Uit: Language in Thought and Action,
door S.I. Hayakawa.
Chapter 3 Reports, Inferences, Judgements
Inferences
The reader will find that practice in writing reports is a quick means of
increasing his linguistic awareness. It is an exercise which will constantly
provide him with his own examples of the principles of language and
interpretation under discussion. The reports should be about first-hand
experience-scenes the reader has witnessed himself, meetings and social events
he has taken part in, people he knows well. They should be of such a nature that
they can be verified and agreed upon. For the purpose of this exercise,
inferences will be excluded.
Not that inferences are not important-we rely in everyday
life and in science as much on inferences as on reports-in some areas of
thought, for example, geology, paleontology, and nuclear physics, reports are
the foundations, but inferences (and inferences upon inferences) are the main
body of the science. An inference, as we shall use the term, is a statement
about the unknown made on the basis of the known. We may infer from the material
and cut of a woman's clothes her wealth or social position; we may infer from
the character of the ruins the origin of the fire that destroyed the building;
we may infer from a man's calloused hands the nature of his occupation; we may
infer from a senator's vote on an armaments bill his attitude toward Russia; we
may infer from the structure of the land the path of a prehistoric glacier; we
may infer from a halo on an unexposed photographic plate that it has been in the
vicinity of radioactive materials; we may infer from the sound of an engine the
condition of its connecting rods. Inferences may be carelessly or carefully
made. They may be made on the basis of a broad background of previous experience
with the subject matter, or no experience at all.
For example, the inferences a good mechanic can make about the internal
condition of a motor by listening to it are often startlingly accurate, while
the inferences made by an amateur (if he tries to make any) may be entirely
wrong. But the common characteristic of inferences is that they are statements
about matters which are not directly known, statements made on the basis of what
has been observed.
The avoidance of inferences in our suggested practice in
reportwriting requires that we make no guesses as to what is going on in other
people's minds. When we say, "He was angry," we are not reporting; we are making
an inference from such observable facts as the following: "He pounded his first
on the table; he swore; he threw the telephone directory at his stenographer."
In this particular example, the inference appears to be fairly safe;
nevertheless, it is important to remember, especially for the purposes of
training oneself, that it is an inference. Such expressions as "He thought a lot
of himself," "He was scared of girls," "He has an inferiority complex," made on
the basis of casual social observation, and "What Russia really wants to do is
to establish a world communist dictatorship," made on the basis of casual
newspaper reading, are highly inferential. We should keep in mind their
inferential character and, in our suggested exercises, should substitute for
them such statements as "He rarely spoke to subordinates in the plant," "I saw
him at a party, and he never danced except when one of the girls asked him to,"
"He wouldn't apply for the scholarship although I believe he could have won it
easily," and "The Russian delegation to the United Nations has asked for
A, B,
and C. Last year they voted against M and N, and voted for
X and Y. On the basis
of facts such as these, the newspaper I read makes the inference that what
Russia really wants is to establish a world communist dictatorship. I agree."
In spite of the exercise of every caution in avoiding
inferences and reporting only what is seen and experienced, we all remain prone
to error, since the making of inferences is a quick, almost automatic process.
We may watch a car weaving as it goes down the road and say, "Look at that
drunken driver," although what we see is only the irregular motion of the car.
The writer once saw a man leave a one-dollar tip at a lunch counter and hurry
out. Just as the writer was wondering why anyone should leave so generous a tip
in so modest an establishment, the waitress came, picked up the dollar, put it
in the cash register as she punched up ninety cents, and put a dime in her
pocket. In other words, the writer's description to himself of the event, "a
one-dollar tip," turned out to be not a report but an inference.
All this is not to say that we should never make inferences.
The inability to make inferences is itself a sign of mental disorder. For
example, the speech therapist Laura L. Lee writes, "The aphasic [brain-damaged]
adult with whom I worked had great difficulty in making inferences about a
picture I showed her. She could tell me what was happening at the moment in the
picture, but could not tell me what might have happened just before the picture
or just afterward."
1 Hence the question is not whether or not we make
inferences; the question is whether or not we are aware of the inferences we
make.
1 "Brain Damage and the Process of Abstracting: A problem in Language Learning,"
ETC.: A Review of General Semantics, XVI (1959), 154-62.
Naar Hayakawa, contents
, Algemene semantiek lijst
, Algemene semantiek overzicht
, of site home
.
|