Re: Communication thru language is like verbal painting.
- From: "Anpadh" <anpadh@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 4 Sep 2006 06:15:34 -0700
Communication is not at all like verbal painting. And, it is silly to
say "communication through langauge". It is like saying "colouring
through colour". Communication is not even like digital painting which
is what your description of it is really like. It seems that you are
talking about communication between two different entities rather than
communicating with oneself. Furthermore, you assume that all
communication is based on writing. In fact, everyone knows that writing
was invented several million years after spoken communication. To this
day, the elements of writing are called the parts of SPEECH. Spoken
communication relies on the ability of the speaker and listener to
identify CORRECTLY a certain sound as meaning a certain thing when
spoken in a certain rhythm and when associated with certain other
sounds. For instance, "a lot" means many while "allot" means to
methodically distribute. Similarly, when someone says, "It's not" the
listener knows that the combination of the sounds in the two words has
nothing to do with "snot".
Communication is not at all a process of MOVING from A to B. It is
more a process of BUILDING so that A can not only become B but such
that the meanings of A and B themselves can change in one situation
while remaining the same in other situations.
The inability of computers to make errors and to recognize errors is
the primary reason that no computer will ever be able to put a sentence
together. Coputers can, at best, only endlessly repeat something or
make variations on something based on a given rule. But a computer will
NEVER ever understand the verbal joke of a name like Richard Head. Nor
will it see any error in the sentence, "He farted his hair" instead of
"He parted his hair." And it will certainly never see how the sentence
"He farted his hair" could be taken literally and as a joke at the same
time. Spoken language is entirely a social event and a computer is
distinctly anti-social. It works best when it is NOT communicating with
anyone or anything outside of itself. Communication of that type is
likely to slow down and even mess up the computer totally. If that were
not the case, the computer viruses of today would be a non-issue as
computers would not only be able to recognize them but to use them in a
positive way.
JP wrote:
The main characteristic of the verbal communication is that it is
linear and in order to change the direction of the line we need to use
criteria, which act as switches creating binary opposites.
Every switch or criterion changes the direction of the line allowing
the creation of verbal drawings, images, etc.
If for example I want to move from A to B, as in the alphabet, I will
need at least 2 switches or criteria.
The first one will divide the unknown into A and non-A while the second
one will divide non-A into B and non-B and then I will need to connect
the two.
Using consecutive criteria or switches I will move along the alphabet
to any letter.
OTOH if some of these criteria repeat themselves and establish a
pattern or circuit I will be able to replace this pattern or circuit
with only one new criterion which will contain the complete set of the
previous criteria and their specific order, and thus I will move much
faster along the alphabet.
This pattern or circuit is composed of the common set of criteria or
switches and their specific order and this set of switches acts
similarly to a transistor.
JP
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Communication thru language is like verbal painting.
- From: s1423209
- Re: Communication thru language is like verbal painting.
- References:
- Prev by Date: Communication thru language is like verbal painting.
- Next by Date: Re: Communication thru language is like verbal painting.
- Previous by thread: Communication thru language is like verbal painting.
- Next by thread: Re: Communication thru language is like verbal painting.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
