2 ms·
When we read a book, the sum total of our input is ink squiggles on a page. Our brain deciphers those squiggles into words - if they're in a language we know ho
by 8bitsrule 4y ago
When we read a book, the sum total of our input is ink squiggles on a page. Our brain deciphers those squiggles into words - if they're in a language we know how to read - and puts those words together to decode 'meaning'.
The accuracy of the result depends on how well we learned to decode language when we were very small, which depends on the fitness of our brains and the richness and stability of the environment we lucked into. We all 'taught ourselves' language. Amazing really. Over time (depending again on environment, now hopefully involving teachers) we corrected and refined our understanding of that language. (But never completely.)
Then we had to learn to associate that language with ink squiggles on a page.The 'meaning' we take from authored words depends heavily on the life experiences we may share with the author. We may completely miss allusions to experiences we do not share. Slang and jargon words for example. We are certainly not aware of -all- of them. Unusual vocabulary.
There are thousands of single words that each can have -many- meanings ... partly depending on their use as verbs, or nouns, or adjectives. Or completely unrelated to the usual meaning. Each of these exceptions - and many more - will inevitably 'poke holes' in what the author was -hoping- to convey. The word 'love' is much less complex to a 10-year-old than to a 50-year-old.
All of that is asking a lot. Now throw in the burden of deciding whether the author can be trusted, whether they know what they're talking about. Maybe the well-intended author thought s/he could trust themselves most of the time. Or not. Then there's the editor ...