Re: More Etymology!
- From: "Franz Gnaedinger" <frgn@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 13 Feb 2007 08:43:57 -0800
On Feb 13, 2:57 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Yes, google lies. I realized after losing just a few posts to google
that the way to beat it is to copy -- initially, just to the Clipboard
-- the full text of my reply. If I don't have immediate confirmation
that my message has been posted, I Paste the reply into a Notepad file
and try again a few minutes later.
Being a computer moron I don't know how to paste.
I just see that Google favors chatting and quick
shooting while punishing people who take their
time writing, composing and working over their
messages carefully. Not the best way to improve
the scientific fora. The last version worked fine,
after they removed the first bugs, now the second
version is again full of bugs.
You have not stated what is distinction is. I have told you that his
book is not available to me, and from your description, it does not
sound like a professional site report, but a popularization.
You can order the book via www.beck.de ,
I told you so before. And it is a popular book
in the best sense, carefully worded, the author
never jumps to a quick conclusion, and there
are plenty of illustrations - 106 photographs,
56 in colors, plus maps.
This is _not_ how "pictogram" is used by scholars of semiotic systems.
I believe that you would convey your meaning if you used "ideogram"
instead.
A pictogram is a picture that conveys a clear
message, for example informing you where
you can buy a ticket, find a telephone boot,
store your luggage, etc., in a train station.
Yes, there is a variety of meanings involved
with the terms symbol, ideogram, pictogram:
symbols work on several levels and include
ambiguous meanings, ideograms convey
abstract concepts, and pictograms are
more practical. But I think pictogram is
a wide and general term. Klaus Schmidt
uses it for the large figurative reliefs on
pillars at Göbekli Tepe, and I follow him.
I cut off the rest and send this, hoping to
come through; the next part in my next reply.
.
- References:
- Re: More Etymology!
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: More Etymology!
- From: heliogabalus
- Re: More Etymology!
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: More Etymology!
- From: heliogabalus
- Re: More Etymology!
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: More Etymology!
- From: heliogabalus
- Re: More Etymology!
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: More Etymology!
- From: heliogabalus
- Re: More Etymology!
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: More Etymology!
- From: heliogabalus
- Re: More Etymology!
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: More Etymology!
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: More Etymology!
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: More Etymology!
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: More Etymology!
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: More Etymology!
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: More Etymology!
- Prev by Date: Re: Motivation behind Magdalenian
- Next by Date: Re: unnatural languages
- Previous by thread: Re: More Etymology!
- Next by thread: Re: More Etymology!
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|