Servicios personalizados
Inglés (pdf)
Articulo en XML
Referencias del artículo
Enviar articulo por email
Citado por SciELO 
Similares en
SciELO 
Permalink
Introduction
Communication is an important process that facilitates human interaction, enabling the exchange of information, ideas, feelings, and messages between individuals or groups (Solomon & Theiss, 2022). This process involves a sender conveying a message to a receiver through a channel which can be verbally, through written words, or non-verbally forms of communication like gestures and expressions. The channel can vary, for example from face-to-face conversations to electronic media such as emails, social networks, etc. In addition, the process of communication can be influenced by factors such as language, cultural context, etc., and its effectiveness lies in the clarity and precision with which the message is conveyed (Lindblom, 1990). Therefore, studying the process of communication is pivotal as it equips us with the ability to effectively transmit ideas, build robust relationships, and resolve conflicts. Furthermore, it empowers us to navigate an increasingly interconnected world (O’Boyle, 2022).
When we look at the history of communication, it is seen that it is as old as the history of humanity. Mass communication, which started with smoke used for communication, horse-riding messengers, and drums used in some local tribes, progressed significantly with the invention of the printing press and experienced a turning point with the development of science and technology and the resulting use of electricity in the field of communication, first with the telegraph. With the development of the telegraph, the number and quality of communication tools gradually increased, and subsequently, communication became a process that could be done from space by hanging electrical wires (Urquhart & Heyer, 2024). Nowadays, technology is advancing rapidly. Accordingly, there are also important developments in mass communication technologies, which have an important place in interpersonal communication. As it is known, technological developments somehow affect interpersonal relations and social life in general. Especially in an environment where communication technologies have been rapidly advancing in recent years, the impact of technology on the masses has become even more controversial (Yzer & Southwell, 2008). Although the issue regarding mass communication studies has been discussed for a long time, its importance has increased even more today (Griffin et al., 2022).
It is important to remark that communication is a social behaviour that includes both the process of creating mutual relationships and the transmission of information (Gordon, 2024). The main role here is played by the system of signs. Looking at the society surrounding us, it is possible to come across many signs. This system of signs, which has become an integral part of our lives, is considered almost one of the main managers of the world of people and living beings. Footsteps in the university corridor, the whistle of the ship, the neighing of the horses in the barn, the sound of music from the gathering, the direction of the anthill, any human movement, etc. The list here can be extended indefinitely. While everyone gives meaning to such signs according to their profession, on the one hand, they make their lives easier, on the other hand, they get involved in this complex atmosphere. All these are considered to be the object of semiotics, but also the material or means for information exchange (Sadowski, 2022).
On the other hand, linguistic signs, which are an integral part of the sign system, are important elements of information exchange and have their unique functionality. Depending on its simple and complex form, each linguistic sign performs interestingly in the encoding-decoding process. All three aspects of semiotics given by C. Morris (syntax, semantics, pragmatics) ensure the position of linguistic signs in the communication process. The syntax is responsible for the chain arrangement of linguistic signs along a straight line, semantics is responsible for the relationship between linguistic signs and their meanings, and pragmatics is for the relationship between linguistic signs and those who use them. Different from other aspects, pragmatics is based on the working principle of language. It arranges all its obligations based on linguistic activity alone. In the encounter between language and action, language acts as an integral part of behavior with its active activity. Here, linguistic signs mean all speech acts from simple to complex, and those who use linguistic signs mean the roles of addresser and addressee. In the addresser-codes-addressee triad, the process of coding-decoding of the communication process is displayed in a different style, depending on the types of speech acts. Indirect speech acts, distinguished by their complex nature, constitute the most difficult and dark side of this process, which can be cited as an example of "language games". "It is clear that the imagined world, however different from the real world, must have a form that is somehow connected with reality" (Wittgenstein, 1922).
The Austrian philosopher L. Wittgenstein was the first to observe that special roles are performed through speech acts in the communication process. He is one of the well-known philosophers who lived in the 20th century and made great achievements in the field of logic and the philosophy of language. The focal point of L. Wittgenstein's philosophy is the mutual relations between language and thought, thought and reality, and language and its boundaries. Like all his hypotheses given in his "Logical-Philosophical Treatise", the statement given above has great meaning from the linguistic-philosophical point of view. In his work, the philosopher proposed several interesting ideas about similar languages and the world. One main issue that makes him think based on the "language-logic-reality" model is the correspondence between language and its boundaries. Every language has its own rules. Without exception, all types of communication arise due to the regulation of language signs according to special rules (regulations at the minimum and maximum level). Here, let's recall J. Searle's (1984, p. 35) interesting approach to the existence of rules and their position in behavior: "...I do not claim that rules play no role in our behavior. On the contrary, the rules of the language or the rules of the gameplay a decisive role in behavior. However, it is difficult to determine which behavior occurs according to the rules and which does not". Indeed, rules, especially linguistic rules, must be evaluated as one of the existing conditions. The accepted rules of the language are noticeable in every case as the neatness of the language. But sometimes, at different times and in different situations, it seems insufficient to fully adapt to the grammatical rules to turn the thought codes into meaningful sentences. In such cases, it is possible to get better results by moving away from linguistic norms.
Considering the above, the objective of this work is to explore the phenomenon of the "language game" as a current paradigm in the field of linguistics. This concept reestablishes the connection between language and philosophy, highlighting the disruptive influence of "language games" on linguistic norms and the illocutionary force of expressions. The study is qualitative in nature, and it was carried out based on a literature review.
Materials and Methods
The content analysis method was used to examine the indexes of the works discussed in this study. As stated in the research by Ibrahimov (2023), content analysis is a research method that aims to provide objective and systematic information about the text under consideration. Today, this method makes it easier to understand a desired language and helps solve errors that cause misunderstandings. In the study by Gedizli (2021), we see that language is a natural tool that "establishes understanding" between people. "Agreement" consists of "meaning" on one side and "expression" on the other. Expression is an activity in which "meaning" and "telling" are done together. In general, determining the language manifestations of the "agreement" made by the language helps to learn the knowledge of the language correctly. Therefore, identifying the elements that make up the language and the tasks these elements undertake will guide the studies to be carried out on the language.
Yaseen's (2023) research is valuable in terms of learning the change of meaning according to the communication function we mentioned above. In his research, the author states that in the mediatic global village, English has become the most important language used by the majority of people around the world to communicate with each other, and the importance of English is seen in all areas of life, such as business and media. Consequently, many countries where English is not a native language are keen to include English in their curricula. English plays an important role in the education sector, and hence it is imperative to improve language learning through various means. For good communication, it was necessary to learn words and have a good vocabulary. However, today we see that the fact that English is the dominant language in most countries causes English words to be included in the same language. We can look at this as the enrichment of a language and the development of its lexical structure.
On the other hand, in language definitions, it is emphasized that "language is a means of communication." This study organizes and classifies the meaning and expression units by considering language as a "means of understanding." The study consists of three parts: basic concepts, meaning representation, and expression realization order. Basic concepts are associated with concepts that directly affect the language's ability to represent meaning and realize expression. The functions of sound, word, and phrase elements in meaning representation are discussed with examples from linguistics. In the order of expression realization, the contributions of expression, sentence, and text to the realization of expression in linguistics are discussed.
Results and discussion
Basic principles
Looking at the history of linguistics, it is possible to find many years of interesting studies and conclusions of expressions created within the framework of norms. Here, the linguistic norm has been investigated within certain frameworks in most of the communication processes. Every action created based on the rules and laws of language in our daily lives is a prime example of this. However, the existence of linguistic norms may not be taken as an absolute condition for thought to turn into a meaningful sentence. Sometimes interesting expressions appear with a deliberate, purposeful violation of linguistic norms. Also, the functionality of such expressions is superior to other expressions. Linguistic signs that do not comply with linguistic norms and expand the possibilities of language appear as "language games". Thanks to these kinds of acts, it is as if language can transcend its boundaries. Yaylagul (2023, p. 7) was the first to include the term "language game" in scientific research, thereby trying to determine the boundaries of human thought with his logical-philosophical concept. "The process of naming things and repeating spoken words can be called language games". The existence of "language games" is closely related to the principle of language functioning. The purpose and intention that transform sentences into acts of speech are more evident in the formation of "language games".
The purposefulness inherent in games is also clearly manifested in the emergence of "language games". They are created due to a special intention and purpose and perform certain functions specific to the language within the framework of their intra-linguistic activity. Through this purpose, the sentences that existed before the history of the development of pragmatics were forced to give way to speech acts, including "language games", distinguished from other acts by their uniqueness. Due to the purpose and intention of the addresser, "language games" also created conditions for the opening of new directions in the investigation of the system of signs by performing special acts. Thus, these points, which exceeded the scope of interest in syntax and semantics, became one of the focal points of pragmatics. Thus, pragmatics, which differed from other aspects of linguistic signs, had to completely separate from the semantics aspect even within the framework of these studies. Thanks to the transition from the theory of logocentrism to the theory of anthropocentrism, the mobility inherent in "language games", as well as fields belonging to pragmatics, was brought to the fore. From the point of view of anthropocentrism, the main object for pragmatics is the living human factor, which is studied in parallel with the principle of linguistic activity, which is an integral part of behavior. "Pragmatics studies language as a social, interactive form, as a set of rules for interaction between communication partners in a specific situation and the use of appropriate language. The opening of the phenomenon of mobility in modern times goes in two directions: philosophical-methodological and psychology, sociology, and linguistics. The formal structure of types of mobility is developed in the philosophical-methodological discipline. In the other direction, a certain type of mobility is considered. By the philosophical concept, the role of the concept of mobility is not always the same. Its role is either a peripheral category or a universal explanatory principle" (Ibrahimov, 2023).
Thus, the term "language game" began to play a leading position in the field of pragmatics in terms of its dynamics. Hajiyeva (2021, p. 89) stated, "The creation of suitable 'language games' is made possible by the correct adaptation of language mobility and cognition". The main units of pragmatics, which are connected with the movement and activity of language, are speech acts. Several pragmatic features turn ordinary sentences into speech acts, the most important of which are the goals and intentions of the addresser and the illocutionary acts adapted to them. "The theory of speech acts studies, not individual words or sentences, but the structure used for a certain speech activity (illocutionary act), the communicative task of the speaker (illocutive act), and the direction aimed at reaching a certain result (perlocutionary act)" (Hajiyeva, 2021). Taking a general look at the structural division of ordinary speech acts, in the ranking of locutionary and perlocutionary acts, the illocutionary act takes a special leading position.
Considering that the purpose and intention of the addresser are concentrated on a special illocutionary force, "language games" should also be noted as a special kind of speech act. They are also considered as the main units of pragmatics, like other speech acts. However, several interesting points distinguish "language games" from ordinary speech acts. For example, while ordinary speech acts try to necessarily reflect the rules of language, "language games" seem to manifest themselves in this process in the form of disdain for the norm. In this regard, "deliberately violated norms" are one of the main characteristic features inherent in "language games". Examples of these are irony, puns, jokes, etc. Acts created in this way can be shown as examples. For instance, speech acts given as irony are often found in our daily lives. "Ironic indirect expressions mainly have two illocutionary forces. By performing a 'game' with his act, the speaker makes the listener think. The fact that the language game presented here has a dual illocutionary force distinguishes it from other 'language games'" (Hajiyeva, 2021).
While normally every ordinary speech act has an illocutionary force, this dual force character present in "language games" also complicates the semantic load of information. These dual-illocutionary force-laden game-like acts go beyond the boundaries of language norms and sometimes remind us of incorrect idioms or incorrect expressions at first impression. As Erol's (2016, p. 9) notes about incorrect idioms, "...in some cases, incorrect sayings have a meaning. This means that incorrect idioms can be considered as a whole mental act with a purpose, a certain form of expression, and a meaning". Freud calls ambiguous incorrect statements a clash of two different intentions. In the first collision, the intention mixes with the other as a whole, that is, it substitutes, and at this time, expressions with opposite meanings appear. In the second case, the intention is distorted, and combinations are created (Erol, 2016). In addition, the codes transmitted in ordinary speech acts are formed in the form of explicit or implicit meanings and are decoded based on the listener's pragmatic criteria. The goal and intention of the addressee who creates “language games” is not codified as in ordinary speech acts.
In the 20th century, Wittgenstein (1922, p. 138), who re-examined the ideas he put forward in the early years of his creativity, brought together his old and new ideas with the work "Philosophical Investigations" and tried to further improve his ideas about the "language game". "We cannot see the amazing variety of everyday language games because the imagery of our language makes them look alike". This time, he more seriously covered the moments related to the meaning and concept of the word, expression, slightly exceeding his positions in the past. As he states in his notes, "The words of the language name objects-sentences are combinations of such names.-In this sense, every word has meaning. This meaning is correlated with the word. It is the object for which the word stands." That is, using a word, knowing and applying its use can actually gain the necessary meaning and sense within the context. In the book "Philosophical Investigations", the philosopher tries to explain it more precisely with the famous "Beetle in a Box" analogy. Let's think of a group of people and suppose that each of them has a box in their hand and that the object inside the box is called a "beetle" (what we call beetles can be what we imagine, but it can also be completely different). No one can look inside someone else's box, and everyone is required to describe what is inside their box. Since no one knows what is inside other boxes except their own, the word "beetle" has no other meaning than "the thing in the box".
With this, L. Wittgenstein, based on the thought "The meaning of a word is its use in the language", argues that the question "What is a word in reality?" is similar to the question "What is a piece in chess?" and likens language to a game. When we pay attention to this analogy, we see that L. Wittgenstein likens the box to ideas and thoughts, and the beetle to what is inside our brain. From this position, L. Wittgenstein defends the idea that there is no common language for humans and that words acquire meaning depending on their use. Yeshiltuna (2015, p. 114) stated, "Describe the aroma of coffee! Why can't this be done? Are words not enough? Why are they in the minority? But how can one conclude that such a description is even possible? Have you ever experienced a moment when such an image is impossible? Have you ever tried to describe the aroma of coffee and just couldn't?".
Indeed, when we analyze the philosopher's ideas, the notion is formed that, when approached philosophically, meaning does not exist by itself. Rather than meaning, the communicative functions of language should be taken as a basis, and the addresser's use should be brought to the fore. Because it is not the meaning, but the usage that matters first. It is as if thanks to the communicative functions, the word finally acquires some meaning. To clarify L. Wittgenstein's ideas about meaning, let us consider Lyons' (2014, p. 50) distinction between descriptive and non-descriptive meanings: "Language can be used to make descriptive statements. Such statements mean that the propositions they express are true or false... Non-descriptive meanings are more varied and, according to several philosophers and linguists, less fundamental".
Lyons (2014) has named non-descriptive meanings as the expressive component, that is the affective meaning that expresses the speaker's attitude, termed emotive meaning. "Expressive meaning is a kind of meaning, by means of which the speaker expresses his thoughts, attitudes, and feelings, rather than a description, which is considered to belong to the field of stylistics and pragmatics". At this point, in addition to the descriptive character of language, another functionality emerges, which is explained based on the term "language game". In fact, the term "game" used here brings out some important features of language in a playful way. Thanks to its unusual performance, the addressee's attention is easily directed in the right direction compared to other acts. What is important is to understand the functionality and operation of language based on its practical use. The philosopher considers the correct handling of the functionality and functioning of language to be an important skill and describes it as a "language game". Wittgenstein, who tries to correctly convey the cases of playful use of language functionality to his audience, revives interesting examples in his "Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus" by changing the place of correspondences in some elementary language functions.
In this strange way, simple language elements take on the character of a complex game, and as a result, the possibilities of language expand even further. For example, "In ordinary spoken language, it is common to use the same word for different symbols in different ways, or to pronounce two words that appear differently in a sentence in the same way in a sentence". The word "is" appears as a link as an expression of existence and the same sign; "to exist" as the intransitive verb "to go"; "identical" as a word that means sign; we are talking about something, but also something that happened (in the sentence "Green is green" - The first word is a proper name, and the last word is an adjective - these words not only have different meanings but also different symbols)" (Wittgenstein, 1922).
Variability of Meaning Depending on Communication Function
In today's world, individuals in all developed or developing societies use mass media in their daily lives, albeit for different purposes, and are exposed to the influence of mass media. Diversity in mass media is increasing due to the development of technology. Diversity in technology and mass media, which develops depending on the needs that arise in social life, changes the way media is used, individual habits, and many other things related to them. Of course, it is very difficult to include all research in the context of this study. However, it is observed that the underlying development process, especially the changes in the economic, social, and political fields, starting from the industrial revolution, has also shaped communication research. The development of the phenomenon of communication with technology today covers many issues, such as the power of the media, its monopolization, its effects on individuals, and how the masses are managed by the dominant powers.
In fact, language necessarily performs several known functions, and ultimately a process of mutual exchange takes place. Due to the multitude of these functions, language carries out the tasks before it. Simple language functions are created based on the use of language signs in a complex form (within the framework of strict language rules). Interestingly, "language games" are created based on the simpler use of linguistic signs, and ultimately, the existing functions of the language become more complex. There is a certain inverse correlation between the use of linguistic signs and the resulting language functions: easier use leads to more expanded possibilities. Complex language rules induce simple language functions, and simple linguistic rules induce complex linguistic functions. The final result created by complex linguistic functions opens the way to a wide range of language possibilities.
Such an excellent performance in "language games," unlike other language elements, has a constantly non-static and dynamic character. This can be applied, of course, to all games at the forefront. What unites all the games that we bring to our imagination, and those we cannot bring, is their dynamic nature. Their dynamic existence constantly operates within the scope of activity in accordance with the wishes of the addressee. Here, the addressee is completely free to give each language sign the desired color, to place them in different contexts and situations. It seems as though the addressee is playing with linguistic signs as desired, encoding thoughts, and leading the process to a more interesting coding.
Indeed, it resembles an intriguing game of the addressee with elements of language. Although the emergence of "language games" occurs in contravention of linguistic norms, like all games, it possesses its own especial set of rules. According to the philosopher who characterizes "language games" as a form of life, the concept of "language games" is explained through the analogy between people's behavior and games. Both involve a predetermined set of rules, defining the potential combinations of "moves" or actions. After all, a game lacks meaning without rules, and unexpectedly changing the rules can disrupt the game. Furthermore, rules provide logic to games and offer variety. An action system following strict rules ceases to be a game. In this regard states:
Most people who use smartphones or tablets quickly learn how to use apps. The user-friendly nature of mobile apps and mobile devices has helped teach and learn languages more effectively as far as teaching and learning English as a second language is concerned. (Yaseen, 2023, p. 99).
"Language games," which exhibit a complex character through simplified linguistic forms, indeed serve as the most convenient key in the decoding process. These "language games," portrayed based on various life experiences, demonstrate an intriguing performance within the communication process, ultimately simplifying the language of communication. As evidenced by examples in the works of L. Wittgenstein, nearly all "language games" are artificially constructed based on cognitive experiences, making it challenging to find direct equivalents in real-life scenarios. Their primary objective, in general, is to unveil the implicit codes inherent in everyday language.
The derivation of "language games" from life experiences guides these linguistic units from the realm of semiotics toward the cognitive domain. Unlike other perspectives, cognitivism views individuals as information processing systems, with human behavior seen as a description and explanation of one's internal state. In this regard, "language games" are intertwined with human knowledge, particularly within the realm of cognitivism, encompassing cognitive knowledge, cognition, mental understanding, and intellectual insights.
Similar to other linguistic units, the production and reception of "language games" occur through schemes, programs, plans, and strategies via cognitive activities. In conducting such an analytical process, the primary operational units of memory come to the forefront: frames (stereotypical situations), concepts (the sum of meanings derived from words), gestalts (fragments of the world), and so on. While "language games" differ from other language signs in certain aspects, the process of their formation, from a cognitive perspective, bears resemblance to the formation of language signs in a certain sense. Considering this, Richard (1998, pp. 124-129) stated, "From a cognitive perspective, 'language games' are investigated as declarative and procedural knowledge, as static and dynamic frames, and scripts".
These linguistic signs, capable of complicating all functions of language, heighten the impact of the expressive function. Their cognitive nature becomes evident when considering the mentality of the addressee. The addressee, in attempting to convey thoughts to the other party through "language games," envisions the listener's orientation, particularly their mentality, and subsequently utilizes corresponding codes. Thus, the life experiences present in both the speaker's and listener's cognitive bases are crucial factors that shape "language games."
Last observations
In the last quarter of the 20th century, there were rapid and significant advancements in the techniques employed within the realms of communication, telecommunications, and publishing. Particularly in radio and television broadcasting services utilizing digital communication techniques, the superiority in sound and picture quality over analog broadcasting systems, coupled with the ability to transmit a multitude of information programs simultaneously and under more cost-effective conditions, prompted countries to delve deeper into research in this area. From a technological standpoint, the prevalence of computers is notorious. While newspapers are expected to remain dominant as printed materials for many years to come, it is apparent that the newspaper industry is shifting towards electronic publishing in response to evolving technology.
Then, one of the most debated topics today revolves around the use of media dominance, especially considering the theories and perspectives that have emerged since the latter half of the 20th century, which have focused on the power that mass media have acquired through technology. The rise of mass culture and popular culture is significant due to the media's role as a tool of domination. Those who view popular culture as the culture of everyday life argue that it serves as a means to escape the negative aspects of reality and fabricate a sense of artificial happiness. Despite the fantasies portrayed in products of popular culture being often created by classes as opposed to dominant classes, they possess a misleading nature within today's technological societies. The social and individual expectations they convey are shaped and produced within the daily practices of the public, largely influenced by the hegemonic culture of the ruling bloc. In a narrow sense, popular culture encompasses entertainment, serving as an input for the daily reproduction of labor. In a broader sense, it lays the groundwork for the ideological reproduction of a specific lifestyle, creating an environment that fosters the dissemination and acceptance of everyday ideology.
On the other hand, the cognitive exploration of "language games," which form the foundation of the communication process, is closely intertwined with the concept of purely "cognitive metaphor," frame analysis, and the decoding process. According to D. Lakoff and M. Johnson, metaphors play a vital role in structuring our perception and thought processes. The conceptual metaphor is rooted in the interaction between two knowledge structures: the cognitive structure of the "source" and the cognitive structure of the "goal." In this context, the cognitive structure of the "source" is activated through "language games," making the path to true meaning intricate. In such instances, cognitive schemes such as frameworks, geospatial data, and scripts come to the rescue, creating a specialized path from encoding to decoding. It is at this juncture that "language games" shed light on a unique aspect of human thought, unveiling a new pathway leading to a cognitive-discursive metaphor. In these scenarios, linguistic units that typically reflect the reality of the world take a back seat, while concepts forged through "language games" assume the forefront of the stage.
Considering that the world is governed by language, directly linked to life and activity, one can envision the connection of "language games" with cognition. From the perspective of cognitivism, "language games" function as genuine cognitive mechanisms based on linguistic units. "Each individual presents these 'games' in varying ways due to their cognitive abilities" (Hajiyeva, 2021). A thorough examination of them promises insight into the true structure of human thought. Within this mechanism, all concepts form an interconnected chain.
From a psychological standpoint, the nervous system operates differently within "language games". The presence of "language games" introduces specific alterations to the standard flow of the cognitive mechanism. Through them, expression transcends the confines of its signs, unveiling an entirely different scene. In this context, the conventional form of worldly reality is disregarded, with the concepts utilized by the addressee taking precedence. This philosophical concept facilitates the transformation of information from one part of the brain to another.
"Language games" involve the manipulation of language, wherein manipulation represents the distinctive use of the addressee's language units. The phenomenon of manipulation can also be executed through ordinary speech acts. However, when we consider the manipulative influence wielded through the unique characteristics inherent in "language games," we encounter an entirely different landscape. In this respect, this linguistic philosophical criterion consciously points towards a specific type of behavior rooted in the disruption of the language system, exhibiting a more active stance than any other norm. Consequently, information conveyed through the strategy of manipulation spreads swiftly within the brain, occupying a distinct place in memory.
Conclusions
The concept of "language games," which represents the principle of language functioning at a heightened level compared to other speech acts, stands out as one of the most pertinent issues in recent times within the realm of linguistic philosophy. Upon analysis in line with the structural framework of speech acts, intriguing aspects of "language games" come to light. Although they bear a structural resemblance to ordinary conversational acts, they bring about certain modifications in the illocutionary force component. The illocutionary force capsule, inherent to "language games," exhibits twice the potency compared to other acts. This heightened potency allows for the semantic meaning embedded in signs to shift its direction or be attributed to a different context. Consequently, the meaning of any sign takes on a varied appearance following the desires of the addressant. Through the communicative function of language, linguistic signs also can alter their connotations of meaning. In line with the perspective of L. Wittgenstein, language possesses the capability to transcend its confines. All such instances unfold playfully within the addressee's cognitive base, yielding more favorable outcomes aimed at influencing the behavior of the other party.
