TALE: Product, Langue, and Speech

A Linguistic Perspective on Product Engagement

Published in

TALE500

14 min readMar 1, 2023

On Jan 25, 2023, I shared a possible theme called “Product Langue” with the above picture. Initially, I used it to refer to an idea about Knowledge Engagement about Product.

Langue and Parole is a theoretical linguistic dichotomy distinguished by Ferdinand de Saussure. Langue refers to the abstract system of language while Parole means concrete speech.

If we use the diagram below, we can find four types of knowledge engagement about the theme of “Product”.

Unobservable: Users’ subjective experience
Observable: Product Managers and Researchers
Parole: Experts who product knowledge about “Product”
Langue: Knowledge curators who aim to turn pieces of Parole (speech) into Langue (language)

Yesterday, I had a short conversation with Anthony Pireei on Linkedin.

Anthony: When are you going to write a book and compile all these ideas into one place??
Oliver: In the past two weeks, I wrote several articles which highlight some possible themes for further discussion. One of these themes is called “Product Langue” which is about connecting Ferdinand de Saussure’s structural linguistics with the Product practice. I am attracted to this theme. Maybe I will work on a research project about it and write a book later.

This conversation inspired me to develop a new idea about the possible theme “Product Langue”. While the old idea is about Product Knowledge in general, the new idea is about A Particular Product.

The Basic Model of Product Langue
Five Types of Product Speech
Fourteen Types of Thematic Spaces
#1 The Thematic Space of “Consumer Research”
#2 The Thematic Space of “Product Design”
#3 The Thematic Space of “Product Decision”
#4 The Thematic Space of “Product Strategy”
#5 The Thematic Space of “Product Development”
#6 The Thematic Space of “Product Marketing”
#7 The Thematic Space of “Public Beta”
#8 The Thematic Space of “Startup Fundraising”
#9 The Thematic Space of “Initial Public Offering (IPO)”
#10 The Thematic Space of “Product Discussion”
#11 The Thematic Space of “Product Review”
#12 The Thematic Space of “Product for Culture”
#13 The Thematic Space of “Product for Case Study”
#14 The Thematic Space of “Competitor as Reference”
The Attachances of “Translation”
The Landscape of “Product Langue”

The Basic Model of Product Langue

I use the following working definition for the new idea.

Product Langue: an abstract thing that describes what a product is.
Product Speech: what people actually say about a product in various concrete situations.

The above diagram also highlights two ideas for the new idea: Essential Differences and Situated Dynamics.

Product Langue: It is about Essential Differences.
Product Speech: It is about Situated Dynamics.

These two ideas are inspired by the Platform Genidentity Framework. I used the diagram below to represent a rough idea of the “Platform Genidentity” framework.

What’s Platform Genidentity? I use the concept of Platform Genidentity to describe a process of keeping the uniqueness of a platform within a long-term duration. For example, Google.com (a Search Engine), Wikipedia.org, YouTube.com, these three websites keep their original core design without major changes.

In order to understand the complexity of Platform Genidentity, I developed the following two new concepts:

Platform Core: a basic unit of a platform. For example, a Tweet, a YouTube video page, a Q&A page on Quora, etc.
Platform-ba: a platform-based sociocultural field. For example, YouTube-ba is a YouTube-based sociocultural space. You can find more details here.

There is an operational definition of the concept of Genidentity: A thing’s Genidentity is defined by Essential Differences with Situated Dynamics.

The new idea offers a Linguistic Perspective on Product Engagement and Platform Genidentity. Moreover, it also indicates a possible way of empirical research. We can focus on collecting data about Product Speech and use them to explain Product Langue which represents Platform Core or Product Core.

The above diagram also uses the concept “Thematic Space” for the new idea. For the present discussion, I use it to refer to a social practice containing product speech.

The above diagram is the basic model of “Product Langue”. The “Langue” is a representation of a “Product”s core which describe its uniqueness.

In different concrete situations, the “Langue” is represented by different things which are focuses of product speech.

Five Types of Product Speech

Based on the above model, I identify 14 types of thematic spaces and 5 types of product speech. See the diagram below.

Each thematic space has its own rules for its thematic conversation and speech in general. These rules can be found in real-life social practices. For example, “Consumer Research” and “Initial Public Offering (IPO)” are two different social practices of business development.

The typology of product speech is a high-level abstract classification. The typology is based on the Ecological Practice approach and the Attachance Framework. The diagram below is the basic model of the Ecological Practice approach.

The above diagram encourages us to pay attention to two types of Attachances:

The Attachance within a Container
The Attachance between two Containers

The Attachance framework for “attach” and “detach” is inspired by William James’ relation theory.

As Harry Heft pointed out in his book Ecological Psychology in Context, William James’ Radical Empiricism can be seen as a philosophical foundation of Gibson’s Ecological Psychology.

William James described several types of relations in Essays in Radical Empiricism:

conterminousness (things with but one thing between)
contiguousness (nothing between)
likeness
nearness
simultaneousness
in-ness
on-ness
for-ness
with-ness
and-ness

Inspired by this relation theory, I discover the following five types of product speech.

Toward-us
Only-us
With-us
Without-us
Not-us

The “Toward-us” speech refers to the thematic conversation within a social practice that 1) happens outside the environment of the firm, 2) at least a team member joins the thematic conversation, and 3) aims to develop something for the firm.

The “Only-us” speech refers to the thematic conversation within a social practice that 1) happens inside the environment of the firm, and 2) only team members join the conversation.

The “With-us” speech refers to the thematic conversation within a social practice that 1) happens inside or outside the environment of the firm, and 2) team members and external stakeholders join the conversation.

The “Without-us” speech refers to the thematic conversation within a social practice that 1) happens outside the environment of the firm, 2) no team member joins the conversation, and 3) the conversation is about our product.

The “Not-us” speech refers to the thematic conversation within a social practice that 1) happens outside the environment of the firm, 2) no team member joins the conversation, and 3) the conversation is not about our product, but other teams’ products.

The above typology is based on the following four criteria.

Time: when does the thematic conversation happen? before we have the product or after we have the product?
Place: where does the thematic conversation happen? internal space or external space?
Members: who is involved in the conversation?
Themes: Is the conversation about our product or not?

These four criteria define a meta-structure of thematic spaces at the abstract level. We can see it as an abstract container.

At the concrete level, we also can develop a typology of thematic spaces.

Fourteen Types of Thematic Spaces

In TALE: A Possible Theme called “Idea Engagement”, I discussed these three types of projects about idea generation.

In TALE: Idea Engagement, Members of Projects, and A New Canvas, I discussed some members of projects. See the diagram below.

Today I am going to discuss 14 types of thematic spaces which refers to different projects. This typology is open. We can add new types later.

For the present discussion, our goal is to identify different Forms of Objectification of “Product Langue” within situational “Product Speech”.

#1 The Thematic Space of “Consumer Research”

This is the place where we can find the “Toward-us” speech.

Time: before we have the product
Place: external space
Members: researchers and users
Themes: the conversation about users’ needs which refers to our potential products

The Form of Objectification of “Product Langue” within this thematic space is Insight.

At this time, the “Product Langue” is about potential products which are represented by Insight.

This article doesn’t aim to discuss the method of consumer research. In this manner, a founder can be a “Researcher” too if he can detect an Insight for a possible product.

#2 The Thematic Space of “Product Design”

This is the place where we can find an “Only-us” speech.

Time: before we have the product
Place: internal space
Members: researchers and designers
Themes: the conversation about turning users’ needs (potential products) into prototypes (possible products)

The Form of Objectification of “Product Langue” within this thematic space is Prototype.

At this time, the “Product Langue” is about possible products which are represented by Prototypes.

There are many ways to define the outcome of a design activity. For example, John S. Gero uses “Design Description” to define the final outcome of design activity in his 1990 paper Design Prototypes: A Knowledge Representation Schema for Design.

According to John S. Gero, “The purpose of designing is to transform function, F (where F is a set), into a design description, D, in such a way that the artefact being described is capable of producing those functions.”

In the field of digital product development, some designers are required to produce the final CSS code for their designs.

I’d like to use “Prototype” to describe the Form of Objectification of “Product Langue” within the “Product Design” thematic space.

#3 The Thematic Space of “Product Decision”

This is the place where we can find an “Only-us” speech.

Time: before we have the product
Place: internal space
Members: Strategists and designers
Themes: the conversation about connecting the firm’s strategy (possible collective self) with prototypes (possible products)

The Form of Objectification of “Product Langue” within this thematic space is Description or Strategic Description.

Strategists refer to founders or product managers who make the final decision about product development.

From the perspective of “Product Langue”, Strategic Description refers to Framed Products.

#4 The Thematic Space of “Product Strategy”

This is the place where we can find an “Only-us” speech.

Time: before we have the product
Place: internal space
Members: Researchers and Strategists
Themes: the conversation about connecting the firm’s strategy (possible collective self) with users’ needs (potential products)

The Form of Objectification of “Product Langue” within this thematic space is Strategy or Product Strategy.

From the perspective of “Product Langue”, Product Strategy refers to Anticipatory Products.

#5 The Thematic Space of “Product Development”

This is the place where we can find an “Only-us” speech.

Time: before we have the product
Place: internal space
Members: Designers and Developers
Themes: the conversation about turning prototypes (possible products) into requirements (initial products)

The Form of Objectification of “Product Langue” within this thematic space is Requirements.

There is a point that developers deliver an “initial product” that represents the Requirements. I also consider it as “Requirements” from the perspective of “Product Langue”.

#6 The Thematic Space of “Product Marketing”

This is the place where we can find an “Only-us” speech.

Time: after we have the product
Place: internal space
Members: Strategists and Marketers
Themes: the conversation about turning requirements (initial products) into messages (marketable products)

The Form of Objectification of “Product Langue” within this thematic space is Messages.

There is a gap between requirements (initial products) and messages (marketable products). Developers need to work on requirements that are described in technical language. However, marketers need to write messages in cultural language.

#7 The Thematic Space of “Public Beta”

This is the place where we can find a “With-us” speech.

Time: after we have the product
Place: external space
Members: Designers and Early Adopters
Themes: the conversation about generating new insights by connecting users’ behavior and users needs

The Form of Objectification of “Product Langue” within this thematic space is Signals.

This With-me speech is similar to the Toward-me speech. The difference between these two is the former has the initial product while the former doesn’t have the initial product.

However, the goal of capturing Signals aims to produce Insights too.

New Insights will lead a new round of product development which transforms initial products into iterated products.

#8 The Thematic Space of “Startup Fundraising”

This is the place where we can find a “With-us” speech.

Time: before we have the product or after we have the product
Place: external space
Members: Founders and Private Investors
Themes: the conversation about connecting investors’ needs and the team’s strategy

The Form of Objectification of “Product Langue” within this thematic space is Value Proposition.

The typical activity is Startup Pitch and the typical genre is Startup Pitch Deck. Value Proposition is the primary “product langue” within the activity.

From the perspective of “Product Langue”, Value Proposition refers to Presentable Products.

#9 The Thematic Space of “Initial Public Offering (IPO)”

This is the place where we can find a “With-us” speech.

Time: after we have the product
Place: external space
Members: Founders and Public Investors
Themes: the conversation about connecting investors’ needs and the team’s strategy

The Form of Objectification of “Product Langue” within this thematic space is Prospectus.

According to SEC, “The prospectus is the offering document. describing the company, the IPO terms and other. information that an investor may use when deciding. whether to invest.”

From the perspective of “Product Langue”, Prospectus is a great genre for researching Ideal Products.

#10 The Thematic Space of “Product Discussion”

This is the place where we can find a “Without-us” speech.

Time: after we have the product
Place: external space
Members: Users and Bloggers
Themes: the conversation about consumers’ needs and behavior

The Form of Objectification of “Product Langue” within this thematic space is Buzz.

Buzz refers to discussions about a product. It can be seen as the representation of Used Products or Product-in-Use.

#11 The Thematic Space of “Product Review”

This is the place where we can find a “Without-us” speech.

Time: after we have the product
Place: external space
Members: Reviewers and Reporters
Themes: the conversation about public opinion

The Form of Objectification of “Product Langue” within this thematic space is Reports which can be seen as the representation of Publicized Products.

While Buzz is about consumers’ subjective user experiences, Reports is more about professional feedback from public intellectuals.

#12 The Thematic Space of “Product for Culture”

This is the place where we can find a “Without-us” speech.

Time: after we have the product
Place: external space
Members: Artists and Audiences
Themes: the conversation about public imagination

The Form of Objectification of “Product Langue” within this thematic space is Symbol that can be seen as the representation of Imagined Products.

#13 The Thematic Space of “Product for Case Study”

This is the place where we can find a “Without-us” speech.

Time: after we have the product
Place: external space
Members: Teachers and Learners
Themes: the conversation about public education

The Form of Objectification of “Product Langue” within this thematic space is Perspectives that can be seen as the representation of Theorized Products.

In the field of business education, successful products are often used for case studies from different perspectives.

#14 The Thematic Space of “Competitor as Reference”

This is the place where we can find the “Not-us” speech.

Time: before we have the product or after we have the product
Place: internal space or external space
Members: Team members, Competitors, or Others
Themes: the conversation about competitors’ products

The Form of Objectification of “Product Langue” within this thematic space is Reference.

From the perspective of “Product Langue”, we see our products and competitors’ product are members of a large network which represents the meaning of the product web.

Reference can be understood as the representation of Mirrored Products.

The Attachances of “Translation”

As mentioned above, each thematic space is a concrete container. Each type of product speech is an abstract container.

If we put two thematic spaces together, we see a process of “Translation” of product langue.

In the thematic space of “Product Development”, the primary theme of the conversation is about turning prototypes (possible products) into requirements (initial products).

In the thematic space of “Startup Fundraising”, the primary theme of the conversation is about connecting investors’ needs and the team’s strategy.

If a team member detaches his/her mind from a thematic space and attaches his/her mind to the other thematic space, the product langue needs to be translated too.

I use the term “Attachance” to describe the meanings and value of the “detaching act” and “attaching act”. Attachance can be negative or positive.