nucleation

ARG-004: Relativistic frames vary descriptions systematically under constrained transformations with invariants, so variations in translation are transformations between pragmatic frames preserving selected invariants

1 min read

Properties9
StatusRejected
Formanalogy
Tagsphilosophy-of-language, linguistics
Linepragmatic-transport
Rests onCLAIM-006 — What fundamentally distinguishes variations of a translation is the frame from which it is delivered
GroundsCASE-012 — The modernized refrains of Henley's Villon
ConcludesCLAIM-102 — Variations in translation are transformations between pragmatic frames of reference that preserve selected invariants of the communicative act
Undercut byCLAIM-035 — Translation operations are generally not invertible, need not compose by a fixed rule, and preserve no structure given in advance; which communicative properties are invariant must be discovered or negotiated, CLAIM-004 — Not every difference between translations is a difference of frame: some change the act being framed
Rendered intodocs/arguments-by-conclusion.md

Graph View

The inference

A18 took three features of inertial frames: “Frame dependence is systematic”, transformations between frames “are constrained”, and “Invariants permit us to identify the same physical structure”. If renderings of one act in different pragmatic frames (TERM-016) behave alike, translation variation is a change of frame with selected invariants preserved (CLAIM-102).

Critical questions

  • In what respect are the cases alike? Description varies with frame, and something is held fixed across the variation.
  • What transfers? “a research program inspired by relativity’s architecture: identify frames operationally, characterize transformations between them, and investigate their invariants.”
  • What does not? The group structure: “Lorentz transformations are invertible, compose according to a precise rule, and preserve a specified mathematical structure. Real translation operations generally have none of those guarantees” (CLAIM-035). Nor the source of the invariants: in physics they “arise from the mathematical structure of the theory”; in translation “we must discover—or negotiate—which communicative properties deserve invariance”. A18 disclaimed the literal reading: “I would avoid saying that speech acts are literally relativistic”.

Rejected as an inference to CLAIM-102. A30 left the coordinate picture behind (TERM-026), and the manuscript has no relativity in it; what it kept is CLAIM-098.

Backlinks