Communication: A Limitation or a Liberation?

As language shifts from cuneiform to alphabetic writing, this change suggests that the physical structure of language directly shapes how its speakers communicate. As the boundaries of communication expand, humans are able to convey increasingly complex ideas and thoughts. The shift from Mesopotamian cuneiform to the Grecian alphabet represents a more logical system capable of defining abstract concepts.

Goody and Watt argue that the Greek alphabet with the first to posess a “comprehensively and exclusively phonetic system” (314). This suggests that prior to the creation of a phonetic means of communication, complex thoughts and ideas could not have been conveyed. As the alphabet was standardized, literacy is more easily taught, which disrupted the prior tradition means of oral heritage. Through the popularization of literacy, written records have asserted a more “objective recognition” of the past, which eliminates inconsistencies that would have been characteristic of oral tradition (Goody & Watt 311).

Van De Mieroop asserts that Bablyonian cuneiform fosters a more abstract or “pointillistic” means of communication (30). Cuneiform was first developed as a means of accounting, and to learn how to write cueiform, visit the British Museum. They apporach communication on a case-by-case basis, rather than creating a universal definition for the objects and situations they encounter. Mesopotamians employ a subjective means of communication in which they “grasped reality through its written form” (Van De Mieroop 9). Though alphabets encourage a standardized mechanism of understanding, early means of communication posess an implicit need for interpretation rather than absolute definition.

The frameworks present within the arguments suggest that computer code, similarly to cunieform and alphabet, is not inherently netural tools. Rather, they define the limitations in which we are able to digitally “think”. Any means of communication provides constraints upon the message that the author can convey. As the Greek alphabet enables the development of a seemingly endless means of constructing new ideas, these ideas are confined by the language in which we are able to code. Ultimately, the means in which a particular language exists is confined to the manner it is presented in, so our digital communications are confined to the means in which we choose to write it.