On 10/11/2017 7:50 AM, [email protected] wrote:
[Peirce] also says that “the logician assumes that the meaning
of language is well known between himself and the person to whom
he is imparting his doctrine” — an assumption that is quite
unrealistic in ordinary dialogue, and in fact is a common source
of miscommunication between people
I agree with both you and Peirce.
But I'd add two points, which I'm sure that Peirce would make:
(1) we have no other choice; and (2) we can always ask a question.
One reason why there are so many "flame" wars with email and tweets
is that it's not possible to make an immediate comment or question.
When two people are engaged in a face-to-face discussion, they can
detect intentions by tone of voice or gestures. But a text by itself
has no context -- that's why people added emoticons and emojis :)
In fact, it's not surprising that the Japanese invented emojis.
('ji' is Japanese for 'character'.) The Japanese language itself
has the word order Subject-Object-Verb. It also has the option
of putting a little particle after the verb.
For example, any Japanese sentence can be turned into a question
just by adding 'ka' at the end. You can add other particles to
emphasize it or weaken it.
That means you can watch the other person's expression while
you're talking. If you notice the beginning of a smile, you
can add 'yo' to emphasize the point. If you notice a frown,
you can add 'ka' to turn it into a question.
The listener can show a facial emoji during a sentence, and
the speaker can insert a responding emoji at the end.
John
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
