Arbitrary Words

While reading the excerpt from An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, it was clear that John Locke believes there are flaws within the system of language and communication; however, I think his opinion on words is incredibly interesting. Through his argument, it seems that it can be concluded that words are completely arbitrary, and therefore nothing more than a tool to “fill one another’s heads with noises and sounds” (Locke 818). This statement caught my attention because it forced me to think more about words and the role that they play in language. Without meaning attached to them, words truly are just sounds, that people have been socialized throughout history to understand. Specifically, this can be seen when considering other languages. For example, the word love in English is amor in Spanish and liebe in German. Although there is a simple dictionary definition available for the word, it is granted numerous titles and therefore interpreted differently by people across the world. So, the reader is then forced to think of how this affects communication; of course language barriers are always a challenge, but do meanings translate exactly? Locke notes that words “must be learned and retained” (818). Therefore, it is possible that the meanings of words can change throughout time and across cultures if they taught to have different meanings. The argument presented in the essay draws attention to the importance of words, or lack there of. Are words necessary to communication? Is there any alternative? Or way to create a common language amongst all cultures?