Re: genes and language (Homer, Richard Dawkins)
From: Franz Gnaedinger (frgn_at_bluemail.ch)
Date: 02/12/05
- Next message: mb: "Re: s"
- Previous message: josephus: "Re: All agglutinative languages are SOV-ordered?"
- In reply to: Franz Gnaedinger: "Re: genes and language (Homer, Richard Dawkins)"
- Next in thread: grapheus_at_www.com: "Re: genes and language (Homer, Richard Dawkins)"
- Reply: grapheus_at_www.com: "Re: genes and language (Homer, Richard Dawkins)"
- Reply: josephus: "Re: genes and language (Homer, Richard Dawkins)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 11 Feb 2005 23:37:31 -0800
Yesterday I mentioned the Glozel inscriptions, which
had been claimed to be of Magdalenian origin, but are
generally considered fakes. The first inscriptions were
on baked clay. An archaeologist pointed out that there
was no baked clay in the Magdalenium. Whereupon all the
subsequent "finds" were on unbaked clay ... I share the
general view on the Glozel inscriptions; I have a right
to say that in sci.archaeology and sci.lang, and the
more so as I found a new argument in favor of the general
opinion (early writing wasn't simply and plain linear,
as shows the case of the Vinca script).
This message is a warning to my perpetual molestor Marie
Jean Faucounau alias grapheus aka fr.soc.histoire.antique
aka circle aka Alan_Crozier, all messages sent via the
anonymized e-mail address grapheus@www.com. Alan_Crozier
is not identical with the poster Alan Crozier, whose name
was abused by Marie Jean Faucounau grapheus@www.com.
Marie Jean Fauconau's pseudonym circle was part of my
first e-mail address, and Deja used circle for my name,
although I did not use it as a pseudonym, I signed every
post of mine by my actual name Franz Gnaedinger.
Why did Marie Jean Fauconau use my Deja "name" circle?
Perhaps the strangest he wrote under this pseudonym was
"Franz Gnaedinger aka Jean Fauconau" = Franz Gnaedinger,
also known as Jean Fauconau. Nau nau nau, he is not my
alter ego.
He wishes to be me, but he is not me. He wishes to get
my support, but he does not get my support. Which is why
he must go on molesting me for ever.
Next time: are viruses alive or not? I shall ponder that
question by regarding the Usenet as a global experiment
in evolutionary theory, wherein the scientific fora shall
play the role of organisms, and the kooks the one of the
viruses ... Got me plenty of experience with kooks, and
shall use my "kookledge" in a productive way.
-
Franz Gnaedinger www.seshat.ch
> In my Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of
> the English Language I find the terms: body language,
> bird language, animal language, artificial language;
> and not body speech, bird speech, animal speech,
> artificial speech. One can't possibly say bacteria
> speech, although English "speech" is an equivalent
> of German "Sprache," as you rightly say.
>
> If language resembles a car, speech resembles a moving
> car, and communication resembles traffic, the sum of all
> vehicles in motion. As I am interested in the vehicles
> themselves I shall go on using the word language, also
> on the levels of cells, bacteria, and genes.
>
> You call my conception of language extremely broad,
> while I find the classical understanding of language
> too narrow, probably due to writing and book printing.
> Squeezing all we convey by so many forms of language
> - sounds, mime, body signals, etc. - into a sequence
> of syllables, or a string of signs on paper, reduces
> the richness of natural communication. Or, the other
> way round: to transform what we so easily convey by
> means of sounds, facial expressions, body signals,
> and so on, into a string of words is a demanding art,
> which is why some of our modern languages have been
> formed by poets; consider Dante Alighieri in Itlay,
> and Shakespeare in England. The Homeric bards may
> have done the same for ancient Greek.
>
> By the way: early writing was not linear, as shows
> the case of the Vinca script, while the faker of the
> Glozel inscriptions, allegedly of Magdalenian origin,
> simply assumed that writing was always linear, which
> gives him away. With modern writing systems, as used
> in the World Wide Web, we are returning to multimedia,
> a blend of verbal and visual languages arranged in
> an area, and supported by sounds. Will be interesting
> to see how language evolves when (partly) freed from
> the former limitations of writing and printing.
> -
> Regards Franz Gnaedinger www.seshat.ch
- Next message: mb: "Re: s"
- Previous message: josephus: "Re: All agglutinative languages are SOV-ordered?"
- In reply to: Franz Gnaedinger: "Re: genes and language (Homer, Richard Dawkins)"
- Next in thread: grapheus_at_www.com: "Re: genes and language (Homer, Richard Dawkins)"
- Reply: grapheus_at_www.com: "Re: genes and language (Homer, Richard Dawkins)"
- Reply: josephus: "Re: genes and language (Homer, Richard Dawkins)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|