4 ms·

That's a fair point, although I think that writing has been with us for so long that we can no longer say that it's something we haven't adapted our language to

That's a fair point, although I think that writing has been with us for so long that we can no longer say that it's something we haven't adapted our language to. Think of it this way: when you think in terms of defining a word, don't you picture how it's written down? That is probably a different mindset from the one people who can't read are in. Plus, many times orthography has to do with how the word has evolved from a different language.

autora 7y ago
>when you think in terms of defining a word, don't you picture how it's written down? Interesting hypothesis. I don't think I do, and my assumption is that most other people don't either? I learnt to speak well before I learnt to read and write. The process of speaking without any knowledge of the letters was deeply embedded in my brain. People that are unable as adults to read or write, or have severe impediments to reading/writing in the same way that I do (e.g. dyslexia) don't speak any differently. If I try to, I can picture how my spoken word is written down, but I'm pretty sure when I'm talking in a more "autonomic" fashion I'm not really picturing the words?
- ohduran 7y ago
  That's actually a very good point. The way I see it, although I may be wrong, is that people that have difficulties in reading/writing are a minority, at least in developed countries. Thus, they are nevertheless exposed to a way of speaking that is mainly influenced by the majority, who are influenced somehow by the written word. On the other hand, what strikes me as a contribution of Internet to the language is our capacity to communicate through videos and pictures. Which means that our vocabulary is narrower. I don't have to be so elaborate when describing my room; I can just take a picture, and tweet it.
jhanschoo 7y ago
> when you think in terms of defining a word, don't you picture how it's written down? Not really, actually. To illustrate, if someone asked me what "diarrhea" means, I would answer quickly that it's having a stomachache and runny shits, and it would be an adequate definition, even though I would have to take a moment to figure out its spelling and even then I won't be certain.
- ohduran 7y ago
  I stand corrected, that's good counterexample.
_emacsomancer_ 7y ago
Orthography doesn't affect underlying structure of language. It's a meta-representation layer. Again, this doesn't mean it isn't interesting, but I'm not going going to say "Oooh, people are writing sentence in English which don't start with capital languages, what an exciting language change." Because it's an orthographic change, and not a language change.

autora 7y ago

>when you think in terms of defining a word, don't you picture how it's written down? Interesting hypothesis. I don't think I do, and my assumption is that most other people don't either? I learnt to speak well before I learnt to read and write. The process of speaking without any knowledge of the letters was deeply embedded in my brain. People that are unable as adults to read or write, or have severe impediments to reading/writing in the same way that I do (e.g. dyslexia) don't speak any differently. If I try to, I can picture how my spoken word is written down, but I'm pretty sure when I'm talking in a more "autonomic" fashion I'm not really picturing the words?

ohduran 7y ago
That's actually a very good point. The way I see it, although I may be wrong, is that people that have difficulties in reading/writing are a minority, at least in developed countries. Thus, they are nevertheless exposed to a way of speaking that is mainly influenced by the majority, who are influenced somehow by the written word. On the other hand, what strikes me as a contribution of Internet to the language is our capacity to communicate through videos and pictures. Which means that our vocabulary is narrower. I don't have to be so elaborate when describing my room; I can just take a picture, and tweet it.

jhanschoo 7y ago

> when you think in terms of defining a word, don't you picture how it's written down? Not really, actually. To illustrate, if someone asked me what "diarrhea" means, I would answer quickly that it's having a stomachache and runny shits, and it would be an adequate definition, even though I would have to take a moment to figure out its spelling and even then I won't be certain.

ohduran 7y ago
I stand corrected, that's good counterexample.

_emacsomancer_ 7y ago

Orthography doesn't affect underlying structure of language. It's a meta-representation layer. Again, this doesn't mean it isn't interesting, but I'm not going going to say "Oooh, people are writing sentence in English which don't start with capital languages, what an exciting language change." Because it's an orthographic change, and not a language change.