Monday, March 27, 2006


"Wow, things really are hard."
"This is what I was thinking. Or, it was the first thing that came to mind."
"Also what came to mind, is how different this would look spelled phonetically."
"Or with a different alphabet."
"A phonetic alphabet."
"All alphabets are phonetic."
"No they aren't."
"I see, by your ironic example of the '."
"That's not really a referring to a sound though, so it's not an example."
"So I perceive irony where there is none."
"That is often the case."
"Anyway, things are hard."
"Right, they are hard. Sometimes they are hard."
"No, they always are hard. Never easy."
"I disagree, for me things often are easy."
"It is hard for me to believe you."
"Perhaps this is a problem of perception."
"I think that easiness and hardness are always things that are perceived."
"True enough, though you evade my true meaning."
"Is it interesting how you can have linked antonyms?"
"What do you mean?"
"Like rough :: smooth :: difficult :: easy :: hard :: soft :: crunchy :: squishy."
"I've never thought about that."
"So, is it interesting?"
"In a pointless sort of way, yes."


  1. What if things are easy when they're hard because it is hard when it is easy? What then? Didn't think of that did you?

    On a sidenote referring to your comments on the alphabet, in De Saussure's lectures on linguistics, he clearly identified that the relationship between signifier and signified is arbitrary - that even a "phonetic" alphabet would still base itself on symbols whose link to the signified phonetic item is based on nothing more than a universal agreement of meaning.

    The only way to create a true representative language would be as follows:

    To say "the bear ate all the honey":

    Take the person you are talking to into the Bear maze of Alaska and kill every bear except for one, this creating a single bear allowing for the specificity of "the" and point to said bear. Than eat all of something.
    Than point to some honey.

    This would not work by using photographs or drawings because drawings only point to instant moments and time, and a bear is not a bear unless it exists in time in accordance to the theories of objective reality posited by Derrida and the concept of Differance.

    Unfortunately, a phonetic language is not possible because language and communication is based on ideas and definition and there are a limited number of sounds that embody the concepts of ideas/definitions.

  2. I think linked autonyms are way cool.

  3. Cheese : peas :: noodles : doodles :: graphic : sapphic :: Andrew : Dandrew :: I : want a new post :: I check this : blog too much