Re: LOGO-L> Language vs Visual

["James E. Hoburg" <james.e.hoburg@lucent.com>]

Jeff writes:
> First, speaking and hearing are different to reading and writing. But to 
> test your 'why': write this message out in morse, then try reading it, 
> then try writing something in morse, then try reading it aloud...
> 
> Alphabets are highly evolved and efficient language mediums. Morse is a 
> machine readable code for storing and transmitting, like ASCII. Try 
> reading your morning newspaper, or the back of the cereal box, in 
> ASCII(or morse).

  When we watch children acquire oral and graphic language, we see that
mastering those skills requires large investments of energy devoted to trial and
error practice--as well as a supple brain.  Same for an adult learning a new
language, really.  Some aspects of language acquisition, like vocabulary, are
even life-long.

  It seems to me that any fair test of either the efficiency or learning
difficulty of Morse code or ASCII would of neccessity have to involve an effort
commitment approaching that of learning, say, German, Chinese or any other new
and unfamiliar language.  Wouldn't effort-to-fluency be a reasonable gauge?

Cheers,
jeh
---------------------------------------------------------------
Please post messages to the Logo forum to logo-l@gsn.org.  Mail
questions about the list administration to logofdn@gsn.org.  To
unsubscribe send    unsubscribe logo-l    to majordomo@gsn.org.