Theories Of Cratylus

884 Words4 Pages

The dialogue of Cratylus mainly focuses on the giving of names with two divergent opinions about names. On the one hand, Hermogenes argues over an impulsive idea: His belief is that whichever name a person is given is the one that everybody agrees to use. On the other hand, Cratylus leans on the naturalistic belief about names and suggests that behind names hides the description and reflection on the object they refer to, so that a name is perfectly given with a specific correctness about it (Annas, 1982). As an example, Socrates refers to the name Theophilus for the name has to be given to a person who loves god and does not evil actions. However, the theory of Cratylus is not consistent with what people know nowadays, for most names and language …show more content…

The mental analysis of why several words cannot be memorized quickly by learners of a second language lies behind the huge appearance of illogicality in linguistics. Moreover, students often try to find a connection between words of other languages so, it would seem that the linguistic system is often arbitrary except in some hints where meaning is found behind words. Without using prescriptive grammar someone could say that language depends on the connotations and denotations of a word derived from different cultures. An example of this is when language beginners learn new words separately because they are unable to find a meaning in every word even if it sounds familiar to …show more content…

It is not a choice for people to select their names, instead they must live with the name they are given. Nevertheless, Hermogenes claims that in case, names are given consistently with the arbitrary necessities of people, they are valid only for appearance and not to reality (Kretzmann, 1971). However, names are not created to describe what objects are. As Socrates argues, Hermes, the god who provided language the traditional way, was actually known as a distrustful person. Therefore, even if there was the affirmation that heavenly derivation of names exists, one would have to be certain both that the gods told them the names, and that what they created was true. For Socrates, gods do not speak to people unswervingly, instead they use oracles and signs (Mackenzie,