[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: VMs: semiotics & vms: homepage

Hi Gabriele,

Actually, I don't understand what you're saying. An example for this model
is the "Morse code", where there's a strict biunivocal correlation between
"letters" and "impulses". If you input a plain text in a PC, it's really
easy for the machine to convert it in morse code and viceversa.

Well, not quite: Morse code telegraphers also developed a culture of abbreviations (such as "R" for "ready", which - in a way Professor Eco would probably applaud - I believe turned into "Roger" in radio-speak). I guess most media are likely to have a similar culture spring up around them requiring "intervention" to be comprehended, so your "algorithm model" may be a slightly idealistic example.

>It is quite easy to right an algorithm that reinserts vowels (or anything
>left out for that matter). Ambiguous cases can be resolved resorting to
>other algorithms, similar to syntax checkers. In fact, modern speech
>recognition programs are perfect examples of such algorithms.

Correct. Good point. :-)

...though I'd hesitate to call even state-of-the-art speech recognition programmes "perfect" just yet! :-)

See above, there's a big difference between random and meaningless. One of
the "Golden Rules" of communication is that "it's impossible not to
communicate". Even a book containing absolutely random text has many
meanings (for a semiotic point of view): its images, the layout...

Errm.... "has many *possible* meanings", surely? :-9

Cheers, .....Nick Pelling.....

______________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying: unsubscribe vms-list