Re: "maybe even in the fact that you use words as all," (sic)

On Jul 17, 2008, at 8:00 AM, Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd) wrote:
> Did you accidentally omit the <sneer> tags, Brad ?
> Philip TAYLOR

I'm just a proponent of increasing literacy, not decreasing it. I  
think it is absurd to suggest that we reduce all written communication  
to what the illiterate can understand, and I don't think trying to  
talk with pictures does that anyway. They are still visual a written  
language of sorts, but just one that is not standardized, much more  
ambiguous, and less rich in meaning. I think that if you like to write  
in pictograms, you would have much more communicative effect if you  
used simplified Chinese, which derives its symbols from word pictures.  
Or if you wanted to use something even more pictographic, you could  
advocate for the use of Egyptian hieroglyphics. At least that is  
something that is more well developed in vocabulary.

There are good reasons why written communication developed from  
pictures into more formalized systems.

Received on Thursday, 17 July 2008 15:18:38 UTC