Re: Writing, language, & consciousness
Jesse S. Cook III (jcook@AWOD.COM)
Fri, 4 Oct 1996 16:01:38 -0400
On 3 October 1996, Ronald Kephart wrote:
>Speaking for myself and probably most people on the List, we are glad you
>responded. You called everyone's attention to the psycholinguistic model of
>reading which regards the reading process as an INTERACTION between readers and
Talk about absurdities! Here is the definition of INTERACTION: "action on
each other; reciprocal action".
The text might very well have an effect on the reader; the reader can have
no effect on the text--unless the reader subsequently has access to the
author and the author is willing to change the text and the publisher, if
any, is willing to put out a new edition.
>and has nothing to do with the presence or absence of the text's author(s).
>The interaction is very complex
So complex that it is nonexistent.
>The idea that only reading/writing on the internet involves "interaction"
>reflects, as you say, an outdated view of the reading process.
That's a laugh and a half.
Jesse S. Cook III E-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Post Office Box 40984 or
Charleston, SC 29485 USA email@example.com
"...it is not for our faults that we are disliked and even hated,
but for our qualities."--Bernard Berenson (1865-1959)