I would delete this before I would redirect to colloquialism. it's just that rediecting this page to colloquialism tells little to someone searching to understand colloquial language. BingoBob 19:33, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
from tractatus logico-philosophicus:
4.002
Man possesses the capacity of constructing languages, in which every sense can be expressed, without having an idea how and what each word means -- jsut as one speaks without knowing how the single sounds are produced.
Colloquial language is a part of the human organism and is not less complicated than it.
From it it is humanly impossible to gather immediately the logic of language.
Language disguises the thought; so that from the external form of the clothes one cannot infer the form of the thought they clothe, because the external form of the clothes is constructed with quite another object than to let the form of the body be recog nized.
The silent adjustments to understand colloquial language are enormously complicated.
- I think that's worth something to the conversation. I'm just saying- don't redirect to colloquialism. also- if you read it here- third paragraph there's a typo. it says "logical of language". I corrected above. it's "logic of language". k later. BingoBob 19:41, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Most articles that reach this article, including the Persian wikilink, were intended to reach Colloquialism. If one is interested in creating a worthy stub of the Philosophical concept Colloquial language (Philosophy) can be used.--Rafy talk 00:07, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
The topic of Alphabetic list of colloquial language is based on the following.....
edit--222.64.22.120 (talk) 01:35, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
- In a nutshell -- lots of computer language book title use this phrase
- http://scholar.google.com.hk/scholar?as_q=in+a+nutshell&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_sdt=1.&as_sdtp=on&as_sdts=5&hl=en
--124.78.210.211 (talk) 02:33, 15 May 2010 (UTC)