ChatGPT said:
Here’s a concise but deep exploration of relative vs absolute linguistic nonsense, drawing from philosophy of language, linguistics, and semiotics:
Relative Linguistic Nonsense
Definition: Language that appears nonsensical in a given context or to a particular audience, but has potential meaning in another context, framework, or usage.
Argument for Its Existence and Relevance:
- Context Dependence of Meaning:
- Wittgenstein’s language games illustrate how the meaning of a sentence depends on its use within a social practice.
- Example: “The quark danced sideways into the vacuum.” — nonsense in casual conversation, but meaningful in quantum physics discourse.
- Cultural and Subcultural Variability:
- Slang, dialects, and technical jargon can seem nonsensical to outsiders but are deeply meaningful within a community.
- E.g., “She ghosted me after I slid into her DMs.” — may sound like nonsense to someone unfamiliar with internet slang.
- Poetic or Experimental Language:
- Literary nonsense (e.g., Lewis Carroll’s Jabberwocky) plays with syntax and phonetics to create evocative but semi-meaningful expressions.
- The phrase “’Twas brillig, and the slithy toves…” is grammatically structured, suggesting a system behind the apparent nonsense.
Implication:
Relative nonsense shows that language meaning isn’t intrinsic to the symbols but emerges from shared systems and pragmatic context.
Absolute Linguistic Nonsense
Definition: Language that has no possible semantic, syntactic, or pragmatic coherence — not interpretable in any context or framework.
Argument for Its Possibility:
- Total Semantic Breakdown:
- Stringing random words or phonemes without any structure:
- “Glarfblent zoodle frask quantum smeer” — no decipherable grammar, logic, or consistent reference.
- Stringing random words or phonemes without any structure:
- Violation of Compositionality:
- Language meaning generally arises from the parts and their arrangement (Frege’s Principle).
- Absolute nonsense breaks this rule — either the words themselves are invented without conventions, or the syntax violates any known rule system.
- Unrecoverable Meaning:
- Some glossolalia (speaking in tongues), or Dadaist language experiments, aim to eliminate any communicative function.
- In these cases, no “language game” or cultural translation helps because there is no stable referent or rule of use.
Implication:
Absolute nonsense tests the boundaries of what it means to be a language at all — possibly signaling the collapse of communication.
Comparison
| Feature | Relative Nonsense | Absolute Nonsense |
|---|---|---|
| Interpretable in context? | Yes, potentially | No, not at all |
| Depends on audience? | Yes | No |
| Violates all linguistic rules? | Often not | Yes |
| Examples | Slang, jargon, poetry | Word salad, random phonemes |
Final Thought
While relative nonsense is ubiquitous and often creative — forming the edge of innovation in language — absolute nonsense acts as a boundary marker, showing us what language ceases to be when it loses all structure. Both help define and explore the limits of meaning, communication, and linguistic order.
Would you like examples from literature, philosophy, or AI-generated nonsense to go further?
You said:
yes
ChatGPT said:
Great — let’s deepen this with concrete examples of both relative and absolute nonsense, drawn from literature, philosophy, and even AI-generated language. Each helps reveal how and why nonsense functions or fails to function.
1. Relative Nonsense – Examples with Potential or Contextual Meaning
Literary Nonsense – Lewis Carroll
“‘Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe…”
- Analysis: Structurally, this follows English syntax (articles, verb agreement, prepositional phrases).
- Interpretability: Many of the words are invented, but native speakers intuit part of their role (e.g., “brillig” seems like a time of day, “slithy toves” are noun phrases).
- Conclusion: Nonsense on the lexical level, but meaningful in syntax and style — relative nonsense.
Philosophical Jargon (Appears Nonsensical Out of Context)
“The ontological difference is the difference between being and beings.” — Martin Heidegger
- To a layperson: This sounds tautological or meaningless.
- To a philosopher: It references a core distinction in metaphysics.
- Conclusion: Without grounding in a conceptual framework, it seems like nonsense — but it isn’t. It’s relative nonsense dependent on discipline.
AI-Generated Technical Jargon
“Recursive dynamic bindings enhance the neuro-symbolic manifold with probabilistic bias propagation.”
- Appears impressive but opaque.
- May contain actual technical content (e.g., “recursive,” “probabilistic”) but their juxtaposition lacks clarity without context.
- Could be meaningful in certain AI research contexts, or could be buzzword salad.
- Conclusion: A classic case of relative nonsense that hinges on contextual knowledge.
2. Absolute Nonsense – Examples Beyond Meaning
Word Salad (Schizophrenic Language or Dadaist Poetry)
“Blue sleeps faster than Tuesday when up the sky flies flatly to mangle grapes.”
- Analysis: No clear syntactic structure, logic, or recoverable metaphor.
- Even in metaphor or poetry: Meaning fails to stabilize.
- Conclusion: Absolute nonsense — it resists all systems of meaning.
Glossolalia (Speaking in Tongues)
“Shamala kandorra veshtali to ma saphin elodia!”
- In charismatic religious contexts, this might be perceived as spiritual language.
- Linguistically: No grammar, no semantic system, and no consistent phonology.
- Conclusion: From a linguistic standpoint, it’s absolute nonsense (though pragmatically meaningful to believers, ironically bridging nonsense and ritual).
GPT Prompt Hallucination or Failures
“The clock sang softly while potato logic disrupted the glimmering syntax of refrigerator truths.”
- AI often strings syntactically correct yet semantically void expressions when it loses context or purpose.
- This is “coherent gibberish” — a case of AI-driven absolute nonsense that imitates structure but lacks any grounded semantic map.
- Conclusion: No real-world reference, metaphor, or internal logic = absolute nonsense.
Summary Table
| Example | Source | Nonsense Type | Why? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jabberwocky | Lewis Carroll | Relative | Lexical nonsense, syntactic structure preserved |
| Heidegger’s Ontology | Philosophy | Relative | Requires philosophical literacy |
| Word Salad | Mental illness / Dada | Absolute | No structure or logic |
| Glossolalia | Religious ritual | Absolute (linguistically) | No grammar; pragmatic function only |
| GPT Hallucination | AI | Absolute | Surface form without semantic content |
Bonus: Why This Matters
- Literature & Art: Push boundaries of language — see what’s still felt even when sense fails.
- Philosophy: Distinguishes deep meaning from mere obscurity.
- AI & NLP: Helps identify when machines are faking it — sounding right but saying nothing.
- Psychiatry: Understanding language breakdown helps diagnose disorders (e.g., schizophrenia).
Would you like to generate some creative nonsense together — or analyze a piece of writing to see which type it leans toward?Attach
Search