Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Non-linear full-2d writing (again)

From:Sai Emrys <sai@...>
Date:Thursday, January 26, 2006, 16:37
On 1/25/06, R A Brown <ray@...> wrote:
> Thanks - that's a tall order :P
I try.
> To be _fully_ 2D it must be at least a network, and something *that > cannot be recomposed in linear form _without loss of meaning_*.
I think this is a pretty good summary. With of course the clause that everything can be linearized (viz. all digitization) with no actual loss of data; it's just that they loose *comprehensibility*. (E.g. arrays -> lists still preserve their data, but
> Secondly, there must be positive reason for using two dimensions. It > should not be just linear stuff, recomposed, with a few extra 'fancy bits'. > > What, I think, we are attempting is to represent thought without having > to process the thoughts through linear language. It is an attempt to > represent thought(s) as, say, a 'thought-web'. > > > I ran into a similar problem a few days ago, when talking to a > > linguistics prof about this - she got stuck on the idea that it was > > 'non-temporal', > > I suppose time as we perceive is linear. But to say the thing is > non-temporal is, I think, missing the point. Temporality is not what > this about. We are creatures of time & and thoughts occur in time. > > > and kept overstating my position > > IME a common habit of those who disagree with one another :) > > > I think I left that conversation > > with her still thoroughly convinced that what I was talking about was > > completely impossible by everything she knew from linguistics and > > cogpsych - > > Yes, an overstatement - to say something is _completely_ impossible is > often rash. I don't know how realizable such a non-linear full-2d > writing system is - perhaps it may prove impossible. But until we try we > will not know. > > > and me with the impression that she didn't understand what > > I was trying to describe. > > Probably a correct impression. > > > But then, Lakoff said the same thing when he gave me a F on my paper > > about it. It'll probably be one of those nice things to frame and put > > on my wall, once (if? nah, 'once') I succeed in making such a system. > > :-P > > Yep - one must be positive. > > > Yahya - > [snip] > >>.......... And your latest posts on > >>this topic are more concerned than ever with the > >>idea of writing expressing a gestalt, with higher- > >>level connections. > > Gestalt - yep, that's the sort of idea, I think. > > >> Sometimes I thinnk the ideal > >>poem would be like that - a simple, integrated whole. > > Yep - that's the sort of thing! > > >>Indeed, I hadn't yet joined this list in May, so I > >>had better follow Ray's advice and look up the > >>original thread. > > > > No offense taken. Please do read those, and let us know what you think > > about the idea once you have. > > Quite a bit of reading - but, yes, I too would be interested in what you > think. > > > I (and others here most likely) could > > use some more inspiration / ideas about how this could be done. > > Count me in as one of those others. > > > I'm currently a bit stuck on it - pending, as you say, the gestalt. > > It's like poetry-writing for me; I can't really force myself to do it > > is. And in this case, while I have a few ideas of how I want it to > > work, and various angles at it, I don't have a good feeling of the > > gestalt. > > > > I figure that once I do, the rest will come pretty quickly though. > > 'Tis a nice thought - let's hope it's true :) > > -- > Ray > ================================== > > > ================================== > MAKE POVERTY HISTORY >


Sai Emrys <sai@...>