|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 89
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 89 |
"Is alright a word?"Alright, Faldage, if you insist, we'll resume our discussion about words... First out we will explain words without using any words... 0mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!Alright, those of you who are one with the Universe now know the true meaning of all words, but for those of you who are at odds with the Universe let us together use Wordwind's twirling dogs as a koan for understanding words... Yes, Wordwind, the dog trainer's circling finger is, in fact, a "word", albeit a simple one. A more intricate "word" would be indicated if the dog trainer reversed the finger circling direction from clockwise to counter-clockwise and the dog followed suit. This is not likely but not because dogs are dumb. This is because dogs at this point in time don't have a proper language to stimulate their behavior. You really want to see some twirling? Go see the Twirling Dervish Sect of Muslims. Man, they can really whirl. But don't put down the circus dogs, the Twirling Dervish are simply lucky. They are lucky to have the push of a great parcel of words accumalated through vast time to set them to spin. But ultimately, the only difference between the dogs and the dervish is the complexity of the stimulus and of the response. Now Wordwind, let's say for example that you are a woman and that you have given birth to a cro-magnon baby. (Yes I know that most human babies born today are probably cro-magnon, but what I'm talking about is that you give birth today to a cro-magnon baby of 100,000 years back.} Anyway, your baby would very likely grow up to be articulate and smart, and might even make the debate team at school. On the other hand if you were a wench in the cro-magnon culture and had a modern baby back then, he would likely grow up stumbling around the dark woodlands while articulating at best, let's say for example , maybe about one hundred and twenty-two basic words. So what, you might say, that is a lot more words than the neighboring Neandertals, and they seem to be happy and content while making do with barely fourteen gestures, words, and expressive grunts. Words? Who needs them? Sure thing, little momma, met any neandertals lately? And so now, praise the Lord, say amen, at long last, here is my point... The human brain stores information by association. The formulation of words reinforces the association and thereby enhances recall. The ability to build pyramids and send Alice to the moon is a product of words.
Not ideas, not bulldozers, not free-enterprise, but words. The words we speak and sign are not from us, they are us, in other words, Words R Us, and without words we likely wouldn't be extant. -----------------> On the other hand it might be our inability to understand the nature of our words that causes us to become extinct 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 247
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 247 |
On the other hand if you were a wench in the cro-magnon culture and had a modern baby back then, he would likely grow up stumbling around the dark woodlands while articulating at best, let's say for example, maybe about one hundred and twenty-two basic words. How about an ape in our own day recognizing a thousand word signs, Amemeba, even signing messages back to her human custodians? Please see "Ape Masters Sign Language", Associated Press, August 9, 2004: http://abclocal.go.com/wls/news/strange/080904_ap_sn_ape.htmlOr, how about a dog which made frontpage headlines around the world recently because it recognizes the name for over 150 toys and, in particular, because it can make logical deductions and find a toy by name when it has never heard the name of the toy before. The dog, Dante, a border collie, has become a tv star in Germany. This feat of logical deduction [ie. finding a toy by a name it has never heard before] is comparable to the abilities of a human toddler, and has never been considered within the reach of any non-human other than a chimpanzee. [ *I will find this story, published on the frontpage of the New York Times and other leading North American papers within the last 2 months, and post it here when I find it, Amemeba.] Would either of these animal feats cause you to reconsider your 'cro-magnon' theory of words, Amemeba [if I may call it that in short without intending any disrespect]? If an ape, a chimpanzee and a border collie can demonstrate a true understanding of human words, Amemeba, even put those words to actual use, is it not ideas, rather than words, which distinguish humans from animals?*"Rico" not "Dante"The border collie's name is "Rico", not "Dante", and it has mastered the name of over 200 toys, not 150.  Go to: http://www.boston.com/yourlife/articles/2004/06/10/border_collie_found_to_understand_more_than_200_words/BTW here is a photo of Rico [in USA today] for those who find animals at least as appealing, if not so articulate, as people. http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2004-06-10-dogs-language_x.htm
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,475
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,475 |
Play on, jheem. And damned be he who first cries "Hold, enough!"
Well, thanks for the kind words. This leads me to a strange question but here goes: "Are you real?" I sometimes feel, when reading and posting to this group, that I am conversing with 'bots or Elizas or what-have-yous. (Maybe Tanzarian was right.) Whether than ask if "fnxrd" is a word, I would ask whether "fnxrd" means something in the absence of humans. In a den of textually infernal machines, spewing out itty-bitty nastigrams, can I possibly understand (not you necessarily, but at least what you type)? No, understand is probably not the right word. What is the inverse of "mean"? Using the passive is not enough. "Apple means X." ==> "X is meant by apple." / "I understand what you mean by 'apple'." / "X?" But I digress. At times, I feel that you and tsuwm and faldage and amemeba and grapho are all just the same aperiodic crystals or FSTs generating strings based on such things as arbitrary grammars, the current time and weather, and the input I (and some of my otherselves stuck in this Chinese room that is AWADtalk) provide. And maybe some of the other 'bots and avatars and meat-puppets and hand-socks left unnamed and unenumerated in the list above. Please don't take this as a personal attack. I'm truly curious. At times, I feel like one of the little clay golems under the thumb of the stranger in town in the Twain story.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 89
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 89 |
I feel rather like Ralph Nader must feel, running for a job he can't possibly win, with his dearest admirers begging him to leave the field.
I personally feel Nader should leave the field, altho I am one of his admirers as well. Perhaps I should take heed of my own advice. Perhaps, I will.  My Dear Mister Wordminstrel, the only conceivable reason that I can imagine for you taking away your songs from the mostly good thinking men of the Awad Board is the fact that you openly admit that you admire Ralph Nader. Either that or the fact that you have learned all that you can learn and can now only sing the Song of Zarathustra while accending floatingly up unto the welcoming arms of the blue skies above. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 247
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 247 |
Well, thanks for the kind words.
It occurs to me that "kind" is to "kindness" what "honest" is to "honestness", jheem.
One can be "kind" on occasion without evincing the more substantial, the more enduring, the more treasured, the more jewel-like preciousness of "kindness".
So one who is not known for "honestness" can be "honest".
So it is with "honesty", the true meaning of which is so poignantly revealed in the time-honored aphorism "Honesty is the best policy".
"Honestness" is not a pragmatic "policy". It is the very stuff, the very essence, the flesh, the blood, and the bone, yes, the very bone, of the person who embodies it.
As to the the larger issues you are pondering, jheem, those are deserving of more thoughtful and deliberate rumination.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 247
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 247 |
while accending floatingly up unto the welcoming arms of the blue skies above.
Ah, but the blue skies above are mostly clouded in greenhouse gases, microscopic soot and smog, Amemeba ... which Ralph Nader laments as much as I do.
BTW one can admire someone for their values, Amemeba, without believing in the strategies they employ to achieve their goals.
Many who admire and respect Ralph Nader for the immense contributions he has made to society over the past many decades, going back to the salad days of "Nader's Raiders", would not want to see him occupying any office of national significance, least of all the Oval Office.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 89
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 89 |
And since we're in an argumentative mood,...
Uh, jheem, is disagreeing argumentative? If so maybe we here should sit around singing innocuous songs about cute words, playing no-keep scrabble , and ferreting out the obscure roots of obscure words like the great tsuwm does just for kicks.
my dear amemeba, why haven't you answered my question about which came first, ideas or words. My injunction to not use words is dropped.
You got me, jheem, ideas came first. At the time I wasn't ready to explain the essence of an "idea". I'm still not.
And as to me explaining words without using words...sure I could, if my ideas had wings.
As for "audacious"...
Maybe my request asking you to explain the processes in signing the concept "audacious" wasn't very clear. I just wanted to understand how a term with nuance like audacity could be signed without cluttering up the lexicon of the American Sign Language.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,475
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,475 |
me: And since we're in an argumentative mood,...
amemeba: Uh, jheem, is disagreeing argumentative?
No, amemeba, but argumentative can mean quarrelsome or contentious. In this case, "we" meant "I". It was more of a rhetorical florish. You can ignore the statement. (I love nothing better than a good argument.)
ideas came first
This is an axiom, yes? It has not been demonstrated. Nor can it. Since ideas cannot get from one noggin to the other without language. There are some language-like gestures (twirling fingers to whirling dogs), but they seem to me more like stimulus-response rather than language / idea-transferance. It's a a large chasm between mechanics of rut/estrus and the poetry of courtly love.
"audacious"
Ah, signing "audacious". (Slaps forehead with open palm.) I can be so thick sometimes. Sorry about that. You'd be best asking a fluent ASler not me. But what is nuance in a spoken language? Or perhaps, just in English? Is nuance part of the default meaning of a word like "audacious" or is part of how two speakers use a word in a discourse? Nuance, to me, has something more to do with the performer (speaker, signer) and the audience (hearer, watcher) than with the materiality of the text (utterance, signage). Unless of course nuance exists a priori in the ideas behind the words (signs). Nuance is added to the utterance suprasegmentally (prosodically, like stress) to change the meaning of the message. Can nuance change the ideas in the speaker's head or just in the hearer's?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 247
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 247 |
At times, I feel like one of the little clay golems under the thumb of the stranger in town in the Twain story.You are to be lauded for thinking these thoughts, jheem, for it is you more than any of the rest of us who could break AWADtalk free of this "Chinese room". P.S. I assume "Chinese room" is inspired by the term "Chinese wall" used by investment bankers and the like. It is a very useful and insightful turn on that esoteric term, jheem. Sometimes I think the "Chinese room" you speak of is more like a "Chinese box". [And, I hasten to add that neither you nor I intend any disparagement of the Chinese people, as distinct from the authoritarian ways of their inscrutable, and necessarily paranoid, leaders.] For any who might be interested in the term "Chinese wall", here is an explanation: http://www.investopedia.com/articles/analyst/090501.asp
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,475
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,475 |
P.S. I assume "Chinese room" is inspired by the term "Chinese wall" used by investment bankers and the like.Sorry, no. It refers to a Gedankenexperiment in a 1981 paper by the US philosopher John Searle, at UC Berkeley, which is his attempt at a refutation to "strong" AI (i.e., that we can build machines that think). See: http://www.iep.utm.edu/c/chineser.htm
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 247
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 247 |
Sorry, no. It refers to a Gedankenexperiment ... which is his [Searle's] attempt at a refutation to "strong" AI (i.e., that we can build machines that think).Your clarification makes the Matrix reference I had in mind even more apt. You are "the one", jheem. And now that "the one" has come, Wordminstrel can [and should] depart. Adieu. It is well that I go in any event. I have just discovered to my horror that Wordminstrel has become an "enthusiast", and with each new post he climbs higher into the hierarchy, as though into Amemeba's "blue skies", where, eventually, he will surely lose his soul floating in the amorphous ethers ... a friend to all but "the one" who comes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 89
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 89 |
Now we've done it. We've run Wordsminster off. Now what? Should we beg for his return? Or respect his decision to leave and say nothing. I say say nothing. Oh well, see you all later, I've suddenly got an urge to go listen to some Strauss. Maybe Ein Heldenleben...no wait! Til Eulenspiegel. Yes thats it... Til Eulenspiegel's Merry Pranks.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
What this thread needs is a really lousy pun from TEd.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
we've run wordminstral off? Ha, that's a good one..
wordminstral is like that cat who keeps coming back.. announcements of his departure, are usually false (even when they come from him!) and when true, never very long lasting...
Fer sure, one thing that we all can agree on is, we are all pretty self determaning.
i come, or go, stay, post, scan or ignore based on my needs, not on anyone's dictums, and everyone here does pretty much the same.. i don't think my misspelling have the power to drive tsuwm off, (even if i have cost him a few hairs) and no matter how much of fetish exist with washing pigs, i still check in..
AWAD is like a long established habit, once developed, the habit pretty much sticks. (even when we make claims we are giving it up for good, Really this time i mean it..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467 |
Well that would be a first!
Actually, you may not have noticed my lack of presence in the preceding fifty-some posts. I cannot say that I find this sort of discussion interesting to me personally. I generally don't do well in deep philosophical discussions because I'm really not a deep sort of guy. I guess I don't really care about when a word is or isn't a word or when a word is a symbol or whether a digitus impudicus is a word or a symbol or a referent or whatever. Please note that I'm not belittling the discussion, I'm belittling myself.
I've read some of the stuff about semantics by Hayakawa and some other similarly boring people, and it turns me off, primarily because I don't find myself gaining anything from the interminable prose he and others of that ilk seem capable of generating. I'm much more interested in a discussion of why something is humorous because humor is so important to me.
TEd
TEd
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,475
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,475 |
Hayakawa [...] and others of that ilk
OK, that's it. Now I'm logging off forever and a day. Now let's see. What should my next avatar be called? Varaha or Vamana? You really all will be sorry. (Stamps foot.) I'll hold my breath until I'm blue in the face. OK, that should come in handy as an avatar. (Stamps foot again and disappears in puff of smoke.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 133
member
|
|
member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 133 |
When the discussion turned to animal response to language, I thought I would mention talking birds--specifically, my daughter's cockatoos.
When I remarked that one of them said very sensible sounding things, I was told that she once said, being out of doors at twilight, "Its's raining." My daughter said, "No, you silly bird, it's getting dark". I thought that, since the bird was afraid of rain and of the dark, that wasn't really silly, just a minor confusion of "words for things I'm afraid of".
Another of her birds, seeing a human infant in a vet's waiting room, and not being accustomed to such, asked "What kind of bird is that?"
Now, are these birds more intelligent than their wild kin who have no human contact, thus no human vocabulary?
Is it risky business to keep teaching chimps, gorillas, and yes, perhaps dogs and birds "better" ways of communicating, even after seeing PLANET OF THE APES?
But now I don't know if I'm communicating with anyone or if you all minimized AWAD TALK and went web-surfing. Or just surfing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385 |
It is well that I go in any event.
You can say that again, laddie ... but don't trouble yourself.
We've all had it up to here with your insufferable, sanctimonious "honestness". Fat lot of friends it made you!
Show up around here again, Wordminstrel, and I'll personally crash a few symbols around your ears.
We've got drivel running like sludge around here without you swinging your smudge pot like incense.
"What is a word?"!!! If you don't know the answer to that, Wordminstrel, you shouldn't ask.
Begone! And good riddance!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385 |
re "Begone! And good riddance!"And, by the way, don't send any of your Wordmongrels around here to torment us. Or I'll have something to say to them, too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 19
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 19 |
"What is a word?"!!! [...] Begone! And good riddance!
You oughtn't to be so tough on yourself, Gnatminister. Now where did I put that boon?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
roughly two thirds of this thread should be moved to the "A bunch of baloney" thread. furthermoreover, and in the second place, it seems somehow appropriate that it's made the screen go wiiiiide.
- joe (PIDOMA) friday
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385 |
roughly two thirds of this thread should be moved to the "A bunch of baloney" thread."2/3rds"? !!! You are being far too charitable, tsuwm. What about the baloney Wordminstel wrote? No fair. You're just trying to spare his feelings.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,624
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,624 |
Jeez, don't you realise just how transparent your sock puppets are, Word-what-ever-the-hell-you call-yourselves-now? Every time I see one of your posts I'm irresistably reminded of the "The Three Faces of Eve". Except she was interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385 |
re Word-what-ever-the-hellI won't let your provocation induce me to stay, Capfka. However, it is a temptation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Regarding the "Chinese room":
Given the other allusions in his message, I suspect he was refering to the Chinese Room experiment of John Searl. John Searl is a philosopher who believes not only that computers can't think now, but that they won't ever think in the future. And his chinese room gedankenexperiment is intended to demonstrate this.
(Of course, I disagree with John Searl, but that's irrelevant.)
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 89
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 89 |
Hey Plutarch, do you ever talk to ole Wordminstrel. He might not be the smartest turtle in the tank but he would at least stick to the subject. I found this refreshing. Maybe he simply avoided making rude remarks only in deference to the instigator of the thread, but no matter, I thought his predilection of focusing on the point to be very considerate and polite. Anyway if you happen to see him tell him that his last salient post, the one that cited the example of Koko; the talking gorilla, was not well thought out. Koko; the gorilla who once signed her masters that she wanted to move from California to Hawaii, and so they did. Koko, whose signing skills are highly suspect. Koko, who allows herself to be the fund-raising instrument of many thousands of dollars while her brothers and sisters in the African grasslands are becoming extinct. Not to mention "Rico" the border collie. While Rico's feats are mind-boggling, at their core they are merely an astonishing display of the innate skills of certain doglike creatures especially when shown in a showboat setting. Here in Alabama our tracking hounds can track a single low-life escapee from our modern prison system while at the same time simultaneously studiously ignoring the tens of thousands of decent folks who go to church. Now that's impressive. Please tell Wordminstrel, Plutarch, that his dog and gorilla example sucked.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 247
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 247 |
re Plutarch's mannersYou mustn't take Plutarch too seriously, Amemeba. I don't. He does like to sport with his fellow sock puppets, me and Grapho, but that's just what AnnaS would describe as "male bonding". In any case, Plutarch is never disrespectful to anyone who is not a sock puppet, unless they are disrespectful to him first. That is something Capfka might wish to take into consideration in the future. As an aside to Capfka, Plutarch seldom gives anyone more than one warning. re KokoIt seems it is more than just Koko who has learned ASL, Amemeba, as you can see: Extract: Dr. Chalcraft's presentation, "Sign Modulations of Cross-Fostered Chimpanzees and Gorillas," demonstrated that both chimpanzees and gorillas (Koko) who have been taught American Sign Language (ASL) modulate their sign to change the meaning or emphasis in a manner similar to human signers: The part of the study involving chimpanzees was performed by Dr. Chalcraft as part of her Ph.D. dissertation before coming to the Gorilla Foundation. For more, pls go to: http://www.koko.org/world/journal.phtmlre RicoYour characterization of Rico's skills as simply "dog-like" misses the entire point of the particular skill which has generated so much excitement and interest in the scientific community, Amemeba, namely, the cognitive skill known as "fast mapping". I don't claim to be an expert on this subject, but those who are experts seem to be divided into 2 camps: Those who are convinced that Rico exhibits cognitive skills equalivent to a human toddler; and Those who remain unconvinced and would like to see further studies. None of the experts quoted in the many newspaper reports I have read are as dismissive of the evidence supporting Rico's "fast mapping" abilities as you seem to be, Amemeba. I'm sure Dr. Bloom, the psychology professor at Yale University who wrote a commentary on the Rico study for Science magazine would be interested in knowing what science you are relying on in concluding that his evidence for Rico's human toddler-like abilities "sucks". Extract from USA Today report of June 10th: "The researchers think Rico figures out the words by using a strategy called "fast mapping" that lets him quickly figure out that a new word goes with a new object. "We know children can do this -- if they hear a word just once, in the course of a conversation, they can remember what it means weeks, even months, later," said Paul Bloom, a psychology professor at Yale University who wrote a commentary for Science about the study. Children typically pick up the technique at age 2, he said." You have always been respectful of me, Amemeba, so I thought I would return the courtesy by returning, on this one occasion, to make this reply.While I will not be returning any time soon, Amemeba, I can't speak for Plutarch. He was more than a little put off by Capfka and he might return to give Capfka a chance to show what stuff he is really made of - in a battle of wits befitting gentlemen, I hasten to add, not with the crudeness which marked Capfka's earlier outburst.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Koko and Rico. Vaguely familiar with koko. Never heard of Rico. In general, I'm highly skeptical of these kinds of things - and yet. When I was young, our family had a lot of dogs. By the time I was a teenager I was training them. When I was 15 we moved back to the lower 48 from AK. Drove through Canada and stayed with grandparents in OH for a few weeks. I got bored and decided to try my hand at training my mom's poodle. In a day and a half to three days I trained her to do an entire obstacle course I had layed out in the bedroom. Part of the course consisted of her going around the leg of a chair exactly three times. I was aware that the dog might be drawing subtle cues from me - unfortunately I didn't know how to do a controlled experiment at that time. But I did make every effort not to betray my feeling to the animal.
I've done part of the training on LOTS of dogs and complete training on one or two, but this was really remarkable - not that I was able to do it, but that I was able to do it so quickly. And the going around the leg three times part - well, if a complete amateur like myself could teach a dog this in three days, I reckon it's not inconceivable to me that an animal much closer to human might learn a great deal more. I'm skeptical, but not closed-minded.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,027
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,027 |
What is the inverse of "mean"? Using the passive is not enough. "Apple means X." ==> "X is meant by apple." If a relational term like "meaning" actually had a unique "inverse", things would be much simpler - and rather boring. Every transmission of information is lossy by necessity, i.e. partly irreversible, and thanks to this fact, new things may still be said and heard  ..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385 |
Every transmission of information is lossy by necessity, i.e. partly irreversible, and thanks to this fact, new things may still be said and heard
Putting together what jheem has said, and you have just said, in connection with "Turing's dilemma", it helps me to understand what Amemeba may have been getting at in describing her "Cro-magnon" theory of words [again intending no disrespect to Amemeba in abbreviating her theory in this way, in fact, exactly the opposite].
Poets use words as word pictures to communicate ideas and feelings which are not otherwise accessible using words anchored to their strict, technical meanings. In this way, I would agree with you that words can be "lossy" and, in this "lossiness", stretch the boundaries of perception, and, consequently, the boundaries of what is possible, the comprehension of what might be.
Einstein explained that he achieved his greatest insights in visual terms, including his theory of relativity which came to him in the image of a person falling off a roof with the ground rushing up to meet him.
Perhaps we should be paying more attention to the contribution which poets, throughout history [reaching all the way back to Amemeba's "Cro-magnon" wordsmiths], have made to the advancement of science, wseiber. After all, it was William Blake who said "to see the world in a grain of sand".
It is also William Blake whose navigations of the "terra incognita" are seen by some as having prepared the ground for Sigmund Freud and later Carl Jung.
Thank you, all of you, not least Amemeba, for bringing me to this compelling insight.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,475
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,475 |
I'm skeptical, but not closed-minded.
I understand. I, too, am skeptical and not credulous. The problem so far with Koko is that her handler is the onliest person who seems to be able to understand her. Her utterances are usually two or three symbols, and just don't display much of anything in the way of syntax. Her handler usually seems to provide a lot of the glue and interpretation necessary. I read an account of some ASL-signing consultants who were brought in, anxious to talk with Koko. They became more and more skeptical and finally disassociated themselves with the project.
Also, you'd think others would be preplicating the experiment with other gorillas and different handlers. But so far no go.
As for Rico, nobody denies that dogs can be trained to respond to all kinds of stimuluses. I know from experience with pets of my own that dogs can respond to hand gestures, tone of voice, stern looks, attitude, and simple one or two word commands. I'm just not compfortable calling what Koko and Rico and their handlers are doing language. It just doesn't help me much to understand human language, but others may find it inspriational or what not. I'm willing to say that it exhibits some language-like properties, but then so do bee dances, etc. Happy trails to them.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
"The problem so far with Koko is that her handler is the onliest person who seems to be able to understand her."
Not sure of what to make of that. I know that some animals can get very attached to certain individuals. In AK, our husky got attached to me. Poodle got attached to mom. My Lab got attached to me, my dad's to him.
Just picked up a Jack Russel from the animal shelter for the girls this past Saturday. It's the girls' dog, but so far she only comes when I call her. Probably she thinks this is a pack and I'm the leader of the pack. For whatever reason, though, she "performs" for me and not others. It's only been a few days and I'm sure things will evolve, but the trend is already set.
"Her utterances are usually two or three symbols, and just don't display much of anything in the way of syntax."
This, I think, is important. Positive reinforcement is a good thing, but it can be misleading. If the animal is getting continual praise for jabbering, then it will jabber. (OTOH, one would think a psychological researcher would be aware of this.)
"koko want banana"
"good girl koko, have a treat!"
"koko want banana"
"good girl koko, have a treat!"
"koko poopoo"
"good girl koko, have a treat!"
"koko poopoo banana"
"good girl koko, have a treat!"
You get the idea.
"... ASL-signing consultants who were brought in ... became more and more skeptical and finally disassociated themselves ... "
That's interesting - and reminiscent of other miraculous or amazing claims made in other venues. When a disinterested observer reads initial accounts from newspapers and so forth, the event sounds utterly amazing and convincing, but once a little research is done, the miracle tends to evaporate.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,475
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,475 |
Probably she thinks this is a pack and I'm the leader of the pack.
That reminds me TFF, there's a book from the late '40s by Konrad Lorenz on canine behavior that's a fun and informative read. Can't remember the title, but it could be Man Meets Dog.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
Well--I am sorry, now, that I haven't been able to get to this category for so long; I thought I might have time to catch up on all 155 new posts this morning, but this thread was first up, and I'm going to have to stop here and just hope I can remember how many others to get to next time.
I have read this thread twice, and am still unable to pinpoint the exact spot where it started to get ugly; but I am nonetheless filled with dismay. Disagreeing/asking for clarification is one thing. Disagreeing/asking for clarification while making snide remarks or personal attacks is quite another, and extremely unwelcome, to say nothing of disruptive.
Questioning someone or their thoughts while attacking them at the same time is a near-guarantee that they will not respond to the question but to the attack. If this has been done on purpose, then I say: attackees, be warned! Realize that you may be being deliberately lured away from presenting your thoughts on the subject, and feel free to ignore the attack, or at least not to give it star billing.
For what it's worth: saying something like, " N (author) bores me", or " N (author)'s ideas are ridiculous" is NOT necessarily the same as saying, "You're stupid if you like N".
This thread opened with a perfectly valid and wonderful question, one that virtually demands different viewpoints and lovely, lively discussion! Can we go back to the loveliness, PLEASE? If anyone has a "beef" with a particular person, would you please let them know via a PM, and not drag the entire readership into your vendetta? Despite some personal past unhappiness, I still care about this place.
*********************************************************
I hadn't even thought of ASL, re: what constitutes a word. I wish Brandon would respond to that. As to how the nuance behind the word audacious is gotten across, I wonder if the signer's facial expressions add to it?
As to which came first, ideas or words, I would have to say ideas. Think back to the earliest humans: it makes sense to me that they would have had to first be aware of what their needs were ("food", "danger!") and then found ways to communicate these to others--possibly hand signals or drawings, first, but there surely would have been times when these were impossible, so spoken words developed.
I was interested to read, in the context of this thread, the phrase "make the law spring off the page": I took it that the writer was meaning that the concept, or understanding, became clear in the minds of the students, not that the words of the law literally rose from the page into the air! Amazing things, words...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,788
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,788 |
Konrad Lorenz' Man Meets Dog was first published in German in 1949, first published in English in 1953, and reissued in 1980, as interest in Lorenz' work grew. The edition reprinted in 1994 can still be found in some bibliopoles.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
"Man Meets Dog"
will check it out.
k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661 |
Is a Salchow any less distinctive and enthralling than the stylings of Frank Sinatra...(?)Less distinctive however often more enthralling.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,788
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,788 |
Unlike some of the very scholarly things written by Lorenz, this one (Man/Dog) was written for the general reader ... which is better, in many respects.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,027
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,027 |
better, in many respects - It was one of the few books I read several times in my youth. It was one of the reasons why I also worked my way through his later writings, and observed the fluctuations of his popularity..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,788
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,788 |
My introduction to Lorenz happened when my mother bought me a used copy of King Solomon's Ring, which was another book the professor wrote for general audiences. I read it when I was about ten years of age and found it to be excellent, as I have found it on the several occasions when I have reread it (or read it to a nephew or niece) as an adult.
|
|
|
|
|
