 |
 |
Dear Ken, Word fréquence and usage patterns indicate something but what? The word ³no² for example, occurs a lot more than the word ³yes² (last time I did a Google search). What does this imply? For one thing, it implies that there are many more uses for ³no² than for ³yes². "Yes, we have no bananas" is apt as an illustration. The predisposition of language is the affirmative so that when we utter ³no bananas² we are asserting the existence of ³bananas² which implies the affirmative and hence, the redundant joke. So, is negation a kind of double affirmative as in ³yes we have no bananas²? This double affirmative shows up in the US army radio chatter such that in oder to ask a question you firstly make a statement such as ³30 degrees West² and then you add ³interrogative?² So a question is a modified statement as a negation is a modified assertion. (Is zero the absent presence of one?) So, if a designer is an implication in any and all designs then designer is likely to turn up less than a design and/or to design unless someone wishes to be ironic of silly as in the case of someone making the claim they are a designer (like a lover) which is an assertion of a predisposition to design but not a claim to having designed something (like a lover who actually loves no-one but themself). If they were involved in the production aspects of something (pre-post - whatever) then why not simply say what they did, like they specified the key elements of the design which led to the manufacturing of the chair. To go beyond such an assertion is to make a grand claim that is funny but of not much use. Actors/actions/outcomes are categorical assumptions in language much as Kant¹s Time/Space/Identity are universal categories of consciousness. Through this language logic (there is a something therefore there must be an originator of a something) we get GOD the designer. It is a trivial and vanity ridden assertion. No black snakes today but a turtle on a rock sun baking in our beautiful spring sunshine. Cheers keith On 21/09/2014 2:36 pm, "Ken Friedman" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >Dear Terry, > >Please allow me to differ on the matter of nouns and verbs with respect >to the word ³design.² > >You wrote: > >³It demonstrates how the *design* (noun) referring to the drawings for >manufacture is characteristically and historically more common, and hence >more important, than the verb form (designing) or the occupation >Œdesigner¹ which seem absent from any discussions at the time.² > >This is incorrect. > >The noun form of the word design is ³design,² either general, ³a design,² >or specific, ³the design.² The noun form of the word also occurs in the >plural, general ³designs² or specific ³the designs.² > >The verb form of the word design is ³to design.² ----------------------------------------------------------------- PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design -----------------------------------------------------------------