Do you think this gap was closer or non-existant in the past?
I like this perspective a lot.
I remember reading how in some (Australian aboriginal) societies the
culture is passed on as songs and stories told during, and as part of the
painting of pictures or making of artifacts - all bound into the same
knowledge. The process *is* knowledge, story, music etc.
Sanskrit as spoken in ancient India was sung, it wasn't meant to
be spoken at all. I believe that the gap did not exist in the past
and everyone who spoke was part of a great song.
This is one of the key aspects of my research.
However, the problem with Sanskrit was over-specification,
and as memory capabilities of the human brain fell, and
physical memory devices gained curency, any language
with a long learning curve fell off the radar. Except Chinese,
which was simplified for the layman by the regime, even
in its structure.
What I'm trying to create is a framework within which an
abstract language can be created for instantaneous use
and when the conversation is over, the language too
dies away. In this manner, memory plays no role in
communication.
Received on Wed Jun 07 2006 - 10:45:41 BST