The concept of universal language initially interested me through
the potential that the word ‘language’ holds. In definition language is ‘the method of human communication, either
spoken or written, consisting of the use of words in a structured and conventional
way.’ I believe this definition restricts the value of the word – language is
more than just spoken and written, but exists in image, colour, body language
and objects. Many of these languages aren’t necessarily universal, but pose for
interesting starting points into which I could begin to explore this idea.
My
initial thoughts question aspects such as navigation, how symbols, for example arrows and crosses, represent a well known function of direction and limitations.
These incorporate colour to emphasis the meaning. These semiotics are arguably
social constructs and do not mean exactly the same worldwide. That said, there
is still a wide spread connotation of red representing danger and stop which
suggests semiotics has the potential to become a universal language. The most interesting
aspect is how semiotics drifts from the need of ‘language’ as the dictionary
defines it; it communicates an exact meaning and purpose without any form of verbal
or written language to be required.
My
decision to approach language with this interpretation stems from my
incapability to speak another language. That said there I have never had
trouble communicating across ‘language’ barriers; there has always been a way around
it, which allows communication to commence without ever even needing to say a
word.
Leading
on from this, another interesting starting point I began to think about is the
relationship with objects, and the way in which humans interact with them.
Could this be an example of a language? In a simple example, I am questioning
the purpose and understanding of a folded piece of paper. Is there a universal
understanding to unfold that paper, a language in which doing an action there
is an expectation there will be something on the other said of the paper? This
is not strictly a ‘language’, but there is a sense of communication that is a
universal understanding. Taking this further, continuing with the basic form of
paper, the connotations of a book lead to a universal understanding of how to
read it, how to open it, how to turn the page. I am questioning the word
language itself, and how it is a communication of any sort.
Body
language is another interesting topic in which communication is understood
across ‘language’ barriers. Although nothing translates to an exact understanding,
the communication of touch, hand gestures, pointing and physical interaction
with others can be largely summarised as similar worldwide. The extent of which
will be interesting to investigate, as to what exact body language varies
across countries and cultures. When thinking about language in sense of the historical,
cultural and social context of body language, objects, colours and images, it
is important to recognise the differences that can cause complications in
understanding of language. Are there repetitive examples of differences in worldwide
understanding? Do these things allow for a universal language to be
created, applying rules to allow for universal communication and
understanding?
In a
more general point, I want to explore the semiotics of colour and image,
experimenting with these things to question language, communication and
understanding in today’s society. What are the smallest possible changes I
could possibly make to preconceptions of objects, to change the meaning of that
object entirely? Could I change the colour or material of the object to
communicate a completely different meaning as to what the original object is?
When
thinking about these senses of language, it is important to incorporate already
existing language to give me insight into developing my own work. As well as
question colour and image, I want to question the most basic form of language,
being spoken and written. How and why does tone change the meaning of something
so drastically? Is it possible to speak a incoherent language whilst using the
tone of a pre-existing language to communicate what it is that you mean? Further
than this, the written text allow for further manipulation. How much can letterforms,
alphabets and words be adapted, manipulated, changed and distorted before they
are no longer recognisable? How far can this be taken until the meaning of
something is completely lost, or even emphasised? Another general question I want
to think about is the history behind languages as we know them today. How is
there so much variation? Where was the first language created?