Re: Some thoughts on mutli-modal (signing / speech) languages and communication.

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Paul Kershaw <ptkershaw@...> wrote:
> I would think that it would be more logical for a natural language to
> have a parallel gestural system, just as we have written language for
> times when speech is not a useful channel, as opposed to a mixed
> gesture/speech system.

Well, inverting it, that's another interesting idea: A language that's
spoken and written at the same time, as parallel channels.  (I'm
reminded of my dad teaching me algebra at the kitchen table, talking
and also writing on a pad of paper.)

Hmm what other modalities could you combine?  Typing and vocalization?
 Touch plus sound or sight or both?  It makes me think of all of the
channels that I've considered and rejected as too limited: Perhaps
they could usefully be used as mixins along higher bandwidth channels.
 Taste by itself makes for a very slow (if perhaps enjoyable)
conversation, but perhaps tastes could be used as occasional accents
in a language that's mostly in another modality.

Here's another sort of inversion: You could have a multi-modal
language for people with both hearing and sight that mostly uses
gestures, but occasional sounds for accents or structuring.

Oh hey!  I just reminded myself of something very relevant to the
topic of multimodal sign/speech, and also tremendously entertaining:
The CODA Brothers:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Olsonterp


<3,
mungojelly