Abstract
By developing Searle’s (1995, 2005) argument that language is the fundamental institution, this chapter contributes to the growing institutionalist literature on the conception of the institution and the understanding of institutional change. Language is ambiguous, however, and so institutional reproduction, mediated by language, is a deeply contentious process. Moreover, ontologically, language and understanding delineate and circumscribe a community. A community cannot function without a common language, as Searle argued, but language at the same time constitutes a community’s boundaries, allowing for focused and effective communication. I develop the argument by drawing upon Luhmann’s (1995) systems analysis and notion of communication, underlining the essentially vulnerable nature of institutional continuity with change and reproduction as meaningful information crosses a system’s boundaries. This raises the question of how institutions may be recognized when they are vulnerable even when reproduced. Drawing from John Davis (2003) one may pose the questions: what differentiates institutions, and how can institutions be identified through time and space?
Boundaries are an evolutionary achievement par excellence.
(Luhmann 1995, p. 29)
With John Finch and Robert McMaster.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Copyright information
© 2009 Wilfred Dolfsma
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dolfsma, W. (2009). Institutions, Institutional Change and Language. In: Institutions, Communication and Values. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230250666_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230250666_3
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-30876-7
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-25066-6
eBook Packages: Palgrave Economics & Finance CollectionEconomics and Finance (R0)