These are very good points. Here I follow closely the position of David R.
Olson in his book "The World on Paper": we have writing when we have scripts
with syntax. This includes, for instance, numerical and musical notations.
In this sense, if Stonehenge and the Lascaux calendars were tokens of a
syntactical system, they indeed could be called "logotechniques". But I
really don't know enough about them. The key moment here, and again I take
it from Olson, is when human beings start _reading texts_, instead of
"simply" seeing/describing images.
As regards language, however, I stick to the good old fashioned "innate
endowment" hypothesis.
Luiz Carlos Baptista
lucabaptista@sapo.pt
lucabaptista@hotmail.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Cole" <mcole@weber.ucsd.edu>
To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: segunda-feira, 29 de Setembro de 2003 22:11
Subject: Re: research - writing, printing, computing
> Luiz-- Why wouldn't Stonehenge or lunar calandars from Lascaux not count
> as logtechniques? And why not language itself?
> mike
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Oct 01 2003 - 01:00:08 PDT