« The View from our window | Main | Video of n+1's evangelicalism panel »

Comments

I’m glad to hear you referencing McLuhan, but I think he handles the middle ages in Galaxy, from 103 to 148, in a developmental way: “In antiquity and the Middle Ages reading was necessarily reading aloud”; and the hilarious “The medieval monks’ reading carrel was indeed a singing booth” (foreshadowing the telephone booth). I remember a funny story attributing the first silent reading to Aquinas, and thought it was in Galaxy, but it’s not: the story goes that Aquinas was the first monk to read silently, and that monks for miles around used to come to watch him do it. Alberto Manguel in his A History of Reading gives credit to Ambrose, who, according to Augustine, “was an extraordinary reader. ‘When he read,’ said Augustine, ‘his eyes scanned the page and his heart sought out the meaning, but his voice was silent and his tongue was still.’” In any case, today’s young readers, immersed in a whole language experience, still want to mouth the words, for reading is organic, or, as you said, humanistic, and probably begins with the very young reading lips. I realize this is only tangential to the camel issue, but I’m looking forward to checking out Space Between Words – (I also want to see that paper) from singing carrel to cubicle; if only we could read aloud again.

Hi, Joe! Saenger retells the Augustine/Ambrose story, too, and argues that it suggests that silent reading was then exceptional. Silent reading wasn't unknown in medieval times, Saenger says, but descriptions of it usually involve either a reader who was trying to conceal the content of what he was reading or who was emotionally overwhelmed.

Worse than camelCase: Gulf + Western

I've seen some awfully old Torahs with spaces between words (no vowels, but spaces). I'm pretty sure that the Irish monks weren't involved in that one.

Hi, Ari! You're right, of course. Many of the earliest scripts, including Hebrew, did leave space between words. It's a puzzle why later-born scripts didn't, because it's harder to read without it. Saenger hypothesizes that the trouble was introduced by ancient Greek, the first alphabet with vowels. Because Greek had vowels, it was possible to write it without word spaces and not have it turn into a cryptography problem, and people did so. The Romans had word spaces and then shed them, perhaps in imitation of the Greeks, with whom they were culturally smitten. Next thing anyone knew, centuries had gone by without any word spacing in Latin, which was restored, according to Saenger, in 7th/8th-century Ireland and England, as mentioned in the article.

In my first draft, I wrote the story with all these zigs and zags and hopping abouts: that is, there were spaces in Hebrew, then there weren't in Greek, then they came back in Latin. But my first draft was 50 percent over my word count! So I had to chop out a lot of things, and decided to start the story of word spacing with Greek "doing without" spaces, which I hoped would at least suggest that there had been word spaces before. Journalism, alas, cannot recapitulate paleography. (That's meant to be a kind of pun on the ontogeny/phylogeny thing, but it doesn't quite work, does it.)

I think your real culprit here is trademark law. You can't trademark common words like "Word" and "Perfect," but you can trademark the neologism "WordPerfect."

I don't understand the comparison between camel case and lack of word spacing. In most camel cased words, like Powerpoint, ipod, or Astroturf, it would be a single compound word no matter the capitalization. Camel casing actually does the work of spacing by showing you where the next word begins in the compound word making it easier to read. I'm afraid your argument makes little sense.

The comments to this entry are closed.

19th Century Online

About