The first is a simple attempt to improve the layout of the keyboard, which was originally designed to slow typing down. The Dvorak Simplified keyboard was developed in the 30's, and has been shown to allow for significantly faster typing speeds, but has yet to become widely adopted. More info here:
The second interesting example is a "constructed language" called Ithkiul. The most interesting and relevant aspect of this creation is the claim that "a fluent speaker of Ithkuil... would think 'about five or six times as fast' as a speaker of a typical natural language."
More on that here:
And to hear an example of how the language sounds, click here:
Could a speaking a different language really increase the speed of one's thinking ability?
Are languages and other evolved media of communication like typewriters inherently flawed by their organic nature, or are they do they exemplify a give and take necessary for cognitive systems to be adapted by large populations?
5 comments:
I remember reading an article about a race between two people reading a paragraph.
The paragraph was the same idea and wording however one was Italian and the other was English. The Italian read his selection about fifteen seconds faster than the English reader. This is because the English language requires so many mental connections while people are reading, we actually translate much of our dialogue when speak and read. The Italian and oter latin based languages, however not ours, is basic in stating what who and where. possessive nouns do not have as much grammar baggage as our dialogue has. So in time the Italian paragraph reads faster then the English paragraph.
I learned this in high school during a typing class.
its also impossible for me to use my sisters laptop because, est dans francais.
I find it very interesting that there has been so much scientific research to back up the keyboard transition, and yet it still has not become mainstream. I don't really understand the rejection of it, other than people not wanting to learn something new, but the way we use typing now is still relatively new-- the amount that we put focus on it, the prevalence of computers in our society. I just don't think it's too late, and yet we are still resistant to change? On the other hand, I type 130 wpm with QWERTY, and so it seems like we're not as much at a disadvantage with speed and precision as we are with carpal tunnel, etc. I can see us being resistant to changing something that seems so "stock" or "common" because we don't want to have to relearn something, but if it's to prevent a painful affliction later in life? Then it seems more logical.
The language reminds me of Newspeak in 1984-- constructed and eliminating words. In 1984 it was to erase certain ideas of freedom. With this language, it was to make people think quicker. But quicker is not always better, especially in regards to thinking. Sometimes more thought is better. Anyway, language evolves in a natural process so much already, creating a new language for speed doesn't seem like it should be such a priority.
I also thought about newspeak when i saw that. I guess its really no different then the shorthand that we use everyday without thinking about it. Even though we learned the proper grammatical sentence structure in school, we all condense everything. Especially with technology, texting, informal emails etc. Even though we can get the point across quicker, its often a disadvantage to use these types of shorthand.
While it does seem a bit ridiculous that a faster more efficent way of typing exists, yet we refuse to adapt it, I have to say I understand the resistance. It would be such a huge and expensive transitional period to make a universal crossover to the Dvorak system, and since clearly the QWERTY system hasn't been that detrimental to society; people wouldn't want to bother. I think Megan raised an interesting point in her post however, that perhaps the implimentation of the Dvorak system could prevent such afflications as carpal tunnel etc., Perhaps the Dvorak system could be implemented in certain workplaces where people are required to type constantly, where it would make more of a significant difference.
It’s really interesting to know that a person who speaks English might read slower than one who speaks another language. I suppose it’s hard to comprehend something like that when English comes so naturally to me. I would never think that it would take me longer to process something because I feel like I can already do it so fast. I wonder what this means when it comes to learning languages. Is it harder for someone speaking English to learn another language than non-English speakers.
I think the Dvorak keyboard brings up an interesting, and maybe a disappointing aspect of humanity. It seems rather ignorant of people not to want to better something even if what they have is working okay. However, I think a transition would have to be a slow, probably over decades rather than instantaneously.
Post a Comment