Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 October 2022
An ideography is a general-purpose code made of pictures that do not encode language, which can be used autonomously – not just as a mnemonic prop – to encode information on a broad range of topics. Why are viable ideographies so hard to find? I contend that self-sufficient graphic codes need to be narrowly specialized. Writing systems are only an apparent exception: At their core, they are notations of a spoken language. Even if they also encode nonlinguistic information, they are useless to someone who lacks linguistic competence in the encoded language or a related one. The versatility of writing is thus vicarious: Writing borrows it from spoken language. Why is it so difficult to build a fully generalist graphic code? The most widespread answer points to a learnability problem. We possess specialized cognitive resources for learning spoken language, but lack them for graphic codes. I argue in favor of a different account: What is difficult about graphic codes is not so much learning or teaching them as getting every user to learn and teach the same code. This standardization problem does not affect spoken or signed languages as much. Those are based on cheap and transient signals, allowing for easy online repairing of miscommunication, and require face-to-face interactions where the advantages of common ground are maximized. Graphic codes lack these advantages, which makes them smaller in size and more specialized.
Target article
The puzzle of ideography
Related commentaries (26)
A bigger problem for ideography: The pervasiveness of linguistic structure
A cognitive account of the puzzle of ideography
A source- and channel-coding approach to the analysis and design of languages and ideographies
Bypass language en route to meaning at your peril
Chinese offers a test for universal cognitive processes
Communication consistency, completeness, and complexity of digital ideography in trustworthy mobile extended reality
Emoji use validates the potential for meaning standardization among ideographic symbols
Fractals and artificial intelligence to decrypt ideography and understand the evolution of language
Functional ideographies are composite semiotic systems
Graphic codes, language, and the computational niche
How standardized must a code be to be useful?
Ideography in interaction
Ideography insight from facial recognition and neuroimaging
Ideography, Blissymbolics, standardization, and emergent conformity
Mind the gap: Why is there no general purpose ideographic system?
Notational systems are distinct cognitive systems with different material prehistories
On the semiotic and material constraints of ideographies
Pragmatic interpretation and the production of ideographic codes
The centrality of practice in ideographic communication, and the perennial puzzle of positivistic thinking
The design space of human communication and the nonevolution of ideography
The different paths to cultural convergence
The disadvantage of ideography
The feasibility of ideography as an empirical question for a science representational systems design
The stranding of the ideography: A nonnegligible role of the spoken language
Visual languages and the problems with ideographies: A commentary on Morin
Why the use of ideographic codes does not improve communicative skills in patients with severe aphasia?
Author response
Puzzling out graphic codes