Skip to content

Verbatim quote · from the corpus

I want to suggest that the interaction between ostensive and imperative produces the possibility of something we might call “originary nihilism,” which is to say, a situation in which, due to colliding imperatives, or later imperatives that undermine the earlier ones, or subsidiary imperatives that don’t fit the central ones, there is no longer an “object” the parties involved can point to in order to verify compliance with the imperative. I furthermore want to suggest that we need to hypothesize such a situation to account for the emergence of the declarative in the first place, which is to say that the declarative emerges as the deferral of the impossible imperative and the transcendence of originary nihilism. The first “claim” made by the declarative (and here I am working with the basic topic/comment form proposed in The Origin of Language ) is that things can be “otherwise” than proposed by the impossible imperative–which, interestingly, means that things can be both more “realistic” (the declarative offers something “possible”) and otherwise than could have been previously imagined.

Adam Katz, Originary Grammar and Political Transparency · Nov 2007 · GABlog

Evidences

Read in context →center.study/q/3a46ad297b1d
GuideSearchConceptsAsk AIArchive