To philosophers and logicians, self-contradictions are a primary or quintessential type of nonsense, for the logic that ancient Greek philosophers devised is geared to true-or-false statements of literal meaning. Self-contradictions defeat the purpose of making a statement, however, and end up saying nothing at all because they take themselves back.
Self-contradictions resemble intelligible statements in their grammatical structure, though. Grammatically, “I am naked under my clothes” looks like “I am sweating under my clothes,” yet the self-contradiction negates itself and says nothing, while the other is a meaningful statement. In other words, despite their correct grammar, self-contradictions are not a workable formula for making intelligible statements.
C. I. Lewis (1883–1964), an eminent logician, made an astonishing discovery about self-contradictions. Specifically, Lewis proved that any conclusion whatsoever would follow logically from a self-contradiction. His proof is a transparently valid, deductive argument of only four simple, logical steps. Fully understanding the proof requires some background knowledge of formal logic. Still, the implications of the proof can be simply stated.
Suppose, for instance, that we begin with the self-contradictory premise that “a bachelor has been married to a young spinster for twenty years.” Then, we could prove any conclusion we might desire in a few indisputably valid steps of logic from that self-contradictory premise. We could prove that purple kangaroos live on Mars or that only 58 people live in Washington, DC, or whatever else we might choose.
Therefore, accepting self-contradictions would bring down the entire structure of rational knowledge by destroying the distinction between truth and falsehood. The law of non-contradiction is one of the three fundamental laws of logical thought propounded by Aristotle. Accepting self-contradictions would abolish reason and all the knowledge that has been built by following the principles of logical reasoning.
Another way of putting Lewis’s argument might be to say that a self-contradiction opens up infinite possibilities. Perhaps that is why a bold self-contradiction can make an effective beginning for a book. A self-contradiction attracts readers’ interest and attention. The opening line of Dickens’s A Tale of Two Cities is a prime example: “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.” A self-contradiction like that can prepare readers’ minds to accept anything and everything that might follow.
exercise
Self-Contradictions
That cannibal you men just ate was the last one in this county.
I’m not an actor, but I play one in the movies.
1. Write an original example of a self-contradiction.
2. Introspect and record your feelings of this type of nonsense.
Near English
Near-English nonsense is defined by three characteristics. First, near-English consists of sentences that conform to the grammatical rules of English. Second, the sentences contain, along with ordinary English words, a smattering of made-up, meaningless words. Third, the meaningless words nonetheless sound like English words, not like French words, German words, Italian words, or Spanish words, for meaningless near-English nonsense words are concocted using the phonetic principles of word formation in English.
Consider this declarative sentence: “A shining flamooma quickly turbled and then easily smibbled the five sarbic glusters away.” The sentence structure is sound according to the rules of English grammar. Hence, we can deduce from the sentence structure which parts of speech the concocted nonsense words are. Specifically, “flamooma” and “glusters” are nouns, “turbled” and “smibbled” are verbs, and “sarbic” is an adjective.
Now, we could apply the same rules of formulation that define near-English mutatis mutandis to, for instance, French. That is, we could start with the correct French grammatical format for declarative sentences. Next, we could put in some ordinary meaningful French words in their correct grammatical positions. Then, we could add a smattering of made-up nonsense words that, because of their phonetic structure, sound like French words. Those steps would produce near- French nonsense.
We could also apply those rules of formulation mutatis mutandis to other languages, such as German, Spanish, and Italian. In that way, we would create near-German nonsense, near-Spanish nonsense, and near-Italian nonsense. Therefore, the potential for this type of nonsense exists in practically any language.
Each individual writer’s near-English nonsense words sound and look a little different from those of other individuals; we could say that each individual nonsense writer has a distinctive style of writing near-English. Each writer’s style leaves a unique imprint on that writer’s near-English nonsense words. For example, consider the following near-English nonsense poem by Ogden Nash:
The sharrot scudders nights in the quastron now,
The dorlim slinks undeceded in the grost.
Appetency lights the corb of the guzzard now,
The ancient beveldric is otley lost.21
In my university courses on nonsense, students were able to recognize individual writers’ distinctive styles of writing near-English nonsense. In one exercise, students looked at three lists of near-English nonsense words written, respectively, by Edward Lear, Lewis Carroll, and Ogden Nash, and then they looked at several near-English nonsense words without knowing which author wrote them. Most students were able to easily identify which near-English nonsense word was written by which particular author.
exercise
Distinctive Styles of Writing Near-English Nonsense
A simplified version of the original exercise is reproduced below.
Edward Lear
Lewis Carroll
Ogden Nash
scroobius
brillig
quastron
meloobius
galumphinx
undeceded
ombliferous