The Imperfections of Language

Locke’s “Essay on Human Understanding” and Derrida’s “Difference” almost appear to be working in opposite directions in order to unravel the complexities of language. Locke explores language more broadly in trying to unpack the it’s uses and Derrida appears to be deconstructing words to illustrate various nuances.

Locke’s essay contains multiple propositions in which he is attempting to unravel the psychology and process for language. Words are only so helpful in allowing us to be able to communicate but they have various imperfections that he illustrates throughout. For example, Locke pays special attention to the words are almost “certainly doubtful and uncertain in their significations” (p. 817). What Locke is trying to say here is that words alone complicate communication because their meanings could be different varying from one person to another. The experience and personal worldview of a being is exclusive to them so their perception of language influences the way in which they intake communication. Differences in language derive from differences in humans. This can be due to a myriad of factors such as geography, culture, age, etc. Essentially what is troubling about language is that without contextualization words fail to communicate properly because of differences. Locke suggests that communication by words has double use: civil and philosophical. Words are used to communicate in day-to-day living and they also seek to explore the abstract in the universe around us. These categories for me though don’t fully encapsulate the uses of language but perhaps they serve as umbrella terms. I wonder how figurative speech would fit into these generalizations especially considering he cites it being abusive towards language. But couldn’t figurative speech be a way in which one explores abstract concepts in a philosophical sense? People use metaphors in order to convey ideas that can’t explain when words aren’t enough to solely encapsulate their meaning. 

It’s interesting to note how Locke say words fail another way when they do not carry meaning behind them. This illustrates why the signification is important because signifiers give ideas more weight to them, more credibility. Derrida’s essay explores this signification process by breaking down what “differance” means and the discourse surrounding the nature of signifiers and words. Derrida contests signs or words are defined by other signs or words making meaning “deferred” as he puts it. This assertion is similar to how Locke contests that words fail when used without ideas, they need signification and context otherwise they simply exists. Words need other words in order to understand complex thought and ideas. The language process isn’t just one action or movement but rather it has multiple steps that are required in order to garner meaning. Problems for this arise in that meaning here can fail to be complete or misunderstood, similar to what Locke illustrates in his essay through the imperfections of language. Unraveling the complexities of language is very significant in trying to understand what happens when such complications arise because words are not really complete in the ideas they convey, they get meaning from their relationships to other words and ideas.