Semantic Restructuring is the pursuit of enlightenment, enlivenment, empowerment through the creative re-arranging of the building blocks of meaning. For a better description, Start Here.
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | |||||
| 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
| 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 |
| 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| Months | ||
|---|---|---|
| Jan | Feb | Mar |
| Apr | May | Jun |
| Jul | Aug | Sep |
| Oct | Nov | Dec |
Bateson, books, cogling, context, CPB, embodiment, framing, I Ching, paradox, perception influence, prisdem, semantic punctuation, sensation, techniques, unconscious
A recent discussion helped clarify some of the foundational observations on which I rest much of my thinking about language.
Words don't mean, people do.
People make noises.
People hear noises they and other people make.
People respond to what they hear.
People gesture.
People see gestures they and other people make.
People respond to what they see.
People make marks.
People see marks they and other people make.
People respond to what they see.
"Language" is, generally, a reified subset of the noise, gestures, and marks people see and hear.
Discussion of "language" which strays too far from the basic observations is suspect.
It is this last piece that sets me apart from the mainstream, for there is nothing controversial about the rest (outside of those circles which have reified the domain so completely that they cannot undo their construction.) Keeping the above in mind means constantly taking conversations about language with a grain of salt, at lest to the extent that such languages rely on traditional distinctions and nomenclature which all presupposes acceptance of the reified domain.
[]
static link
writebacks: 0 (writeback = trackback +/- comment)