Well there seem to be three dictionary definitions:
- perceive the intended meaning of words, a language, or a speaker (e.g. "he didn't understand a word I said")
- interpret or view (something) in a particular way (e.g. "I understand you're at art school")
- be sympathetically or knowledgeably aware of the character or nature of (e.g. "Picasso understood colour")
I suppose I meant the 3rd one, but it's not so different from the 1st one in concept, since they both mean some kind of mastery of being able to give or receive information. The second one isn't all that relevant.
So only someone who has a mastery of English can be said to understand English? Does someone who speaks only a little bit of English not understand some English? Does someone need to “understand color” like Picasso in order to say they understand the difference between red and yellow?
Why did we need the dictionary definitions? Do we not already both understand what we mean by the word?
Isn’t asking someone to pass the small blue box and then experiencing them pass you that small blue box show that they perceived the intended meaning of the words?
> Isn’t asking someone to pass the small blue box and then experiencing them pass you that small blue box show that they perceived the intended meaning of the words?
You can teach a dog to fetch something particular. The utility of that is quiet limited.
- perceive the intended meaning of words, a language, or a speaker (e.g. "he didn't understand a word I said")
- interpret or view (something) in a particular way (e.g. "I understand you're at art school")
- be sympathetically or knowledgeably aware of the character or nature of (e.g. "Picasso understood colour")
I suppose I meant the 3rd one, but it's not so different from the 1st one in concept, since they both mean some kind of mastery of being able to give or receive information. The second one isn't all that relevant.