This is still very rough : I’m working my way through and smoothing things out I’m including the section titling to ensure the sequencing is obvious. I am not looking forward to having to work in Word.
@ face value [working title]
Interpersonal communication is a complex thing. Professor Albert Mehrabian, a pioneer in the understanding of communications since the 1960s, was involved in research that featured strongly (mid-late 1900s) in establishing early understanding of body language and non-verbal communications. His investigations resulted in a formula that is applicable to the communication of feelings and attitudes in verbal communications
7% of meaning in the words that are spoken.
38% of meaning is paralinguistic (the way that the words are said).
55% of meaning is in facial expression. (“Mehrabian’s Communication Study”)
This data highlights how critical external cues and clues are in our understanding of what is being said. With a mere 7% of meaning contained in the words themselves, it is evident how challenging it is to create precise communications when only words are available. Such is the case in text-based forms of connections: email, text messaging (texting), instant messaging (i.m.), discussion forums, social media sites, online dating, etc., which are rapidly displacing and replacing traditional communications.
B. thesis statement
Text as a vehicle of communication relies almost entirely on external styling, talented wordsmithing, or intrinsic knowledge / assumed intent to convey emotional and intellectual nuances.
The growing number of communications that take place using text-based methods (i.m., texting, email, internet), coupled with increasing demands on time and focus makes devising and implementing an efficient method of imbuing greater clarity into our writing an overdue imperative.
A new set of typographic elements embracing a semiotic approach needs to be developed that extends our written vocabulary, complementing and improving the communication opportunities that technology offers.
text (or words alone) rely on expert manipulation or assumption to add clarity
- assumed tone/intent
- none of of these methods are reliable or often even feasible in today’s digital communications environment
format, time and distraction in sending and receiving
- lack of stability in how our words are presented
- how we read now
- immediate gratification/expectation of expedience
current methods of adding clarity and facilitating brevity are unsatisfactory
- text-messaging shorthand
- assuming / inferring tone can create epic mis-communications
- a method of imbuing clarity and facilitating brevity is an overdue imperative
a super brief history of punctuation
- began as a way of directing tone (speech writing / the question mark to direct the pitch of voice)
- but hundreds of years later, we are still only left with ? ! as formal marks that give clear direction embryonic
- Rhetorical question mark
- Vladimir Nabokov would regularly use unconventional applications of existing marks and expressed a wish for a new piece of punctuation predating the the internet and the emoticon by decades.
- Ambrose Bierce early advocate for extending existing lexicon of marks
contemporary efforts to move punctuation forward
- Elray – weird-ass exclamation mark
- neither is very satisfactory and represents only a slight expansion
what qualities should new marks possess to optimize integration
- ability to be integrated into existing font sets
- semiotic sensitivity
- capitalize on known meaning of existing marks
- specificity (antithesis of such a new mark that lack this one quality interrobang asks a question in an excited manner, expresses excitement or disbelief in the form of a question, or asks a rhetorical question)
what expressions and tones are most in need of clarification
• method of determining relevance and usefulness
• locate studies?
• research linguistics?
• conduct polls?
Filed by Michele Buchanan at March 2nd, 2013 under Uncategorized