| Language evolution: Are moving images replace the words in the future?
Newsmeldung von slashCAM:
November 2010
Hier geht es zur Newsmeldung: Language evolution: Are moving images replace the words in the future?
Antwort von wartifan:
Typich academically detached discussion.
Language can abstract wonderful, the picture can never!
Language is also always available.
Even with chip in the brain is coded one some day (Language) to communicate. Is quicker and is effective.
Antwort von Axel:
Language can abstract wonderful, the picture can never!
The article provides both words and pictures as a language. It is probably so that as a sign of one's neighbor long before the first deliberately designed the Picture was sound (finely modulated grunts for I want sex with you: In the beginning was the word!), But is pretty sure that images - quite synonymous in quasi-sequences, see here several thousand years before the first set font existed. We can therefore say that video (in the broadest sense) was the first conserved form of communication. Much more difficult I imagine a prehistoric smartass, cramming up with the other lemurs, the first writing. I hear formally Barney: I do too abstract!
Typich academically detached discussion.
Second, you seem "wonderful abstract" relationships, subject to the written word to you as the ultimate in the next sentence to be considered as dispensable. And in a sense, this is so. climb the heights of abstraction that can be hair-splitting, pure luxury. In a simpler world, such as the Stone Age grunting and graffiti and in the rich world of tomorrow, of the boundless love among the people, synonymous again. Ground Language is a weapon for predators who hunt not a possum, but other abstract-windbag.
Antwort von NEEL:
In a simpler world, such as the Stone Age grunting and graffiti and in the rich world of tomorrow, of the boundless love among the people, synonymous again. Ground Language is a weapon for predators who hunt not a possum, but other abstract-windbag.
Hehe.
Antwort von wartifan:
Not to be confused:
Non-derivative of the new language, so writing: language is meant s.sich.
Antwort von Axel:
Not to be confused:
Non-derivative of the new language, so writing: language is meant s.sich.
Very good. Sun to just keep us in a common language in our playful entertainment. Theme of the dialogue that we could just orally, with support of one or two lead beer cooler, could hardly be more abstract. If the language of words designate specific things such as the 50 - Uga-Uga-100 most important words in a guidebook, so you can buy something on vacation or start a charming come-stupid-Smallesttalk, there is hardly anything essential. Here I find little voice displays a delicacy:
The article accuses the other hand, to the provocative thesis that the visual language - except of course the more general - while an abstract picture that takes the author can show, as synonymous very direct, concrete and / or emotional. Images were never s.sich things for them but they have always been synonymous characters, but even more: an expression of ...
| |
