Misunderstundings about understanding

Jacek Juliusz Jadacki

Misunderstundings about

understanding

Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Philosophica nr 9, 33-41

1993

A C T A U N I V E R S I T A T I S L O D Z I E N S I S

F O L I A P H I L O S O P H I C A 9 , 1993

J a ce k Ju liu sz J a d a ck i

M IS U N D E R S T A N D IN G S A B O U T U N D E R S T A N D IN G

1. A R G U M E N T S O F T H E R E L A T IO N O F U N D E R S T A N D IN G

T w o m is u n d e rsta n d in g a re c o n n ec te d w ith th is m a tte r.

T h e first m is u n d e rsta n d in g is th a t th e n ecessary c o n d itio n o f d efin in g (a n d c h arac te riz in g ) 'u n d e rs ta n d in g ' is to in d ic a te th e field (scil. th e d o m a in a n d the c o u n te rd o m a in ) o f the re la tio n o f u n d e rs ta n d in g . T h e seco n d m is u n d e rsta n ­ ding is th a t i.a. n o n -o b se v ab le o b jects (e.g. in te n tio n a l o b je c ts) b e lo n g to th e c o u n te rd o m a in o f th is relatio n .

F ro m a n o th e r place it is th e fact, th a t th e d o m a in o f th e re la tio n s o f u n d e rs ta n d in g c o n ta in s p eo p le (N B . n o t all, certa in ly ), a n im a ls, a n d p e rh a p s c o m p u te rs. O n th e o th e r h a n d th e c o u n te rd o m a in (o r o n e o f the c o u n te r­ d o m a in s a t least) is c re ated by o b serv ab le ob jects.

2. T H E S E M A N T I C C A T E G O R Y O F -U N D E R S T A N D IN G '

T h e m is u n d e rsta n d in g co n sist h ere in th e view , th a t th e w o rd 'u n d e rs ta n d ' - a cc o rd in g to a given c o n te x t - h a s o n e o f th e fo llo w in g categ o ries: _ 2_, z , o r z . A s a m a tte r o f fa c t th ese a re c a te g o rie s o f th re e v a rio u s η η II z 111111 functors: x u n d e rs ta n d s v, n n — x u n d e rs ta n d s th a t p, n z [33]

3 4 J a c e k J u liu s z J a d a c k i

■- x u n d e rs ta n d s z by y (i, e, x m ean s y as z),

n n n J '

E a c h o f these fu n c to rs refers to a c e rta in tw o - o r th re e -a rg u m e n t-re la tio n . It is th e fu ll list, a p a r t fro m th e m e ta p h o ric a l c o n te x ts (e.g. o f th e k in d o f H eid eg g er’s d e c la ra tio n s th a t the m a n ... is u n d e rs ta n d in g ).

3. P O L Y S E M Y O F ‘U N D E R S T A N D I N G ’

'U n d e rs ta n d in g ' is th e d o u b le p olysem . T h e p o ly sem y p e c u lia r to every m e n ta l p re d ic a te c h arac te riz e s, firstly, this w o rd . ’U n d e r s ta n d in g ’ as th e m e n ta l p re d ic a te c an re fer e ith e r to a c e rta in d isp o sitio n (habitual u n d e rs ta n ­ d in g ), to a c e rta in a c t (actual u n d e rs ta n d in g ), o r to a c e rta in c h a in o f acts

(processual u n d e rsta n d in g ). T h e specific p o ly sem y o f 'u n d e r s ta n d ’ c a n be call

'p o ly se m y o f fo u r і-s’. F o r to u n d e rs ta n d is, seco n d ly , e ith e r to feel (intuitive u n d e rs ta n d in g ), to be co n sc io u s (identificative u n d e rs ta n d in g ), to ju s tify

(indulgentive u n d e rs ta n d in g ), o r to signify (inscriptive u n d e rsta n d in g ).

It w o u ld be m is u n d e rsta n d in g to believe th a t th e h a b itu a l, a c tu a l, an d p ro c e ssu a l u n d e rs ta n d in g fro m th e o n e h a n d , a n d th a t the in tu itiv e, id e n ­ tificativ e, in d u lg en tiv e, a n d in scrip tiv e u n d e rs ta n d in g fro m th e o th e r h a n d - c re ates th e m em b ers o f tw o logical c la ssific a tio n s o f th e d e n o ta tio n o f 'u n d e rs ta n d in g ’. T h ese a re v a rio u s m e a n i n g s o f ‘u n d e rs ta n d in g ’, a n d n o t v a rio u s su b se ts o f o n e set o f u n d e rs ta n d in g s.

L et us a d d , th a t in tu itiv e u n d e rs ta n d in g (scil. feeling) - c o n ta in in g the e m p a th y in to o th e r's feelings, as well as th e id e a tio n in to essences o f th in g s - is a k in d o f c o g n itio n . B eing c o n sc io u s o f so m e th in g c an be d escrib ed as id en tificativ e u n d e rs ta n d in g , on ly if the o b je c t o f c o n sc io u sn ess is so m eh o w h id d e n fro m o u r sight o r a t least h a rd to be th e o b je c t o f o u r c o n scio u sn ess on a c e rta in acc o u n t. In d u lg e n tiv e u n d e rs ta n d in g - m o tiv a tiv e o r m o tiv a ti- v e -b e h av io ra l o n e - is o f v a rio u s degrees: fro m a p p ro v in g a n d reco g n izin g as rig h t (m o tiv es o r b eh av io u rs), th ro u g h o u t c o n se n tin g a n d p e rm ittin g , u ntil n o n -d a m n a tio n a n d excusing. F in a lly in scrip tiv e u n d e rs ta n d in g is the th re e -a rg u m e n t-p re d ic a te a n d c an be c o n n o ta tiv e o r referen tiv e u n d e rs ta n d in g a cc o rd in g to w h a t is signified b y so m eth in g : connotatum o r a referen t.

4. E L L I P T I C I T Y O F ‘U N D E R S T A N D IN G ’ IN T H E ID E N T I F I C A T I V E S E N S E

T h e te rm 'id en tific ativ e u n d e rta n d in g ’ a p p e a rs in v a rio u s ellip tic co n tex ts. T h e p h ra s e ,,x u n d e rs ta n d y ” c an m ean th a t:

b) x is co n scio u s o f th e s tru c tu re o f y (co n stitu tio n al u n d e rstan d in g ); c) x is co n sc io u s o f th e h o riz o n o f y (co n tex tu al u n d e rstan d in g ); d) x is c o n sc io u s o f th e re a so n o f y (causal u n d e rs ta n d in g : initial o n e - o f m otives, o r effectual o n e - o f aim s);

e) x is co n sc io u s o f th e sense o f y (conceptual u n d e rs ta n d in g ). T h is e llip ticity o f six c ’s is p ro b a b ly the d e riv a tiv e o f the p o ly sem y o f 'sen se' sensu largo ('n a t u re ', ‘s tru c tu re ’, ‘h o riz o n ', ‘re a s o n ’, a n d ‘sen se’ sensu

stricto).

H o w ev e r it w o u ld be m is u n d e rsta n d in g to th in k t h a t c a rd in a l, c o n s ­ titu tio n al (i.a. s y n tac tic a l), c o n te x tu a l (i.a. p s y c h o c o n te x tu a l a n d p sy ch o c o n - tex tu a l-b e h av io ra l), c au sal (i.a, p y c h o ca u sal a n d p s y c h o c a u sa l-b e h a v io ra l), and c o n c e p tu a l (i.a. v erb a l) u n d e rs ta n d in g s - a re types o f u n d e rs ta n d in g . F o r th a t rea so n , it is m is u n d e rsta n d in g also s p e a k in g (litterally ) a b o u t w a y s or m e t h o d s o f u n d e rstan d in g .

S. E X P L I C A T I O N S O F C U R R E N T U S E S O F ‘ U N D E R S T A N D I N G ’

E ach o f the c u rre n t use o f ‘u n d e rs ta n d in g ’ (a n d th e d é riv â te s o f th is w o rd ) can be p a ra p h ra s e d w ith th e aid o f th e in tro d u c e d h e re sp ecialized term s. It w ould be. ho w ev er, m isu n d e rsta n d in g to re q u ire th e p a ra p h ra s e o f every c u rre n t use o f ‘u n d e rs ta n d in g ’ w ith th e a id o f e x a c t l y o n e o f these specialized term s.

Let us c o n sid e r the follow ing c o n tex t:

W e a r e n o t d o w n h e a rte d . T h e o n ly t r o u b le is. w e c a n n o t u n d e r s ta n d w h a t is h a p p e n in g to o u r n e ig h b o u rs .

J o s e p h C h a m b e r la in

T h e sense o f ‘u n d e rs ta n d in g ’ o scillates h ere betw een th e id en tificativ e an d indulg cn tiv c ones. A n alo g ic ally th e c o n tro v e rs y a b o u t th e q u e stio n , w h e th e r to u n d e rs ta n d m u sic is to be c o n sc io u s o f th e (fo rm a l) s tru c tu re o f a given w o rk , o r o f the p sychical c o m p o se r’s acts, a c c o m p a n y in g th e c re a tio n o f th is w o rk , o r o f th e m o tiv es o f c o m p o sin g , o r p e rh a p s o f s o m e th in g else (e.g. to re a ct p ro p e rly to th is w o rk in th e e m o tio n a l sp h ere) - is th e p u rp o se less co n tro v e rsy .

6 . C O N T R O V E R S I E S A B O U T U N D E R S T A N D IN G

T h e d iv ersity o f o p in io n s in the m a tte r o f u n d e rs ta n d in g e ith e r h as its source in the c o n fu sio n o f m ean in g s (i.e. so m e o f th ese o p in io n s a re

3 6 J a c e k J u liu s z J a d a c k i

m is u n d e rstan d in g s), o r these o p in io n s a re e m p iric a lly te stab le (i.e. som e o f th em a re sim ply Talse).

A g o o d e x am p le o f the first situ a tio n is the S O P H IS M O F T H E H E R M E N E U T IC C IR C L E . T o u n d e rs ta n d it is s u p p o se d to u n d e rs ta n d in a d v an c e . In d eta il: to k n o w why s o m e b o d y d o s o m eth in g , o n e s h o u ld k now th a t so m eb o d y d o th is th in g a n d these a re to be th e facts n o n -id e n tifica b le sep a ra te ly . T h e p ress o f th e b u tto n by a c e rta in p e rso n is to be (cau sally ) u n d e rs to o d o n ly by this m a n . w h o k n o w s th a t th is p e rso n w a n ted to press the b u tto n . In fact, it is u n d e rs to o d by th e m a n , w h o k n o w s th a t this p e rso n w a n ted (e.g.) to ring. In g en eral, it is n o t th e case, th a t:

1Γ w e u n d e r s ta n d a g iven a c tiv ity o f a c e rta in p e r s o n , w e k n o w , th a t h is p e r s o n w a n te d to c a rry o u t j u s t t h i s a c tiv ity .

T h e fa c t is, o n th e o th e r h a n d , th a t:

I f w e u n d e r s ta n d a g iv en a c tiv ity o f a c e rta in p e r s o n , w e k n o w , t h a t th is p e r s o n w a n te d to c a rry o u t s o m e th in g d i f f e r e n t fr o m th is a c tiv ity ( s o m e th in g h a v in g th is a c tiv ity a s its c a u se ).

T h e g o o d e x am p le o f th e seco n d situ a tio n is to a d m it (w ith n o fo u n d ) to th e Q U E S T IO N O F T H E C O N G E N IT A L I T Y O F D IS P O S IT IO N S T O U N D E R S T A N D I N G th e s ta tu s o f th e p h ilo so p h ic a l (a n d n o t em p irical) p ro b le m .

7 . R E L A T IO N S B E T W E E N N O T I O N S O F ‘U N D E R S T A N D I N G ’

T h e m a in m is u n d e rsta n d in g c o n sists h ere, firstly, in th e view , th a t c ertain o b jects c a n be u n d e rs to o d o n ly th a n k s to intuitive u n d e rs ta n d in g . In fa c t, we d o n o t k n o w su ch a resu lt o f this in tu itiv e u n d e rs ta n d in g , w hich c a n n o t be reach ed w ith th e aid o f « n o rm a l» m e th o d s, e.g. w ith the a id o f re a so n in g . B ut i s it a rg u a b le a t all, th a t so m eth in g d o e s n o t exist?

It is m is u n d e rsta n d in g , seco n d ly , to c o n sid e r th e n o tio n o f ‘identificativc u n d e rs ta n d in g ' - o r m o re e x actly o f ‘c o n c e p tu a l u n d e rs ta n d in g ' - as the g en erically p rim itiv e n o tio n .

T h ird m is u n d e rsta n d in g is th e view , th a t the n ecessary c o n d itio n o f the id en tificativ e u n d e rs ta n d in g o f a c e rta in o b je c t is th e indulgentive u n d e rs ta n ­ d in g o f this o b ject. L et us c o m p a re th e fo llo w in g d e c la ra tio n :

AH. e v e ry th in g th a t I u n d e r s ta n d . I u n d e r s ta n d o n ly b e c a u s e I love. L eo T o ls to y

A n alo g ically g ro u n d le ss c o n v ic tio n is th e view , th a t th e n ecessary c o n d itio n o f th e p sy ch o c o n te x tu a l u n d e rs ta n d in g is to f e e 1 (o r to h av e th e ab ility to feel) the p ro p e r (« u n d e rsto o d » ) experiences. T h e m o re g ro u n d le ss c o n v ic tio n is the view th a t o n e c a n (c o n c ep tu ally ) u n d e rs ta n d the u tte ra n c e o f a c e rta in p e rso n b e t t e r th a n this p erso n h er/h im self. (It w as said a b o u t T a d e u sz K o ta rb iń s k i, th a t his su m m a rie s of' o th e r's p a p e rs sh o w ed him b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n ­ d i n g the u tte ra n c e s o f the a u th o rs o f su m m a riz ed p a p e r s t h a n th e a u th o rs them selves).

In th e e x tre m e case th e idea w o u ld be th a t it w o u ld be p o ssib le to u n d e rs ta n d (c o n c ep tu ally ) a n u tte ra n c e in c o m p re h e n sib le to the sen d e r. It sh o u ld be a d d , o f co u rse, th a t th e m a tte r is h ere a b o u t th e p r o p e r c o n c e p tu a l u n d e rs ta n d in g (i.e. the re c o n stru c tio n o f th e sense m e a n t by th e sen d er) a n d n o t a b o u t a n y u n d e rs ta n d in g (i.e. a sc rib in g a n y sense).

F in ally , fo u rth m is u n d e rsta n d in g is so -called T H E P R I N C I P L E O F H E R M E N E U T IC S , a c c o rd in g to w hich th e n ecessary c o n d itio n o f inscriptive a n d c o n c e p tu a l u n d e rs ta n d in g is to reach th e full c o n te x tu a l u n d e rs ta n d in g (o f a given in te rp re te d u tte ra n c e). W h a t is m o re , su ch a full u n d e rs ta n d in g is sim ply u n a tta in a b le .

8 . U N D E R S T A N D IN G A N D A N O T H E R M E N T A L F U N C T I O N S

W e have the fo llo w in g d ep en d en ces:

1. If so m eb o d y u n d e rs ta n d s s o m e th in g id en tifically (in th e a c tu a l sense), he T H I N K S .

2. If s o m e b o d y u n d e rs ta n d s c o n c e p tu a lly (in th e a c tu a l sense) th e u tte ­ rance o f a c e rta in p e rso n , he P E R C E IV E S th is u tte ra n c e . O f c o u rse, th e th in g is h e re o f th e « u n d e rs ta n d in g » p e rc e p tio n , a n d n o t o f th e em p ty «gaping».

3. If so m eb o d y h a s th e ab ility o f S P E A K IN G , he h a s also th e ab ility o f c o n ce p tu a l u n d e rs ta n d in g . T h e th in g is h ere, also , o f sp ea k in g , a n d n o t o f «bab b lin g » .

4. I f so m eb o d y IN F O R M S a c e rta in p e rso n o f s o m e th in g w ith th e aid s o f a c e rta in u tte ra n c e , b o th o f th em u n d e rs ta n d c o n c e p tu a lly th is u tte ra n c e .

5. If so m eb o d y u n d e rs ta n d s c o n c e p tu a lly th e u tte ra n c e o f a c e rta in p e rso n , this p e rso n E X P R E S S E S so m eth in g w ith th e a id o f th is u tte ra n c e . N P . it h a p p en s th a t th e th in g ex p ressed d iffers p rin c ip a lly fro m th e th in g u n d e sto o d . H ere we h av e th e so u rc e o f th e re m a rk :

S peec h w a s g iv en to m a n to d is g u is e h is th o u g h t. C h a rle s - M a u ric e d e T a lle y r a n d

3 8 J a c e k J u liu s z J a d a c k i

6. If s o m e b o d y R E A C T S E M O T IO N A L L Y to a c e rta in w o rk o f a r t in the p ro p e r w ay, he u n d e rs ta n d s it c o n ce p tu a lly . T h is d e p en d e n c e sh o u ld be, c erta in ly , lim ited to th e d o m a in o f th e w o rk s o f lite ra ry a rt.

7. I f s o m e b o d y u n d e rs ta n d s inscrip tiv ely b y a c e rta in ex p re ssio n s o m e t­ h in g d e te rm in e d , he C O N C E D E S th e s ta te m e n t th a t this d e te rm in e d th in g is th e sense o f th is expression.

8. I f a c e rta in p e rso n u n d e rs ta n d s in scrip tiv ely (in th e h a b itu a l sense) by a c e rta in sign a c e rta in o b ject, th e p re s e n ta tio n o f th is o b je c t w ith this p e rso n is A S S O C IA T E D w ith th e p re s e n ta tio n o f this sign.

O n th e o th e r h a n d , it is m is u n d e rsta n d in g to c o n sid e r u n d e rs ta n d in g as a k in d o f R E A S O N IN G . T h e so u rc e o f th is m is u n d e rsta n d in g is p ro b a b ly the c o n fu sio n o f u n d e rs ta n d in g w ith th e I N T E R P R E T A T I O N , i.e. c o m in g at u n d e rs ta n d in g . T h e re a re m a n y tech n iq u es o f a ch iev in g this state: expressive, a esth e tic , sy m b o lic, h e rm e n e u tic, p sy ch o lo g ic, h u m a n istic, im a g in a tiv e , tele- olo g ic. p sy ch o a n a litic , a n d - last b u t n o t least - logic in te rp re ta tio n . In o p p o s ite to th e in te rp re ta tio n u n d e rs ta n d in g (th e in tu itiv e u n d e rs ta n d in g e x cep ted ) is e ith e r o n ly a c e rta in (p o te n tia l o r a c tu a l) s ta te o r a c h a in o f c o g n itiv e states.

It is m is u n d e rsta n d in g also to th in k th a t w e c an c o n sid e r s o m e th in g (i.e. a c e rta in sen ten ce) as tru e , a n d to n o t u n d e rs ta n d it a t th e sam e tim e. It w as p u t in a n u tsh ell:

T h e ig n o r a n t m a n a lw a y s a d o r e s w h a t h e c a n n o t u n d e r s ta n d . C e s a r e L o m b ro s o

L et us a d d th a t it is h a rd to im ag in e th e m o re essen tial m is u n d e rsta n d in g th a n q u e stio n in g th e d ependence:

I f s o m e b o d y u n d e r s ta n d s s o m e th in g c o n c e p tu a lly , th e th in g u n d e r s to o d is th e S E N S E F U L e x p re s s io n .

O n th e o th e r h a n d , it is a n o p e n q u e stio n , w h e th e r o n e c an say a b o u t c o n c e p tu a l u n d e rs ta n d in g in te rn a lly c o n tra d ic to ry u tte ra n c es.

9. D E G R E E S O F I D E N T IF IC A T IV E U N D E R S T A N D IN G

M a n y fa c t sp ea k fo r th e view , th a t id en tificativ e u n d e rs ta n d in g (scil. being c o n sc io u s) is g ra d u a l. I th in k th e fo llo w in g d e p en d e n c e s ta k e place:

1. T h e m o re d etail s tru c tu re , th e m o re w ide h o riz o n , a n d th e m o re d is ta n t re a so n s o f a n u n d e rs to o d o b ject a re co n sc io u s by a given p e rs o n , th e b e tte r this p e rso n u n d erstan d s id en tificativ ely this o b ject.

2. T h e m o re elem en ts o f th e c o m p o u n d e x p ressio n is u n d e rs to o d c o n c e p ­ tually, the b e tte r th is p e rso n u n d erstan d s th is exp ressio n .

3. L et us su p p o se th a t:

a) so m eb o d y u n d e rs ta n d s selectively a c e rta in e x p ressio n , if he is c o n sc io u s only o f a p a rt o f th e d e n o ta tio n o f th is ex p ressio n ;

b) so m eb o d y u n d e rs ta n d s c learly a c e rta in ex p re ssio n , if he is co n sc io u s o f the w hole d e n o ta tio n o f th is ex pression:

c) s o m e b o d y u n d e rs ta n d s d istin ctly a c e rta in e x p ressio n , if he is c o n sc io u s o f a n y c o n n o ta tio n o f th is ex p ressio n ;

d) so m eb o d y u n d e rs ta n d s a ccu rately a c e rta in ex p re ssio n , if he is co n scio u s o f th e lexical c o n n o ta tio n o f th is e x p ressio n ;

e) so m eb o d y u n d e rs ta n d s e x ac tly a c e rta in ex p re ssio n , if he is c o n sc io u s o f the essen tial c o n n o ta tio n o f th is exp ressio n .

N ow , th e m o re s o m e b o d y ’s c o n c e p tu a l u n d e rs ta n d in g a given ex p re ssio n on the scale fro m (a) to (e) d ra w s to th e e n d (i.e. to e x ac t u n d e rs ta n d in g ), th e better he u n d e rs ta n d s this exp ressio n .

4. T h e m o re d etail p re s e n ta tio n is b eeing c o n sc io u s o f th e sense o f a given exp ressio n , th e b e tte r th e u n d e rs ta n d in g p e rso n u n d erstan d s (co n c ep tu ally ) this expression.

O n th e o th e r h a n d it is m is u n d e rsta n d in g to c laim th a t th e m o re d ista n ce is betw een th e lite ra ry sense o f a given ex p re ssio n a n d th e sense b eeing c o n sc io u s by a c e rta in p e rso n , th e b e tte r th is p e rso n u n d e rs ta n d s (co n c ep tu ally ) this expression.

10. D E F I N I T I O N O F ‘C O N C E P T U A L U N D E R S T A N D IN G '

It w o u ld be m is u n d e rsta n d in g to re q u ire th e re c o n stru c tio n o f th e n o rm a l, e q u iv a len t d e fin itio n o f „ p r o p e r c o n c e p tu a l u n d e rs ta n d in g " (scil. ‘p r o p e r co m p re h e n d in g '). W e h a v e only:

I f it is u n d e r s to o d in s c rip tiv e ly b y th e s ig n y th e o b je c t z. th e n th e p e r s o n x u n d e rs ta n d s p ro p e rly y. if a n d o n ly i f x u n d e r s ta n d s in s c rip tiv e ly b y y (th e o b je c t) z.

It is a n o th e r m a tte r th a t th e in itial c o n d itio n o f th is d e fin itio n is n o t precision. D o es ,,il is u n d e rs to o d " m ean : „ e v e ry b o d y u n d e rs ta n d s " , „ th e m o st p eople u n d e r s ta n d " , „ so m e b o d ie s u n d e s ta n d s ” , o r „ (e ac h of, th e m o s t of, a c erta in of) p ro ficien t u sers u n d e rs ta n d " ?

T h e n o rm a l d e fin itio n c a n be given on ly fo r „ a n y u n d e rs ta n d in g " :

T h e p e r s o n x u n d e rs ta n d s so m eh o w th e sig n y i f a n d o n ly i f x u n d e r s ta n d s in s c rip tiv e ly a n y th in g b y y.

4 0 J a c e k J u liu s z J a d a c k i

B ut it w o u ld be m is u n d e rsta n d in g to id e n tify p ro p e r c o m p re h e n d in g w ith a n y c o m p re h e n d in g (i.e. w ith instru m en tal c o m p re h e n d in g ). A n d th e view , th a t in s tru m e n ta l c o m p re h e n d in g a c e rta in o b je c t is id e n tic al w ith b ein g c o n sc io u s o f th e fa c t th a t th is o b ject is a sign - is still g re a te r m isu n d e rsta n d in g .

I I . C R I T E R IA O F C O N C E P T U A L U N D E R S T A N D IN G

T h e b asic m is u n d e rsta n d in g is th e fa ith in e x istin g th e u n iv e rsal c rite rio n o f c o m p re h e n d in g a n d u n d e rs ta n d in g in g en eral - such a c rite rio n w hich c o u ld be th e n ecessary as well su fficient c o n d itio n . T h e m is u n d e rsta n d in g e q u al to the fo rm e r is to lo o k fo r a n y c rite rio n sensu stricto , a n a b so lu te c rite rio n . In fact we d isp o se o f c rite ria sensu largo, i.e. p a rtia l crite ria . T h e y lo o k like these:

a) feeling c o rre c t u n d e rs ta n d in g a given u tte ra n c e ; b) c o rre c t reproducing (i.e. q u o ttin g ) a given u tte ra n c e ; c) c o rre c t explaining (th e sense of) a given exp ressio n ; d ) c o rre c t sum m arizing a given u tte ra n c e.

T h e s o u rc e o f feeling o f m isunderstanding a given u tte ra n c e c an be d is tu rb a n c e s o f th e a tte n tio n o t th e co m p le x ity o f th e o b je sc t d e crib e d in this u tte ra n c e . T h e so u rc e o f m istak es a n d difficu lties in re p ro d u c in g , ex p lain in g , a n d su m m a riz in g , c an be defects o f in te lle c tu al d is p o sitio n s o th e r th a n u n d e rs ta n d in g -d is p o silio n s (e.g. tro u b le s w ith th e m e m o ry , m ista k es in re a so ­ ning), o r even p u re ly a rtic u la tiv e defects. T h e s o u rc e o f im proper, re a ctio n to ta k e a h o p e d -fo r sta n d (e.g. in th e case o f lying an sw er).

O n th e o th e r h a n d th e c o rre c tn e ss o f th e resp ectiv e b e h a v io u rs c an be resu lt o f th e in cid e n tal coexistence. O ne c an find th e p ro p e r d efin ien s w ith o u t u n d e rs ta n d in g it. It is very h a rd to m a k e su re, w h e th e r a given u tte ra n c e i s the a n sw e r fo r th e q u e stio n b ro u g h t up . a n d w h e th e r th is u tte ra n c e b e a rs w itness to u n d e rs ta n d in g th is - a n d n o t a n o th e r - e le m en t o f th e fo rm u la te d q u e stio n .

12. L IN G U A L C O M P E T E N C E

W h a t d o e s m e a n to h av e th e lingual co m p eten ce?

T w o a b ilitie s c re a te it: th e ab ility o f c o n c e p tu a l u n d erstan d in g u tte ra n c es a lre a d y h e a rd , a n d th e ab ility o f producing (o r co m p le m en tin g ) u tte ra n c e - i.a. (c o m p o sed ) u tte ra n c e s n ev er h e ard before.

W h a t w e g e n u in e ly u n d e r s ta n d , w e c a n d o . R a y m o n d W illiam s

T h e m a in m is u n d e rsta n d in g h ere is th e view , th a t th e n ecessary a n d sufficient c o n d itio n o f su ch a n ab ility is u n d e rs ta n d in g th e s tru c tu re a n d the sense o f e le m en ts o f such u tte ra n c es. T h e existence o f id io m s (u n d e rs to o d en

bloc) a n d o f th e a b ility o f c re a tin g c o m p lex ex p re ssio n w ith th e a id o f

sy n c a te g o re m a ta (n o il-u n d e rsto o d very o fte n in is o la tio n ) sp ea k s fo r the fau ltin ess o f th e m e n tio n e d view.

W a r s a w U n iv e rs ity P o la n d J a c e k J u liu s z J a d u c k i N I E P O R O Z U M I E N I A W O K Ó Ł R O Z U M I E N I A P u n k te m w y jścia ro z w a ż a ń są c z te ry h ip o te z y : d w ie le k s y k a ln e , g ra m a ty c z n a i h is to r y c z n a : 1. W y ra ż e n ie ..ro z u m ie ć ” je s t p o lise m e m i to p o d w ó jn ie :

a ) w ie lo z n a c z n o ś c ią w ła ś c iw ą w ielu p r e d y k a to m m e n ta ln y m (tj. m o ż e m ieć w sz c z e g ó ln o śc i sens a k t u a ln y , h a b ilu a ln y , s e k w e n c y jn y lu b p ro c e s u á ln y );

b ) w ie lo z n a c z n o ś c ią s w o is tą (tj. m o ż e w s z c zeg ó ln o śc i m ieć s e n s in tu ic y jn y , id e n ty fik a c y jn y , in d u lg e n c y jn y lu b in s k ry p c y jn y ).

2. W y r a ż e n ie „ r o z u m ie ć ” w se n s ie id e n ty fik a c y jn y m w y s tę p u je w k o n te k s ta c h e lip ty c z n y c h (m o że m ie ć w ó w c z a s sen s e s e n c ja ln y . s t r u k t u r a l n y , f u n k c jo n a ln y , k a u z a ln y , k a te g o ria ln y lu b k o n c e p tu a ln y ). 3. W sz elk ie (n ie m e ta fo ry c z n e ) k o n te k s ty i d e r y w a ty w y r a ż e n ia „ r o z u m ie ć ” d a d z ą się s p a r a fr a z o w a ć z a p o m o c ą w p r o w a d z o n y c h ro z ró ż n ie ń . 4. R ó ż n ic e z d a ń w s p ra w ie ro z u m ie n ia a lb o b io rą się z p o m ie s z a n ia z n a c z e ń , a lb o są em p iry c zn ie le s to w a ln c . P rz e d s ta w io n e h ip o te z y p o z w a la ją u s u n ą ć n ie p o ro z u m ie n ia , d o ty c z ą c e k o le jn o : a r g u m e n tó w relacji ro z u m ie n ia , k a te g o rii s e m a n ty c z n e j „ r o z u m ie n ia ” , re lacji m ię d z y p o s z c z e g ó ln y m i p o ję c ia m i „ r o z u m ie n ia ” o r a z m ię d z y ro z u m ie n ie m a in n y m i fu n k c ja m i m e n ta ln y m i, w a r u n k a m i p o p ra w n o ś c i defin icji „ r o z u m ie n ia k o n c e p tu a ln e g o ” , n a k o n ie c k ry te r ió w k o m p e te n c ji ję z y k o w e j.