It’s interesting, isn’t it? We humans like to classify things and give them clean, well defined labels. And we often have a good reason to, since there is obviously something going on. It’s not like these labels are entirely arbitrary. But pinning down the nature of the label is often exceedingly difficult. I suppose that’s the difference between ideals and reality. I mean, we all know the difference between a bowl and a vase, but where does one start and where does one end?

This is a common theme in any discipline that studies complex systems. Especially linguistics. It’s a bit of a tragedy of language science as many linguists confidently operate in notions that have very weak theoretical foundation. There is a lot of unspoken assumption, driven by tradition, in the linguistic theory, and not enough people question the tradition IMO. I mean, starting with such basic things like “meaning” or “word”.