Conflict – Language Uptake – Social Programming and Scripting – A Suggestion


Program: Aggregate of rules, deduced or interpolated, attending listening; Script: Accessed cultural and social content and templates extant.


Programming f/ Listening | Discernment of Significance (Primacy) x Discernment of Rules [Associative Symbols (metonymy) : Appropriate Deployment (Social Grammar) ; Preparation (grammar) –> Expression]


I’d be happier working up a “suggestion” with funding and some collegial interaction, but, alas, age, time, and competing invested interests and talents forestall a return to the once freshman’s invitation to scurry up the linguistics branch of the college’s English department.  Instead, and given a certain kind of bloody conflict as the nut for moving, a brief and cryptic approach seems wanted.


In my thinking, the language programming part of language uptake sets the receptivity to the content (of mind) of the language culture defining the infant’s environment.  To say that “sound takes on meaning” may not be accurate as to get to that — prepare ye to arrive at the edge of the great mystery of human language behavior — requires that the infant discern significance in sound, separating signal from noise right away, and (the hard part) integrate that discernment with a growing volume of associated aural and symbolic memory matched to social contexts integrated with wants (desires, needs, wishes) and opportunities for deployment (and testing) of what is essentially for yon rug rat a new technology.

Package it up, wail it out, and see how mama (or daddy) responds!

For the curtain climber, the basic language uptake programming process may have no cultural identity (tautologically: it’s an acquisitive process with sonic anchors, generally speaking, derived from repeated sounds and an hedonic survival-oriented curiosity quite capable of putting two and two — or one plus one set of possible associated derivations) — together.

It, the curtain climber, is learning.

At the program derivation level, what it’s learning may be an integrated structure devoid of cultural value.  Nouns are essential; verbs are useful; recursion, however, may or may not be a part of the world view to come (but, for the most part, it is a part of how thought will be evoked and retained).


Scripting f/ Perceived Survival Advantage | Cultural Environment Precepts Extant : Scripting f/ Cultural Language Invention and Related Biology (Personal), Customs, Manners, Self-Concept, and Way

IF, for example, the culture accidentally chooses to value hallucinations, whether experienced in sleep or imagined while awake, THEN  one might incline toward the acceptance, even devotion, to the existence of the genie loci or, I guess, any magical or mystical powers associated with the Lord of the Manor as backed by the King of the Country as confirmed by God’s Representative on Earth.

* * *

Friends have seen these words from me frequently: “we’re a wild species” — attach to that our invention of ourselves in language as a cultural and most social technology.  We would seem to become and are, for a while, what we think we should be and as consequence are, until, again as intimated, some other force or variable blocks, channels, or deflects the promotion and progress of that idea that has been, actually, our own beloved, embraced, inseparable-from-ourselves cultural and personal script.

If we weren’t so wild (a species) and so wildly self-inventing and stubbornly suspended in language, we’d probably get along much better and die merely from boredom or sufficient and creepy “natural causes”, but we have our pride, a part of our survival in language and in our perceived reality, that is our peculiar belief, legend, myth, self-concept, and promise.


We’re a wild species.

Prior to investigation by acquisitive and curious English-speaking adventurers arriving beneath the Christian banner and embarked on spreading the gospel by way of learning remote languages and firing the Second Testament (the Jews got the first one) back down the newly opened two-way (One Way) channel, the island of Papua New Guinea supported some 848 distinct language cultures, each bounded by each clan’s territorial claim.  Not all have vanished or will but all have acquired English (I presume on the needs-must basis) as a common medium, and it would seem the job of the English has shifted from “converting the heathen” to preserving the cultural integrity and legacy of the same in a rapidly evolving greater world.

Should I want my Facebook buddies in Pakistan to tone down that Jihad thing a bit — most of those want that too, truth to tell — shall I chide the same also over acceptance and belief in the jinn?

Again: we’re a wild species.

Sideways to to the topic of language programming and scripting, I promote the broadest and most peaceful cultural polyphony possible, and that on the basis — similar to the promotion of “biodiversity” — that we humans may not know what we’re going to need or when we’re going to need it from our own immense cultural libraries: we do not want one world religion, language, culture, etc. because the same would not only be maladapted to our various regions but positively suicidal given human energy and its penchant for a boundless, delightful, and positive creativity, at least so when not applied to killing one another en masse with ever greater ferocity and genius.

# # #

3 thoughts on “Conflict – Language Uptake – Social Programming and Scripting – A Suggestion”

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.