I want to take into account the "voice", the robot can never be defined as "talking"?
In men we talk about creativity of language, which allows him to make an infinite number of sentences, but we also come within the various metaphors or jokes that usually occurs when a man speaks ... A robot will never be able to produce these language games and to understand its meaning?
The evolution of man, has a long history, but we make the jump ... we leave the man of Neaderthan. Homo sapiens was a man highly evolved, had an 'idea of \u200b\u200blife and death, it had a tendency to bury its dead, but was however able to produce sound evolved, there was no man to Neaderthal tract above the larynx, which allows two important functions:
1.Chiudere lungs
2. This sudden change
breathe deeply the structure of the vocal and digestive.
Neaderthan could not talk as I said ... and this brings the woman to get away from him ..
This is a representation of the engineering model of Shannon and Weaver, however, rather than invoke the method of communication between two people, seems to speak of two machines, perchè tutto è trasmesso linearmente. Non viene preso in considerazione il fatto che due persone possano fraintendersi, quindi un errore di comprensione.
Quest'immagine è tratta da "Corso di linguistica generale" di Saussure. Siamo collocati qui nel cossidetto "atto di parole", vi devono essere minimo due individui per completare il circuito. Questo può essere considerato l'embrione del linguaggio,bisogna uscire dal fatto individuale (in cui tra gli individui si stabilisce una sorta di media: tutti produranno, certo non esattamente ma approssimativamente, gli stessi segni uniti agli stessi concetti) e abbordare al fatto sociale.
0 comments:
Post a Comment