# The Naudé Hypothesis. A tool for Semantic Listening

## 8 Pages

2
The correct formula in a linguistic sense would then be F
A
= (+F
B
) + (--F
B
).
The first action or series of actions symbolized by F
A
will produce complementary actions of
similar intensity (+F
B
) it will concurrently produce a resisting action ( --F
B
). This formula is purely
experimental and needs to be tested.
To illustrate, in a hypothetical situation an institution may choose to change wording within their
school motto in order to "modernize" it, this idea may have support due to the progressive
nature of individuals and their concepts, yet there may be a resistant force in a more
conservative group who object to the change in language for a variety of reasons based on
preformed values. In such cases the success of the action is not necessarily bound to a purely
democratic process but may be heavily directed by individuals, culture, institutional policies and
numerous other factors. The relative outcome be it predominantly (+F
B
) or ( --F
B
)will then be
based on the combination of various factors not any singular factor.
The dominating set of factors be they (+F
B
) or ( -F
B
) will then set the direction for that society on
a various linguistic and social issues.
The hypothetical formula will then follow a set of perceivable course.
If FA =- FB then by implication FA = (+F
B
) + ( --F
B
). Further if one side becomes dominant
whether (+F
B
) or (--F
B
), the dominant side becomes an influencing factor on the original FA
In a cycle the F
A
will either Galvanise or Undermine the dominant form or group.
To clarify in the form of formula, if F
A
= -F
B
then in like manner, F
A
=(+F
B
) + ( -F
B
). The
dominant section will then change the path of the formula. If FA = (+FB) becomes dominant
then F
A
= (+F
B
) in like manner will be (+F
B
) =F
A
.
If F
A
= (-F
B
)then in like manner equates to (-F
B
) =F
A
.
This hypothetical formula will be used to test the relationship between catalyst and language,
language and catalyst. It will also be used to compare and collate collected data.
If society influences language, then language in turn influences society.
If a policy is implemented toward language it will be both supported and opposed with the
stronger area gaining dominance. Support or Opposition will then will be an influencing factor on
language policies either to uphold or degrade the systems under which they hold sway.
In a linguistic sense these "diagnostic artifacts" are references to, and/or literature that displays
examples of linguistic shifts, not only in grammar forms used but also in the nature and tone of
rhetoric during reforms or social changes or even preceding these so as to gauge the social,
political, religious and educational spheres that gave rise to the current system. (Shohamy)

3
These "diagnostic artifacts" will be analyzed using a comparative framework in which their
correlation or lack thereof will the ascertained through the contrast with relative modern or
current patterns or linguistic forms.
Examples of this may include the following (this list is by no means exhaustive);
Frequency of words or idioms
Deliberate changes to previous forms of wording
Prohibitions on certain words, expressions or language forms.
The institution of a "singular" or "authorized" ideas or concepts
which are de rigueur and impose conformity.
Ways in which the superiority of the current idea system is expounded.
The degree or force with which language forms are imposed (i.e. the censorship of free
speech, prohibition of women to use certain linguistic forms, prohibition of certain groups to
point out inconsistencies etc...)
The second area is that of data collection in connection with native speakers and/or experts in
the field.
The feelings of native speakers in relation to the "opposing" form of their language can give
grounds as to what the proliferated views or institutionalized propaganda that affect the way a
particular group or language is perceived really are.
To illustrate, an Institute may say "We have no aversion to dialect B, all dialects are equally
acceptable." However, are the views of the members of the given institute in harmony with this
principle? Do students through the collected responses show an unbalanced lean toward not
using dialect B due to social stigma or the possibility that teachers show favoritism to users of
dialect A? Surveyed responses will then give insight not only into "official stances" of institutes
or educational systems but rather to the actual situation. This survey will use neutral language
to avoid leading to a certain response, it will further choose wording that is culturally sensitive so
as to ensure accuracy. Clear identification of any trend or movement toward linguistic
discrimination must treated seriously during the stage of data analysis and where this trend
originates from, this is because linguistic discrimination is an abuse of human rights. (Rannut)
Data will be interpreted using the traditional forms of data visualization such as graphs depicting
the frequencies of results and their interrelated trends. These results will be further used to
hypothesize future leaning or directions of societies based on their current linguistic product.

4
The validity of FA = (+FB) + ( -FB) which will henceforth be referred to for the ease of reading
and writing as the Naudé Hypothesis.
The test for the Naudé Hypothesis will include the evaluation of the hypothesis through the
stability of the results which it produces, or whether the hypothesis produces results that can be
measured in any consistent way.
In its construct the hypothesis will seek to identify and categorize the mutational catalysts
responsible for the diversity in dialects and for the partiality given to certain dialects within a
society.
The danger in this form of hypothetical testing is that of the caveman effect, which leads to an
unsatisfactory and inaccurate interpretation of the data in question. (Berk)
Further , due to the complex nature of linguistic influences this formula best serves to explore
the relation between two social factors at a time. The formula may be altered to include more
fields based on the manner in which the given data is analysed.
Hence, F
A
= (+F
B
) + ( --F
B
) .
If F
A
= +F
B
then it is logical that
F
A
--F
B
+F
B
and --F
B
receive a respective numerical value based on the degree of social dominance
they display within the society under observation with a root metric factor of ten being the unit of
measurement. The value itself may include decimals although the total value of +10 to -10 may
not be exceeded. Exceeding the unitary value of +10 to -10 will indicate an error in the equation
sequence.
Consider the following hypothetical sequence for comparing Religion designated as (+F
B
)and
Politics designated as (--F
B
). The value of "
B
"will represent the given factors social influence.
Consider the following formula based on the hypothetical values for a Progressive Modern
Country.
F
A
= (+F
4
) + ( --F
7
)
F
A
=--F
3

5
As can be noted the hypothetical society has a stronger linguistic leaning toward Politics than to
Religion. In a society of this nature, socio--dialects can be expected to arise through terminology
used by marginalised social groups.
Next consider a hypothetical society in which older traditions and beliefs hold sway.
FA = (+F
9
) + ( --F
4
)
F
A
=+F
5
In this hypothetical country a local religion or system of beliefs holds power and much of the
linguistic influence comes through this vector. The power of religion in such influence
(Iannaccone) and in others areas is not to be overlooked.
Dialects are likely to arise from groups where the common or state religion is not their medium
of worship and may be directly influenced by the liturgy and terminology of their minority
religion.
The greater the final number, the greater the influence of that factor will be, in turn, the level of
freedom in association to opposing ideas will decrease. A value of ten would be either a blatant
authoritarian state, dictatorship or an error in analysis.
In the rare case that no given or compared factors produce dominance in any area ( this is nigh
on impossible and such a result would likely indicate either an error in the data collection or
incomplete data) the formula will be expressed as F
A
=F
ø
where Ø is the standard linguistic
notation for zero.
F
A
=Fø would therefore represent a country in perfect social balance in regard to the compared
factors.
F
A
= (+F
B
) + ( --F
B
) serves to give an approximate trend per social factors and while not being
infallible provides insight into potential problematic factors within a society.
It differs from Newton's Third Law in that one sector produces dominance even while resistance
is present. The "mass" to use physics terminology, will then be the sector having the largest
numerical representation via the equation.
The primary aim of this equation then is to understand the semantic element within any given
piece of writing, however within the context of the language and should be contrasted only with
another form of the same language or find the trend within a single piece of literature of speech.

6
There is however the possibility that the semantic encoding within a piece of literature/speech
can be misinterpreted by the second party that is to say the listener (Lewis). Poor choice of
semantics in association with the syntactical delivery is therefore a powerfully detrimental force
when communicating between two parties. There are underlying factors that could be the cause:
A semantic shift in the localised use of a word, phrase or structure.
A propagandic ulterior motive as in `Strategic Semantics'.
There are five essential features in play during any communicative situation (Jakobson);
Of these, the expressive, directive and phatic functions greatly influence the social roles of
language and its interpretation. A writer or speaker or yet anyone else who when expressing
feelings or perceived rather than actual facts affects the emotional response of the listeners
either positively or negatively.
As Leech points out on pp. 50;
"
Whenever language is loaded toward or against a given set of attitudes, there is a danger of
confusion, unless the addressee is able to distinguish between the conceptual and affective
content of the message.
"
Indeed, if the speaker himself/herself is not able to distinguish the reality of a matter the
listeners can not be expected to understand either. In this case, the listeners will hypothetically
take two possible courses of interpretation;
The message communicated is unclear and appears to be without basis or is irrelevant to me as
an individual. I am unable to take in all the facts but feel I understand the main gist of the
message which is important.
The second line of reasoning can be of serious social detriment when the interpretation is
rendered to encourage ideas or actions that are of an anti-social nature. "What the speaker

7
said" can therefore become grounds for the extremist or anti--social activities that follow and will
be seen by those who interpret it as such, as a form of justification of the given action.
A worse situation is where the speaker purposely and clearly encodes socially degraded
semantics ie. `violence is necessary, no mercy for the enemy' type reasonings. This is ultimately
solely designed to elevate the speaker, his cause or another social factor above all else, a
proverbial `rallying of the troops'.
There is a strong danger that the actual semantics of a word will be ignored in favour of the
associative meaning or its affective connotation. This is spectacularly the case in words dealing
with social groupings, especially words relating to nationalism, politics or religion.
The Naudé Hypothesis can therefore be used as a tool for predicting future trends nationally or
globally based on printed or spoken material and can determine to what degree these are pure
propaganda.
In conclusion, facilitated by the given facts and the model for function it can be said that the
Naudé Hypothesis is significantly rooted in its application so as to be used as a pilot model for
further studies. The overall ability of the hypothesis to pinpoint trends within language use and
to find the underlying issues within the semantics of a given text make it one of several valuable
tools for any linguist. It is hoped that this formula will assist in clarifying further writing within the
field of linguistics and guarantee the continued linguistic rights of all people.

8
Bibliography:
Newton, I.,ed. 1729; "
Principia
" p20 Volume 1,
Leech, G., 1974.
SEMANTICS
, Harmondsworth: Penguin Books
Ricento, T. ed., 2009.
An introduction to language policy: Theory and method
. John Wiley &
Sons.
Wodak, R. ed., 1989.
Language, power and ideology: Studies in political discourse
(Vol. 7).
John Benjamins Publishing.
Shohamy, E.G., 2006.
Language policy: Hidden agendas and new approaches
. Psychology
Press.
Rannut, M., 1994.
Linguistic human rights: Overcoming linguistic discrimination
(Vol. 67). Walter
de Gruyter.
Jakobson, R. 1960
Linguistics and Poetics
. In Seboek, T.A(ed), Style in Language, Cambridge,
Mass, MIT Press
Iannaccone, L.R., 2003. Looking backward: A cross-national study of religious trends.
Unpublished working paper, George Mason University, July
.
Lewis, G.M., 1987. Misinterpretation of Amerindian Information as a Source of Error on Euro
American Maps.
Annals of the Association of American Geographers
,
77
(4), pp.542-563.
Berk, R.A., 1983. An introduction to sample selection bias in sociological data.
American
Sociological Review
, pp.386-398.
Hayakama ,S.I. 1964,
Language in Thought and Action
, 2nd Edition, New York; Harcourt, Brace
8 of 8 pages

Details

Title
The Naudé Hypothesis. A tool for Semantic Listening
Author
Year
2017
Pages
8
Catalog Number
V388338
ISBN (Book)
9783668622890
File size
581 KB
Language
English
Tags
Sociolinguistics, Alaric, Naude, Semantics, Linguistics, Linguistic Theory
Quote paper
Prof. Alaric Naudé (Author), 2017, The Naudé Hypothesis. A tool for Semantic Listening, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/388338