Meta-narrative as gateless gate to the Language of the Birds

Re-Emergence of the Language of the Birds through Twitter? (Part #4)

---

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]

---

As is to be expected, there are various studies of interjection. Surprisingly, one of the most extensive is that of their use during the Roman Empire (Gabriela Sauciuc, Types of interjection (interjection as viewed by Latin Grammarians). 2004). There does not appear to be a typology in the sense implied by the repertoire mentioned above. It is appropriate to note that "ejaculation", previously synonymous with interjection, is now primarily used with its sexual connotations. However, it should not be forgotten the extent to which interjections have sexual and scatological connotations in order to convey the pattern-breaking meaning evoked by circumstances. Curiously appropriately, it is the integrative ("holistic") approaches that are most evocative of sexual interjection in the larger world. To what extent are the set of interjections then indicative of the repertoire of systemic corrective requirements?

Prefixes: The status of "interjection" is of interest as a form of commentary or meta-narrative with respect to conventional discourse on more substantive matters -- as a response to the framing constituted, often unquestioningly, by the following set of terms:

• object, objection, and objecting
• subject, subjection, and subjecting
• dejection and abjection
• project, projection, and projecting
• reject, rejections, and rejecting
• eject, ejection, and ejecting
• conjecture
• inject, injection (and interjection), and injecting

The mode of "inter-jection", "ex-clamation" or "ex-pletive" is in this sense "outside-the-box", namely discourse that either:

• refuses to "buy into the box" and effectively challenges it -- a pattern-breaking form
• affirms the pattern of the box, but from an other, typically emotional, perspective -- thus a pattern-affirming form

Interjection in particular recalls the continuing challenge of the use of prefixes such as inter-, multi-, cross-, and trans- in relation to disciplines (transdisciplinarity, etc), faith (interfaith, etc), culture (multicultural, etc). This is a theme explored by Erich Jantsch (Towards interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in education and innovation, 1972) as previously discussed (Conceptual Gaps And Confused Distinctions: possible ambiguities in the translation of interrelated concepts between sectors, jargons or languages, 1974). The more general implications of such prefixes in framing discourse were considered previously (New Paradigms via a Renewed Set of Prefixes: dependence of international policy-making on an array of operational terms, 2003). The focus here is however on the nature of the repertoire of interjections -- with the purpose of clarifying how together they functions as a vehicle for global sense-making for the individual.

This contrasts with initiatives such as those of the Global Sensemaking Network. The contrast is perhaps consonant with the rationale for the study of head nodding, especially in meetings of strategic significance -- even at the highest levels of governance (Isabella Poggi, et. al., Types of Nods: the polysemy of a social signal, 2010). However it should not be forgotten that the relative value of verbal discourse in some cultures -- in comparison with interjection, gesture, and the like -- may be less than that assumed in conventional international arenas (cf. Sotaro Kitaa, et al., Nodding, Aizuchi, and Final Particles in Japanese Conversation, Journal of Pragmatics, 2007).

Unparliamentary language: Given the effective failure of the integrative approaches (associated with inter-disciplinarity, etc), interjection might also be understood as their "shadow" of unfulfilled potential -- in the psychological sense. This is interesting in that, in the Westminster parliamentary tradition, it is members of the "Shadow Cabinet" that are both source and focus for pattern-breaking interjections in relation to those speaking on behalf of the government.

It is noteworthy that, whatever the mode, interjections are typically edited out of official records of debate -- as unparliamentary language relative to parliamentary language (lingua legislata). This would tend to confirm their role in pattern-breaking.

Unfortunately Hansard (as the generic name for that reporting tradition) is therefore an incomplete guide to interjections, recording only those that draw a reaction from the member speaking, and thus held to be important to the overall sense. For example, interjection from a seated member generally is only included if the member who is speaking at the time refers to it. Any interruption to debate, whether from the member being shouted down or the physical invasion of the chamber, will be marked with the word "(Interruption)". Expletives are necessarily deleted. Interjections giving rise to a call for order by the Speaker are reported only as "Interjection." Other interjections are reported as spoken if they are clearly audible and if they are responded to in some way by the member who has the floor.

It might even be said that democracy, as currently practiced, is a mode of organization based on the suppression (or even violent repression) of interjections -- which may then effectively take the form of the crudest expletives and associated invective. In a period where various forms of cyber-censorship are envisaged, appropriately issues regarding the "shadow" of Twitter itself have been raised in a dialogue between Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey and the Jungian analyst Doug Tompkins (C. G. Jung, Twitter and its Shadow, 3 November 2009).

Underlying cognitive framework: The question is how does an interjection, especially of non-lexical form, highlight the existence of a more fundamental cognitive framework with which people habitually have an only partially explored degree of contact -- although possibly embedded within that context in unsuspected ways. The associated cognitive modalities may well constitute a more "primitive" way of knowing. However the latter may also be intimately related to a potentially more subtle way of knowing. Given the primary focus of the lexical form on sight, and its exploitation in the "vision" metaphors typical of "in-the-box" governance, an interjection may be associated to some degree with other senses consistent with polysensorial modes of cognition (Cyclopean Vision vs Poly-sensual Engagement, 2006; Strategic Challenge of Polysensorial Knowledge bringing the "elephant" into "focus", 2008).

With respect to its "primitive" nature, such "re-cognition" may recall the cognitive origins of human language, necessarily "integrative" and "global" as a mode of knowing -- being prior to lexical articulation (cf Paul Feyerabend, Conquest of Abundance: a tale of abstraction versus the richness of being, 1999). In this sense it may have affinities with the "language" of animals and indeed it may typically be in that mode that many people currently "communicate" with animals, infants or the very severely handicapped. The case of working communication with sheep dogs is of particular interest. It may be in such a constrained mode that extraterrestrials will communicate with humans (Communicating with Aliens: the psychological dimension of dialogue, 2000) .

Integrative subtlety: But there is also the interesting possibility that this modality offers clues to a much more subtle language, as recalled in the many mythical and mystical references to the Language of the Birds -- whether a "perfect" language or the "divine" language of the gods and angels. A blogger, Conrad H. Roth (Varieties of Unreligious Experience: for the birds, 19 August 2007) bluntly states:

Now, what is this 'language of the birds' all about? There is, of course, a Wiki article on it, though the page is rather haphazard and unreliable. Similarly, the internet is full of newage mama-djambo on the subject, much of it in French. We can do better.

Roth then notes that the trope is found throughout classical literature, associated often but not always with the great Roman institution of augury, divination by birds. He helpfully quotes numerous examples, concluding:

To comprehend the language of birds is to transcend the realm of culture for that of nature. The language of culture uses clumsy, confusible words; the language of nature moves with the rhythms of the world -- it is beyond words, and more like music -- birdsong. It is also, like everything natural, an expression of divine will; thus augury and prophecy. This yearning for the pre-cultural and the pre-verbal represents a sort of Rousseauvian streak in the classical world.

In his references  to the mythical tradition of that language by Islam, Hinduism and Judaism, René Guénon indicates (The Language of Birds, Studies in Comparative Religion, 1969):

The expression is clearly a symbolic one since the very importance which is attached to the knowledge of the language -- it is considered to be the prerogative of a high initiation -- precludes a literal interpretation....

This brings us back directly to what was said at the outset about "the language of the birds", which can also be called "angelic language", and which is symbolized in the human world by rhythmic language, for the science of rhythm, which has many applications, is in fact ultimately the basis of all the means which can be brought into action in order to enter into communication with the higher states of being. into communication with the higher states of being. This is why it is said in an Islamic tradition that Adam, whilst in the Earthly Paradise, spoke in verse, that is, in rhythmic language. It is also why the Sacred Books are written in rhythmic language, which clearly makes them some-thing altogether different from the mere "poems" (in the purely profane sense) which the antitraditional prejudice of the "critics" would have them to be...

The nature and structure of birdsong therefore offers a fruitful metaphor through which to explore this possibility, especially since it evokes the cognitive engagement with nature promoted by various authors associated with deep ecology, ecophilosophy and ecopsychology (David Abram, The Spell of the Sensuous: perception and language in a more-than-human world, 1997; Henryk Skolimowski, The Participatory Mind: a new theory of knowledge and of the universe, 1995; Theodore Roszak, et al., Ecopsychology: restoring the Earth, healing the mind, 1995; Theodore Roszak, The Voice of the Earth: an exploration of ecopsychology, 2001; Thomas Moore, The Re-enchantment of Everyday Life, 1997).

The question is the cognitive structure required for that engagement as intimated by Gregory Bateson (Mind and Nature: a necessary unity, 1979; Angels Fear: towards an epistemology of the sacred, 1988). It is intriguing that the Language of the Birds is also known as the "Green Language" because of the purported ability, through it, to communicate with animals, notably as imputed to shamans. This is perhaps implied by films such as Dances with Wolves (1990) or The Horse Whisperer (1998).

For David Abram (The Spell of the Sensuous: perception and language in a more-than-human world, 1997):

In such indigenous cultures the solidarity between language and the animal landscape is palpable and evident. According to Ogotemmeli, an elder of the Dogon tribe of Mali, spoken language was originally a swirling garment of vapour and breath worn by the encompassing earth iteslf. Later this undulation garment was stolen by the jackal, an animal whose movement, ever since, has disclosed the prophetic speech of the world to seers and diviners. Many tribes, like the Swampy Cree of Manitoba, hold that they were given spoken language by the animals. For the Inuit, as for numerous other peoples, humans and animals all originally spoke the same language.

The incidence and implications of such modes of knowing are helpfully presented in a compilation for UNEP edited by Darrell A. Posey (Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity: a complementary contribution to Global Biodiversity Assessment, 1999).

Pre/Trans fallacy: In considering the insights to be drawn from such modes, careful attention is appropriate to the traps of the pre/trans fallacy articulated by Ken Wilber (Sex, Ecology and Spirituality, 1995). This may either take the form of considering, as with Freud, that mystical realization is a regression to infantile oceanic states. Alternatively it may take the form of considering, as with Jung, that pre-rational myths reflect divine realizations. Pre-rational states may be misidentified as post-rational states. A fruitful reframing might be articulated through the classic verse of T. S. Eliot:

We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know it for the first time.
(Little Gidding, 1942)

---

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]