…saying something is never merely saying something, but is saying something with a certain tune and at a proper cue and while executing the appropriate business…
The central premise of the book is outlined in this statement, though admittedly on a bare-bones essentialist nature. Thematically significant to every page of the book is the concept that the act of saying and meaning are always united, but the content of what is said and is meant may not be so clear. This idea should, of course, but so obviously as to not require explanation, but the evolution of civilization continues to prove one thing above all: it is idiocy to assume anything is manifestly obvious. Recognizing this fact of life, the author therefore grounds his controlling thesis early enough in the text to try to those who may still confuse the act of speaking with the act of conveying obvious meaning.
…an individual's intentions or wishes can no more produce the general meaning for a word than they can produce horses for beggars, or home runs from pop flies, or successful poems out of unsuccessful poems.
The meaning of what one says is a matter of precision. One cannot—or, to be more precise—should not throw out words in their speech willy-nilly in the mere hope—again, to be precise—expectation—that the transmission will be understood. The metaphorical comparison here is particularly effective as it creates in the reader’s mind the idea that it is much easier to hit a pop fly than a home run or a bad poem than a good one. Almost anyone can swing a bat or pen in a way that resembles how others have successfully knocked balls into the stands or created verse that touches the hearts of millions, but merely replicating process does not guarantee outcome.
Someday, if there is someday, we will have to learn that evil thinks of itself as good, that it could not have made such progress in the world unless people planned and performed it in all conscience.
This is a perfect example of the chasm existing between saying something and meaning it as well as saying something, meaning and getting the listener to understand that meaning. Tremendous evil has been perpetrated on millions of people throughout history because of the gap between what is said and what is meant and what is understood. This is often a process called propaganda and in today’s world it has become actually easier to manipulate the gap so that the meaning of what is said is the opposite of what is meant to the point that those receiving the meaning go on to uproot the very basis of truth and reality.
To say we own the same car (that is, are partners) is to say that there is one car we own. (What makes it the same one is its physical integrity, so to speak.) To say we have the same car is to say that my car is the same as yours (both are 1952 MG-TD's).
Here is the author presenting a spectacularly effective example of how what is said and what is meant is an exercise in complexity of such a depth that it’s often a wonder communication is ever possible. Language has developed to a degree that one can clearly understand the subtle differentiation in meaning between the two assertions of ownership provided above. But only within a certain culture; extricate one person in this conversation from contemporary industrialized society and confusion begins to enter the equation. Now consider the possibilities of confusion when such a similar conversation takes place about a subject more complex than the specificity of owning a single car or two people owning the same make and model. Communication in the modern world is anything but smooth, but the real wonder is that it is as smooth as it is.
