This reading was extremely long, especially for a two day span. It was also complex where it didn't make it any easier to read and took time to fully comprehend all that i was reading. It could have definitely been shortened. However these scientist took the time to break down and fully understand how language and folklore are interrelated and can respect that. Every time i enter class i see or view another way of the folklore's i read. Now reading part of this texts shows me that their is even more to it. Folklore can be influenced by the type of language, breakdown, or sequence. I honestly just thought they were stories to explain the unnatural or mysterious situations.
To even go as far as to compare myth structure eventually to brain structure and images sounds kind of excessive but interesting. Along the lines of the brain, cognitive function brought up by Colby and Cole makes sense. They state that higher education or occupation led to higher cognitive function which in turn leads to more complex and diverse stories. I found this quit true when i read the native american folklore. There stories to me where random and uninteresting. Not to say they lacked intelligence but using what i remember from history, all natives did the same type of job. Most of them were not specialized preventing higher learning. However in other folklores most people who told the tales had a certain amount of education or were profound in there field of work.
Hey,
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree, this article was very long and extremely complex. However, it was certainly interesting and deep, as I also would never have thought to view fairy tales in the same light as that of brain functions and thinking patterns, either. Overall, I though that the text was loaded with useful, relevant information but was brought down by its higlhy advanced style.