Some of the initial discussion focussed on "what is language" (communication code?); What is language for(to enable communication transfer?). The consideration that we understand the above based on the bias of the originator and in the context of the communication. Recommended reading included Crow, David "Visible Signs" (ordered for hold from BA library the following day! Discussion of Language (linguistics); Signs (semiotics). We looked at our onn perceptions, feelings and understanding of a theory - "ideology" based on self or impressions from others and considered "borrowed theories - out of context" and the imposition of our own theories on others. Medina, Jose - Language, Key Concepts in Philosophy.
We considered why we should understand meaning not explicitly expressed. Is language always pre-packaged (politics). Can we read it without realising the bias or understanding the context?
This discussion allowed me to question my own understanding of how I view the use of language, its persuasion and indeed that it cannot exist without bias. Taking part in discussion raised questions of readership/understanding/ownership of communication taking place.
2 Questions as feedback:
1 What did I gain that I didn't expect to gain?
Some understanding of Bias/Context. The idea that no communication, written or spoken, can be really reflected upon or debated without defined context; equally there will always be a bias controlled by the writer or originator of the communication.
2 What did I find most difficult or challenging
Challenging aspects were those of specific language. ie. the philosopphy of language and the associated terminology. Also... sitting through this session with serious pain from "Sciatica"...
No comments:
Post a Comment