Biosemiotics

, Volume 4, Issue 1, pp 25–38 | Cite as

A Biosemiotic Analysis of Braille

Original Paper

Abstract

A unique aspect of human communication is the utilization of sets of well-delineated entities, the morphology of which is used to encode the letters of the alphabet. In this paper, we focus on Braille as an exemplar of this phenomenon. We take a Braille cell to be a physical artifact of the human environment, into the structure of which is encoded a representation of a letter of the alphabet. The specific issue we address in this paper concerns an examination of how the code that is embedded in the structure of a Braille cell is transferred with fidelity from the environment through the body and into the Braille reader’s brain. We describe four distinct encoding steps that enable this transfer to occur.

Keywords

Braille Encoding Biosemiotic systems Neuronal groups Somatosensory system 

References

  1. Barbieri, M. (2010). On the origin of language: A bridge between biolinguistics and biosemiotics. Biosemiotics, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  2. Bolanowski, S. J., & Pawson, L. (2003). Organization of Meissner corpuscles in the glabrous skin of monkey and cat. Somatosensory & Motor Research, 20, 223–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Deacon, T. W. (1997). The symbolic species: The co-evolution of language and the brain. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  4. Edelman, G. M. (1987). Neural darwinism: The theory of neuronal group selection. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  5. Edelman, G. M. (1989). The remembered present: A biological theory of consciousness. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  6. Gould, S. J., & Vrba, E. (1982). Exaptation: a missing term in evolutionary theory. Paleobiology, 8, 4–15.Google Scholar
  7. Knibestol, M. (1972). Stimulus-response functions of rapidly adapting mechanoreceptors in the human glabrous skin area. Jounal of Physiology, 232, 427–452.Google Scholar
  8. Legge, G., Madison, C., & Mansfield, J. (1999). Measuring Braille reading speed with the MNREAD test. Visual Impairement Resarch, 1, 131–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Nicolelis, M., & Ribeiro, S. (2006). Seeking the neural code. Scientific American, 295, 70–77.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Niedermeyer, E., & Da Silva, F. (1999). Electroencephalography: Basic principles, clinical applications, and related fields. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
  11. Phillips, J. R., Johansson, R. S., & Johnson, K. O. (1992). Responses of human mechanoreceptive afferents to embossed dot arrays scanned across fingerpad skin. The Journal of Neuroscience, 12, 827–839.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Sahin, N. T., Pinker, S., Cash, S. S., Schomer, D., & Halgren, E. (2009). Sequential processing of lexical, grammatical, and phonological information within Broca’s area. Science, 326, 445–449.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Swan, L. S., & Goldberg, L. J. (2010a). Biosymbols: symbols in life and mind. Biosemiotics, 3(1), 17–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Swan, L. S., & Goldberg, L. J. (2010b). How Is meaning grounded in the organism? Biosemiotics, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  15. Varela, F., Lachaux, J. P., Rodriguez, E., & Martinerie, J. (2001). The brainweb: phase synchronization and large-scale integration. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2, 229–239.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ontology Research Group, New York State Center of Excellence in Bioinformatics & Life Sciences, Department of Oral Diagnostic Sciences, School of Dental Medicine, Squire HallState University of New YorkBuffaloUSA
  2. 2.Center for the HumanitiesOregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA

Personalised recommendations