Language and non verbal constructs

John M Fisher (101515.501@CompuServe.COM)
04 Jun 96 02:19:30 EDT

Over recent weeks I have been reading some threads which all appear to
pre-suppose that language is the most important means of creating or defining a

Whilst I would not wish to argue about the importance of language as a means of
communication and the vital role it plays in defining our interactions I would
like clarification on how the group perceives th interplay between language and
non verbal constructs.

Kelly cited "pre-verbal" constructs (althought here I must admit I prefer Tom
Ravenette's re-definition as "non verbal" constructs) - those for which we have
no word to describe. I (rightly or wrongly) equate these to the Jungian
construct of the Archetype. These constructs have a deeper underlying meaning,
possibly more basic, more primal (if you will excuse mixing pop psychological

How do these non verbal constructs fit in to the theory that language defines
everything? We have knowledge that even ancient people with a supposed basic
language structure (if any) had a fairly complex set of constructs around a
belief system - wall paintings, rock carvings etc.

Thanks :-)

john m fisher