🪴 Quartz 4.0

Interpretive sway of proximity of meaning

Apr 19, 20194 min read

  • Different people have different interpretations of what a word means.
  • People differ on how close word X and word Y are in meaning.
  • phenomenon
    • Mr. A. “It’s X.”
    • Mr. B. “I see, it’s Y.”
    • Mr. A. “No!”
  • explanation
    • In Mr. A’s mind, words X and Y are placed far apart.
    • They are placed close together in Mr. B.
    • image
    • The word “Y” is probably more “natural” to Mr. B than the word “X”.
      • Familiarity with hearing, etc.
      • Each person’s “Natural Words” are also different.
      • So Mr. B chooses Y.
        • If you have unconsciously rewritten
        • If you are intentionally trying to make the explanation natural and easy to understand and Y
    • For Mr. A, X and Y are totally different, so he replies “No”.
      • This is hard for Mr. B to understand.
      • In Mr. B’s mind, X and Y are in close proximity, so it’s hard to recognize the difference.
      • If Mr. B does not recognize the difference between X and Y
        • Mr. B thinks, “That’s what Mr. A said.”
      • If Mr. B recognizes that there is a difference between X and Y, but not a big difference.
        • Mr. B thinks, “You’re such a detail-oriented person, it doesn’t matter either way.”
      • If Mr. B intentionally chooses words in an attempt to provide a clear explanation
        • Mr. B thinks “it’s easier to understand this way.”
        • They’re thinking, “Oh, he’s one of those people who can’t tolerate expression unless it’s what he wants, ugh.”
    • If Mr. A tells Mr. B “No” and Mr. B changes his perception that X and Y are different, it will be improved.
      • But it’s hard to change perceptions.
      • In this explanation, X and Y are just one word discrepancies, but often discrepancies occur in more complex situations
      • It is difficult for Mr. B, who identifies X and Y, to come to distinguish X and Y on his own.
      • Mr. A, who distinguishes between X and Y, needs to facilitate the separation of concepts within Mr. B.
    • Separation of concepts
      • Collect cases where Mr. B identifies X and Y.
      • Show it to Mr. B. “You think these words mean the same thing, don’t you?” and confirm
      • Then tell them, “I want X and Y to be treated differently for this reason.
        • It is important to clearly show why.
        • If the only reason is Mr. A’s feelings, there is no reason for Mr. B to step up to the plate.
        • Suppose, for example, that someone confuses “symmetric key cryptography” with “public key cryptography.
          • It’s not symmetric key cryptography, it’s public key cryptography!” “How many times are you wrong? but it’s futile.
          • The symmetric key cipher is

            • A cryptographic scheme that uses the same (common) key for encryption and decryption (Wikipedia)

          • Public key cryptography is

            • This is a cryptographic scheme that uses separate keys (procedures) for encryption and decryption and allows the encryption key to be disclosed. (Wikipedia)

          • So, he says, treat it as a separate thing.
        • ↑upThis is a case where the word has a formal definition, so it is relatively easy
        • Complicated cases
          • A word has multiple meanings.
            • Example: equating “hash” with “associative array
              • In some contexts, “hash = associative array” is fine, but now Mr. A is talking about a SHA-1 hash, and the situation is that he is talking about a SHA-1 hash.
          • Combination of multiple words, not words, not corresponding to distinct terms, Y encompasses X
            • Example: equating “disruptive innovation” with “some amazing innovation” rather than a single technical term
              • From Mr. A, who uses “disruptive innovation” to mean “an inferior performing product taking over a market,” Mr. B sometimes gets it right, and sometimes gets it wrong from the premise.
          • The definition of the word is not clear to begin with.
            • Example: equating “sight” with “field of vision”.
            • Example: equating “knowledge” with “information”.
            • Unlike technical terms, general terms are not clearly defined, so either A, who makes a distinction, or B, who does not, is not correct
            • If person A uses the distinction and person B is unaware of the distinction, information loss occurs.
            • For effective communication, it is necessary to create a consensus of distinction

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/意味の近さの解釈揺れ using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.

Graph View

Backlinks