In my work as an e-learning instructional designer, I spend a lot of time considering the design and layout of text and how this will impact the learner. Because of this outlook, the question “Did the shift from writing to print promote changes in literary form?” immediately grabbed my attention. The idea that auditory dominance so impacted writings in the sixteenth-century – title pages in particular – so that major words were divided and the first word was much more visually dominating (Ong, 1982) goes against everything I believe when it comes to presenting text and information to readers. However, I guess the fact that I think of learners simultaneously as readers is quite telling when it comes to my perspective…
Ong (1982) remarks on the influence of orality still existent in written manuscripts when he asks “if you felt yourself as a reader to be listening to words, what difference did it make if the visible text went its own visually aesthetic way?” It seems that writing still had quite a lot of oral influence in the way text was presented on the page and it wasn’t until the shift from writing to printing that this started to change and the influence of orality began to wane.
So, just like orality had an influence on early writing, the transition from writing to print was no different: writing techniques influenced early printing as well. Bolter (2001) remarks that early printers tried to make their books the same as written manuscripts, so they used the same thick letter forms and layout on the page. However, eventually the shift from writing to print did change the visual character of the page. In other words, the “writing space became cleaner and clearer” (Bolter, 2001, p. 14).
Because the writing space became cleaner and clearer, printed texts were of course much easier to read (Ong, 1982). The improved legibility of printed text introduced the concept of rapid, silent reading and made print much more consumer oriented than written manuscripts. All this seems to lead to an opening of access to information – printing made text more legible and easier to read, it also made it easier to produce mass quantities of information, and so brought information and knowledge to a wider set of people.
It’s interesting to look back at this historical timeline and see how it affects the work I do today. As Ong (1982) says, “a few hours spent producing a more readable text immediately improves thousands of copies” (p. 120). Because potentially large numbers of people are enrolling in the online courses I work on, I do spend time making the text more navigable and I wholeheartedly believe in this process. I’m not saying I have revolutionary techniques in the ways I do this, but simple things like headings and sub-headings certainly help people orient themselves in the material and more easily navigate the page. While these ideas seem like common sense now, it’s interesting to look back in history and see how this wasn’t always the case, and the effects that the printed word has had on how text is presented today.
I want to end this post by sharing a video (in particular, the first two minutes) on typography and how the way text is presented can have a resounding impact on the way we read and process information.
References
Bolter, Jay David. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print [2nd edition]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ong, Walter. (1982). Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. London: Methuen
amy
June 23, 2018 — 12:24 pm
Hi Katie,
I really enjoyed reading your post and after watching the video you shared, it led me to revisit how the internet and social media has changed and affected the way in which people around the world interact, communicate, and write. Social media, such as Twitter requires us to summarize and convey our key thoughts and ideas in its 140 character limit. Consequently, writing has become shorter and more concise, but also makes way for incorrect grammar usage in the wake of limiting the user to essentially 25-30 words per Tweet. Abbreviations are also more prevalent and as a result, a new form of writing has emerged with the rise of social media. Some might even argue that a new language has been created! I myself often find my students using “U”, “TTYL”, and “LOL” when they are writing a post or sending me an email, which are only a few of the commonly used abbreviations my students use today.
Your post also led me to think about both communication and in particular miscommunication in writing via the internet and social media. Instant messaging, such as iMessage allows users to send texts messages and is a convenient way to communicate with others by writing. It is used to send messages immediately and as a result, helps to save time and energy because it allows you to send a message when ever and where ever you are. Jay David Bolter (2001) states that with each new medium that is introduced to replace a pre-existing one, the newer one typically will have an attribute that improves upon the old medium, which can be deemed as useful. However, we need to keep in mind that although sending and receiving text messages is a great resource to communicate with others, it does lack tone, emotions, facial expressions, gestures, body language, oral speech and simply put, the traditional face to face interactions between people. Text messages can cause miscommunication, whereby things can be misinterpreted and misunderstood. The actual meaning of the message one may be trying to convey can be lost through this medium. Hence, there is always a chance that the intended message does not come across accurately, since one cannot always understand the correct tone of the writer, which in turn can also lead to false assumptions about what was meant.
How do you think the internet and social media is affecting the way in which we communicate and write today?
Reference
Bolter, Jay David. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print [2nd edition]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Jo
July 6, 2018 — 10:13 pm
Hi Katie and Amy,
Thank you for your post Katie. Your comments on the way you approach instructional design and Amy’s subsequent comments got me thinking further about how social media and technology have changed language, how we communicate with each other and how as educators we need to be mindful of these changes.
With regard to social media affecting language, I find the phenomenon of the re-appropriation of existing words (the cultural process by which a group claims words that were previously used in a certain way and gives them new meaning) because of social media really interesting. The terms “friended” and “unfriended” have taken on new meaning from the original. The word ‘friend’ and ‘befriend’ comes from Old English, but because of Facebook it now means something totally different. ‘Like’ and ‘viral’ are also examples of having their meaning re-appropriated by social media. It’s not just social media, it’s the same case with certain brands now too, ‘Google’ has become so universal in its usage that the phrase ‘Google it’ has virtually replaced the phrase ‘search for it’ in everyday language. But is this so different to words like ‘Hoover’ and ‘Kleenex’ or ‘Tylenol’ which have been used over the years as generic terms for all products which fall under those categories. I’m sure that the printed word sped these phenomena up and that technology and all that comes with digitalization is speeding this process up even further now. Language is constantly evolving and has been from the beginning of time. Is this necessarily a bad thing? Is it worse now because it seems to be speeding up with each technological advancement?
As Amy pointed out, Bolter (2001) says that with each new medium that is introduced to replace a pre-existing one, the newer one typically will have an attribute that improves upon the old medium, which can be deemed as useful. I guess the trick is, being able to identify the attribute which brings improvement and using it further in our role as educators / instructional designers and so on to raise standards and improve quality of teaching resources. Advancements in technology are bringing about changes faster than ever before and we need to adapt along with these changes. Until Facebook came along in 2004, the last time anyone I’d just met asked me to “be their friend” was probably in the playground in primary school many years before that …
Reference:
Bolter, Jay David. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print [2nd edition]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.