Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA07903 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 1 Jun 2000 20:11:45 +0100 Message-ID: <000f01bfcc00$cd919640$1901bed4@default> From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> References: <B6E47FBD3879D31192AD009027AC929C368908@NWTH-EXCHANGE> Subject: Re: Jabbering ! Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 21:37:18 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
----- Original Message -----
From: Bruce Jones <BruceJ@nwths.com>
To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 4:50 PM
Subject: RE: Jabbering !
> My take on Jabbering:
>
> I have been off line a few days so excuse me if I step on a conversation
> here!
>
> na-na, ta - ta and similar mouthings and vocalizations are just like the
> flexion of the muscles ... an exercise to learn to control the muscles
> involved. The "primal language" argument is ...to me the same as the
> meteor theory for dinosaur extinction ... good press-- no sustenance.
>
> Bruce
<< Good, we disgard the primeval argument as relevant for our discussion
here. No problem with that though !!
If we take the stance " language can be described as some kind of collec-
tive invention " instead, what do we get !?
_In one or more places, one or more individuals managed to get an idea
of identifying a particular action or piece of rock or a location by a
parti-
cular sequence of sounds, repeated substantially unchanged over time and
recognized as a communication symbol by others._
From such a situation the development of language can be envisaged !
Language is then in itself a set of memes which formed a complex system
and is so also the vehicle, tool and reflection of all other aspects of the
activity of human beings.
Strange though, that a set of memes along the path of evolution were in
such a manner favourised so that they not only change along various kinds
of pressures but also change the cultural systems of a people.
In addition, each individual changes some or many of his/ hers ways of
speaking, as he does this others imitate him, and the change spread.
An examination of the facts would give indeed a strange picture.For
change there had to be actor, an action and a goal.
This leads to the suggestion that not one memeplex but three meme-
plexes were involved !
Does this means that the concept of memetics was then already in place !?
The question is particular important to us, the memetisists:- is a general
culture habit reflected in the language (and if so what came first_the idea
(meme) of the word (for that meme)) or is the use of a particular word a
prior stimulus to change our behavior and thus the language !?
(For example, the use of computers is reflected in different words as
virtual reality; links; . com and www. or vice versa_did www. change
our behavior and thus the language !?
Any feedback would be welcome.
Regards,
Kenneth
(I am, because we are)
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 01 2000 - 20:12:23 BST