Limitations of Language

[caronbot]

After reading Langer's dissertation on, I suppose, expression (?) I find myself confused as to how to take and apply it to our study of narrative.  It fits in very well to our discussions about both technological and social evolution of narrative as needed, in that "language is a very poor medium for expressing our emotional language" (Langer 100

Comments

Limitations of Media in General

[ammamc]

In many ways, Langer is right to say language and our other various media are incapable of allowing us to truly express ourselves. How many times has anyone become so frustrated when a thought in their mind or an image they had just imagined could not be easily translated onto pen and paper? How many times have we been incapable and deeply vexed when we could not realize in painting or sculpture what we had envisioned in our minds? Even with new media, we rely on age old methods of conveying our feelings and thoughts. We still write and use language on the Internet. We continue to use images, except now they are moving--but can they really capture what we want it to

[se101]

This is where the symbolism comes in. I don't think we as humans can ever literally or textually describe our emotions in a physical sense. But we can symbolize these emotions. Symbolism allows humans to bridge that gap which prevents us from physically describing a certain feeling. I doubt any medium will ever supply an adequate way for allowing humans to express feeling. After all manuscripts, books, and computers were meant merely to store data, not describe the intricate feelings a baby feels when it gets a pacifier stuck in its mouth.

-Ross

[jamiebussey86]

This will be a very ill-informed comment, but I also found myself asking "Why and I reading this?" I actually took a break from it to get on here, because it was giving me flashbacks (not good ones, but ones of utter confusion) to sophomore year with sign and signifier in Dr. Foys 210 class.

But through reading everyone's musings I am getting a better understanding. I agree with Matt, when he says, Forgive this seemingly haphazard musing, but it seems to me that if given enough time, people will constantly examine and re-examine our means and find them lacking. Language wasn't good enough, so we needed writing. Writing wasn't productive enough, we needed print. Print was too exclusive, not connected enough, so we needed television, radio, etc. Then computers came about...

I think that technological developments are a part of human nature in an odd way.

I also liked when ammamc said, How many times has anyone become so frustrated when a thought in their mind or an image they had just imagined could not be easily translated