Kilka pytań o definiowanie błędu
Some Questions Relating to the Definition of błąd ('mistake')
Languages of publication
This paper aims at determining the semantic representation of the expression błąd ('mistake'). The presented deliberations focus on a few questions that need to be answered in order to fulfil this aim. The first one relates to the isolation of linguistic units that represent the notion of błąd, and additionally, the issue of the characteristic lack of summetry between the functioning (including semantic funtioning) of the expressions błąd and błądzić / zbłądzić (błądzenie / zbłądzenie) ('to make a mistake / to have made a mistake (making a mistake / having made a mistake)'). The second question is associated with, as it appears, a commonly held differentiation into systemic mistakes (spelling mistakes, calculation mistakes, etc.), and mistakes made in life (mistakes relating to the decision resulting in someone's specific behaviour, e.g. undertaking a traineeship, resigning from work, taking out a loan) that - in the light of the hetero conclusions - seem neither necessary, nor needed. The third question refers to the basic issues in determining the meaning of the expressions, that is determining the obligatory features, and at the same time, sufficient ones so that one can say about something: to (jest) błąd ('it is a mistake'). According to the presented interpretation, błąd is the result of someone's controlled, intentional activity, leading to negative consequences. A readiness to evaluate something done by someone as błąd implies the possibility of choosing a particular action by someone who makes a mistake. The fourth question develops the idea of being aware of making a mistake, introduced earlier. Acknowledging the effect of someone's action as błąd is related to the perception of the doer as someone who may know that what he is doing may lead to an adverse result. The final question is in fact a synthesis of the solutions adopted with regards to the previous questions. This synthesis proposes an explication of the expression under discussion.
Publication order reference