Language works when we think the same, connecting the words to the same meanings and such. But that never actually happens 100%. It might be closer to 80%. (or if it’s a strange subject, 15%)
So this “conversation” that we’re having here is, to some degree, not actually happening.
But we pretend that it is.
So how much are we pretending? How much of the conversation is hallucinatory conversation?
Your question is related to a very difficult interdisciplinary research problem: “how does ‘meaning’ occur in human conversations?” You can approach it from e.g. philosophical, psychological, linguistic, or sociological disciplines, and fields as diverse as literary critical theory, neuroscience, and artificial intelligence also have a lot to say about it.
So to answer your question: nobody knows for sure, but if you’re interested in academic pursuits you’re headed in a great direction.
Where did you get 80% from - is that based on something more than anecdotal?
hallucinations
Probably about 7. Give or take 10lbs.
Depends on how you define hallucination
Misremembering details, false assumptions about what is said, assuming intentionality incorrectly, projection of emotions onto others, bias, etc mean that the same words are said but we walk away with potentially wildly different interpretations of the experience
“Getting on the same page” is a challenge
And that in turn leads to diversion from the topic (and meaning).
A friend of mine, back when we got stoned a lot, had an idea that language, or words, are magic. Stringing together incantations to share thoughts is a neat way of thinking about it. Especially because we’re just jello trapped in a mecha made of bone and meat. It’s surprising there’s not more hallucinations to be honest.
Glamour, grammar, and grimoire are all cognate.
TL;DR: Natural language is ambiguous. How much of it do we misunderstand?
There are many tools to reduce misunderstanding: feedback, rephrasing, definitions, etc., but it would be really cool if a standardized logical language (like loglan/lojban but actually well done lol) became the worldwide second language and lingua franca. That would help a lot in our increasingly vocal interactions with computers.
Usually you dont need 100% of the information to get across and also sgouldnt expect it. When you want to make a point, you dont need every tiny nuance stored in your mind for that. The 80% is what you actually want understood, the last 20% are negligible.
But yes, the concept is interesting and in some cases a conversation is interpreted wildly differently between people, especially when you dont know the other person very well (e.g. someone might be intimidated by a stranger talking to them interpreting what they say in a negative way while the other person is trying to be friendly and wouldnt know how it is percieved)
