A multi-sensory discussion post, apparently
Sight
I've recently been noticing how much I rely on visual metaphors. An example: my phonology book was talking about the "discrepancies" between an underlying and surface representation, and in parentheses said "(... or "distance" ...)" and it just clicked into place in my head. I of course understood 'discrepancies', but the use of 'distance' made it so much clearer (visual metaphor there, too!), so much more concrete (sense of touch metaphor, interestingly, seems better suited). The simple switch to 'distance' helped me 'see' what he was talking about instead of trying to understand it. I almost said 'trying to visualize it'. Furthermore (oops, almost said 'en plus'), 'distance' gives the in this case important concept of the degree of discrepancy - how far is it between where we started and where we end up?
I've noticed before that I do much better with visual stimuli, but I hadn't really considered my apparent reliance on visual metaphor, and I'm starting to wonder about the connectedness of the two. I mean, when you see something, the image in your mind is a reproduction, a metaphor even, for the concrete thing you are perceiving. I've never really tried to consider any of this in detail. It's interesting to me, but I don't know what exactly I will get out of it. I'm glad I have somewhere to put the thought, instead of just letting it fade away (visual, again! so cool). Have you noticed anything like this about yourself? Do you tend to use any sensory metaphors or figures of speech more often than others? Anybody use a different sense more? Sight seems so central to me, but I'm betting that's because I use it so often. I can't decide if that helps me or acts as a crutch - a crutch, meaning, I guess, that I rely on it so much that I would flounder without it. Does using visual metaphor so extensively cause difficulty in thinking outside that particular box? Perhaps. I think it simultaneously helps and hinders me. I wonder how I can test that?
I think this is one reason I'm so crazy about linguistics - so much of the theory is couched in the visual: geometry, tree structures, symmetry, etc. Now, I wonder, is it inherently easier to understand that way for some reason, or is it just put into those terms because the people coming up with the theories are relying on visual terms? Is there a connection between those two reasons?
Cool. Very very cool. I have no idea what I'm going to do with this, or if there's anything to do with it. I think there is something to do with it, but I don't really know what. Fun.
Sound
On a completely separate sensory note, here are some songs I am listening to at the moment. It is completely eclectic, and I don't think I would recommend it in a mix. I blame House, M.D. for three of them.
Blame House:
Follow the Leader - Matthew Ryan (Heartbreakingly sad, beautiful beautiful beautiful)
In the Deep - Bird York (unfolding/rolling, slow, melancholy, pretty. Reminds me heavily of Mazzy Star)
Baba O'Riley - The Who (sweet)
Blame Me:
Lovely Day - Donavon Frankenreiter (light-hearted and wonderful)
Far Far - Yael Naïm
Young Soul - Yael Naïm (ok, this one, you can blame Apple. Not a fan of the MacBook Air, but the song is nice)
Life Less Ordinary - Carbon Leaf
Various Julie Doiron
Various Madeleine Peyroux
Blame
ghazal:
Various Ingrid Michaelson (especially liking The Way I Am)
*blames*
ETA:
In fact, Into the Deep by Bird York is NOT what I meant. I had Into Dust stuck in my head, which, surprise surprise, is by Mazzy Star, which, I suppose, is why it reminded me so much of her. Woops! Into the Deep belongs up there, too, so we'll just add Into Dust - Mazzy Star. Good!
...Touch?
My hip has been hurting more the past week or so, for some reason. Why? Don't know. *sighs* Yoga is in my future.
I've recently been noticing how much I rely on visual metaphors. An example: my phonology book was talking about the "discrepancies" between an underlying and surface representation, and in parentheses said "(... or "distance" ...)" and it just clicked into place in my head. I of course understood 'discrepancies', but the use of 'distance' made it so much clearer (visual metaphor there, too!), so much more concrete (sense of touch metaphor, interestingly, seems better suited). The simple switch to 'distance' helped me 'see' what he was talking about instead of trying to understand it. I almost said 'trying to visualize it'. Furthermore (oops, almost said 'en plus'), 'distance' gives the in this case important concept of the degree of discrepancy - how far is it between where we started and where we end up?
I've noticed before that I do much better with visual stimuli, but I hadn't really considered my apparent reliance on visual metaphor, and I'm starting to wonder about the connectedness of the two. I mean, when you see something, the image in your mind is a reproduction, a metaphor even, for the concrete thing you are perceiving. I've never really tried to consider any of this in detail. It's interesting to me, but I don't know what exactly I will get out of it. I'm glad I have somewhere to put the thought, instead of just letting it fade away (visual, again! so cool). Have you noticed anything like this about yourself? Do you tend to use any sensory metaphors or figures of speech more often than others? Anybody use a different sense more? Sight seems so central to me, but I'm betting that's because I use it so often. I can't decide if that helps me or acts as a crutch - a crutch, meaning, I guess, that I rely on it so much that I would flounder without it. Does using visual metaphor so extensively cause difficulty in thinking outside that particular box? Perhaps. I think it simultaneously helps and hinders me. I wonder how I can test that?
I think this is one reason I'm so crazy about linguistics - so much of the theory is couched in the visual: geometry, tree structures, symmetry, etc. Now, I wonder, is it inherently easier to understand that way for some reason, or is it just put into those terms because the people coming up with the theories are relying on visual terms? Is there a connection between those two reasons?
Cool. Very very cool. I have no idea what I'm going to do with this, or if there's anything to do with it. I think there is something to do with it, but I don't really know what. Fun.
Sound
On a completely separate sensory note, here are some songs I am listening to at the moment. It is completely eclectic, and I don't think I would recommend it in a mix. I blame House, M.D. for three of them.
Blame House:
Follow the Leader - Matthew Ryan (Heartbreakingly sad, beautiful beautiful beautiful)
In the Deep - Bird York (unfolding/rolling, slow, melancholy, pretty. Reminds me heavily of Mazzy Star)
Baba O'Riley - The Who (sweet)
Blame Me:
Lovely Day - Donavon Frankenreiter (light-hearted and wonderful)
Far Far - Yael Naïm
Young Soul - Yael Naïm (ok, this one, you can blame Apple. Not a fan of the MacBook Air, but the song is nice)
Life Less Ordinary - Carbon Leaf
Various Julie Doiron
Various Madeleine Peyroux
Blame
Various Ingrid Michaelson (especially liking The Way I Am)
*blames*
ETA:
In fact, Into the Deep by Bird York is NOT what I meant. I had Into Dust stuck in my head, which, surprise surprise, is by Mazzy Star, which, I suppose, is why it reminded me so much of her. Woops! Into the Deep belongs up there, too, so we'll just add Into Dust - Mazzy Star. Good!
...Touch?
My hip has been hurting more the past week or so, for some reason. Why? Don't know. *sighs* Yoga is in my future.
