Post by rollerk on Nov 25, 2017 1:31:55 GMT
Butts idea of "language games" is consistent with the idea of language as constructive rather than the idea of language as descriptive. It is argued by social constructionists that words can not be understood entirely or even mainly by dictionary definitions. In other words, you cannot use words to explain and understand words. He likens the attempt to use words to understand words to trying to explain money by translating euros into dollars. We can truly only understand money when we observe how it is used. Social constructionists argue that it is the same for words and language. "Knowing how words are used tells us of their meaning..." (Butt p. 68)
In this way, it is important to use what Butt calls instances of "language games" - promising, warning, naming, and describing - to observe how words are used in order to understand their true meaning.
In this way, it is important to use what Butt calls instances of "language games" - promising, warning, naming, and describing - to observe how words are used in order to understand their true meaning.
