🚀 go-pugleaf

	In his reply to the posting on the subject of Literacy vs. Computer
Literacy by Dave Taylor, it seems that Martin Harriman is missing the point. 
It is true that in present-day society literacy is an absolute necessity for 
effective communication, since a very large portion of our communication is 
carried by the written word.

	I feel, however, that is necessary to examine the reasons for this. 
The question is, then, do we need to be literate (i.e. able to use written 
communication 'well') because written communication is the *best* mode of 
communication, or just because it is the only form of communication presently
available in many situations?  It is my contention that the latter is the case,
and that with the wider availability of higher bandwidth modes of communication
will reduce (but almost certainly not wipe out) the overwhelming advantage the
literate enjoy over the illiterate.

	Martin is correct in that current alphabets all evolved from picture
writing. This was not, however, due to the inherant advantages of alphabetic
writing over iconography.  Writing was developed as a method of recording 
information, and the original picture writing was cumbersome because it used
up a great deal of space.  Scribes only had room to store so many clay 
tablets.  Another problem with iconography is that it bears little relation 
to the spoken language that everybody knows, and hence some confusion can 
exist as to the interpretation of such communication.  An alphabetic system 
in which the words bear a one-to-one correspondence to spoken words will be 
interpreted and evolve on a parallel path to spoken language.  

	*Writing is just an attempt to store spoken language*

And up until now, due to technological factors, alphabetic writing, be it 
ever so cryptic, narrow of bandwidth, and lacking in nuance, has been the 
only practical way of storing language, and hence ideas.  Due to this narrow 
bandwidth, the more adept have developed techniques have developed methods of 
encoding nuance into their writing which are not needed, and hence not used 
in the spoken language in which other, more natural techniques exist.  We do 
not speak as we write, and vice versa.  A speech which is merely read is
usually dead boring, and one who writes as s/he speaks runs the risk of being
misunderstood.  Thus developed that class of people who were particularly adept
at expressing themselves in written language, the literati. 

	Iconography, was not abandoned completely, however. It was merely 
superceded as a method of storing the written **WORD**. I challange anyone to
describe an electronic curcuit using words more succinctly and clearly than
the most illiterate engineer can using the standard iconographs. This and many
other applications are simply beyond words, written or spoken.

	This is where Dave Taylor had a good point: computer literacy is 
an unfortunate expression in that it is derived from the Latin for letters. 
It is, however, currently used to denote the ability to get things done with 
computers.  While using a computer requires a whole host of arcane knowledge,
the computer literati will be a small and select group.  While the only method
of computer communication is via the written word, the computer literate in that
sense will be restricted to the "letter literate".  When, however, we have voice
mail, it will be a whole new ball game . Those who express themselves best in
spoken words will have an advantage, and this group will certainly not be
restricted to those who use written words well.  (Ronald Reagan is a very good 
example of a person who has a consummate command of spoken communication 
techniques, but has, to my knowledge, shown little evidence of being a 'man of
letters'.)  Delivery rather than precision seems to be what is required here.
(Obviously both classes must have the ability to use words, since both modes 
of communication use words.)

	Improvements in the man/machine interface as can be seen, for example 
in the Macintosh, and the widening of the communication interface to include
iconographs, voice, and even video recordings will go a long way to allowing
those who are not literate in the strict sense of the word to become 'computer
literate'.  However, just as a person who speaks 5 languages has a greater
chance of communicating effectively with speech, one who can make use of all
modes of communication via computer will obviously have the advantage. All the
same, I believe that one who can speak well, draw well, and presents well on 
the video screen will beat the 'man of letters' hands down.
 
					Mark Williams.