universal symbols

Further consideration led me to the idea that there are many universal symbols in existance.  Such as a heart for love, a peace sign, etc.  Many corporate logos are universal in the companies they represent.  I wouldn't consider corporate logos characters per se, as they can't be combined to communicate many thoughts.

Interesting.  It seems the more ways a given symbol can be utilized, the more likely it is that I would consider it part of a language.  For instance, I could make up a word.  But since noone uses it but me, I wouldn't consider it part of the English language.  A popular word, on the other hand, I would.  A corporate symbol has too few legitimate uses in communication, so I wouldn't consider it part of language.  But yet there are words in the English dictionary with very few useful situations.  These probably shouldn't be considered part of the language either, but these guys printing the dictionary are quirky, aren't they.

There is an interesting parallel to all of this in the concept of data compression.  The goal is to create a minimal character set to represent data in the smallest space.  Ahah, this realization makes my earlier blog's consideration of ways to make communication more efficient rather special.

It seems the idea of making communication more efficient is a very good goal.  So then, the embedded nature of culture and language is seen to be a bad thing.  Culture resists change, but more efficient communication requires the language to change.

I bet there are dudes that research what an optimal form of language is.  Commence www search..