Comments on: Web 2.0–Don’t call it that! http://www.zachbeauvais.com/archives/web-20-dont-call-it-that-2/ Blogging Perspective Sun, 25 Sep 2011 14:15:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Wil http://www.zachbeauvais.com/archives/web-20-dont-call-it-that-2/comment-page-1/#comment-3780 Wil Wed, 04 Nov 2009 06:09:13 +0000 http://www.zachbeauvais.com/archives/web-20-dont-call-it-that-2/#comment-3780 <p>In fairness, language itself is just a categorisation? When you're trying to describe an emotion, doesn't that one word seem hideously inadequate? The next problem is that the more erudite the speaker (more often than not) the more alienated the audience. For example when Dr Rowan Williams wrote about Sharia law and the Daily Mail didn't understand and construed it the only way they know how - as hate.<br><br>I think semantics are only really a way to shorten the gap between the author’s intent and the audience’s translation. So really the best way to bridge that gap is with some kind of telpathy device so there is no need for language, and people understand each other despite of education, prejudice or grasp of literary semantics.<br><br>There's a niche, I'm going to put my inventor’s hat on; see you at the Nobel Prize ceremony.</p> In fairness, language itself is just a categorisation? When you're trying to describe an emotion, doesn't that one word seem hideously inadequate? The next problem is that the more erudite the speaker (more often than not) the more alienated the audience. For example when Dr Rowan Williams wrote about Sharia law and the Daily Mail didn't understand and construed it the only way they know how – as hate.

I think semantics are only really a way to shorten the gap between the author’s intent and the audience’s translation. So really the best way to bridge that gap is with some kind of telpathy device so there is no need for language, and people understand each other despite of education, prejudice or grasp of literary semantics.

There's a niche, I'm going to put my inventor’s hat on; see you at the Nobel Prize ceremony.

]]> By: Wil http://www.zachbeauvais.com/archives/web-20-dont-call-it-that-2/comment-page-1/#comment-8 Wil Sat, 05 Apr 2008 15:04:29 +0000 http://www.zachbeauvais.com/archives/web-20-dont-call-it-that-2/#comment-8 <p>In fairness, language itself is just a categorisation? When you're trying to describe an emotion, doesn't that one word seem hideously inadequate? The next problem is that the more erudite the speaker (more often than not) the more alienated the audience. For example when Dr Rowan Williams wrote about Sharia law and the Daily Mail didn't understand and construed it the only way they know how - as hate.</p> <p>I think semantics are only really a way to shorten the gap between the author’s intent and the audience’s translation. So really the best way to bridge that gap is with some kind of telpathy device so there is no need for language, and people understand each other despite of education, prejudice or grasp of literary semantics.</p> <p>There's a niche, I'm going to put my inventor’s hat on; see you at the Nobel Prize ceremony.</p> In fairness, language itself is just a categorisation? When you’re trying to describe an emotion, doesn’t that one word seem hideously inadequate? The next problem is that the more erudite the speaker (more often than not) the more alienated the audience. For example when Dr Rowan Williams wrote about Sharia law and the Daily Mail didn’t understand and construed it the only way they know how – as hate.

I think semantics are only really a way to shorten the gap between the author’s intent and the audience’s translation. So really the best way to bridge that gap is with some kind of telpathy device so there is no need for language, and people understand each other despite of education, prejudice or grasp of literary semantics.

There’s a niche, I’m going to put my inventor’s hat on; see you at the Nobel Prize ceremony.

]]>