Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!sri-unix!hplabs!hplabsc!taylor From: taylor@hplabsc.UUCP Newsgroups: mod.comp-soc Subject: Re: Literacy versus Computer Literacy Message-ID: <1468@hplabsc.HP.COM> Date: Mon, 23-Mar-87 17:56:53 EST Article-I.D.: hplabsc.1468 Posted: Mon Mar 23 17:56:53 1987 Date-Received: Wed, 25-Mar-87 04:14:35 EST References: <1411@hplabsc.HP.COM> Sender: taylor@hplabsc.HP.COM Distribution: world Organization: Prentice Computer Centre, University of Queensland Lines: 73 Approved: taylor@hplabs In his reply to the posting on the subject of Literacy vs. Computer Literacy by Dave Taylor, it seems that Martin Harriman is missing the point. It is true that in present-day society literacy is an absolute necessity for effective communication, since a very large portion of our communication is carried by the written word. I feel, however, that is necessary to examine the reasons for this. The question is, then, do we need to be literate (i.e. able to use written communication 'well') because written communication is the *best* mode of communication, or just because it is the only form of communication presently available in many situations? It is my contention that the latter is the case, and that with the wider availability of higher bandwidth modes of communication will reduce (but almost certainly not wipe out) the overwhelming advantage the literate enjoy over the illiterate. Martin is correct in that current alphabets all evolved from picture writing. This was not, however, due to the inherant advantages of alphabetic writing over iconography. Writing was developed as a method of recording information, and the original picture writing was cumbersome because it used up a great deal of space. Scribes only had room to store so many clay tablets. Another problem with iconography is that it bears little relation to the spoken language that everybody knows, and hence some confusion can exist as to the interpretation of such communication. An alphabetic system in which the words bear a one-to-one correspondence to spoken words will be interpreted and evolve on a parallel path to spoken language. *Writing is just an attempt to store spoken language* And up until now, due to technological factors, alphabetic writing, be it ever so cryptic, narrow of bandwidth, and lacking in nuance, has been the only practical way of storing language, and hence ideas. Due to this narrow bandwidth, the more adept have developed techniques have developed methods of encoding nuance into their writing which are not needed, and hence not used in the spoken language in which other, more natural techniques exist. We do not speak as we write, and vice versa. A speech which is merely read is usually dead boring, and one who writes as s/he speaks runs the risk of being misunderstood. Thus developed that class of people who were particularly adept at expressing themselves in written language, the literati. Iconography, was not abandoned completely, however. It was merely superceded as a method of storing the written **WORD**. I challange anyone to describe an electronic curcuit using words more succinctly and clearly than the most illiterate engineer can using the standard iconographs. This and many other applications are simply beyond words, written or spoken. This is where Dave Taylor had a good point: computer literacy is an unfortunate expression in that it is derived from the Latin for letters. It is, however, currently used to denote the ability to get things done with computers. While using a computer requires a whole host of arcane knowledge, the computer literati will be a small and select group. While the only method of computer communication is via the written word, the computer literate in that sense will be restricted to the "letter literate". When, however, we have voice mail, it will be a whole new ball game . Those who express themselves best in spoken words will have an advantage, and this group will certainly not be restricted to those who use written words well. (Ronald Reagan is a very good example of a person who has a consummate command of spoken communication techniques, but has, to my knowledge, shown little evidence of being a 'man of letters'.) Delivery rather than precision seems to be what is required here. (Obviously both classes must have the ability to use words, since both modes of communication use words.) Improvements in the man/machine interface as can be seen, for example in the Macintosh, and the widening of the communication interface to include iconographs, voice, and even video recordings will go a long way to allowing those who are not literate in the strict sense of the word to become 'computer literate'. However, just as a person who speaks 5 languages has a greater chance of communicating effectively with speech, one who can make use of all modes of communication via computer will obviously have the advantage. All the same, I believe that one who can speak well, draw well, and presents well on the video screen will beat the 'man of letters' hands down. Mark Williams.