Sorry, I meant to write something with my last reply to this.  I've been
trying to just do posts that don't take much thinking.  Now you now why.

> Rick Seddon wrote:

> You and Nancy are right;  language has sequence and therefore is
> That said;  Images (with a big "I") are not language.  They are invoked by
> charged language but are themselves beyond language.

And that is why I mentioned the collage of TWL.  A bunch of images that can
be rearranged different ways and they can be pictured two dimensionally
(maybe 3 if you're really good at it) instead of the one dimensionally
linear text that implies a chronological order.  You've sudied it better
Rick and can word it better too but I think we might be of like minds on

> BTW word order in some languages is not so important.  In an inflected
> language a noun has negative or positive referrents within it that tell us
> whether it is an object or a subject.  A verb likewise has referrents to
> us know when(time!) its action(time!)  takes place.

I think I sent a post recently quoting Mark Twain saying that he would
rather decline a good drink than a German noun.  Russian is worse! Three
genders like German but 6 declinsions instead of German's four (if I'm a bit
off please forgive me.  Its been a real long time since I've studied either.
All I can do with Russian now is to read it phonetically.  I need a Russian
to translate that.)  Anyway, it was through German that I realized about the
word order in English.  You can get by ignoring it (think of Star War's
Yoda) but it sure helps to use it.  With Russian, even more than German, you
can place words all over the place.

   Rick Parker