Invisible hand explanation

The German linguist Rudi Keller, among others, holds the view that language change and the alteration of language use is caused by an “invisible hand”. The term invisible hand itself was shaped by Adam Smith and is generally known and established in economics.

The phenomenon of the third kind

Typically the world is divided exclusively into two kinds of phenomena: natural and artificial. However, this leads to a misinterpretation of certain processes like for example linguistics and language. Keller offers a solution to this dilemma by identifying a third phenomenon that contains natural and artificial elements. Language for example is artificial since it is created by man, but it evolves naturally in a way that cannot be influenced or predicted by individuals. So language change is caused by the multitude of individual actions, as an unintentional and unplanned structure and the effect of the invisible hand. A phenomenon of the third kind is the causal consequence of a multitude of individual and intentional actions, which have at least partially similar intentions. It is a process and a result at the same time. Keller compares this to the moral conception, which is not an ultimate result, but changes and is only an episode in the processes of cultural evolution, without a nameable beginning or end.

The three main characteristics of the phenomenon of the third kind:

- It is process-related

- It constitutes on a micro- (the multitude of the individual intentional actions) and macro- (the causal consequences) level

- It cannot be identified as exclusively natural or exclusively artificial in origin

This can be illustrated on the basis of an example: a driver on a highway needs to decelerate for irrelevant reasons. The driver behind him, seeing the brakelights, will brake rather a little bit too much then too little, just as the next driver behind them. This will continue until one car far behind them comes to a standstill. None of these drivers intended to cause a traffic jam, still it happenes.

The invisible-hand-theory

The invisible-hand-theory explains the explanandum, a phenomenon of the third kind, as the causal unintentional consequence of individual intentional actions, with at least partally similar intent. The theory can explain and uncover structures and processes which people unintentionally and without recognition perform as if they were guided by an invisible hand.

The three ideal levels of an invisible-hand-theory are:

1. The depiction of the motifs, intentions, aims and convictions which are central to the actions of the individuals who are involved in the creation of the phenomena, including the surrounding conditions of their actions (formulation of the premise; the cause)

2. Depiction of the process; how the structure to be explained is formed by the multitude of the individual actions (the general laws)

3. Depiction of the phenomena/structure originating from these actions

The points one and two are the hypothesis, point three is that which needs to be explained, the explanandum.

Keller uses trails on a university campus as an example: these trails are the shortest connections between the most important buildings and institutes. Their structure is much more economical and logical than the original pavements that were designed by the architect. Although it requires far less intellect to create these trails than to create the paved ways, this new system is still far more rational. The invisible hand theory here is, according to the above pattern:

1. The motif behind the action: people tend to act on the maxim to choose the shortest path

2. Premise: the grass gradually withers on the frequently used trail

3. Conclusion: the system of trails is the unintended causal consequence of those intentional, final acts aiming to reach certain destinations at minimal expense of time and energy

Change of meaning

A change of meaning is a special case of language change. According to Keller, words change their meaning if their usage is changed. He clarifies this by the example of the German word “englisch”.

1. Ecological conditions: in the middle of the 19th century the word “englisch” had two different meanings. The one was “angelic”, the other was “English” in the sense of British. This started to cause problems when cultural processes led to an increased usage of the latter: now it was ambiguous whether the speaker was talking about an angelic woman or a British one (which was not necessarily angelic as well).

2. Dictum of action:

a) Make sure you are not misunderstood

b) Make sure you are understood (These two are not identical: in the late 19th century, using the word “englisch” for angelic would be understood, but might be misunderstood; while nowadays this speaker would not be understood at all, because the word “englisch” has lost its former meaning.)

3. The invisible-hand-process: in order to avoid misunderstandings, speakers use different, unambiguous synonyms and avoid the ambiguous expression. The ambiguous form falls into disuse, and thus is not acquired by the following generation of speakers.

4. The explanandum: the causal consequence is that in present-day German, the word “englisch” has only one meaning, “English”, and different words exist for “angelic”.

References

de:Unsichtbare Hand