Can language be compared with other human forms of symbolic representations?
967050
Of course.  Ideas are represented in words.  Your words are graphically composed of letters and each letter representing a corresponding sound. \n\nIn sign language, thoughts are represented by signs which correspond to a word.  I am not deaf and when I don't know the sign of a word, I use dactylology or spell out each letter by signs.
501980
Using imagery is appealing to 1 (or more) of the 5 senses.  For example:  If I give you the sentence "John is strong", you have an image in your head.  If however, I say "John is as strong as an ox" you have a much more vivid image in your mind because of the comparison that is made.  This is an example of visual imagery but often authors try to appeal to other senses for more effective writing.
592558
1- Arbib, M. A. (1969). Theories of Abstract Automata. Englewood\nCliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.\n2- Arbib, M. A. (1987). Brains, Machines and Mathematics. Second\nedition. New York: Springer.\n3- Arbib, M. A., Ed. (1995). The Handbook of Brain Theory and Neural\nNetworks. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press\n3- Chomsky, N. (1963). Formal properties of grammars. In R. D.\nLuce, R. R. Bush, and E. Galanter, Eds., Handbook of Mathematical\n4- Handbook of Mathematical Psychology, vol. 2. New York:\nWiley,  Minsky, M. L. (1967). Computation: Finite and Infinite Machines.\nEnglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.\n5- Post, E. L. (1936). Finite combinatory processes—formulation I.\nJournal of Symbolic Logic 1: 103–105.\n6- Seidenberg, M. (1995). Linguistic morphology. In M. A. Arbib,\nEd., The Handbook of Brain Theory and Neural Networks.\nCambridge, MA: MIT Press.\n6- Shannon, C. E., and J. McCarthy, Eds. (1956). Automata Studies.\nPrinceton: Princeton University Press.\n7- Turing, A. M. (1936). On computable numbers. Proc. London\nMath. Soc. \n\nI can't work the format when I post my answer, but I reposted the answer with numbers so it can be easy for you to look at.
1018287
Some written languages use symbols to represent spoken words.  (Chinese, Korean and Japanese languages are good examples of this.  Ancient hieroglyphics is another example.)  Other written languages (like English) use letters to represent the smaller parts of words:  phenomes (or sounds).  The alphabet simply lists the letters we use to represent each one of those sounds.  Then we can arrange these letters in an endless number of ways to create words!
276776
The answer is...both.  I had an anthropology of the mind course and we studied this topic.  Humans have an innate ability to produce language, but will mimic whatever language is used in that particular environment.  \nHowever, if isolated, humans will produce, what is called, a pidgin dialect that still follows the same sort of rules that all other languages follow.  So, there seems to be some sort of mental map for language that is innate.
1137970
Logical levels of abstraction and specification exist in the realms of the social, mental and physical -> so yes such concepts are a smothering by politically minded people, but also concepts are maintained by those without time to consider such things or minds...... its also worth stating that biological, psychological and social differences do exist and are studied by psychologists, neurologists, sociologists and the like -> however these studies are usually stopped in this politically crazy era in order to stop 'socially sensititve implications' occuring and thus causing mindless racisism and homophobia - obviously we cant go into every element but i think these are key concepts
629698
the art of a particular language.
72903
in a way, it can be thought of as a sense, like touch, smell, taste, etc.  It is a sense like sight, and we even say "insight."  We say we "grasp" what one is saying, to mean we know what they are saying.  That is, we have a sense of what they are saying.\n\nSo I think it is in some ways a sense.\n\nBut it is more than that, because it is formed as a result of various senses.  The 5 physical senses, plus mind or consciousness come together to form knowledge.\n\nSo I think it is its own category.  I could be wrong.
912635
very simple approach to words is to see them as labelling things in the world. This works well for some words. Concrete nouns like cat, sheep, or frog are used to refer to certain animals that can readily be described or pointed to. \nHowever, there are many nouns for which this approach will not work. We cannot point to abstractions like feelings, employment, or pleasure, even though we understand the meaning of these concepts. Other word classes also present problems with this simple approach: we cannot point to referents for words like when or until. \n\nIt is useful to make a distinction between this kind of "naming" meaning, which is called denotation, and another kind of meaning, which is called connotation. Connotation refers to the associations that words can have in our minds. \n\nThe denotation of the noun pig is a non-ruminant omnivorous ungulate. \n\nFor some people, the word pig might have connotations of dirty and smelly; others will think of inquisitive or cheeky. \n\nOften we have a choice of words that can express our point of view. One person's din might be another person's music. Some might see terrorists where others see freedom fighters. One person's stunning architectural statement might be another's hideous blot on the landscape. \n\nThe American linguist S. J. Hayakawa invented the terms purr words and snarl words to describe words with different associations in people's minds.\nthinking day-dreaming \ndancing jiggling about \nsmiling smirking \nweeping snivelling \nwriting scribbling \n\nSome words bring very different connotations to mind among different groups of people.\nfeminist\nrugby\nsocialist\ncasino\n\nThose whose profession it is to persuade us, such as advertisers, politicians, preachers, and orators, need to be sensitive to the connotations of the words they use. One way of testing the connotative meaning of words is to ask speakers to rank them on a scale of different qualities. \n\n     good----------bad\n     sincere--------insincere\n     happy---------unhappy\n     light-----------dark\n     beautiful-------ugly\n     strong---------weak\n     valuable-------worthless\n     smooth--------rough\n\nIt might seem a little strange, but people seem to be quite good at saying whether words like natural or fresh or smelly or fragrant are smooth or rough, light or dark, valuable or worthless. \n\nThe connotations of words are culturally determined.\nIn English, the word "red" can have negative connotations of "blood" or "communism". In Russian, krasnyj, the word for "red", has very good connotations. The Russian word for "beautiful" is prekrasnyj, which contains within it the word for "red". \nWithin contemporary society, connotation branches into a culmination of different meanings. These could include the contrast of a word or phrase with its primary, literal meaning (known as a denotation), with what that word or phrase specifically denotes. The connotation essentially relates to how anything may be associated with a word or phrase, for example, an implied value judgement or feelings.\n\nA stubborn person may be described as being either strong-willed or pig-headed. Although these have the same literal meaning (i.e. stubborn), strong-willed connotes admiration for someone's convictions, while pig-headed connotes frustration in dealing with someone. Likewise, used car and previously owned car have the same literal meaning, but many dealerships prefer the latter, since it is thought to have fewer negative connotations. \nIt is often useful to avoid words with strong connotations (especially disparaging ones) when striving to achieve a neutral point of view. A desire for more positive connotations, or fewer negative ones, is one of the main reasons for using euphemisms.\n\nIn logic and in some branches of semantics, connotation is more or less synonymous with intension. Connotation is often contrasted
606527
Do you mean imagery? Imagery is language which evokes one of your five senses. This would give a visual image of something which you normally hear.
841987
Yes, this is very interesting. This was discovered at Cambridge University, it is because the human mind reads each word as a whole, instead of each individual letter. That is why we can still read it. Neat huh?
404072
This is something believed by some researchers  in some prestigious univeristies: There are more similarities than differences between cultures.Cultural differences decide the way something is percieved or felt. Surely there is a study of somekind in soem language about this phenomenon
956071
Computers are lacking in their capability to learn. They tend to surpass humans in pure rationality issues, and eventually they'll be better at certain things humans are good at intuitively just by taking in enough information. However, the algorithms for a computer's intelligence requires everything to be objective. So there's no way for it to interpret something unless there's an algorithm there to determine how to interpret it. In short, the brain is self-programming. A computer does not really have that capability. To do such would require human beings knowing how to program computers that can program brains. And at that point, we might as well just program our own damned brains to be like that.\n\nBut in terms of raw processing speed, sure, computers will eventually surpass mankind. After all, if nothing else, they're likely using superior technology. All we have is a bunch of neurons and whatnot.
795084
as a tool for expressing correctly what you are trying to communicate ,your toughs,your feelings,your ideas,but languages,can be communicated in other forms ,an example,would be the visuals that you show in a conference,so since ther are different types of intelligence the concept applied to communicate your ideas depends on the kind of language tool you use to express your knowledge
547613
There are many sign languages.  Users of different sign languages cannot understand each other, just as users of different spoken languages cannot understand each other.\n\nYour question suggests you think there might be sign language equivalents of spoken languages, i.e. Arabic sign language is used in places where people speak Arabic.  This is not true because sign languages are created and used by themselves; they are not signed versions of spoken languages.  Nicaraguan Sign Language, for example, was created entirely by deaf children who lived in the same school in Nicaragua; it is not a signed version of Spanish.  American Sign Language also is not a signed version of English -- it has its own syntax and is very different from English in some respects.  I hope this clears that up.\n\n(Actually, there is a signing system called Signed English that IS a signed version of English but it's not considered a language.)
1007533
I don't think this has anything to do with communication.  I think what it means is that words equal ideas.  If we don't have the word, the idea doesn't exist and we are, therefore, unable to explore a concept that can't exist in our own minds.
1113559
Handwriting is not controlled by just one part of the brain. It involves many parts. Language, muscle movement, imagination, creative activity etc