05:43, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Uvgum
Uvgum ..... I seem to know many speakers.
It involves splitting words into syllables and inserting "vg" before the vowel sound, so "I dislike your bicycle" becomes "IvgI dvgis lvgike yvgour bvgi cvgi cvgle" 163.1.42.6 12:47, 15 February 2007 (UTC)Tom 15/2/07
