Medium and Form (Definition according to Niklas Luhmann)
From Mmswiki
This is Page is about the concept of Medium (and Form) in Niklas Luhmann's systemstheory. For other articles on this topic see the Disambiguation Page
A definition according to the fourth lecture of Luhmann (pages 94 through 98)
Medium is a superabounding, combinative potencial that gets only useable when and if it is provided with some fixed interconnection.
Therefore, "medium" (we refer here to language as being a "medium") is an abstract, conceptional description of what we might call (in the case of language) internal repertoire of language knowledge like vocabulary, grammer rules, communication skills etc. It is an abstract phenomenon that can not be observed, it can not be seen or listened to. Ex.: People using a language know app. 4000 to 10.000 words. The know some grammar rules that they have to apply in order to form sensible and understandable sentences. They can use the language (of which they have at least basic knowledge) to speak with others respectively to mediate their message. However, all we will perceive is the message and NOT the language, meaning the medium, itself. All we can observe is the linguistical expression, the realisation of the medium which we will call the form. Medium is a preliminary for communication yet does not express anything itself.
Form is a specific realisation and application of the medium (e.g. language) that is capapable of evoking a reply or a reaction in a potential listener.
Herefore, the counterpart (the listener) must also be able to understand and interprete the expression. Otherwise it was not a "form"ally correct expression (the sentence did not carry any information) or the listener is not familiar with the specific language. Form is not strictly limited to grammatically correct sentences but must be extended to expressions, exclamations, sounds etc. that might be well interpreted by others and may cause them to respond to our expression. Ex.: "I listened photography at tree stem." is a grammatically correct sentence, yet lacks the capability of being interpreted correctly. Unless the speaker and the listener have developed their own secret language and therefore expanded the medium, the expression will not evoke a systematical reaction (which excludes shaking of the head). Communication has not taken place. Whereas an expression like "Yuck" is far from being a grammatical sentence and yet is a form in the sense of Luhmann' for it evokes reaction like "What's wrong" or "Don't you like mould cheese?" Form can be considered as a specific combination of elements of "medium" that can informationfully be decoded by another user of the same medium (e.g. the english language).
The interplay of medium and form
As the above definitions have shown, communication only occurs in the (very unlikely) case of a right combination of words in an adequate situation. Thereby the range of selections for "formally" right utterances is limited as we can not choose any combination, however it is too unlimited as we can choose from an indefinite number of combinations without "wearing out" the language. By this selection/limitation too, it is more likely for anyone to get the message and the meaning of the utterance. The form, in other words, limits the possibilities of combination in an communication, however thereby makes communication happen in the first place.
We can form (and I use the verb "form" with intention) new words or phrases (and thereby expand the medium). So the medium will be a lively pool of loose elements that can be selected to express in form whatever message I want to mediate.
Even though this play of medium and form seems very complex and has evolved through the history of spoken language, it is not yet perfectly distinct nor efficient. Ex.: "The front door of the barn is standing open" says one farmer to another, using nine words to express that the front door of the barn is standing open. From the context that these farmers will be in while using this statement, it would also be as clear (or it wouldn't be clearer with even more words) what is meant if the one farmer would have said :"barn door open" or even "barn open". Then again, the context plays an important role. Does the first farmer want the door to be closed or does the second farmer want the key for the barn or does the second farmer want to open the windows to let some air in? As the interpretation is very dependant on the situation which already carries a lot of information too, it would be more efficient to just use the form "barn open" to express his wishes.
Contributed by Benjamin Baumann for Seminar Pedagogical Media Theory (Wise 2008/09)
