لخّصلي

?A corollary of arbitrariness - of association between sound sequences and meanings or in the order of words in phrases - is duality.Because there is nothing about the pronunciation of the word one (transcribed phonetically as it sounds - it would be wan]) that necessarily associates it with the

?numeral 1, that same sequence of sounds (but spelled won) can also be used to mean something entirely different, the past tense of the verb win (Bolton, 1982: 5).?Reliance on context is a crucial property of languages, not just in figur ing out the meaning of words like one and won, but in interpreting the meaning of entire utterances.That context could be the sen tence or sentences that immediately precede it, or it could be the broader physical or social circumstances in which the sentence it uttered.Languages rely on the connection between form (what is said) and context (when, where, by whom, and to whom it is said) to communicate much more than is con tained in a sequence of words.The meaning of a sentence depends cru cially on the context in which it is uttered.

‏A corollary of arbitrariness - of association between sound sequences and meanings or in the order of words in phrases - is duality. Because there is nothing about the pronunciation of the word one (transcribed phonetically as it sounds - it would be wan]) that necessarily associates it with the

‏numeral 1, that same sequence of sounds (but spelled won) can also be used to mean something entirely different, the past tense of the verb win (Bolton, 1982: 5). But if the same sequence of sounds can represent differ ent concepts in the same language, how are you able to figure out which meaning I intend when I say [wan)? The answer - which is as complex as it is obvious- is that you rely on its context. If I say [wan] before a noun, as in "wAn] dog," your knowledge of English grammar will lead you to guess that I mean one. On the other hand, if I say [wan] after a noun (or pronoun), as in "Mary [wan]," that same knowledge will lead you to guess that I mean the past tense of win.

‏Reliance on context is a crucial property of languages, not just in figur ing out the meaning of words like one and won, but in interpreting the meaning of entire utterances. The meaning of a sentence depends cru cially on the context in which it is uttered. That context could be the sen tence or sentences that immediately precede it, or it could be the broader physical or social circumstances in which the sentence it uttered. If some one says "One," the meaning of that utterance is only clear in the context of a preceding utterance - for example, "Do you want one lump of sugar or two?" Similarly, "It's cold in here" could be a complaint, a request to close a window, or even a compliment (about a freezer, perhaps). Who or what a given pronoun (like she, it, us, or them) refers to may rely on prior sentences or the immediate physical environment. Languages rely on the connection between form (what is said) and context (when, where, by whom, and to whom it is said) to communicate much more than is con tained in a sequence of words.