Can a word exist without a sound or letters?

I stopped a homeless person one day, that was asking and answering his own questions.

I just assumed he was hearing voices in his brain and let him be. does this qualify?

@john65pennington I hear my voice in my brain. My question put in different words is, “Can you think of a word without imagining you hear it or see it? And if you can, what is it like?” I can’t. And I can’t imagine what it would be like.

Sure. Just look at French.

And on the serious side, no, a person cannot think without symbols in their head. Our ability to understand those thoughts are contingent upon having symbols with which to express them. An interesting study on a set of twins that had an internal language showed that without a word for “left” and “right” they were unable to understand the concept.

The person in the other thread was either mistaken or they simply weren’t thinking. Such an act would be neurologically impossible.

An idea can exist for which there is not yet any word so you can have an idea without sound or letters but not a word.

Assuming by letters you mean all written symbols (not just alphabets but characters, etc) then no. The idea can, though.

@papayalily So it is possible to think an idea without thinking words, right?

@stump Yes, but not as complexly. Can you think without language? Answer: Nope, at least not at the level humans are accustomed to. That’s why deafness can have far more serious consequences than blindness, developmentally speaking. The blind suffer many hardships, not the least of which is the inability to read in the usual manner. But even those sightless from birth acquire language by ear without difficulty in infancy, and having done so lead relatively ordinary lives. A congenitally deaf child isn’t so lucky: unless someone realizes very early that he’s not talking because he can’t hear, his grasp of communication may never progress beyond the rudiments. Link, more info

Isn’t this what happens when you forget a word… it’s on the tip of your tongue… you have a concept for it but no symbols or letters…yet you know what it is you mean….???

@stump No. The feeling that a though exists could theoretically take place without putting it into words but the very notion of an “idea” suggests verbage. It would be like saying that an object can exist without mass and then holding out your hand until it fills with falling snow. The idea does not exist until the words are there to describe it.

@nebule There are also words in other languages that have no English equivalent. The Bible says ‘in the beginning was the word’ but I don’t believe it I think the ideas must have come first.

@nebule I hadn’t thought of that. That’s brilliant. In that case, you know your meaning, and know the word exists, but can’t say it. When that happens to me, I often simply pass on knowing I know what I mean. Do people actually think that way, without words at all, just allowing meaning to flow?

@nebule +1 for you!

Thinking about thinking without words, I picture playing catch. The ball is headed my way, I need to gauge its speed and trajectory and place my hands where I expect it to land. No words involved.

@jaytkay Is there thought involved?

@stump but could that same thought exist if you’d never known the word?

@crazyivan I don’t know.

Whoever said that pretty much nailed how I think of words in my own head. I don’t hear a voice in my head. I don’t see the words, either. It’s just like they are there. Is that really unusual? Does everyone “hear” the words in their head?

@TheOnlyNeffie I do, and I think most people do. I envy you.

I wonder what causes the difference. I can’t even imagine hearing a voice in my head every time I think. That is something that I can’t even wrap my head around, I guess because it has never been that way to me. I didn’t know that it was unusual not to have one.

@TheOnlyNeffie When you are going to speak to someone later in the day, do you ever practice in your head what you will say to them? And if not, when do you formulate words for your thoughts? How do you choose your words?

@stump sure, of course I do. But I don’t “hear” them in my head. I don’t know how to describe it.

@stump ................... .

@TheOnlyNeffie Maybe I am not expressing myself well. I don’t actually hear a voice in my head. I am imagining my own voice in my head, as if I were talking to myself, just not out loud.
@lloydbird I know exactly what you mean.

@stump but there is no voice. I don’t know how else to word that. I don’t hear a voice, not my own, not any voice. I don’t hear myself in my own head. I would never describe it that way.

@TheOnlyNeffie I wish I knew what makes us different.

Of…....... it can, at least I…..... so :¬)

There are other symbolic systems at our fingertips that we can use to create a word. Literally. Braille. We have many modes of thinking and we have many ways of creating symbolic systems. I’m sure we could create a symbolic system with smell or taste, if necessary.

It seems that whatever “language” you use, no matter what sense it uses primarily, we can create “words;” little units of meaning.

I also believe there is non-linguistic thinking—that is, thinking that is performed without words. I think that it goes on in all our minds all the time. However, we are generally unaware of it because it doesn’t use words. I think it is most obvious when it presents us with images—solutions to problems that appear as if from nowhere.

However, there are other ways to access this kind of thinking—the usual suspects—yoga and meditation and dance and any other activity that calls for enough focus to turn off the linguistic mind enough, that we can attend to the non-linguistic mind.

The problem with these kinds of experiences, which happen in all kinds of ways and are often called spiritual experiences, is that there is no language to discuss them with. Therefore we can’t adequately describe them, and it’s hard for people who have never had such experiences to lend them any credence.

We can’t describe them because they are wordless experiences. I think they are direct experiences with our environment without the observing, linguistic mind in between. I’m not exactly sure what I mean by this.

I see words as a kind of translation. We perceive and then translate what we perceive into language, and that’s how we think about it and talk about it.

When we have direct experience, there is no language that the experience has to be translated into. It’s just us and experience.

I think our non-linguistic minds perceive these things and process them in a direct way that has no separation between us and the world. This is where those ideas about us all being one and connected and this amazing experience of oneness comes from. And anyone can have it anytime they are able to shut down the babbling mind long enough for the direct mind to come into awareness.

I believe that this other mind does things with the information it receives in that direct way. It “thinks” somehow, but not with words. I think of it as holistic thinking. It doesn’t break things down into little bits in order to understand it. It’s just a way of knowing the whole.

When we have those moments of sudden inspiration, I believe those come from this other mind. When we worry about a problem, often if we stop our worrying and give up (I like to go out for lunch), when we come back, the solution is often there. We are letting this invisible mind do its thing.

I wish I could figure out what it means to have direct experience. Sometimes I think I have felt it, but not nearly to the degree it could be felt. I suspect that the more deeply one attends to direct experience, the larger the sense of connection with the world/universe will become.

There are several versions of this experience—at least as far as I know. One is this more amorphous connection with the all, but the other is a direct connection with another person. I have experienced this twice in my life, both time with music as the intermediary—or perhaps not intermediary, but the direct connection. Amazing stuff.

I suppose I’ve gone a bit astray here. Such is life.

When two people meet and they don’t speak the same language they can still communicate and they can do it without words.

I don’t hear a voice in my head but words are there. I often know the word I want to say, too, I have the meaning and pictures of how it might apply like flash video! but no voice. I don’t think always in words- lots of flash video and feelings.

@faye Thank you for making me feel like less of an oddball for not having a voice in my head.

@TheOnlyNeffie I don’t have one either, and nobody has ever asked me anything like, “What kind of a nut does’nt have at least one voice in his head?!” ;-)

@Brian1946 it’s so funny when you put it that way. :)

When I had a long period of enforced inactivity, I discovered that I think at essentially three levels: intentional verbal, where my thoughts are already in verbal form as the result of my deliberately thinking about something; unintentional, where my thoughts arrise out of somewhere below conscious level, but not completely unconscious, and have to be put into verbal form; and non-conscious, where my thoughts are usually emotionally laden and non-verbal, and are sometimes difficult to verbalize.

When I was learning Japanese Kanji, most of the characters represented ideas or objects. This is not to be confused with Japanese Katakana and Hiragana which are alphabets that have sounds associated with them.
Because sometimes I was not the best student in the world, I would not know the correct word or pronunciation for the Kanji character. However I would almost always remember the what the character meant. Looking at a Kanji character string was a really fast way to get the meaning without actually hearing voices.

What about the symbol that was Prince’s name for a while?

You mean the symbol meaning: “The artist formerly known as Prince?” : D

To me, that would be an idea, not a word. However, I was trying to figure out how to spell the sound my dog makes when he is mmmmmmm, mmmmmm, mmmming for me to open the door, or give him food.

What? Am i the only one with more than 5 voices then? What? whosaidthat? You shut up…

What about if say.. Someone grew up by themselves on an island or something, you know tarzan kind of thing. Never had any communication with any one else or language contact.

What is their thought process going to be like?

@Arbornaut that is a complete absence of language altogether, though. I would think the thought processes of a person with zero exposure to language would be solely in images and emotions.

There is some evidence that the propensity toward language is hard-wired into the human brain. People raised without language will obviously have a hard time gaining any appreciable skills, but apparently they try very hard.

@TheOnlyNeffie Yeah, crap I just rephrased the original question. whoops.
It is something iv often thought about though.

The original question “can a word exist without sounds or letters?”
I would say no. Because a word is part of a language, and a language is made up of sounds and letters. Without language to describe something using a ‘word’ its not a word at all, its just something.. Maybe? this is complex.

People seem to be discussing several related but distinct questions on this thread. I’ll have a go at ‘em:

Q: Can people experience words without sounds or letters?
A: Yes. Deaf people use sign language. Incidentally, Children who are born deaf and raised together in orphanages have been observed to develop their own systems of signs spontaneously.

Q: Can people think without words?
A: Yes. Musicians and painters don’t need to internally verbalize their works to create them.

Q: Can people think without symbols?
A: Yes. See above.

Q: Can people think without representations?
A: Not if thought is defined strictly (so that it is different from feeling, willing,desiring, etc.). To think about something is to mentally represent it somehow.

Q: Do non-deaf people have to “hear” words in their “mind’s ear”, so to speak, when they engage in discursive thought?
A: Try this—Read the following three words to yourself, silently: Kill. Mice. Elf. ... Ok, now read them out loud. Notice anything different? If not, say them faster.

The thought processes of people who have no exposure to language are not just limited to pictures and images. They are limited to what they have seen in life. Abstract concepts cannot be understood without symbolic representation and thus a form of language. The act of thinking implies “words in your head”. Anything on a strata below “words (or symbols) in your head” is not thinking, it is emotion.

It cracks me up that this question (more or less) actually has a definitive answer but that doesn’t stop everyone from offering a differing viewpoint.

People are forgetting the ‘symbol’ part of the question. Sign language, words, and pictures of things are all sybols if they stand for or refer to the real object.

To this question, I say no. The word is just something that stands for its meaning. When you talk, you automatically connect the word “pencil” to the object you were just thinking about. However, the object “pencil” is not actually a “pencil.” Saying “pencil” makes sure other people understand what you are talking about, but the object is not fundamentally a “pencil.” It just is. Your mind likely perceives it as that object, so when you talk (or think about talking) it is a “pencil” because “pencil” is the word which represents that long and pointy yellow thing made by Ticonderoga in our language.