If language is indeed less fixed as is often thought, why would graphic designers apply this very symbolic signification so much? Can’t we consider linguistic signification differently?
Language is always altering since it’s subjected to many influences like technology, recognizable in MSN slang, multicultural influences, like the Moroccan rif (????) slang that is entering our Dutch standard language and so forth. How can we connect the immaterial meaning to the material expression in a way suiting our communication?
‘Man does make his own history, but not under self-chosen measurements’ and ‘Fight for a classless society’ are well known slogans of Karl Marx. He revised our daily perception of labour within an economic system and focussed on an international system of equality by balancing economy and production. Eventually, what we need to consider is our work ethic. In the current globalising timeframe we still search for balance between economy and work.
When graphic designers and typographers use language without rethinking its limitations, they operate as alienated reproducers within a system of cultural (re) production.
Is it still possible to produce a character with universal acceptance or can you only prescribe one? Can different language systems exist in a plural manner or are we stuck in a fundamental unintelligibility?