Vol. 2(8), pp.

194-202, August 2014 International Journal of English

DOI: 10.14662/IJELC2014.056
Copy©right 2014 Literature and Culture
Author(s) retain the copyright of this article
ISSN: 2360-7831©2014 Academic Research Journals
http://www.academicresearchjournals.org/IJELC/Index.htm

Review

Aristotle‟s Definition of Language

Wen Qiu
School of Chinese Language and Literature, Beijing Normal University
School of Languages, Cultures and Societies, University of Leeds. E-mail:wenqiubnu@gmail.com. Phone: 07419210443

Accepted 26 August 2014

Aristotle defines “speech” as a kind of articulated “voice”, and the basic difference between “voice” and
“speech” is the process of articulation which is performed by the tongue. He draws such a difference
from the aspect of vocalization organs. Judged from this biological base, speech does not belong to
human beings uniquely, some other animal species also have the ability of speech, and the difference is
just the degree of the ability to use speech. In Aristotle’s view, the distinguishing feature of human
language is its semantic scope. Aristotle thinks that only human beings has the ability to use
“language”(λόγος) to indicate the advantageous and the harmful, the right and the wrong, while other
animals can only emit voice to indicate painful and pleasant things. Such a difference is based on the
different faculties of the soul. Animal speech origins from the sensation faculty, while human language
involves not only the sensation faculty, but also a higher faculty of soul, namely thinking faculty. The
perfect human language ability needs human beings to use their mind and intellect to control the
vocalization fully. It is the common ground for Aristotle and Chomsky to emphasize the contribution
made by human mind to human language, but Chomsky stresses the syntax of human language decided
by human mind, Aristotle stresses the semantic scope of human language endowed by human mind.
Again different with Chomsky’s view that human language is innate and universal, Aristotle thinks that
human language is social and diverse. He regards human language as a kind of man-made arbitrary
symbol, the meaning of this symbol is not from the voice itself, but established by convention among
human beings.

Key Words: voice(θσλὴ) sound(ςόθνο) animal speech(δηάιεθηνο) human language(ιόγνο) semantic scope mind
and intellect social and conventional

Cite This Article as: Wen Qiu (2014). Aristotle‟s Definition of Language. Inter. J. Eng. Lit. Cult. 2(8): 194-202

other fields have began to pay attention to language.

INTRODUCTION Then what is language? What are the special features of
human language? This is the first and most important
Human beings rely on language to express themselves, problem for language research to solve. The solutions of
communicate with others, and know the world. As early other problems related with language, for example, the
as more than two thousand years ago, the ancient Greek meaning of language, the use of language, the rule of
scholars have begun to study language. Till now language, the scope of language, the relationship
language has become the central topic of western between language and other research fields, are all base
humanities. Not only linguists, but also more and more on the understanding of language. Modern linguistics,
philosophers, psychologists, sociologists and scholars of
mostly influenced by Chomsky, pay much attention to Scott G. Schreiber(2003), Aristotle on false reasoning :
syntax. language and the world in the sophistical refutations, State
Avram Noam Chomsky sometimes called as the “father University of New York Press, Albany.
of modern linguistic”, challenges structural linguistics with Qiu 195
his Syntactic Structures and introduces the theory of
transformational grammar. The basis of his theory is that
the underlying structure of human language is decided
biologically by the human mind and transmitted discussion of language. In this paper, I try to conclude
genetically. Chomsky emphasizes the biological basis of Aristotle‟s definition of language through his related
human language and sees it primarily as a mental faculty, discussion in Historia Animalium, Parts of Animals,
which is a unique development of the human brain. So Generation of Animals, On Interpretation, Politics,
human language is innate, universal, and different from Poetics, On the Soul, Problems. Although these
other animal communication modes. His evidence is the discussions are different in context and purpose, I will
fact that a human baby can acquire its native language show that they fit together to constitute a basic definition
successfully in little time, but the animal which is exposed of language and demonstrate the distinguishing feature of
to the same linguistic data could never acquire the human language compared with animal voice. It is hoped
language ability. In Chomsky‟s view, the most that, on the one hand, such an endeavor can deepen our
distinguishing feature of human language is “productivity” understanding of language, may even inspire new
or “creativity”, that is to say, human beings can produce perspective of language study, because Aristotle is one of
and understand an infinite number of sentences with a the earliest linguists, on the other hand, it can enrich
limited set of grammatical rules and words. So the most people‟s understanding about Aristotle, not as a
important task for linguistics is to find the generative philosopher or logician, but as a linguist.
grammar of human language.
The brief introduction of the Chomskyan linguistics
brings us to the consideration of Aristotle‟s work because 1. Comparison of Speech (διάλεκτος) and Voice
Aristotle is the pioneer of western linguistics. Although (φωνὴ), Sound (ψόφος)
Aristotle does not write a book about language, he makes
lots of discussions about language, which are all In terms of physical media, language is a kind of voice
scattered among his different works. Among these and the discipline which studies the voice is called
scattered discussions, Aristotle puts forwards many Phonetics. General Phonetics includes two aspects of
profound and enlightening linguistic views, many research, namely narrow Phonetics and Phonology.
contemporary linguistics theories can be traced back to Narrow Phonetics studies the process of the voice‟s
these views, or to say, Aristotle has made similar production, transmission, perception, Phonology studies
arguments in more than two thousand years ago. Many the distinctive features of voice and the specific rules for
scholars have already paid attention to Aristotle‟s its operation in a particular language, that is, studies how
discussions of language, but they mainly focuses on two human beings differentiate the different voice in a series
aspects, first, most books discuss Aristotle‟s philosophical of sound, and how human beings combine different voice
language in the background of philosophy, including the in order to express a certain meaning. Narrow Phonetics
essence of language, cognition of language, meaning focuses on the physical level, studies how human beings
theory, the relationship between language and reality 1; use different kinds of body organs to make different voice,
second, some books focus on Aristotle‟s viewpoints about Phonology focuses on the psychological level, discussing
language in his Organon, discussing Aristotle‟s influence how human beings use voice to express inner thoughts.
on language made by his logic works 2. Few scholars has Narrow Phonetics includes three branches: articulatory
ever paid attention to Aristotle‟s definition of language, phonetics, the study of the production of speech sounds
and Aristotle‟s views about the distinguishing feature of by the articulatory and vocal tract by the speaker;
human language, which is the base of Aristotle‟s other acoustic phonetics, the study of the physical transmission
of speech sounds from the speaker to the listener;
1
Miriam Therese Larkin(1971), Language in the auditory phonetics, the study of the reception and
philosophy of Aristotle, Mouton, Hague. perception of speech sounds by the listener. Aristotle
Deborah K.W. Modrak(2001), Aristotle's theory of language and explores in detail how the living animals comprehensively
meaning, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge;New York. use the body organs, such as lung, throat, tongue, lips,
Julie K. Ward(2008), Aristotle on homonymy : Dialectic and teeth, to make a voice in his works Historia Animalium,
science, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Parts of Animals, On the Soul. From the perspective of
David Charles(2000), Aristotle on meaning and essence, modern linguistics, Aristotle is the founder of articulatory
Clarendon Press; Oxford University Press, Oxford; New York. phonetics.(Moreover, Aristotle briefly introduces the
Marguerite Deslauriers(2007), Aristotle on definition, Brill, Boston. physical process of sound transmission in the Volume 2
L.M. De Rijk(2002), Aristotle: semantics and ontology. Volume II, Chapter 8 of On the Soul, which covers the research
The metaphysics. semantics in Aristotle's strategy of argument, Brill, scope of acoustic phonetics.1) The paper will begin with
Boston. Aristotle‟s discussions about the biological base of
2
Hans Arens(1984), Aristotle's theory of language and its
tradition : texts from 500 to 1750, Benjamins, Amsterdam. 1 Aristotle, translated by W.S. Hett(1957). On the Soul, William
Robert Wardy(2000), Aristotle in China : language, categories, Heinemann Ltd, London; Harvard University Press, Cambridge,
and translation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Massachusetts.
language, trying to discover the difference between (θαληαζίαο); for the voice(θσλή) is a sound (ςόθνο) which
human language and animal voice in the aspect of 196 means (ζεκαληηθὸο) something, and is not merely
Inter. J. Eng. Lit. Cult. indicative of air inhaled, as cough is; in uttering the voice
the agent uses the respired air to strike the air in the
windpipe against the windpipe itself.(On the Soul 420b23-
421a2) (Aristotle, translated by W.S. Hett,1957)
vocalization. From a physical point of view, “sound” is the noise
Again, some emit a noise (ςνθεηηθά), some are produced by something striking another thing in a
mute(ἄθσλα); some have a voice (θσλήεληα); and of the medium. “Voice” is also a kind of “sound”, but not every
latter some are articulate (δηάιεθηνλ) and others “sound” is a “voice”. First, “voice” is the “sound” produced
inarticulate (ἀγξάκκαηα); some are always chattering, by a living creature (δῴνπ) with soul (ἐκςύρνπ). All the
some tend to be quiet; some are tuneful, some are not. things without soul have no “voice”. People often say that
But it is common to all of them to sing or chatter most of some musical instruments can emit “voice”, play music,
all about the time of mating. (Historia Animalium 488a32- but this is just a metaphor.
36)(Aristotle, translated by A.L. PecK, 1965) Next, not all the “sound” produced by a living creature
Aristotle classifies the animals according to the with soul is “voice”, the living creature must use some
difference of vocalization. Some animals are mute special organs to produce “voice”. Aristotle points out that
(ἄθσλα), some make a noise (ςνθεηηθά), some have a since “voice” must transmit in the medium of air, so the
voice (θσλήεληα), as for the animals having a voice, some living creatures, in order to emit “voice”, must have some
use the speech (δηάιεθηνλ), the other have no speech organs that can accommodate air, these organs are lung
(ἀγξάκκαηα). Aristotle does not make a definition for each and throat which deal with breath. All the living creatures
of them (ςόθνο, θσλὴ, δηάιεθηνο), but through the without lung and throat cannot produce “voice”, but they
comparison of speech (δηάιεθηνο)and voice (θσλὴ), can still make “sound” using other body parts. As for
sound (ςόθνο). human beings, such “sound” is a kind of “noise”. For
example, the insect can produce “sound” by the internal
pneuma.
Thus insects produce neither voice (θσλεῖ) nor speech
1.1. Comparison of sound(ψόφος) and voice(φωνὴ)
(δηαιέγεηαη), though they produce a sound (ςνθεῖ) by
their internal pneuma (not by externally emitted pneuma,
Voice (θσλὴ) is the sound (ςόθνο) produced by a creature for none of them breathe), but some of them buzz, e.g.,
possessing a soul (ἐκςύρνπ); for inanimate things the bee and other winged insects, and some “sing” as the
(ἀςύρσλ) never have a voice(νὐζὲλ θσλεῖ); they can only saying is, e.g., the cicada. All these insects produce the
metaphorically be said to give a voice(θσλεῖλ), e.g., a flute sound (ςνθεῖ) by means of the membrance which is under
or a lyre, and all the other inanimate things which have a the hypozoma (this of course refers to those whose
musical compass, and tune, and modulation. The bodies are divided at this point), e.g., a certain kind of
metaphor is due to the fact that the voice (θσλὴ) also has cicada, which makes the sound by friction of the pneuma;
these, but many animals-e.g., those which are bloodless, and so do flies and bees and all the others, as by their
and of animals which have blood, fish-have no voice (νὐθ flying they produce the lifting and contracting movement:
ἔρνπζη θσλήλ). And this is quite reasonable, since sound the noise (ςόθνο) is actually the friction of the internal
is a kind of movement of the air. The fish, such as those pneuma. The noise (ςόθνλ) made by grasshoppers is
in the Achelous, which are said to have a voice (ιεγόκελνη produced by rubbing with their “paddles”.(Historia
θσλεῖλ), only make a sound (ςνθνῦζη) with their gills, or Animalium 535b3-13)(Aristotle, translated by A.L.
with some other such part. Voice (θσλὴ), then, is a sound PecK,1965).
(ςόθνο) made by a living animal (δῴνπ), and that not with All the Cephalopods and Crustacea cannot make any
any part of it indiscriminately. But, since sound only “voice” or any “sound”. Fish cannot produce “voice”
occurs when something strikes something else in a because they have no lung, windpipe, throat, but they can
certain medium, and this medium is the air, it is natural emit “sound”. In Historia Animalium, Aristotle analyzes the
that only those things should have voice (θσλνίε) which different “sounds” made by different kinds of fish, and
admit the air.(On the Soul 420b6-17)(Aristotle, translated summarizes the reasons for these “sounds”. “In all these
by W.S. Hett,1957) what appears to be the voice (ηὴλ δνθνῦζαλ θσλὴλ) is
The organ of respiration is the throat, and the part which caused in some of them by rubbing their gills(which
this is designed to serve is the lung; it is because of this spiny), in others by internal parts round their stomach, for
part that the land animals have more heat than the rest. every one of them has pneuma inside it, and by rubbing
But the region about the heart also has a primary need of and causing movement with this they produce their
respiration. Hence it is necessary that in respiration the sounds (πνηεῖ ηνὺο ςόθνπο)” (Aristotle, translated by A.L.
air should enter the body. Hence voice (θσλή) consists in PecK,1965). Aristotle also emphasizes, in the case
the impact of the inspired air upon what is called the
windpipe under the agency of the soul (ςπρῆο) in those
parts. For, as we have said, not every sound (ςόθνο)
made by a living creature (δῴνπ) is a voice (θσλή)(for
once can make a sound (ςνθεῖλ) even with the tongue, or
as in coughing),but that which even causes the impact,
must have a soul (ἔκςπρόλ), and use some imagination
 197

of these animals, the word “voice” is not appropriate, Hence, those animals which have no tongue, or a tongue
using the word “sound” is more exact. which cannot move freely on its own, cannot produce
But to say that these creatures emit a voice (θσλεῖλ) is speech (δηαιέγεηαη); though of course they may be able
incorrect; it should be called a sound (ςόθνλ). Thus the to produce sounds (ςνθεῖλ) by others parts of the body.
scallop, when it passes along supporting itself on the (Historia Animalium 535a28-535b3) (Aristotle, translated
water (this is what they describe as “flying”), makes a by A.L. PecK, 1965)
whizzing; so does the sea-swallow: this fish flies quite In Historia Animalium 535a28-535b3, Aristotle further
clear of the water, without touching it, having long broad analyzes the difference between “speech” (δηάιεθηνο)
fins. So, just as the sound (ςόθνο) made by the wings of and “voice” (θσλὴ), “sound” (ςόθνο). “Speech” is also a
birds when in flight is not voice (θσλή), neither is the kind of “voice”, in order to emit “speech”, the speaker first
sound which any of these creatures makes (νὕησο νὐδὲ must match the three conditions needed by producing
η῵λ ηνηνύησλ νὐδελόο). (Historia Animalium 535b25-32) “voice”. But not all “voice” is “speech”, the production of
(Aristotle, translated by A.L. PecK, 1965). which needs some more conditions. The animals which
Animals with vocal organs such as lung and throat can have a tongue, and the tongue can move freely on its
produce “voice”. For example, dolphins can produce own, can use the tongue to articulate “voice”. The result is
“voice” by using their lung and windpipe when they are some vowel sounds and consonantal sounds, out of
out of the water and exposed to the air. But dolphins have which the “speech” is combined. Oviparous quadruped
no lips, their tongue cannot move freely, so they cannot can produce “voice” but have no the ability to use
“utter any articulated voice” (ἄξζξνλ ηη ηῆο θσλῆο “speech”. Aristotle thinks that only human beings are
πνηεῖλ). Oviparous quadruped with tongue and lung can good at “speech”. “This power is peculiar to man. The
produce “voice”, although the “voice” is very weak. possession of this power implies the possession of a
Different from ordinary oviparous quadruped, frogs has a voice (θσλὴλ), but the converse is not true. All persons
tongue of peculiar formation, “the front part is firmly who are deaf from birth are dumb as well: though they
attached as in fishes(whereas in other animals it can can utter a sort of voice (θσλὴλ κὲλ νὖλ ἀθηᾶζη), they
move freely), but the part towards the pharynx can move cannot talk (δηάιεθηνλ δ‟ νὐδεκίαλ). Children, just as they
freely, and has a fold in it”(Aristotle, translated by A.L. have not proper control over their limbs generally, so
PecK,1965). With the special tongue, frogs can “produce cannot at first control their tongue, which is imperfect and
their peculiar cry” (ᾧ ηὴλ ἰδίαλ ἀθίεζη θσλήλ). The male attains complete freedom of motion later on; until then
frogs make such croaking in the water in order to call to they mumble and lisp for the most part”(Aristotle,
the females at breeding time. translated by A.L. PecK,1965).
Again, not all the “sound” produced by the living As said above, Aristotle classifies the animals having a
creatures with soul, using their vocal organs such as lung voice into two kinds, some use the speech (δηάιεθηνλ),
and throat, is “voice”. “Voice” is accompanied by some and the others have no speech (ἀγξάκκαηα). So speech
“imagination” (θαληαζίαο), and is a sound meaning is a kind of articulated voice which is different from the
something. Aristotle points out that the cough is just a “ἀγξάκκαηα” voice. In Problems, Aristotelian authors also
“sound”, because it is just an air mass activity in the analyze the difference between articulated speech and
organ, which has not any meaning. “ἀγξάκκαηα” voice. The authors point out that, compared
In conclusion, “sound” must match three conditions to with other animals, only human beings have different
become “voice”, first, speaker must be a living creature forms of language (πνιιαη δηαιεθηνη). It is because man
with soul. Secondly, speaker must use his special vocal can utter a number of letters (γξάκκαηα), but other
organs such as lung and throat. Thirdly, “sound” such animals utter none or only a few consonants (ἀθώλσλ).
made must means something. “These consonants combined with vowels (θσλεέλησλ)
make articulate speech (δηάιεθηνλ). Now speech (ιόγνο)
consists of conveying a meaning (ζεκαίλεηλ) not by the
1.2. Comparison of voice (φωνὴ) and speech voice (θσλῇ), but by certain affections (πάζεζηλ) of it, and
(διάλεκτος) not only shows pain and pleasure. Now the letters
(γξάκκαηα) are affections (πάζε) of the voice (θσλῆο).
Children and beasts show their meaning (δεινῦζηλ) in the
Voice (θσλὴ) differs from sound (ςόθνο), and speech
same way, for children cannot yet pronounce the letters
(δηάιεθηνο) from both. Now the only part of the body with
(γξάκκαηα)” (Aristotle, translated by W. S. Hett, 1936).
which any animal can utter a voice (θσλεῖ) is the pharynx;
The speech of human beings has the greatest number of
hence those that have no lung have no voice (νὐδὲ
differences and forms, and the other animals pronounce
θζέγγεηαη) either. Speech (δηάιεθηνο) is the articulation
no letters or very few (ἢ νὐζὲλ γξάκκα ἢ ὀιίγα), so
(δηάξζξσζηο) of voice (θσλῆο) by means of the tongue
compared with other animals which make a voice, the
(γισηηε). Now vowel sounds (θσλήεληα) are produced by
speech of human beings develops much later. This is
the voice (θσλὴ) and the larynx; consonantal sounds
because “what is most variable and has the greatest
(ἄθσλα) by the tongue and the lips; and of this speech
number of different forms must develop in the longest
consist (εμ σλ ε δηάιεθηνο εζηηλ).
time” (Aristotle, translated by W. S. Hett, 1936).
Qiu The noun “γξάκκα” origins from the verb “γξάθσ”
198 Inter. J. Eng. Lit. Cult.

(write), its original meaning is “that which is drawn”, the that have a thin fine tongue. In some species the male
plural form “γξάκκαηα” often means “lines of a drawing”, and the female have the same note, in others, different
“figures in a picture”. Based on the original meaning, ones. The smaller birds are more vocal and chatter more
“γξάκκα” leads three meanings, “character”, “letter”; “set than the larger ones, and every kind of bird is noisiest of
of written characters”, “piece of writing”; “letter”, “learning”. all at the paring season. Some utter a cry while fighting,
The original use of “γξάκκαηα” implies the meaning of e.g., the quail, others when challenging before a fight,
division, it signifies not the whole picture, but the lines and <e.g., partridges>, or when they have won their fight, e.g.,
figures in the picture. “The term gramma was used to the domestic cock. Some male birds have the same song
refer to minimal units of speech-sound. Hence the term as the female. Thus both the cock and the hen
agrammatos and eggrammatos when applied to nightingales sing, except that the hen ceases when sitting
vocalization should be taken to mean „not resolvable into on the eggs and rearing her young. In some instances
discrete units of speech-sound‟ and only the cock sings, e.g., the domestic fowl and quails,
„resolvable into discrete unit of speech-sound‟ and the hen does not sing at all. (Historia
respectively”(John Corcoran,1974). So it follows that the Animalium536a21-31) (Aristotle, translated by A.L. PecK,
feature of articulated speech that Aristotle discusses in 1965)
these passages is that the sound of articulated speech From the examples above we can see that, birds can
can be resolvable into different letters (γξάκκαηα) which use the articulated voice to communicate with each other,
are further formed through the combination of vowels and such as attracting mates, warning risks, expressing
consonants. Then in Aristotle‟s view, the basic difference victory. Aristotle points out in Parts of Animals660a35-b2
between “voice” and “speech” is the process of that, “All birds use their tongues as a means of
articulation which is performed by the biological organ communication with other birds, and some to a very
tongue. considerable extent, so much so that it is probable that in
some cases information is actually conveyed from one
bird to another. I have spoken of these in the researches
2. Comparison of human language (λόγος) and upon Animals”(Aristotle, translated by A.L. PecK,1937).
animal speech (διάλεκτος) Birds not only use speech as a means of social
communication, but also to convey information to each
Based on the discussions above, Aristotle altogether other, so their speech is of course meaningful.
makes four requirements for “speech”: it must be made by Then we can check the articulated voice of birds
a living creature with soul; it must be vocalized through according to the four requirements which Aristotle makes
some special vocal organs such as lung and throat; it for speech. Birds are living creatures with soul; the voice
must be articulated by the tongue and resolvable into of birds is vocalized through organs such as lung and
different letters; it must be a meaningful sound. Then we throat; birds have tongues and can use their tongues to
must check whether only human beings have such articulate the voice; the articulated voice of birds is
speech described by Aristotle. If other animal species can meaningful. So, speech does not belong to human beings
also use speech, what is the difference between human uniquely, other animal species also have the ability of
speech and animal speech? speech, the difference is just the degree of the ability to
use speech. Human beings are especially good at
“speech” because of their special vocalization organs.
2.1. The continuity of biological communication In Parts of Animal Aristotle analyzes the difference of
the vocal organs between human beings and animal
system
species. Except human beings, all animals use the lips to
preserve and protect the teeth. The lips of human beings
Speech is a kind of articulated voice and the process of are soft, fleshy, and can be separated. As for human
articulated is performed by the tongue. If an animal can beings, the lips is to protect the teeth, but besides this, the
emit voice, and at the same time it has a tongue, then it is lips has another important purpose, “they subserve a
possible for this animal to use its tongue to articulate the good purpose, inasmuch as they are among the parts that
voice, that is to say, this animal may has the ability of make speech (ιόγῳ) possible” (Aristotle, translated by
speech. This is just the ability Aristotle finds in birds, A.L. PecK, 1937).
especially the birds with broad tongue. In Historia This double function of human lips, to facilitate speech
Animalium504a35-37, Aristotle points out that, “all birds (ιόγνπ) as well as to protect the teeth, may be compared
have a tongue, but it is not the same in all: some have a with that of other animal tongue, which is unlike that of
long tongue, some a broad one. More than any other any other animal, and is used by nature for two functions
animals, and second only to man, certain kinds of bird can (a device of hers which we have often noted),(a) to
utter articulate sounds: this faculty occurs chiefly in the perceive the various tastes, and (b) to be the means of
broad-tongued birds” (Aristotle, translated by A.L. speech. Now vocal speech (ιόγνο) consists of
PecK, 1965). Afterwards in Historia Animalium536a21-31, combination of the various letters or sounds (δηὰ ηῆο
he analyzes the “speech” produced by some birds using θσλῆο ἐθ η῵λ γξακκάησλ ζύγθεηηαη), some of which are
the tongue to articulate the voice. produced by an impact of the tongue, others by closing
Birds utter a voice (θσλήλ), and those which have a the lips; and if the lips were not supple, or if the tongue
broad tongue can articulate(δηάιεθηνλ) best; so too those
 199

were other than it is, the greater part of these could not works about animals. He thinks that “man alone of the
possibly be pronounced. For further particulars about the animals possesses speech (ιόγνλ)” (Aristotle, translated
various differences between these sounds you must by H. Rackham,1932).
consult the authorities on Metre. (Parts of And why man is a political animal in a greater measure
Animals659b35-660a8)(Aristotle, translated by A.L. PecK, than any bee or any gregarious animal is clear. For
1937) nature, as we declare, does nothing without purpose; and
The tongue of most oviparous and blooded landanimals man alone of the animals possesses speech ((ιόγνλ). The
is fastened and hard, which is useful for taste, but not mere voice (θσλὴ), it is true, can indicate (ἐζηὶ ζεκεῖνλ)
suitable for speech. The tongue of viviparous quadrupeds pain and pleasure, and therefore is possessed by the
is hard, thick, not sufficiently loose, so they have a limited other animals as well(for their nature has been developed
vocal articulation. Some birds have a broad tongue, they so far as to have sensations of what is painful and
have much more vocal articulation. Compared with other pleasant and to signify (ζεκαίλεηλ) those sensations to
animals, the tongue of human beings is “the freest, the one another), but speech (ιόγνο) is designed to indicate
softest, and the broadest of all”(Aristotle, translated by (δεινῦλ ἐζηη) the advantageous and the harmful, and
A.L. PecK,1937), this is because the tongue, like the lips, therefore also the right and the wrong; for it is the special
has two functions, namely taste and language. property of man in distinction from the other animals that
On the one hand, it has to perceive all the various he alone has perception of good and bad and right and
tastes. Now man has the most delicate senses of all the wrong and the other moral qualities, and it is partnership
animals, and as taste is a sort of touch, the tongue must in these things that makes a household and a city-state.
be as responsive as possible to every contact, and that is (Politics1253a7-20) (Aristotle, translated by H.
why it is soft. It has, also, to articulate the various sounds Rackham,1932)
and to produce speech (πξὸο ηὴλ η῵λ γξακκάησλ It needs to be pointed out that the language which
δηάξζξσζηλ θαὶ πξὸο ηὸλ ιόγνλ), and for this a tongue Aristotle regards as unique to human beings is not
which is soft and broad is admirably suited, because it “δηάιεθηνο”, but “ιόγνο”. Animals can emit voice to
can roll back and dart forward in all directions; and herein express pain and pleasure, but only human beings can
too its freedom and looseness assists it. This is shown by use “language” (ιόγνο) to indicate the advantageous and
the case of those whose tongues are slightly tied: their the harmful, the right and the wrong. Compared with other
speech is indistinct and lisping, which is due to the fact animals, the special property of human beings is the
that they cannot produce all the sounds (γξακκάησλ). cognition of good and bad, of right and wrong, and of the
(Parts of Animals660a20-28)(Aristotle, translated by A.L. other moral qualities. Household and city-state are formed
PecK, 1937) based on such moral qualities. Aristotle thinks that it is
Because human beings use their lips and tongue in the because of the “language” which indicates moral qualities,
process of vocalization, and the tongue of human beings human beings can form a higher political organization. So
is highly free and flexible, so they can produce many in Aristotle‟s view, what distinguishes human language
articulated sounds which other animals cannot make. from animal speech thoroughly is not the vocalization
These articulated sounds provide rich material for human organs, but their semantic scope, which is based on the
speech, so Aristotle thinks that human beings are different faculties of the soul.
especially good at speech. But this does not mean that In Aristotle‟s philosophy, “soul” (ςπρή) is an important
speech is unique to human beings, because some animal term, it means “the actuality of the kind of body”(Aristotle,
species can also utter the articulated speech in a limited translated by W.S. Hett,1957), “the soul must be
degree. substance in the sense of being the form of a natural
body”(Aristotle, translated by W.S. Hett,1957). The
difference between the objects with soul and the objects
2.2. The distinguishing feature of human language without soul is living. “But the word living is used in many
senses, and we say that a thing lives if any one of the
As discussed above, Aristotle regards the basic following is pres ent in it-mind, sensation, movement or
rest in space, besides the movement implied in nutrition
difference between “voice” and “speech” as the process of
and decay or growth”(Aristotle, translated by W.S.
articulation which is performed by the tongue. He
Hett,1957). So the faculties of soul include nutrition,
Qiu
sensation, mind and movement or rest in space. Some
animals‟ soul has all the faculties above, but some
animals‟ soul has only one or several faculties above.
draws such a difference from the aspect of vocalization Now of the faculties of the soul which we have
organs. Judged from the biological base, both human mentioned, some living things, as we have said, have all,
beings and animal species have the ability of articulated others only some, and others again only one. Those
speech, human speech is not thoroughly distinguished which we have mentioned are the faculties for
from animal speech, but performs as a more complex nourishment, for appetite, for sensation, for movement in
degree among the whole biological communication space, and for thought. Plants have the nutritive faculty
continuum. But in Politics, Aristotle puts forwards a only, but other living things have the faculty for sensation
different and even contradictory view with that in the too. But if for sensation then also for appetite; for appetite
200 Inter. J. Eng. Lit. Cult.

consists of desire, inclination, and wish, and all animals same difficulty, but all these difficulties happen less to
have at least one of the senses, that of touch…in addition them (i.e. than to children). (Problems 902b23-
to these senses some also possess the power of 29)(Aristotle, translated by W. S. Hett,1936)
movement in space, and others again-man, and any other It can be inferred from the discussions above that, not
being similar or superior to him-have the power of thinking every voice is language, only the articulated voice formed
and intelligence.(On the Soul414a29- through the regulation of human beings can become
414b19)(Aristotle, translated by W.S. Hett,1957) components of language. The perfect human language
It is clear that perception and mind are different ability needs human beings to control the vocalization
faculties, all animals have the faculty of perception, only a fully, make some vowels and consonants, which then will
few have the faculty of mind. “Nor again in speculative combine into many words even whole sentences. The
thinking, which involves being right or wrong-„being right‟ process needs the participation of human mind and
corresponding to intelligence and knowledge and true intellect.
opinion, and „being wrong‟ to their contraries-the same
thing as perceiving; for the perception of proper objects is
always true, and is a characteristic of all living creatures, 3. Human language is social and conventional
but it is possible to think falsely, and thought belongs to
no animal which has not reasoning power”(Aristotle, As mentioned in the introduction, Chomsky regards
translated by W.S. Hett,1957). One important feature of human language as a mental faculty and emphasizes the
human beings is that the soul of human beings has the role of human brain in the formation of human language.
faculty of thinking. The feeling of pain and pleasure needs So it is the common ground for Aristotle and Chomsky to
sensation faculty belonging to ordinary animals. The pay attention to the contribution made by human mind,
distinguishing between right and wrong, between good but the difference is that, Chomsky stresses the syntax of
and bad, needs thinking faculty belonging only to human human language decided by human mind, Aristotle
beings and other animals similar or superior to human emphasizes the .
beings. Although some animals can also utter articulated In Chomsky‟s view, human language is innate and
speech (δηάιεθηνο), such speech is just used to indicate universal, the task of linguists is to discover the Universal
painful and pleasant thing, only human beings can utter Grammar of human language, because human mind is an
articulated speech (ιόγνο) to make clear moral qualities. It innate mental faculty which is the same all over the world.
can be seen that animal speech and human language Again different with Chomsky‟s these view, Aristotle
both need the participation of soul, but they origin from thinks that human language is social and diverse. In
the different faculties of soul. Animal speech origins from Aristotle‟s view, the cognition of good and bad, of right
the sensation faculty, which needs the sense organs, and wrong, and of the other moral qualities is the special
human language involves not only the sensation faculty, feature of human mind, but all these values are not
but also a higher faculty of soul, namely thinking faculty, innate, but social. Human beings have to learn these
which needs the mind. Human language is not only a kind values in the society and also learn to use language to
of articulated speech, but also a rational speech because express these values. What is innate and universal for
of the intellect of human beings. Aristotle is not human language, but “voice”. Aristotle
The related discussions in Problems also prove the view thinks that the animals within the same genus can emit
that human language needs the participation of mind and the same “voice”, but the articulated “speech” is not only
intellect. The authors of Problems point out that among all different along with genus, even within the same genus,
the living creatures, human is the only one which 4 the
stammers. This is because human alone has a share of articulated “speech” changes according to locality .
language (ιόγνπ), but the other animals only have voice
(θσλῆο). The stammerers “produce voice (νἱ δὲ 4
ἰζρλόθσλνη θσλνῦζη κέλ) but cannot connect their Aristotle, translated by A.L. PecK (1965). Historia
words(ιόγνλ δὲ νὐ δύλαληαη ζπλείξεηλ)” (Aristotle, That is to say, “voice” is a kind of innate abilities, the
translated by W. S. Hett,1936). Compared with adults, animals within the same genus can only emit the same
children are more inclined to stammer, just as they are “voice” because of the innate conditions. However, the
difficult to control their hands and feet, they also cannot formation of “speech” is not only related to innate
control their tongue. The very small children are lack of conditions, what‟s more important, different environments
control, they cannot speak at all, but only make sounds will often facilitate different “speech”. So Aristotle points
like beasts. Lisping and defective speakers are due to the out that “Men have the same voice (θσλὴλ) the world
same reason, namely lack of control. over, but different varieties of speech (δηάιεθηνλ)”
Lisping is an inability to control a certain letter (Aristotle, translated by A.L. PecK,1965).
(γξάκκαηόο), not any letter, but defective speech consists Another evidence provided by Aristotle is that the
of omitting some letter (γξάκκα) or syllable (ζπιιαβήλ), meaning of human language is established by human
while stammering is an inability to add quickly one syllable convention. In On Interpretation, Aristotle emphasizes
(ζπιιαβὴλ) to another. But all these disabilities are due to that, “a noun is a sound (θσλὴ) having meaning
a failure of power; for the tongue will not serve the (ζεκαληηθὴ) established by convention (θαηὰ ζπλζήθελ)”
intention (ηδηαλνίᾳ). The drunken and old men suffer the (Aristotle, translated by Harold P. Cooke,1938),“We have
already said that a noun signifies this or that by
 201

convention (θαηὰ ζπλζήθελ). No sound is by nature a Both Aristotle and Chomsky emphasize the contribution
noun: it becomes one, becoming a symbol made by human mind to human language, but Chomsky
(ζύκβνινλ)”(Aristotle, translated by Harold P. Cooke,1938). stresses the syntax of human language decided by
That is to say, the meaning of human language is not human mind, Aristotle stresses the semantic scope of
from the voice, but established by convention among human language endowed by human mind. Again
human beings, so Aristotle regards human language as a different with Chomsky‟s view that human language is
kind of man-made arbitrary symbol. Voice is just the innate and universal, Aristotle thinks that human language
material used by this symbol system, for language, it is a is social and diverse. Human language expresses not
secondary thing, not the language itself. Any voice only natural feelings but also moral qualities which are not
emitted by speech organs must further combine with innate, but social. What is innate and universal for
some experience ingredients, which decide the meaning Aristotle is not human language, but “voice”. The
of the voice, otherwise it cannot become language. The formation of “speech” is not only related to innate
relation between voice and experience ingredients is not conditions, different environments will often facilitate
natural, but arbitrary, decided by human convention. different “speech”. What‟s more, Aristotle thinks that the
Aristotle thinks that the inarticulate sounds made by meaning of human language is established by human
animals also mean something, but they are not language, convention. He regards human language as a kind of
because the meaning comes from the voice itself, not the man-made arbitrary symbol, the meaning of this symbol is
convention. not from the voice itself, but established by convention
among human beings.

CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
Make a conclusion now. According to Aristotle‟s
definition, “speech” is a kind of articulated “voice”, the Aristotle, translated by A.L. PecK (1965). Historia
basic difference between “voice” and “speech” is the Animalium(volumeI), William Heinemann Ltd, London;
process of articulation which is performed by the tongue. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Aristotle draws such a difference from the aspect of Aristotle, translated by A.L. PecK (1965). Historia
vocalization organs. Judged from the biological base, Animalium(volumeII), William Heinemann Ltd, London;
speech does not belong to human beings uniquely, some Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
other animal species also have the ability of speech, and Aristotle, translated by A.L. PecK (1937). Parts of
the difference is just the degree of the ability to use Animals, William Heinemann Ltd, London; Harvard
speech. Human beings are especially good at speech University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
because of their special vocalization organs. So human Aristotle, translated by A.L. PecK (1942). Generation of
speech is not thoroughly distinguished from animal Animals, William Heinemann Ltd, London; Harvard
speech, but performs as a more complex degree among University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
the whole biological communication continuum. But once Aristotle, translated by Harold P. Cooke (1938), On
leaving the biological base and considering the meaning Interpretation, William Heinemann Ltd, London; Harvard
level, Aristotle thinks that only human beings has the University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
ability to use “language”(ιόγνο) to indicate the Aristotle, translated by H. Rackham (1932). Politics,
William Heinemann Ltd, London; Harvard University
Animalium(volumeII), William Heinemann Ltd, London; Harvard Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Aristotle, translated by W. Hamilton Fyfe (1927). The
Qiu Poetics, William Heinemann Ltd, London; Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Aristotle, translated by W.S. Hett (1957). On the Soul,
William Heinemann Ltd, London; Harvard University
advantageous and the harmful, the right and the wrong, Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
while other animals can only emit voice to indicate painful Aristotle, translated by W. S. Hett (1936). Problems(I),
and pleasant things. It is just because of the “language” William Heinemann Ltd, London; Harvard University
which indicates moral qualities, human beings can form a Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
higher political organization. So in Aristotle‟s view, the David Charles (2000). Aristotle on meaning and essence,
basic difference between human language and animal Clarendon Press; Oxford University Press, Oxford; New
speech is the semantic scope, which is based on the York.
different faculties of the soul. Animal speech origins from Deborah K.W. Modrak (2001). Aristotle's theory of
the sensation faculty, which needs the sense organs, language and meaning, Cambridge University Press,
human language involves not only the sensation faculty, Cambridge;New York.
but also a higher faculty of soul, namely thinking faculty, Hans Arens (1984). Aristotle's theory of language and its
which needs the mind and intellect. The perfect human tradition : texts from 500 to 1750, Benjamins,
language ability needs human beings to use their mind Amsterdam.
and intellect to control the vocalization fully.
202 Inter. J. Eng. Lit. Cult.

John Corcoran (1974). Ancient Logic and Its Modern

Interpretations, D.Reidel Publishing
Company, Dordrecht(Holland).
Julie K. Ward (2008). Aristotle on homonymy : Dialectic
and science, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
L.M. De Rijk (2002), Aristotle: semantics and ontology.
Volume II, The metaphysics. semantics in Aristotle's
strategy of argument, Brill, Boston.
Marguerite Deslauriers (2007). Aristotle on definition, Brill,
Boston.
Miriam Therese Larkin(1971). Language in the philosophy
of Aristotle, Mouton, Hague.
Robert Wardy (2000), Aristotle in China : language,
categories, and translation, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
Scott G. Schreiber (2003). Aristotle on false reasoning :
language and the world in the sophistical refutations,
State University of New York Press, Albany.