Is Music a Language?

Abstract

The discussion of this question began in the chapter on the association theory of meaning. The answer to the question depends upon an acceptable theory of language and meaning. It was shown that those who have tried to answer the question hold unacceptable theories which are mentalistic, metaphysical, ideal (symbolic logic based on mathematics), or no theory at all is presented. Davies (1994: 48), after presenting a problematic theory of language concludes, Music is not usefully to be compared to natural languages with respect to its meaning. As indicated earlier, Wittgenstein (1968) gave epistemological primacy to language. Among others holding a similar view are: Barthes, Derrida, Dewey, Hartnack, Heidegger, Müller, Peirce, Ryle, Sapir, Shibles, Waismann, Whorf, and Winch. This means that the scientific method is not based on observation (naive empiricism), but on language. The concept of seeing-as shows that sensation is always conceptualized, that we never have pure sensation. Cognition or language-use is bound up with all perception. Perception comes classified and evaluated.

Mightn’t we imagine a man who, never having had any acquaintance with music, comes to us and hears someone playing a reflective piece of Chopin and is convinced that this is a language and people merely want to keep the meaning a secret from him?

Wittgenstein 1967: 29