Aside from trivial statements like “turn out the lights,” epistemologically speaking, how can ensure alignment between what we mean when we utter something semi-complex and what the other person understands? Is this purely philosophical? fMRI?
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I believe we often have less evidence of such understanding than we seem to think.
-
And yet the adaptive communication/ evolutionary linguistics picture tends to show otherwise. But what we often miss is the positive value of missing others’ meanings.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
For what it’s worth, verbal interaction makes consensus trivial when compared to online interaction
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yeah, language without tonality is pretty bland. This is why a phone call is much more effective at conveying stuff as compared to a simple text.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
That's why topic detection on NLP works so well, for sure! Combinations of words include/compress a wealth of *shared* meanings in a incredibly small amount of bytes. Despite the diversity of contexts (including locutors).
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yeah. I mean, to realise that one of the primary modes of communication is inconsistent and yet is something that humans have been able to use, to accomplish the things that we have. I find it remarkable and intimidating at the same time.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Try Swiss German ...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Just Kidding
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.