peggy wrote:
<< Mike, perhaps the use of the word "language" in the context that Linda
uses it has a
somewhat different meaning than you're ascribing to it - as shorter way of
saying,
"non-verbal communication using body movement". Do you define language as
purely "verbal
communication"? If so, how does sign language fit in to your definition of
"language"? >>
peggy,
washou (sorry if my spelling does not trigger recognition) was the first
chimpanzee to learn sign language (hence, my reference to him). so, yes, i
do recognize signing as a language.
i think body language and music can communicate emotions but not ideas.
i think a form has to be able to convey concepts and has to allow for
interchange in order to be considered a language.
as far as the efficiency of a language is concerned, it is dependent on
an agreement of terms. you can not say 'go to hell' to someone and then
claim you were just scratching an itch when they protest.
the problem with comparing sonata-allegro form to the hegelian dialectic
is that in 99% of sonata-allegro movements, the tonic wins.
mike
|
|  |
