Language as the most important means of communication and as the immediate reality of thought. About the concepts of “language” and “national language”

LANGUAGE AS THE MOST IMPORTANT MEANS OF COMMUNICATION

AND HOW THE IMMEDIATE REALITY OF THOUGHT

(Kasevich General Linguistics. 1977)

Language is the most important means of transmitting and storing information: the bulk of information circulating in society exists in linguistic form.

The transmission of information is one of the most important types and aspects of communication between people, therefore language is the most important means of human communication. It follows, in turn, that the central function of language is the function of communication, or communicative.

It is known that there is another characteristic of language as the immediate reality of thought. Another function of language is emphasized here, namely reflective (mental): thinking, i.e., a person’s reflection of the surrounding world, is carried out primarily in linguistic form. In other words, we can say that the function of language is to generate (form) information. How do these two functions of language relate?

It can be argued that the communicative function, or communication function, is primary, and the reflection function is secondary, while both functions are closely related. In fact, the reflection of the external world in itself does not require a linguistic form: relatively developed forms of reflection of the external world are already present in animals; the need for a linguistic form for the “products” of reflection arises precisely because these results of reflection of mental activity need to be communicated, transmitted to other members of the human collective. The exchange of individual experience and coordination of actions become possible thanks to language, which is precisely a tool that allows the results of individual mental activity to be “cast” into universally significant forms.

The above simultaneously means that the very reflective function of language is brought to life by its communicative function: if there were no need for communication, there would, generally speaking, be no need for a person to reflect the external world in a linguistic form.

Since the reflection of the external world at any high levels always acts as a generalization in relation to the objects of reality and their properties, we can say, following that, “the unity of communication and generalization” is realized in language. This means that, on the one hand, language provides communication; on the other hand, the results of mental activity, activity to generalize the properties of reality, are developed and consolidated precisely in the linguistic form. Every word generalizes, in other words, every word is the result of the abstracting work of thought (the word tree means “a tree in general”), and, conversely, an abstract concept common to all members of a given collective requires the presence of a word for its existence.

We can say that language, together with labor, created man: “First labor, and then, along with it, articulate speech were the two most important stimuli, under the influence of which the monkey’s brain turned into the human brain” (F. Engels. Dialectics of Nature).

Without language, communication is impossible, and therefore the existence of society is impossible, and hence the formation of the human personality, the formation of which is conceivable only in a social collective. Outside of language, there are no generally valid concepts and, of course, the existence of developed forms of generalization and abstraction is difficult, i.e., again, the formation of a human personality is virtually impossible.

The communicative function of language presupposes a semiotic (sign) aspect of its consideration. The study of the reflective function of language is closely related to the problem "language and thinking". Let's consider the so-called Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, according to which a person's thinking is determined by the language he speaks, and he cannot go beyond this language, since all a person's ideas about the world are expressed through his native language. Opponents of this hypothesis point out that both a person’s thinking and indirectly his language are determined by reality, the external world, therefore assigning language the role of a determining factor in the formation of thinking is idealism.

The determining role of external reality in the formation of human thinking, of course, is not subject to discussion. It is undeniable. However, it should be taken into account activity processes of reflection of reality by a person: a person does not passively capture the material that the external world “supplies” to him - this material is organized and structured in a certain way by the perceiving subject; a person, as they say, “models” the external world, reflecting it with the means of his psyche. This or that modeling method is determined by human needs, primarily social and production. It is quite natural that these needs, associated with the conditions of existence, may be different for different historically established communities of people. To some extent, the methods of modeling reality also differ accordingly. This manifests itself primarily in language. Consequently, the specificity of language here - contrary to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis - is rather secondary, in any case, it is not primary: it cannot be said that the specificity of language determines the specificity of thinking.

This is the case in phylogeny, i.e. in the history of the formation and development of man (and his language). However, in ontogenesis, i.e. in the individual development of a person, the situation is somewhat different. Each person acquires knowledge about the world, about external reality - reflects external reality to a very large extent not directly, but “through” language. A textbook example: the emission and absorption spectrum of light waves, which determines color, is, of course, the same everywhere, and the physiological abilities of representatives of different ethnic groups for color perception do not differ; however, it is known that some peoples have, for example, three colors, while others have seven or more. It is natural to ask the question: why, say, every African Shona(southeastern group of languages Bantu) learns to distinguish exactly three primary colors, no more and no less? Obviously, because in his language there are names for these three colors. Here, therefore, language acts as a ready-made tool for one or another structuring of reality when it is reflected by man.

Thus, when the question arises why in general in a given language there are so many names for colors, types of snow, etc., the answer is that the Russians, French, Indians, Nenets, etc. for their practical activity during the previous centuries (possibly millennia), roughly speaking, it was “necessary” to distinguish precisely the varieties of the corresponding objects, which was reflected in the language. Another question is: why does each member of a linguistic community distinguish so many colors, etc., etc.? Here the answer is that one or another way of perceiving external reality is to a certain extent “imposed” on a particular individual by his language. Language in this regard is nothing more than the crystallized social experience of a given collective, people. From this point of view, therefore, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is quite reasonable.

The above, of course, does not mean in any way that a person is generally incapable of cognizing something for which there is no designation in his language. The entire experience of the development of various peoples and their languages ​​shows that when the production and cognitive evolution of society creates the need to introduce a new concept, the language never prevents this - to denote a new concept, either an already existing word is used with a certain change in semantics, or a new one is formed according to the laws of the given language. Without this, in particular, it would be impossible to imagine the development of science.

One more remark must be made in connection with the issue of “language and thinking”. Even with the most condensed consideration of this problem, the question arises of how close, how indissoluble the connection between language and thinking is.

First of all, it must be said that in ontogenesis (in a child), the development of speech and intellectual development initially occurs “in parallel”, according to their own laws, while the development of speech turns out to be more connected with the emotional sphere, with the establishment of “pragmatic” contact with others. Only later, by the age of two, do the lines of speech and intellectual development “intersect”, enriching each other. A process begins as a result of which thought receives a linguistic form and the opportunity to communicate through language to accumulated social experience; Now language begins to serve not only the needs of elementary contact, but also, with the development of the individual, complex forms of self-expression, etc.

Consequently, there is a certain autonomy of language and thinking from a genetic point of view (i.e., from the point of view of their origin and development), and at the same time their close interconnection.

From our own experience, everyone knows that thinking does not always occur in an expanded verbal form. Does this mean that we have evidence (albeit intuitive) of the independence of thinking from language? This is a complex question, and so far only a preliminary answer can be given.

Much depends on how we interpret the concept of “thinking.” If this term for us means not only abstract thinking, but also the so-called thinking in images, then it is quite natural that this latter - imaginative thinking - should not necessarily be verbal, verbal. In this sense, nonverbal thinking is obviously quite possible.

Another aspect of the same problem is associated with the existence of such types of thinking where the speech form is used, but appears, as it were, reduced: only some of the most important elements remain, and everything that “goes without saying” does not receive speech form. This process of “compression” of linguistic means resembles a common practice in dialogues, especially in a well-known situation, when much that is accepted as known is omitted. This is all the more natural in mental monologues, or “monologues for oneself,” that is, when there is no need to worry about achieving understanding on the part of the interlocutor.

Such condensed speech, shaping thinking, is called inner speech. It is important to emphasize that inner speech is still a reduced “ordinary” speech, arises on its basis and is impossible without it (inner speech is absent in a child who has not yet sufficiently mastered the language).

Questions for the article

1. How do the basic functions of language relate to each other? Comment on the statement of the famous Russian psychologist: “the unity of communication and generalization” is realized in language.

2. What is the essence of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis?

3. Answer, how does the interaction of language and thinking manifest itself in phylogenesis (the history of the formation and development of a person and his language) and in ontogenesis (individual development of a person)?

4. What is “inner speech”? How is it different from ordinary speech?

So, logic (in the broadest understanding of its subject) examines the structure of thinking and reveals the underlying patterns. At the same time, abstract thinking, generalized, indirect and actively reflecting reality, is inextricably linked with language. Linguistic expressions are a reality, the structure and method of use of which gives us knowledge not only about the content of thoughts, but also about their forms, about the laws of thinking. Therefore, logic sees one of its main tasks in the study of linguistic expressions and the relationships between them. And language as a whole is an indirect object of her attention and interest.

A person’s thought is always expressed in language as a sign system that performs the functions of forming, storing and transmitting information and acting as a means of communication between people. Language and thinking form a unity: without thinking there can be no language, and thinking without language is impossible. However, this does not mean that language and thinking are identical to each other. There are certain differences between them.

Firstly, the relationship between thinking and language in the process of a person’s reflection of the world cannot be represented as a simple correspondence of mental and linguistic structures. Possessing relative independence, language in a specific way consolidates the content of mental images in its forms. The specificity of linguistic reflection lies in the fact that the abstracting work of thinking is not directly and directly reproduced in the forms of language, but is fixed in them in a special way. Therefore, language is often called a secondary, indirect form of reflection, since thinking reflects, cognizes objects and phenomena of objective reality, and language designates them and expresses them in thought, i.e. they differ in their functions.

Secondly, differences exist in the structure of both language and thinking. The basic units of thinking are concepts, judgments and inferences. The components of language include: phoneme, morpheme, lexeme, sentence (in speech), allophone (sound) and others.

Thirdly, in the forms of thinking and language, actual processes are reflected, simplified in a certain sense, but in each case this happens differently. Thinking captures the contradictory moments of any movement. Developing itself, it reproduces in ideal images with varying degrees of depth and detail, gradually approaching the full coverage of objects and their certainty, to comprehend the essence. And where consolidation begins, language comes into its own. Language as a form of reflection of the world, like mental images, can represent reality more or less completely, approximately correctly. By consolidating the content of mental images in its forms, language highlights and emphasizes in them what was previously done by thinking. However, he does this with the help of his own means, specially developed for this purpose, as a result of which adequate reproduction of the characteristics of objective reality is achieved in the forms of language.

Fourthly, language develops under the influence of objective activity and cultural traditions of society, and thinking is associated with the mastery of the laws of logic by the subject, with his cognitive abilities.

Therefore, mastery of language, its grammatical forms and vocabulary is a prerequisite for the formation of thinking. It is no coincidence that the famous Russian psychologist L.S. Vygotsky emphasized that a thought is never equal to the direct meaning of a word, but it is also impossible without words. Language and thinking, being in such a contradictory unity, influence each other mutually. On the one hand, thinking is the meaningful basis for language, for speech expressions; thinking controls the use of linguistic means in speech activity, speech activity itself, controls the use of language in communication; in its forms, thinking ensures the development and growth of knowledge of language and experience in its use; thinking determines the level of linguistic culture; enrichment of thinking leads to enrichment of language.

On the other hand, language is a means of forming and formulating thoughts in inner speech; In relation to thinking, language acts as the main means of evoking a thought from a partner, expressing it in external speech, thereby making the thought accessible to other people; language is a means of thinking for modeling thought; language provides thinking with the opportunity to control thought, since it formalizes thought, gives it a form in which the thought is easier to process, rebuild, and develop; language in relation to thinking acts as a means of influencing reality, a means of direct, and most often indirect transformation of reality through the practical activities of people, controlled by thinking with the help of language; language acts as a means of training, honing, and improving thinking.

Thus, the relationship between language and thinking is varied and significant. The main thing in this relationship is that just as language is necessary for thinking, so thinking is necessary for language.

The ability to reflect the surrounding world is most clearly manifested in living beings. However, modern science has come to the conclusion that this property of living matter has a deeper basis. This question was posed by V.I. Lenin on a dialectical-materialistic basis. In his work “Materialism and Empirio-Criticism,” Lenin expressed the idea that all matter has the property of reflection, akin to sensation.

Reflection is seen in any act of interaction. When, say, two absolutely elastic balls collide, then one ball, hitting another ball with a certain force, transfers to the latter a certain amount of energy and expresses its state through a change in energy and the direction of movement of the second ball. Having received a certain amount of energy, the second ball reflects the state of the object that influenced it, the state of the first ball.

However, at the mechanical level, reflection is extremely simple and elementary. Any impact experienced by a body is expressed in it in mechanical characteristics: mass, speed, force, inertia, direction, etc. It is episodic and random, the result of the interaction - a reflected change, “trace” or information - is not fixed and leaves no trace disappears after a certain period of time. The reflection in these cases is not localized and diffuse.

More complex is the so-called physical form of reflection. In every act of physical interaction, the body participates as an organic whole and at the same time as a collection of a large number of molecules. External influence is divided into individual elementary reflected changes, which are simultaneously combined into holistic changes in the body. In accordance with the structural nature of the reflection substrate, the “trace” takes on a dissected, differentiated structural appearance. At the level of the physical form of movement, reflection becomes localized.

At the same time, the physical form of reflection is also limited. In the process of reaction, external influences are remade in accordance with the body’s own nature. Those aspects of the influencing object that are inherent in the reflection substrate are adequately reproduced. On the contrary, when qualitatively dissimilar objects interact, a transition occurs from one form to another - for example, heat into electricity - as a result of which the internal similarity of the reflection and the original becomes distant.

Even greater qualitative diversity is reflected at the level of the chemical form of movement. A chemical element has the ability to change under the influence of an influencing substance and in accordance with its nature. In the process of a chemical reaction, a new quality arises. Therefore, the preservation and accumulation of reflected changes occurs through the consolidation of these changes with a new quality.

The presence of reflectivity in bodies of inanimate nature thus prepares the appearance of irritability and sensations that arise in living matter.

The reflection of the external world in animals and humans occurs on the basis of living matter, as a result of which it acquires special specific features, which consist of the following:

1) Reflection takes on a particularly developed form, since living matter has very rich and complex properties.

2) In inanimate nature, reflection is merged with the general process of interaction of an object with the environment. In living matter, a special type of reflection is isolated and specialized, different from assimilation and dissimilation. The main and special function of this type of reflection is signaling about changes in the external environment.

3) The reflection of external conditions by organisms does not have a self-sufficient significance and serves as a means of adaptation to the environment.

4) With the formation of living protein, a qualitatively new form of reflection arises - irritability, from which, during the development of living organisms, even higher forms emerge - sensation, perception, ideation, thinking.

The forms of reflection observed in the realm of inanimate nature are distinguished by amazing uniformity and constancy, for example, the interaction of two colliding solid bodies or the interaction of chemical elements entering into a combination remains essentially the same over vast periods of time. There are no such phenomena as the interaction of the body and the environment, the adaptation of the body to the environment, etc.

Completely different relationships exist in the field of living nature. The fundamental law of the development of organic nature is the law of the unity of the organism and the conditions of its existence. The external environment is the most important factor determining the nature of a living organism. The adaptability of an animal organism to the conditions of its existence is here an expression of the correspondence of the functions and structure of the organism and all its organs to the given environmental conditions. A change in living conditions necessarily causes a change in the functions of the body, the emergence of inherently new adaptation reactions.

Thus, the desire to exist, the struggle for self-preservation, observed in the field of organic nature, turns into a powerful stimulus that necessitates adaptation to the environment.

In turn, changes in the environment often act as the reason for the appearance of new properties and qualities in the organism. The desire to adapt to the environment often leads to the emergence of more advanced forms of living organisms. Let us explain this situation with some specific examples.

At the lowest level of the animal kingdom, notes I.M. Sechenov, sensitivity is evenly distributed throughout the body, without any signs of division and separation into organs. For example, in lower organisms such as jellyfish, nerve cells have primitive versatility. The same nerve cells are able to distinguish between chemical, temperature and mechanical stimuli. Where sensitivity is evenly distributed throughout the body, it can serve the latter only when influence from the external world acts on the feeling body by direct contact.

At some stage of development, which modern biological science cannot indicate with precision, irritability, i.e., the elementary physiological means of adapting the organism to the external environment, becomes insufficient, since the organism finds itself in some other conditions of existence.

This fused form begins to be more and more dissected into separate organized systems of movement and feeling: the place of contractile protoplasm is now taken by muscle tissue, and evenly distributed irritability gives way to a certain localization of sensitivity, which goes along with the development of the nervous system. Even further, sensitivity specializes, so to speak, qualitatively - it splits into the so-called systemic feelings (hunger, thirst, sexual, respiratory, etc.) and the activity of the higher sense organs (vision, touch, hearing, etc.).

In the process of development of living beings, sensation usually occurs when the body has become able to differentiate stimuli not only by intensity, but also by quality. “The further step in the evolution of feeling,” notes I.M. Sechenov, “can be defined as the combined or coordinated activity of special forms of feeling among themselves and with the motor reactions of the body. If the previous phase consisted of grouping units of feeling and movement in different directions, then the subsequent phase consists of grouping (of course, even more diverse) these same groups among themselves.

Armed with specifically different instruments of sensitivity, the animal must necessarily receive extremely diverse groups of simultaneous or series of sequential impressions, and yet even at this level of development, feeling as a whole must remain for the animal an instrument of orientation in space and time, and, moreover, orientation, obviously , more detailed than that of which less gifted animal forms are capable. This means that it is necessary either to harmonize among themselves those individual elements that make up a sensory group or series, or to divide it into elements - otherwise feeling should have remained a chaotic random mixture.”

“The environment in which the animal exists is also a factor determining organization. With a uniformly distributed sensitivity of the body, excluding the possibility of moving it in space, life is preserved only if the animal is directly surrounded by an environment capable of supporting its existence. The area of ​​life here is, of necessity, extremely narrow. On the contrary, the higher the sensory organization through which the animal is oriented in time and space, the wider the sphere of possible life encounters, the more diverse the environment acting on the organization and the methods of possible adaptations.”

The dissected and coordinated feeling ultimately develops into instinct and reason. “The complication and improvement of the ability of reflection in living organisms occurs on the basis of the appearance and development of a special reflection substrate: initially a special sensitive substance, then sensitive cells, nerve cells and the nervous system, which reaches the highest stage of development in humans. In connection with the emergence of a special substrate of reflection - the nervous system - special states arise due to external influences - nervous excitation and inhibition, special forms of reflective activity - conditioned and unconditioned reflexes, specific patterns of reflective activity - irradiation and concentration, mutual induction, etc. "

Thus, the ability of reflection in living organisms goes through three main stages in its development. The first stage is irritability, i.e. the ability of bodies to respond with a reaction to external influences, which is mediated by the state of tissue excitation; then, on the basis of irritability, a sensation arises, from which the evolution of the psyche begins, as a higher form of reflection compared to irritability. With the transition to work and the emergence of man, the highest form of mental activity—consciousness—emerges and develops.

The ability to reflect the surrounding material world is one of the most important prerequisites for the emergence of human language, since acts of communication, as will be shown later, are based on a person’s reflection of the surrounding reality. At the same time, it should be noted that the implementation of these reflection processes would be impossible if a person did not possess a number of special properties, the manifestation of which is ensured by the ability of reflection.

Serebrennikov B.A. General linguistics - M., 1970.

Language is traditionally viewed as a tool and means of understanding reality. Due to its complexity and versatility, the topic “Language and Cognition” is being developed from different points of view in modern areas of linguistics and philosophy.

V. Humboldt was the first to express the idea that language is the main tool for reflecting and cognizing reality: “Man surrounds himself with a world of sounds in order to reflect and process the world of objects.”

In Russian linguistics, he dealt with the problem of language and cognition A.A.Potebnya. He revealed the deep, constantly operating mechanism of cognitive processes inherent in language that occurs in verbal thinking. A number of questions raised by Potebnya about the anthropomorphism of cognition, about the subjective and objective in cognition, about the influence of the means of cognition on the results of cognition, about the cognitive role of verbal thinking were reflected in heated discussions in science of the 20th century.

The acquisition and consolidation of new knowledge occurs in the practical activity of a person, which includes speech activity. Consequently, the cognitive role of language must be considered in unity with human practical activity. As an instrument of knowledge and a natural sign system, language consolidates the results of knowledge in any area of ​​human activity. But the subject of linguistics cannot be mental achievements in certain areas of knowledge.

Linguistics is interested in studying that side of language which ensures the reflection and consolidation in signs of the results of the activities of the speaking group.

In linguistics, the view has spread that the meanings of words in a common language are “naive concepts”, and the semantics of a language is a “naive picture of the world”. Meanwhile, the concepts enshrined in language and the linguistic picture of the world are far from naive; Many scientists have written about this. The result of the development of the thought and speech of the people was deposited in the semantics of the commonly used language.

The first classification of objects and phenomena of the world is in language. The concepts of common language reach a high degree of abstraction and elaboration. The meanings of commonly used words do not break semantic connections with the corresponding scientific categories: time, space, consciousness, thinking, reason, movement, conscience, pressure. Formation of categories such as subject, substance, object, thing disappears into common language.

Language is designed in such a way that its entire mechanism serves to reflect and understand reality.

Researchers point to language's own heuristic capabilities. With the help of language, a person can understand and assimilate new content, new concepts, create ideas about phenomena and objects that he has never seen, heard or knew anything about. Ludwig Wittgenstein wrote: “The sentence must give us a new meaning in old expressions.”

Man as a subject of cognition confronts the surrounding world. A person can penetrate into this world and cognize it only by subjective means. Language is a subjective means of reflecting and understanding reality. This does not exclude the presence of objective content in it. An abstraction formed with the help of language is not divorced from reality. The material for abstractions are sensual forms of reflection of reality, directly related to it.

The subjectivity of language is manifested in the nature of the reflection of reality. With its individual signs, language dismembers what in reality and in sensory perception exists as a unity. Offer " A white bird is flying", consisting of three words, corresponds to one object. Both in reality and in sensory perception, signs are not separated from objects. Language and our thinking isolate its features from an object and thereby make them separate, independent entities. This isolation allows you to operate them in different connections and relationships with many other objects and phenomena. And, conversely, a word can represent many different objects and phenomena as a single whole: forest, country, people, population, crowd, totality. With the help of language, the analysis and synthesis of reflected objects and phenomena of reality is carried out, and this is a necessary path to understanding their essence.

Subjectivism also manifests itself in the formation of words.

The form of language plays a primary role in the knowledge of reality. It is in the form that two opposing worlds – subjective and objective – “meet” and interact.

Genetically, the elements of the form of language reflect the established relationship between man and reality. Because of this, they cannot but be isomorphic to reality itself. The form itself is subjective, but thanks to it, elements of objective content can be alienated and assimilated from the stream of thought. Form allows one to penetrate into the objective world and cognize it.

Cognition of reality is an endless movement through a subjective path towards an objective state of affairs.

The expression of subjectivity is humanoidness, anthropomorphism of cognition. Man's ways of understanding reality cannot but be humanoid; language is permeated with humanoid elements.

A sentence is constructed as a connection, an identity of subject and predicate. A.A. Potebnya noted: “We call a subject a thing as a cognizing and acting thing, that is, first of all, our self, then every thing that is likened in this regard to our self. We can express the action of the subject, that is, imagine it, only in a human form: it rains like a person walks. Every subject is a likeness of our self, every action is a likeness of our action.”

In modern linguistics, the issue of the influence of the national language on knowledge of the world remains debatable. Some scientists believe that the quality of a thought depends on the means of its creation and expression. Therefore, the nature of thought, its depth, the possibilities of reflection and knowledge of reality directly depend on language. Since there is no language at all, but there are national languages ​​and their varieties, then the knowledge and reflection of reality in language is national. Each language has its own organization and division of the world. In related languages, division and organization will be more similar.

Human consciousness is organically connected with tongue as a way of their existence. Animals have the first signaling system, on the basis of which they form conditioned reflexes. In humans, in addition to the first signaling system, there is second signaling system – speech, language, a specifically human system of communication, communication, and information transfer. In comparison with the sound and gestural ability of animals to transmit information, a distinctive feature of language is that the processing of signs (for example, speed of reading, speech, writing, etc.) is not inherited, but acquired in the process of human socialization. As a way of existence of consciousness, speech is in a complex functional relationship with it. They do not exist without each other: consciousness reflects reality, and language designates and expresses what is essential in this reflection. Language combines the ideal basis (information) and the way it is transmitted through material carrier. The development of consciousness, the enrichment of its information richness develops speech, but, on the other hand, the development of speech as an improving way of the existence of consciousness develops consciousness. Language influences the style of thinking, its manner, techniques and methods.

Language is more conservative than consciousness: the same linguistic shell, word, concept can express different contents of thought, which hinders its development and gives it some compulsion. By improving his language, a person improves his consciousness, and, conversely, by disdaining the manipulation of linguistic symbols, using a limited vocabulary, we conserve thinking and limit it to the available intellect.

There are different types of speech: oral, written and internal. The thought process is always carried out through one or another type of speech, even if this speech does not find direct, sensorily observable expression. Complex neurophysiological processes of mutually coordinated activity of the brain and speech apparatus operate here. Each nerve impulse entering the speech apparatus from the brain reproduces in it a concept or a corresponding series of concepts adequate to the signal. It is concepts that are the primary elements of speech, and since concepts are formed as a result of certain generalizations, then thinking and consciousness are always a process of generalized reflection of reality. That is, thinking is always conceptual and this is what fundamentally differs from earlier forms of reflection, including complex psychological forms. It is language as a way of existence of consciousness, as the “immediate reality of thought” that characterizes the special quality of consciousness as the highest form of reflection of reality, irreducible to its pre-conscious forms.

But information circulating at the level of consciousness functions not only through oral or written speech, i.e. natural language. Consciousness also realizes itself in other sign systems, in various artificial and symbolic languages ​​(musical, mathematical, Esperanto, cybernetic, dance, colors, gestures, etc.).

Signs – these are material objects, processes and actions that play the role of a “substitute” for real things and phenomena. They are used to acquire, store, transform and transmit information . A sign system can be called a human language if it satisfies the following requirements:

It must have semantics and grammar, contain meaningful elements and rules for their meaningful connection;

It must constantly develop, not only under the influence of improving human activity, but also as a result of self-development, i.e. expand consciousness according to certain rules based on final semantic units to create an unlimited number of informative messages;

Messages formed in a particular language should not depend on the presence of the designated objects.

Sign systems arose and are developing as a special material form in which thinking is carried out and information processes in social life are recorded, for example in science and technology.

Natural language is the most common sign system. Among non-linguistic signs there are: copy signs; sign signs; signs-signals; signs-symbols. Sign systems of artificial languages ​​have become widespread at the modern level of development of consciousness: code systems, formulas, diagrams, diagrams, etc. Moreover, any sign has meaning and meaning only in one system or another.

The special intensification and information density of modern development of society not only gives rise to new languages ​​and sign systems, but also sciences about them. In the last century, a new scientific discipline has emerged on the principles of the structure and functioning of sign systems - semiotics.

A reflection of the extreme intensification of information connections in the functioning of society and the need to master new forms and methods of obtaining, processing, storing and transmitting it was the emergence of a scientific direction - computer science. But, in any case, the key measure of the existence of consciousness remains the system of concepts of natural language, which has been formed over millions of years.

Concepts not only denote phenomena, but also express thoughts about objectively existing objects, their connections and relationships. The word is both the bearer of our knowledge about the world, and the “mediator” between thought and subject. From here, concretizing the special role of language in consciousness and its relative independence, we can identify a number of basic functions of language.

1. Denoting. By its content, a word is always connected with an object. Only if there is this connection can it serve as a means of coordinating actions in the process of cognition and practice. It is with the help of words that ideal images are differentiated and concepts are formed. It becomes possible to abstract from specific things, their properties and relationships by operating with concepts and words. The word, in essence, “replaces” the object in consciousness.

2. Cumulative. Language makes it possible to “abbreviated”, “condensed” ideal reproduction of reality, as well as storage, transmission and practical use of the information contained in it. The word reflects in a condensed form what is essential in the phenomenon. In this generalizing function, language acts as an accumulator of knowledge and consolidates (materializes) the social memory of humanity.

3. Communicative. In this function, language acts as a means of communication between people. Information can only be used by society in the form of language (natural or artificial). The communicative function of language in the history of society has changed qualitatively twice, and in each case this led to a more effective consolidation of social experience, increased activity and material and spiritual culture. The first such qualitative leap was the invention of writing. The second is happening before our eyes on the basis of the rapid development of computer technology, information science, and cybernetics.

4. Expressive. Everything reflected in a person’s consciousness by means of language is, to one degree or another, connected with his interests and needs. Hence, his certain emotional and sensory attitude towards surrounding phenomena is inevitable, which is impossible to express otherwise than with the help of language.

5. Interactive.. This function is due to the fact that with the help of language a person always addresses himself or another person, and explicitly or implicitly his speech contains a question, proposal, request, complaint, order, threat, etc., that is, speech always has an impact a certain impact on the listener encourages one or another action.

Language is the most common way of social functioning of the mind. Animals can also use the signs of the second signaling system, but sounds and gestures that denote various phenomena and states and are used by animals to transmit information to their relatives do not form a language in the proper sense of the word. Taking into account the fact that a person is surrounded by things and phenomena, as a rule, created or transformed by him, they can also be considered as certain signs or thoughts that act as an objectified form of ideal existence.

So, the world of man is the world meanings, often hidden from a person and inaccessible to his direct perception. The task of consciousness is to reveal meanings, to reveal the content and meaning of signs coming from the outside world, to transform them into a meaningful, informational image. As a result of this process, a person’s thought ceases to be his subjective, individual property and begins to live according to its own laws, acquiring relative independence. Characterizing the relative independence of consciousness, it should be noted: 1) Consciousness does not develop as a mirror image of the material world, it is a transformed reflection, including all previous experience. 2) Consciousness, existing through concepts, goes beyond the framework of concrete sensory images. Within the framework of consciousness, reflection moves from sensations and perceptions to concepts, judgments and conclusions, which are characterized by creative reflection, analysis and synthesis of sensually given material. 3) The relative independence of consciousness is also manifested in the fact that it reveals a certain conservatism in relation to developing social practice. Firstly, consciousness in materialized ideal forms (monuments of literature, architecture, art) preserves the memory of the spiritual culture of past generations. Secondly, certain ideas, beliefs, ideological and ethical predilections, etc., which no longer correspond to the changed reality, are consolidated, reproduced and stored in the consciousness. On the other hand, especially in scientific thinking, consciousness is capable of getting ahead and anticipating real events, and on the basis of creativity, forming fundamentally new combinations of the interrelations of reality that mobilize human activity and are realized in it.

A comparative analysis of the qualitative characteristics of human consciousness and the psyche of animals confirms the thesis about the socio-historical, socially transformative nature of consciousness and language, both in the genetic and functional aspects. Human consciousness can neither arise nor function outside of society. Cases known to science of the discovery of human cubs, isolated by chance from society and “raised” among animals, indicate the impossibility of forming consciousness outside of society, outside of communication and the exchange of social information.

Thus, the system within which consciousness arises and develops is the practical activity of people aimed at transforming reality. To regulate relations between people during work and in other types of interaction, it took means created by people themselves, not given to them by nature: traditions and customs, norms-imperatives and norms-taboo, forms of social inheritance and family regulation, expressed through language. Thus, people create a “second nature”, a special social environment of life - means of production, social relations, spiritual culture. The experience of this creative activity is reflected in consciousness, determining its consistent development along with the historical enrichment of this experience itself.

Since people carry out their activities together, each new generation assimilates the ideas, concepts, views, etc. already established in society. It is with the advent of consciousness that humanity acquires a means of consolidating and developing its historical and individual experience, while in animals, species experience is transmitted hereditarily, and individual experience is lost for subsequent generations. Consciousness thus turns out to be a universal, necessary and universal way of organizing and expressing a person’s relationship to the world, another person and himself.

Consciousness not only arises historically as a social phenomenon, but also becomes possible only as a product of joint labor activity. The interweaving of the actions of each individual person into joint collective activity at each historical stage of the development of society leads to the fact that the individual’s consciousness acquires a transpersonal, supra-individual character. Formed public consciousness– a set of ideas, concepts, teachings, mass psychological processes that have their own logic of functioning and development, different from individual consciousness.