Indexical Behavior In Linguistics And Philosophy

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

In linguistics and also in the philosophy of language an indexical behavior or utterance indicates some state of affairs, for example "I" is said to refer to whoever is speaking. "Now" is an indicator of the time that word was uttered. "Here" reveals the place that word was uttered. Indexicality is seen by many as a phenomenon that is far broader than language. It is often treated as a part of study of language known as pragmatics because it is concerned with the use and effects of language. Indexicality is often seen as an alternative way of understanding reference because it allows for the expansion for the way people understand language and communication. Indexicality is closely related to deixis which shows a behavior or an utterance whose meaning varies depending on certain features of the context in which it was uttered. Typical examples of deictic terms would include Now, here and I which can also be examples of indexical terms. Indexicals are also closely related to the demonstratives e.g. this and that. This is because they both vary in meaning depending on the context. Demonstratives can be thought of as forming of Indexicals as they are often accompanied in ordinary usage with pointing gestures or other non verbal gestures of their sense.

Many Indexicals but not all are egocentric in that in order to be able to successfully interpret them. The person hearing them must have knowledge of the respective speaker, time and place of utterance. Signs can have two kinds of meaning one which is indexical and the other referential. Indexical meaning is context dependent e.g. the traditional categories of person place and time and also frequently used English words such as pronouns, demonstratives and tense markings. On the other hand referential meaning is described as when a word functions to describe events or the state of affairs in the world that are independent of the context of the utterance. A referential indexical also known as a shifter is described as a sign that contains both referential and indexical meaning. The Word "I" in the following sentence ‘I went to the shore’ is a referential indexical. It said to contain a referential content in that it refers to the singular first person. It also has indexical content because its meaning depends on who uttered the word.

Indexical sign types are defined by rules of use which state the existence of a relationship between mutually implied existence of a sign vehicle token such as icon, sign or even symbol and certain aspects of the context of discourse. Looking at the shifters we examined above we can furthermore say that the aspect of the speech situation was presupposed by the sign token. This is to say that a given shifter token cannot be interpreted referentially without some knowledge of some aspect of the situation. A good example of such a presupposition is the operation of deicties, in English e.g. this and that in the singular. By using a token of the full noun phrase ‘this table’ or ‘that table’ with stressed vowel in both words we point out to some particular object. The referent of the token of table must be identifiable and also exist cognitively for the deictic itself to be interpretable. Proper use of the deictic token presupposes the physical existence of an actual object which can be properly referred to ‘by table’ or it presupposes a prior segment of referential discourse which has specified such a referent. Otherwise the use of the deictic token is inappropriate it can’t be interpreted and is confusing. The use of a deictic can be said to be sometimes maximally presupposing if contextual conditions are required in some appropriate configuration for proper indexical reference with a deictic token.

When using pure indexical tokens the sign can also have a creative or performative action whereby rather than change the context it will create boundaries to the structure of the event e.g. In the case of English indexical pronouns ‘I’ and ‘we’ (as opposed to the he/she/it/they) there is the creation of parameters that specify the parties to whom one is referring to. Indexes both referential and non referential will therefore exist on a sliding scale some more presupposing, others more creative and some containing clear aspects of both. Language users all around the world tend to associate particular linguistic forms with specific kinds of speakers or context of speaking. Scholars argue that the occurrence of no referential Indexicality entails not only the context dependent variability of the speech event but also increasingly subtle forms of indexical meaning (first, second and higher orders) as well. The first order Indexicality is said to be pre ideological but still involves a semiotic act of noticing. The second order Indexicality will bring about an ideology to bear on the relationship noticed. This order involves the politically or morally loaded cultural construal of the first order indexical association with an intentional meaning or content. During this level, we see the actors rationalize, explain and therefore inevitably naturalize and ideologize the social linguistic associations’ also known as indexical relations that they have registered in the first order.

Turkish verbal duels have shown most of the characteristics of the speech events in general. Interaction here is seen to revolve a round a culturally specific range of topics. We start with the topic of homosexuality including the sexual attack of a person’s close relatives, manliness, and courage e.t.c. we get to see rigid constraints on message form with exchanges consisting of two parts that is a challenge and also a reply. This are linked through both content and form. There are limitations on speakers and audiences as only teenage boys are allowed to participate. Topics such as sexuality and manliness and others are not used for the information they convey by themselves. Sexual submission serves as a symbol for interactional inferiority. The actual communicative intent is seen to be to put one’s opponent down or to test his ability to maintain presence of mind in interaction. The author attempts to explain the involvement of men in the genre and it’s meaning by arguing that symbolic sexual is a predominant theme in terms of enculturation experience in the male life cycle. One of the most important goals of verbal dueling is to force an opponent into a female passive role. The retort also must end rhyme with the initial insult which is a critical stylistic principle. I Turkish culture there is considerable sexual segregation with men decidedly dominating women. To belong to world of men in the Turkish culture a boy needs to prove that he is a man not a woman. The difficulty is such that an existence in the world of men necessarily involves the danger of being put in the female position by a more powerful male. Turkish verbal duels serve in part as a kind of extended rite of passage.

In his investigation Danny discovered that the behavior of men and women whatever its substance may happen to be in any specific instance is invariably read through a more general discourse on gender difference itself. That discourse is subsequently invoked to explain the pattern of gender differentiation in people’s behavior. In her essay Butler sees gender as performative. In her suggestive phrase ‘constituting the identity it is purported to be’ Butler claims that feminine and masculine are not what we are neither does the traits that we have but effects that we produce by way of particular things we do. Gender is said to be the repeated stylization of the body seen as a set of repeated acts within a rigid regulatory frame which can congeal over time resulting in the appearance of substance of a natural kind of being. As active producers rather than passive reproducers of gendered behavior, men and women may use their awareness of gendered meanings that attach themselves to particular ways of speaking and acting to produce a variety of effects. Men and women are both members of cultures in which a large amount of discourse related to gender is constantly circulating, they do not only learn and then reproduce ways of speaking they learn a broader set of gendered meanings and they produce their behaviors in light of those meanings.