4 ms·
People are noting counterexamples where pictures are more efficient, such as warning symbols which are resilient to cultural translation. However, I would argue
by doctorstupid 11y ago
People are noting counterexamples where pictures are more efficient, such as warning symbols which are resilient to cultural translation. However, I would argue that such cases are actually forms of text. By 'text', the author really means collections of symbols. In that sense, ancient hieroglyphics are texts and perhaps emojis are too.
- wutbrodo 11y agoI think that stretches the definition a little too far. A warning sign of that type is different from textual symbols in that it's readily understandable to someone seeing it for the first time. I agree with the author's thesis in general but that is a rather good exception to point out.
- doctorstupid 11y agoYou raise an interesting point. Perhaps we shouldn't stipulate that a symbol must be understood the first time - the meaning of most symbols are probably taught in some way - but rather that once learned, the meaning is unambiguous. The silhouette of a shark on a beach sign is quite unambiguous, whereas an artist's illustration of a shark may be open to interpretation. In other words, perhaps it is the level of ambiguity which distinguishes symbols from other graphic forms.