Abstract concepts can be challenging to communicate clearly because they often lack a concrete and tangible form, making them more difficult to grasp and explain. Another aspect is that even words for concrete ideas like ‘water’ are merely placeholders for the actual thing itself. If concrete words are only placeholders, then it makes abstract words that much more difficult to use language to represent. Let’s look at how words act as placeholders for the actual idea, how language shapes how we understand an idea, whether concrete or abstract, and finally, how the way we think is shaped by the language we use.
Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance (ZAMM) uses the Tao Te Ching of Lao Tzu to show how words are merely placeholders for the actual object. Looking at an excerpt from Alan Watts’s book, Tao: The Water Course Way, along with ZAMM, we see where Watts says the Tao, or the name of something, isn’t the object itself. It’s a placeholder for the object. The object’s true form can’t be condensed into a single word or phrase. As Watts says regarding the Tao, “But it is of the essence of their philosophy that the Tao cannot be defined in words and is not an idea or concept.” (Watts) Pirsig says that Quality is the Tao, the object’s true form. Something that can’t be put into words. He’s simplifying the world into “mind, matter, and Quality” (Pirsig 241). Mind is our thoughts and ideas that we try to express into words, but the words only represent those thoughts and ideas. The matter is the physical things we encounter in the world. Quality is the true essence of those objects made of matter. As Pirsig says about Quality and objects earlier in the book, “It has created them. They are subordinate to it!” (Pirsig 243) Without Quality, the objects wouldn’t exist. We use language to attach words to objects, but words can’t replace the object or its Quality. They can only be a placeholder for them. Language is the word or symbol we use for the idea, and the abstract concept of the Tao represents the idea. While language can point towards the Tao, it can never fully capture or define the concept itself.
In Peter Farb’s book Wordplay, he also made note of this when he said regarding the language between the Navaho’s report and the English speaker’s, “it makes numerous distinctions that it never occurred to the white ranger to make, simply because the English language does not oblige him to make them.” (Farb 195) If a word could represent the object, then there would be only one word that perfectly described it so that anyone hearing the word or phrase would see the same object.
Knowing that the word or language we use to represent an idea or concept is only a placeholder for the actual thing, we can begin to understand how language shapes our views on the idea itself. As Farb noted above, the difference in words for fence in the English language versus the Navajo language gives the listener of that language an idea of what the fence is when they hear the word “fence.” The Navajo speaker will have a more specific image of the fence in mind than the English speaker simply because the word they use to represent the idea of a ”fence” has a much more specific meaning than the English speaker.
The difference in words and their meanings is also shown in Don DeLillo’s book White Noise, where the shift from an “event” to a “situation” highlights the challenges of using words to communicate the various levels of a disaster. When the accident first happens, and fumes are seen in the air, the authorities simply describe what it is, “A black billowing cloud.” (DeLillo 113), without attaching any additional meaning to it. Shortly after this changes, we find out that “’ They’re not calling it the billowing cloud anymore.’ ‘What are they calling it?’ He looked at me carefully. ‘The airborne toxic event.’” (DeLillo 116-117) In the novel, an “event” is a specific occurrence that can still be easily understood and communicated. For example, when a toxic cloud of gas is released into the atmosphere, it is a clear event that people can see and react to. As they learn more about the situation, they realize that it is much more complex and difficult to understand. The characters struggle to communicate the nature of the situation, and the media coverage of the event only serves to confuse further and obfuscate the truth.
Later, when the “event” becomes a situation when Jack is speaking with a worker at the shelter, Jack says, “But you said we have a situation.’ the worker replies, ‘I didn’t say it. The computer did. The whole system says it. It’s what we call a massive database tally’ (DeLillo 141). Here, we have not only the word representing what the “black billowing cloud” is changing from something concrete to something more abstract, but it’s also a computer choosing the language to define how the new events are to be viewed. Learning more about the incident and how complex the words needed to describe it become more abstract and therefore offer varying meanings depending on what the word “situation” means to each person. While to many people, “situation” usually has a negative connotation, the word itself only means the present circumstances, positive or negative.
In grappling with this situation, the characters realize that abstract concepts like risk and danger are increasingly difficult to understand in the context of modern technology and media. The characters are bombarded with information from various sources, and it becomes challenging to discern what is real and what is merely a representation.
Overall, the shift from an “event” to a “situation” in “White Noise” highlights the difficulties of communicating and understanding abstract concepts in a world that is increasingly complex and mediated. It suggests that while language and communication can be powerful tools, they have limitations when it comes to navigating the complex realities of the modern world.
In Ted Chiang’s “Story of Your Life,” the heptapods are extraterrestrial beings who communicate through a written language that is fundamentally different from human languages. We see how the foundations of one language shape our views and affect what we’re able to understand. An example of the difference in understanding is found when Louise notes, “Likewise, the physics discussions went poorly. Only with the most concrete terms, like the names of the elements, did we have any success; after several attempts at representing the periodic table, the heptapods got the idea. For anything remotely abstract, we might as well have been gibbering.” further noting that: “To avoid perceptual problems that might be associated with any particular medium, we tried physical demonstrations as well as line drawings, photos, and animations; none were effective.” (Chiang 113) This suggests that language not only reflects but also shapes our understanding of the world around us.
Even in the case of more concrete terms like “water” or other elements of the periodic table, aren’t always easy to communicate if the other being has no water where they lived or live and therefore has no concept of the idea of water let alone a word to represent it. In the case of the heptapods, we don’t know what elements are found where they’re from. What may be common here may not exist where they live, and therefore, we can only communicate what water is by showing them water; there can’t be any substitution for the actual concept in this case.
When it comes to more abstract ideas, it becomes difficult, if not impossible, to fully comprehend and communicate these ideas. In this case, the language of the heptapods is not based on the same ideas and concepts as ours. That is to say that how their language has developed has shaped the way they think, just as ours has shaped the way we think and what concepts we have acquired words for; the heptapods have either not developed words for these concepts or have such a different way of viewing these ideas that our attempt to use our placeholders for these concepts doesn’t even suggest the concept as the heptapods understand it.
This is further shown when Louise notes, “Still, I tried to ponder questions formulated in terms more familiar to me: what kind of worldview did the heptapods have that they would consider Fermat’s principle the simplest explanation of light reflection? What kind of perception made a minimum or maximum readily apparent to them?” (Chiang 121) The heptapods’ language is so drastically different from ours that it allows for a completely different way of thinking. Chiang suggests that becoming immersed in a language, such as Heptapod B, can change how one understands the world. Louise discovers that Heptapod B’s sentence structure isn’t linear like human language but is written as one complete unit. Louise says, “That meant the heptapod had to know how the entire sentence would be laid out before it could write the very first stroke” (Chiang 123), pointing out that the heptapods already know the entire sentence they’re going to write. This suggests that in Heptapod B, the sentence structure and meaning are interconnected, and the complete sentence is conceived as a whole before it is expressed. This is very different from human languages, where meaning is typically constructed through a progression of words or phrases. This also suggests that heptapods perceive time as a whole without a clear distinction between past, present, and future.
Chiang also uses Heptapod B to show how learning another language can change the way we think. As Louise becomes more fluent in Heptapod B, her understanding of time and causality changes, allowing her to see events in a non-linear, holistic manner. The sections that show Louise’s relationship with her daughter, which are woven into the story, suggest that in becoming fluent in Heptapod B, Louise is beginning to see time as the heptapods do. Hence, her memories from different points in time begin to overlap and influence each other. Throughout this story, we’ve seen other periods of time in Louise’s life woven into what we assume is the current day. In one of these periods, Louise starts by noting, “I have a recurring dream about your death.” (Chiang 134). This is the first and only time she refers to any of these periods as a dream. However, this period begins as a dream about a child climbing out of a pack on her mother’s back and falling, which we might assume is a typical parent nightmare of something happening to their child. Then we see Louise move from the dream to the future when she says, “Then all of a sudden, I’m at the morgue. An orderly lifts the sheet from your face, and I see that you’re twenty-five.” before shifting to the present when Gary says “You okay?” (Chiang 134) and we find Louise back in the present, in bed.
Based on this jump from dream/nightmare to an event in the future, we can assume that it’s about this time in the present that the language of Heptapod B is beginning to sink into her unconscious thoughts. Heptapod B does not differentiate between past, present, and future. Instead, it presents all events as happening simultaneously. Louise’s mind is beginning to accept this part of the language as part of a dream, then in full as her fluency grows. She’s beginning to fluidly move between what our language defines as time. This means that Louise’s understanding of language and time is interconnected with her understanding of personal relationships and memories.
Louise confirms she’s gaining proficiency in the language when she notes, “Usually, Heptapod B affects just my memory…”(Chiang 140) and goes on to say, “But occasionally I have glimpses when Heptapod truly reigns, and I experience the past and future all at once…” (Chiang 140). Memories can be accessed one by one’s subconscious mind, allowing her first to glimpse this non-linear time in dreams before she begins to have glimpses while awake of how a mastery of Heptapod B can indeed remove past and future from her mind and allow them to be seen along with the present as one whole concept.
Another example of her moving fluidly from one time to another is at the end of a meeting with the State Department. Gary says, “You mean it’s non-zero-sum game?” before moving to another time period, starting with Louise saying, “A non-zero-sum game.” (Chiang 128) in response to her daughter’s question about a term.
Chiang also uses Louise’s immersion in Heptapod B to explore the concept of language as a fundamental part of perception and understanding of reality. He suggests that language can shape our perception of time, causality, and relationships and that becoming fluent in a different language can change our understanding of time and the world. Moreover, the story suggests that our ability to communicate about abstract concepts is inherently limited by the structure of our language. Human language evolved to describe the concrete, observable aspects of the world, and it may not be well-suited to convey more abstract concepts.
Another way language influences the way we understand abstract concepts like time is shown in Lera Boroditsky’s article, “How Language Shapes Thought, where in one study they had groups of speakers of three different languages watch a video of balloons being popped, either on purpose or accident. They then gave each group a memory test. They found that while all three groups remembered the intentional videos the same way, they differed in how they recalled the accidental videos. They found that “Spanish and Japanese speakers were less likely to describe the accidents agentively than English speakers, and they correspondingly remembered who did it less well than English speakers. This was not because they had poorer memory overall—they remembered the agents of intentional events (for which their languages would naturally mention the agent) just as well as English speakers did.” (Boroditsky 4)
This study suggests that the words we have available in our language influence how we remember things, what’s important to remember, and what isn’t. Different languages have different words available to their speakers the article notes. For example, the article says, “In Mian, a language spoken in Papua New Guinea, the verb I used would reveal whether the event happened just now, yesterday or in the distant past, whereas in Indonesian, the verb wouldn’t even give away whether it had already happened or was still coming up. In Russian, the verb would reveal my gender.” or “And in Pirahã, a language spoken in the Amazon, I couldn’t say “42nd,” because there are no words for exact numbers, just words for ‘few’ and ‘many.’’ (Boroditsky 3) These are just a few examples of how words either limit or add to how much information is conveyed in a single sentence. These limits or additions to the meaning of various words and the information needed to use them to express ideas, whether concrete or complex, shape how we can understand ideas.
Another way we can see how language shapes our way of thinking in Boroditsky’s article is where they discuss a study they conducted that asked groups of people who spoke various languages to arrange a series of photos in the correct temporal order. The results of this study can help us better understand how the aliens’ written language corresponds to how they think. It’s mentioned earlier in the story that the heptapods have eyes going all around a barrel-shaped body. Knowing this, Gary suggests, “…their bodies have no ‘forward’ direction, so maybe their writing doesn’t either.” (Chiang 106) when he and Louise are trying to understand the heptapods’ written language. This idea of how direction is perceived can be related to the Kuuk Thaayorre people who were a part of the study Boroditsky mentioned. They noted that “The Kuuk Thaayorre, however, did not routinely arrange the cards from left to right or right to left. They arranged them from east to west.” (Boroditsky 64) They note that the Kuuk did this instinctively, no matter which direction they were facing.
This arrangement differs from how the English speakers laid out their cards left to right and Hebrew speakers who laid out theirs right to left no matter which direction they were facing when asked to arrange the cards. In both the English and Hebrew speakers’ cases, they placed the cards in the order they read sentences. From this, Boroditsky concluded that …” writing direction in a language influences how we organize time.” (Boroditsky 64) The heptapods arrange their ‘sentences’ by “They join the logograms by rotating and modifying them” (Chiang 105-106). This further relates to the idea that how the heptapods think of language shapes how they think, based on Boroditsky’s observation. Overall, the story of “Story of Your Life” suggests that language plays a crucial role in shaping our understanding of the world and that our ability to communicate about abstract concepts is inherently limited by the structure of our language.
Also, looking back at our own language, it’s not a static entity but rather is shaped and influenced by cultural and historical factors. As a result, the meanings and associations of words and concepts can change over time, reflecting shifting cultural values and beliefs. When looking at abstract concepts like democracy, relationships, religion, altruism, and cruelty, we find that they are not based solely on language but rather on a complex interplay between language, culture, and individual beliefs and experiences. For example, democracy is an abstract concept that involves principles such as equality, representation, and accountability.
To understand democracy fully, one needs to understand the language and cultural context in which it exists. So, even while language plays a crucial role in shaping our understanding of abstract concepts, it is important to recognize that these concepts are also shaped by individual experiences, beliefs, and cultural contexts. It’s also important to remember that language can both reflect and shape cultural values and beliefs and can be used to perpetuate or challenge power structures and inequalities. In this case, language can both shape abstract concepts and be used to shape them. This is another reason expressing abstract concepts through language is so difficult. Language is fluid; as it shapes ideas and is shaped in return by those ideas, we develop different understandings of those concepts based on the language we use to define them.
Language’s influence on our thinking plays a fundamental role in shaping our perception, understanding, and interpretation of the world around us. While it can be a powerful tool for communication, it has limitations regarding abstract ideas that are difficult to define and articulate.
Works Cited
Boroditsky, Lera. “How Language Shapes Thought.” Scientific American, vol. 304, no. 2, Nature Portfolio, Feb. 2011, pp. 62–65. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0211-62. Chiang, Ted. Stories of Your Life and Others. Vintage, 2016.
DeLillo, Don. White Noise. National Geographic Books, 1986.
Farb, Peter. Word Play: What Happens When People Talk. Vintage, 2015. Pirsig, Robert M. Zen And the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry Into Values. William Morrow Paperbacks, 2005.
Watts, Alan. Tao: The Watercourse Way. New York: Pantheon Books, 1975.