Milli mála - 01.01.2012, Blaðsíða 201

201
PÉTUR KNÚTSSON
express the whole breadth of ruach and pneuma and spiritus in one
term without assuming a ‘literal’ or core concept, probably the
most material one, ‘wind’ – and relegating the other meanings to
some sort of figurative language. I am unable to break out of these
terminological straits, for here again language has the upper hand.
What I can do at this point, however, is to affirm that I would like
to be able to use the term ‘pneumatology’ to refer to the pneumatic
(in the modern sense) processes of speech without denying the immate-
rial processes, and that I look forward to a time when this might
become more generally possible. This essay is intended as a nudge
in that direction.
I am in very good company. Heidegger says: “Speech understood
in the fullness of its meaning transcends – and does so always – the
physical-sensible side of phonetics. Language, as sense that is
sounded and written, is in itself suprasensuous, something that
constantly transcends the merely sensible” (Heidegger 1982: 35).
Heidegger’s formulation points towards the idea that language
transcends itself, that the material phenomena of language, its
speaking and writing, is transcendent as language. This can only be
understood as granting language a good deal of autonomy. As
Humboldt had said, in his careful and slightly confused way,
“Language … possesses an autonomy that visibly presents itself to
us, though inexplicable in nature, and, as seen from this aspect, is
no production of activity, but an involuntary emanation of the
spirit, no work of nations, but a gift fallen to them by their inner
destiny” (Humboldt 24). Humboldt’s thought is clouded here by
his perceptions of nationality and a hierarchy of their languages and
cultures, and Heidegger, too, is not altogether free from such
thoughts; but that aside, I wish to make their thoughts my own.
This transcendent autonomy has often been demonstrated: any-
one who has written on the remainder of language has provided
ample evidence – Lecercle (1990) gives a very fine overview of the
matter. In what follows I shall fall to the temptation of illustrating
again an already well-illustrated point.
Milli_mála_4A_tbl_lagf_13.03.2013.indd 201 6/24/13 1:43 PM