Internalising new linguistic symbols and patterns
- From: Jim Burton <jimburton1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 07:00:20 -0800 (PST)
I read an interesting article in the Guardian Review at the weekend
describing something that often happens to me. The writer had been
Foreign Correspondent for somewhere like St. Petersburg and often
described the architecture there, including big statuesque figures
which form part of the columns or support of a building. Years later
he discovered the term for this -- caryatid. He writes,
"I felt a moment of foolishness which must be very old. Whoever
invented fire, I suspect, must have quickly lost ground to the man who
found a name for it."
I think this is very well put and describes something of the power of
words to capture complex ideas. Obscure words with precise meaning
risk confusing and alienating the reader, but if they absorb the
meaning (which they will do if they have a need for it) they may
discover that something they thought was complicated and ill-defined
or localised is covered by a much more general idea. I think the
Caryatid Effect is a nice name for this and, by virtue of the Caryatid
Effect, I'll think of it as that from now on :-)
What terms do linguists have for this, and can someone point me to
some lay-person's reading on what happens when symbolic patterns are
created in this way?
Something similar happens when programming, which is where my main
interest in it comes in. Programs should be written for future
readers; using an obscure but powerfully general idiom risks making
your program seem unclear but can provide the reader with an insight
into patterns he wasn't aware of. There's a tension between this and
the power and benefits of using the plainest "words" available, given
two "words" with the same meaning. The powerfully general idiom seems
like "plain speaking" to those who have internalised it, and like
baffling mumbo-jumbo to those who haven't. I don't know where the
tipping point between accessibility and dumbing-down lies.
Thanks,
Jim
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Internalising new linguistic symbols and patterns
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: Internalising new linguistic symbols and patterns
- Prev by Date: Re: How did the Semitic Alphabet become the Greek Alphabet so quickly?
- Next by Date: Re: If you were to design a language, how many vowels and consonants would you use?
- Previous by thread: love and affection
- Next by thread: Re: Internalising new linguistic symbols and patterns
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|