Re: genes and language (Homer, Richard Dawkins)
From: Peter T. Daniels (grammatim_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 12/30/04
- Next message: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: Chinese-style measure words in English?"
- Previous message: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: Expressing fractions"
- Maybe in reply to: Doug Weller: "Re: genes and language (Homer, Richard Dawkins)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 12:10:05 GMT
Franz Gnaedinger wrote:
>
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > I never looked beyond the first sentence of any posting in that thread.
> > If the question was answered there, it was so buried in excess verbiage
> > that it's unlikely _anyone_ read it.
>
> > Peter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net
>
> I'd say you aren't of the MTV generation with just a very short
> attention span? are you? Oh my, already 2 (two) sentences,
> would you be so kind to read on? Yes? Thank you very much ;-)
At least you've learned to break up your maxiparagraphs.
> In my opinion, the science of language comprises three basic
> questions: where does language occur? what are the elements
> of a given language? and how are these elements processed?
>
> You are considering the human languages, and the rules
> according to which the words and other elements of the human
> languages are alined, modified, processed. However, language
> is a much wider field than the one of classical linguistics.
>
> Languae occurs at many more levels: wherever living beings
> or entities are depending on each other. Cells in a living
> tissue depend on each other, and so there is language
> involved. Cells do not speak as we do. They communicate
> by exchanging molecules, electrons, and photons. The
> elements of their language are not so easily defined,
> and the same goes for the rules according to which the
> elements of their language are processed. Plenty of work
> for aspiring bio-linguists, but, I dare say, promising
> work that may lead to new therapies.
You are using "language" as if it were equivalent to 'communication'. It
is not.
> In this sub-thread "genes and language" I ponder the
> possibilities of language between genes, body and mind:
> genes to body, genes to mind, body to mind, mind to body,
> body to genes, mind to genes. Genes to body: this way of
> language has been well defined by Richard Dawkins, and
> I find it amazing how easily the orders of the genes
> can be rendered in human language. I pondered the
> possibilities of a language from body to genes and
> from mind to genes. The next step will be the language
> from body to mind, in part 4 of my new series: body
> wisdom. I shall post that message next week.
-- Peter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net
- Next message: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: Chinese-style measure words in English?"
- Previous message: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: Expressing fractions"
- Maybe in reply to: Doug Weller: "Re: genes and language (Homer, Richard Dawkins)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
