On 2011-06-11, at 3:31 PM, Rich Cooper wrote:
In my opinion, there is no abstract language; there is only what you have designated in a previous email as “rhetoric”. ALL language is messaging from one person to at least one other person, perhaps even the same person reasoning with himself over past experience and current issues.
As is my context...
Not all messaging/language is person-to-person. There is also person-to-machine/software.
I believe that in the person-to-machine "dialogue" the only concern is to have a unique string of characters within a "namespace."
A person is using software (that they may or may not understand the purpose of) & the software makes demands for say name length.
One of the more fun ones is the classic 8.3 style off MS-DOS, which one can still see in play in people's email addresses. It is not unusual for someone to work at an organization that still has in place some sort of email (registration?) system that restricts the left hand name to 8 characters. With only 8 characters available, things can quickly lurch to the cryptic.
Such "artificial" constraints are obviously long past... yet still in active use.
I would argue these are also a form of abstract language... certainly a form of language that many people have to wrestle with daily.
___________________
David Eddy