indigenous architecture through indigenous knowledge

[Meryuma]

i was inspired to make this topic after responding to the grammar nazi thread it reminded me of a news item i read which was about an architect of first nations descent in vancouver "bc" canada who wrote a thesis on architecture using no capitalization or sentence-ending punctuation

this was meant as a sign of informality a symbol of the arbitrary nature of grammar and notions of "politeness" or "correctness" and a way of conveying the value of oral traditions supposedly the more freeform and understated manner of presenting the text conveys an oral tradition in which knowledge is passed down conversationally

the introduction to the paper was written using traditional standards of typefacing the rest all used the postmodern and "indigenous" style which as the author pointed out has parallels with european-descended modernists such as ee cummings the paper could be viewed as a gimmick but the author's intent is clearly sincere and the work required a vast amount of research and effort

you can find the paper here (i only read a portion of it due to its length) personally i found some of the "interdisciplinary" aspects such as the use of poetry to be a bit pretentious but overall i find the writing style to have a calming and matter of fact quality

the architecture itself is also very nice and the use of photography should honestly be the norm everywhere for papers about the arts tbh it is very attention grabbing as a project and definitely the only time a 200 page academic text about indigenous architecture has been featured in time magazine

[Risottia]

i was inspired to make this topic after responding to the grammar nazi thread it reminded me of a news item i read which was about an architect of first nations descent in vancouver "bc" canada who wrote a thesis on architecture using no capitalization or sentence-ending punctuation

this was meant as a sign of informality a symbol of the arbitrary nature of grammar

Aslkjqo 834je akkaks !!s


Take the above answer as a symbol of the arbitrary nature of language.

[Farnhamia]

i was inspired to make this topic after responding to the grammar nazi thread it reminded me of a news item i read which was about an architect of first nations descent in vancouver "bc" canada who wrote a thesis on architecture using no capitalization or sentence-ending punctuation

this was meant as a sign of informality a symbol of the arbitrary nature of grammar and notions of "politeness" or "correctness" and a way of conveying the value of oral traditions supposedly the more freeform and understated manner of presenting the text conveys an oral tradition in which knowledge is passed down conversationally

the introduction to the paper was written using traditional standards of typefacing the rest all used the postmodern and "indigenous" style which as the author pointed out has parallels with european-descended modernists such as ee cummings the paper could be viewed as a gimmick but the author's intent is clearly sincere and the work required a vast amount of research and effort

you can find the paper here (i only read a portion of it due to its length) personally i found some of the "interdisciplinary" aspects such as the use of poetry to be a bit pretentious but overall i find the writing style to have a calming and matter of fact quality

the architecture itself is also very nice and the use of photography should honestly be the norm everywhere for papers about the arts tbh it is very attention grabbing as a project and definitely the only time a 200 page academic text about indigenous architecture has been featured in time magazine

That's nice. What are we supposed to discuss?

[Conserative Morality]

Everything's arbitrary when you get down to it. Really, fuck that kind of pretentious shit.

[Angleter]

I've got to "why do not more people question the rules of grammar and punctuation" (p.xiii) and I'm unsure whether to continue. Within a, er, written breath of declaring that his new system was "democratic" and "reinforcing my writing as spoken word," the author was forced by his own grammar structure to use a turn of phrase that nobody would use in real life. It quite clearly started as "why don't more people..." and had to be changed to get rid of the offending apostrophe.

NB: My 11,111st post!

EDIT: Page xiv is worse than page xiii - this may well be a decent architecture thesis, but in addition to the annoying foibles of his grammar system (why is c\a\n\a\d\a written in beige, and how on Earth does that backward slash thing chime with the whole 'oral culture' thing, does it mean something when the spaces are different lengths, is the space before 'degrades' intentional and if so, why, is that a space going over the edge of the line and if so, how long is it, etc.), the discussion of education and language and suchlike isn't remotely in-depth enough, especially when it's being used to justify such a radical approach.

[Meryuma]

Aslkjqo 834je akkaks !!s


Take the above answer as a symbol of the arbitrary nature of language.

There's a difference between " arbitrary" and "meaningless". All languages are arbitrary but gain meaning through mutual communication.

I've got to "why do not more people question the rules of grammar and punctuation" (p.xiii) and I'm unsure whether to continue. Within a, er, written breath of declaring that his new system was "democratic" and "reinforcing my writing as spoken word," the author was forced by his own grammar structure to use a turn of phrase that nobody would use in real life. It quite clearly started as "why don't more people..." and had to be changed to get rid of the offending apostrophe.

NB: My 11,111st post!

EDIT: Page xiv is worse than page xiii - this may well be a decent architecture thesis, but in addition to the annoying foibles of his grammar system (why is c\a\n\a\d\a written in beige, and how on Earth does that backward slash thing chime with the whole 'oral culture' thing, does it mean something when the spaces are different lengths, is the space before 'degrades' intentional and if so, why, is that a space going over the edge of the line and if so, how long is it, etc.), the discussion of education and language and suchlike isn't remotely in-depth enough, especially when it's being used to justify such a radical approach.

The way " c\a\n\a\d\a" looks wrong is supposed to represent the wrongness of the country's treatment of indigenous peoples (that part I do find kinda pretentious).

[Caninope]

Everything's arbitrary when you get down to it. Really, fuck that kind of pretentious shit.

I'm actually a fan of this. Far too often, some academics and intellectuals gets wrapped up in the importance of Standard English, so much so that they forget that Standard English is not any more right than any other dialect. People like ee cummings bother me less than people who accept Strunk and White as the Bible of the English language.

[Nazi Flower Power]

I've got to "why do not more people question the rules of grammar and punctuation" (p.xiii) and I'm unsure whether to continue. Within a, er, written breath of declaring that his new system was "democratic" and "reinforcing my writing as spoken word," the author was forced by his own grammar structure to use a turn of phrase that nobody would use in real life. It quite clearly started as "why don't more people..." and had to be changed to get rid of the offending apostrophe.

NB: My 11,111st post!

EDIT: Page xiv is worse than page xiii - this may well be a decent architecture thesis, but in addition to the annoying foibles of his grammar system (why is c\a\n\a\d\a written in beige, and how on Earth does that backward slash thing chime with the whole 'oral culture' thing, does it mean something when the spaces are different lengths, is the space before 'degrades' intentional and if so, why, is that a space going over the edge of the line and if so, how long is it, etc.), the discussion of education and language and suchlike isn't remotely in-depth enough, especially when it's being used to justify such a radical approach.

The way " c\a\n\a\d\a" looks wrong is supposed to represent the wrongness of the country's treatment of indigenous peoples (that part I do find kinda pretentious).

A lot of it is pretentious TBH.

At first glance, I thought the informal no punctuation thing was an interesting concept, but he just went too far with the other gimmicks. The weird formatting (spacing, etc.) is not consistent with the idea of informality and oral tradition. It's highly artificial and dependent on the use of a written format, and I feel like it's a distraction from what's actually being said.

And since I am in this thread, the idea of breaking the rules of standard English to assert your independence from the dominant culture is not original. I've seen it done before. Look up Gloria Anzaldua if you're interested. It's not exactly the same style, but the same general idea.

[Dakini]

I'm not actually even sure that removing commas and periods doesn't reflect an oral tradition. When you insert a period or a comma, you're not just separating ideas or making your text more clear, you're also inserting small pauses and places to breathe if you read the text aloud.

I would think that if one would like to express ideas in a way consistent with oral traditions, one would instead write in a more rhythmic or rhyming way, since that sort of thing is easier to remember and pass on (but that's also a lot more effort than coming up with different arbitrary conventions).

[Tsaraine]

I believe we actually had a poster in the past who wrote like this, for this exact reason (Cameroi, if anyone remembers him). apparently proper punctuation is a tool of the man to keep us down man using things like periods or commas is complicity in centuries of genocide of indigenous people who have been oppressed and their deep spiritual connection with the land snuffed out by the white mans machines cmon man pass the bong man

Oddly enough, back when punctuation was first being introduced into European manuscripts, there were people who opposed it on moral grounds just as this person does. The reason being that the writing of the day was (mostly) Bibles, and WHENYOUWRITEABOUTJESUSCHRISTLIKETHISYOUREYESHAVETOSPENDTIMEPICKINGOUTSPECIFICWORDSOFHOLYSCRIPTUREWHICHINTHEORYLEADSTOADEEPERUNDERSTANDINGOFTHEHOLYTEXT.

As you might guess, I don't think much of this idea. Punctuation is designed to improve legibility and (as Dakini notes) is actually useful in speaking it aloud. The idea that one's punctuation or lack thereof is somehow a choice with moral implications is absurd. I would suggest that we start some kind of foundation to supply extra periods to the people labouring under such a crippling lack of them, and airdrop supplies of polka-dotted fabric on afflicted communities.

[Nazi Flower Power]

I believe we actually had a poster in the past who wrote like this, for this exact reason (Cameroi, if anyone remembers him). apparently proper punctuation is a tool of the man to keep us down man using things like periods or commas is complicity in centuries of genocide of indigenous people who have been oppressed and their deep spiritual connection with the land snuffed out by the white mans machines cmon man pass the bong man

Oddly enough, back when punctuation was first being introduced into European manuscripts, there were people who opposed it on moral grounds just as this person does. The reason being that the writing of the day was (mostly) Bibles, and WHENYOUWRITEABOUTJESUSCHRISTLIKETHISYOUREYESHAVETOSPENDTIMEPICKINGOUTSPECIFICWORDSOFHOLYSCRIPTUREWHICHINTHEORYLEADSTOADEEPERUNDERSTANDINGOFTHEHOLYTEXT.

As you might guess, I don't think much of this idea. Punctuation is designed to improve legibility and (as Dakini notes) is actually useful in speaking it aloud. The idea that one's punctuation or lack thereof is somehow a choice with moral implications is absurd. I would suggest that we start some kind of foundation to supply extra periods to the people labouring under such a crippling lack of them, and airdrop supplies of polka-dotted fabric on afflicted communities.

That sounds fun. Don't drop it in rolls, though. Spread it out so it covers the landscape with polka-dots, and when it's coming down, the people on the ground can look up and see big sheets of it billowing across the sky. It will be a great visual effect.

[Meryuma]

I'm not actually even sure that removing commas and periods doesn't reflect an oral tradition. When you insert a period or a comma, you're not just separating ideas or making your text more clear, you're also inserting small pauses and places to breathe if you read the text aloud.

I would think that if one would like to express ideas in a way consistent with oral traditions, one would instead write in a more rhythmic or rhyming way, since that sort of thing is easier to remember and pass on (but that's also a lot more effort than coming up with different arbitrary conventions).

I do think lowercase letters and a lack of punctuation symbolize informality in a sense - internet comments and messages scrawled on walls are often either all-lowercase or all caps - but all lowercase also implies a quiet or introversion that's not always present in oral traditions or speech. I don't think I speak in all lowercase, though I've written in it in some contexts. For the author's tone I think that aspect worked, though the spelling and sizing gimmicks kinda detract.

On a side note, it's interesting to think about the number of writing systems which featured less punctuation than Latin script or no punctuation at all.

[Risottia]

Aslkjqo 834je akkaks !!s
Take the above answer as a symbol of the arbitrary nature of language.

There's a difference between " arbitrary" and "meaningless". All languages are arbitrary but gain meaning through mutual communication.

I answered in a language arbitrarily defined by myself. And you pop in assuming it's meaningless just because of your own culturally ethnocentrist attitude.

Or is this a case of you choosing deliberately to ignore somebody else's point?

[Ashworth-Attwater]

ejahehgbv12587

[Caninope]

There's a difference between " arbitrary" and "meaningless". All languages are arbitrary but gain meaning through mutual communication.

I answered in a language arbitrarily defined by myself. And you pop in assuming it's meaningless just because of your own culturally ethnocentrist attitude.

Or is this a case of you choosing deliberately to ignore somebody else's point?

It's meaningless because the purpose of language is communication and by defining a language that only you know, you've done something meaningless.

Punctuation and capitalization are helpful but not necessary for written communication.

[The Joseon Dynasty]

In English, doing away with punctuation and capitalisation just makes your writing more labourious to follow. We have those tools so that written language is more consistent with spoken language; so that we can replicate to some extent the intonation of spoken language. The author asks,

do people not question language because everyone is taught in school this is the way it is and always has been? is it that we just like to excel at following other peoples rules? there is a whole reward system built around following rules whether it is in school or at work we like structure i am not preaching anarchy or anything of the sort just the freedom of expression

If this is at the heart of the author's reason for scrapping English syntax, then I'm disappointed. There's nothing new or insightful there.

[Meryuma]

There's a difference between " arbitrary" and "meaningless". All languages are arbitrary but gain meaning through mutual communication.

I answered in a language arbitrarily defined by myself. And you pop in assuming it's meaningless just because of your own culturally ethnocentrist attitude.

Or is this a case of you choosing deliberately to ignore somebody else's point?

If a reductio ad absurdum doesn't actually reflect the logical conclusion of what someone's saying, it's just a strawman. The arbitrariness of language is basically one of the founding principles of modern linguistics. That doesn't mean language is zomg totally random!!, it means language is intersubjective and defined through consensus. In this paper, the vocabulary is all the same as standard English, the orthography is the same as standard English, the grammar is mostly the same. Comparing it to literal jibberish is dishonest.

I believe we actually had a poster in the past who wrote like this, for this exact reason (Cameroi, if anyone remembers him). apparently proper punctuation is a tool of the man to keep us down man using things like periods or commas is complicity in centuries of genocide of indigenous people who have been oppressed and their deep spiritual connection with the land snuffed out by the white mans machines cmon man pass the bong man

Oddly enough, back when punctuation was first being introduced into European manuscripts, there were people who opposed it on moral grounds just as this person does. The reason being that the writing of the day was (mostly) Bibles, and WHENYOUWRITEABOUTJESUSCHRISTLIKETHISYOUREYESHAVETOSPENDTIMEPICKINGOUTSPECIFICWORDSOFHOLYSCRIPTUREWHICHINTHEORYLEADSTOADEEPERUNDERSTANDINGOFTHEHOLYTEXT.

As you might guess, I don't think much of this idea. Punctuation is designed to improve legibility and (as Dakini notes) is actually useful in speaking it aloud. The idea that one's punctuation or lack thereof is somehow a choice with moral implications is absurd. I would suggest that we start some kind of foundation to supply extra periods to the people labouring under such a crippling lack of them, and airdrop supplies of polka-dotted fabric on afflicted communities.

Oh, is that why Cameroi wrote like that? I thought that was just his style.

Chinese and Japanese don't use spacing to this day.

[The Carolines]

This OP was annoying to read. This is why we have grammar rules, to avoid headaches.

[McFjord]

Indigenous architecture through indigenous knowledge?

So that means we'll be living in cabins at best with poor insulation. Damn. I hate it when people get all tribal. Really ruins civic life.

[Geilinor]

If he cares about oral traditions, you'd think he'd try to revive oral traditions rather than doing this.

[Ashworth-Attwater]

Indigenous architecture through indigenous knowledge?

So that means we'll be living in cabins at best with poor insulation. Damn. I hate it when people get all tribal. Really ruins civic life.

[Nazi Flower Power]

I answered in a language arbitrarily defined by myself. And you pop in assuming it's meaningless just because of your own culturally ethnocentrist attitude.

Or is this a case of you choosing deliberately to ignore somebody else's point?

If a reductio ad absurdum doesn't actually reflect the logical conclusion of what someone's saying, it's just a strawman. The arbitrariness of language is basically one of the founding principles of modern linguistics. That doesn't mean language is zomg totally random!!, it means language is intersubjective and defined through consensus. In this paper, the vocabulary is all the same as standard English, the orthography is the same as standard English, the grammar is mostly the same. Comparing it to literal jibberish is dishonest.

I believe we actually had a poster in the past who wrote like this, for this exact reason (Cameroi, if anyone remembers him). apparently proper punctuation is a tool of the man to keep us down man using things like periods or commas is complicity in centuries of genocide of indigenous people who have been oppressed and their deep spiritual connection with the land snuffed out by the white mans machines cmon man pass the bong man

Oddly enough, back when punctuation was first being introduced into European manuscripts, there were people who opposed it on moral grounds just as this person does. The reason being that the writing of the day was (mostly) Bibles, and WHENYOUWRITEABOUTJESUSCHRISTLIKETHISYOUREYESHAVETOSPENDTIMEPICKINGOUTSPECIFICWORDSOFHOLYSCRIPTUREWHICHINTHEORYLEADSTOADEEPERUNDERSTANDINGOFTHEHOLYTEXT.

As you might guess, I don't think much of this idea. Punctuation is designed to improve legibility and (as Dakini notes) is actually useful in speaking it aloud. The idea that one's punctuation or lack thereof is somehow a choice with moral implications is absurd. I would suggest that we start some kind of foundation to supply extra periods to the people labouring under such a crippling lack of them, and airdrop supplies of polka-dotted fabric on afflicted communities.

Oh, is that why Cameroi wrote like that? I thought that was just his style.

Chinese and Japanese don't use spacing to this day.

Chinese uses spacing for the same thing English does -- you put spaces between words. It just happens that the words themselves are not built the same way. Many Chinese characters are composed of multiple parts (radicals), and the way you tell it's all parts of the same character rather than a group of separate characters is by the spacing, but the radicals are not (always) arranged in a horizontal line like the letters of an English word. Some characters are composed of radicals set side-by-side like English letters, but it's not a consistent pattern like it is with alphabetic languages. And the radicals can have a variety of functions. Some are phonetic; some are related to the meaning of the character.

[Meryuma]

Indigenous architecture through indigenous knowledge?

So that means we'll be living in cabins at best with poor insulation. Damn. I hate it when people get all tribal. Really ruins civic life.

You can see the actual architecture he's designed in the paper, but I guess played-out racial stereotypes are easier than skimming a PDF for pictures...

If a reductio ad absurdum doesn't actually reflect the logical conclusion of what someone's saying, it's just a strawman. The arbitrariness of language is basically one of the founding principles of modern linguistics. That doesn't mean language is zomg totally random!!, it means language is intersubjective and defined through consensus. In this paper, the vocabulary is all the same as standard English, the orthography is the same as standard English, the grammar is mostly the same. Comparing it to literal jibberish is dishonest.



Oh, is that why Cameroi wrote like that? I thought that was just his style.

Chinese and Japanese don't use spacing to this day.

Chinese uses spacing for the same thing English does -- you put spaces between words. It just happens that the words themselves are not built the same way. Many Chinese characters are composed of multiple parts (radicals), and the way you tell it's all parts of the same character rather than a group of separate characters is by the spacing, but the radicals are not (always) arranged in a horizontal line like the letters of an English word. Some characters are composed of radicals set side-by-side like English letters, but it's not a consistent pattern like it is with alphabetic languages. And the radicals can have a variety of functions. Some are phonetic; some are related to the meaning of the character.

Huh, I thought Chinese didn't use spacing between words... I guess that's just Japanese.

[Mushet]

Indigenous architecture through indigenous knowledge?

So that means we'll be living in cabins at best with poor insulation. Damn. I hate it when people get all tribal. Really ruins civic life.

Oh colonialist tripe on Nationstates, what a surprise

I could go on but it sucks scrolling through trying to find pictures that'll fit to prove something that anybody that's ever casually flipped through a middle school history textbook should know.

[Nazi Flower Power]

Indigenous architecture through indigenous knowledge?

So that means we'll be living in cabins at best with poor insulation. Damn. I hate it when people get all tribal. Really ruins civic life.

You can see the actual architecture he's designed in the paper, but I guess played-out racial stereotypes are easier than skimming a PDF for pictures...

Chinese uses spacing for the same thing English does -- you put spaces between words. It just happens that the words themselves are not built the same way. Many Chinese characters are composed of multiple parts (radicals), and the way you tell it's all parts of the same character rather than a group of separate characters is by the spacing, but the radicals are not (always) arranged in a horizontal line like the letters of an English word. Some characters are composed of radicals set side-by-side like English letters, but it's not a consistent pattern like it is with alphabetic languages. And the radicals can have a variety of functions. Some are phonetic; some are related to the meaning of the character.

Huh, I thought Chinese didn't use spacing between words... I guess that's just Japanese.

I think the confusion comes from thinking of the characters as letters rather than words, but they are really more like words.