> b:an4b28.clc
> [ANovember 28, 1994
>
> >From Dr. Nemeth to the NFB R&D Committee and friends:
>
> Here are just a few thoughts and remarks prompted by Tim's
> discussion dated November 26.
>
> For people with normal sight, pictures are the "native" means
> of communication. No one has to be taught to comprehend a
> picture. Children at a very early age can associate a picture of a
> familiar object with the real object and call it by name. Text
> is by no means a native method of communication. Learding to read
> and write is laborious and takes several years of learning and
> practice to acquire a creditable skill. Some people remain
> illiterate or semiliterate throughout their adult life, although
> they can perceive the content of a picture immediately. This is
> why pictures have so much more appeal than written text.
I remember reading once that if you show a photograph
to a south sea native, for example, an adult who
has never seen a picture, then he/she is unable to
figure it out. So, appreciation of pictures, drawings,
etc., is probably learned to a certain extent.
This is probably more true in drawings, such as blueprints,
mechanical drawings, drafting, etc., where there are
specialized symbols that represent three dimensional objects.
Blind people need to learn how to interpret graphics as
well, maybe more so, as we generally have so little exposure.
David Andrews
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 02 2012 - 01:30:03 PST