As you know, this world is made up of words. It may seem that there is an object in front of it, but in the end, the object is just an object named for convenience. For convenience, we call red round fruits "apples".
I think that people sort out other people, but it is said that among the nearly 7 billion people, no 1,000 people can be properly identified in their lives. Others are just human beings.
It is impossible to distinguish, that is, it is nothing more than an object named by a person. Then apples and humans are the same.
It is also the words that give meaning to others. "I don't get angry", "I can be attentive", and "Thoughtful" That is the common understanding of everyone, and I simply say that such a person is "friendly" for convenience.
Strictly speaking, the definition of kindness is as different as the number of people.
Then, if you repeat many words, even one thing will be individualized. Taking the apple from earlier as an example,
"Red", "Round", "Fruit", "Sweet", "Becomes a tree" You can easily recognize this as an apple.
However, if there was a fruit called Papillocco, which many people in Papua New Guinea liked, for some reason, if you hadn't seen or heard it because it was a TV or supermarket, Japanese people Can't guess well. Even if you are a psychic person, you can't explain it accurately, including the taste, even if you understand the words.
However, if, in the near future, the litchi, which Japanese people did not know before the war, and Kiwi, etc. were suddenly said to be good for the body and became a boom and were widely covered by the media, they would be recognized in no time. Would be
However, unless I try it, I don't know what it tastes like or smells. It means that the fruit of papirocco becomes common recognition as one proper noun only after it is actually eaten.
What is more scary than anything else is that even if the world is made up of words, 100% of them are not commonly recognized, as in the example of kindness. There is a misunderstanding.
If, in some country, Papillocco does not mean the name of the fruit, it may happen that it is the name of a dictator in history and is imprisoned just by saying it.
When I think so, words are terrifying. The fewer adjectives, the more likely it is to misunderstand.
Then, it may seem that if you describe each item in detail, you can approach the recognition of its existence infinitely.
French former author Balzac, too, seemed to firmly believe in it, and he could not help describing the character's character in such a detailed detail.
Therefore, even if I read the Japanese translation, I can certainly grasp the appearance of the person, but it is too detailed and messy, and it is very difficult to read as sentences. And, as a whole, it becomes vague.
In this way, the more accurately you try to convey it to people, the more detailed the description will be, but it will be difficult to understand as it is inversely proportional. It's really difficult to describe something.
It's the same with speaking. Another difficulty with writing is that there is a person in front of you.
You have to change the language of speaking depending on whether you are a child, an adult, a man, a woman, a small number, or a large number.
I think it's good at saying people who can do it in the world.
With that in mind, talking is another difficulty than writing.
I think that talking is easier because, in a sense, the other person supplements the missing parts with the way they talk and their facial expressions. Of course, the written words have no facial expressions unless they are handwritten.
If you write it so that you understand it, you will fall into the dilemma represented by Balzac's sentence.
I think a good document is one that is easy to read, and the expression of the writer naturally comes to mind. In other words, it looks like a letter. With that, it is possible to infer the intention to say with a simple description.
I remember Salinger, who once said that he liked the kind of dear letters that reached him.
However, it is a very difficult task to assemble it as a novel. Maybe it's impossible for me to compete. If so, I have no choice but to write like a letter.
It was Nakamura who thought that it would be nice to be able to write a sentence with feelings.