AnalyticPaper: Discourse Analysis
Thecore purpose of the underway premise is to illustrate that technologyand discourse exist in a symbiotic correlation. Within the objectivesto trigger discussions on the effect of discourse and socialinteraction that augmented reality technology have. Many arescenarios where scholars believe that discourse analysis is a complexoutcome of technological advancement. The same notion was evident inMcLuhan’s (1964) reasoning when he noted that “our tools ofwriting are influencing our thoughts” (Higgs, Light, & Strong,2000). This argument is also vividly illustrated in FredrickErikson’s argument where he noted that tiny and cheap taperecorders allowed people to capture language in use, which wasinherently difficult in the 1960’s (McLuhan, 1964). FredrickErikson was one of few researchers who had applied sound films inresearch. Journals are underway, and their submission is takingplace on the Internet . The phrase “augmented reality,” whichdelineates the indirect or direct view of the typical and realenvironment via computer-based sensory inputs, is becomingincreasingly common across the board.
Figure1: Augmented Reality: Virtual Experience of an Aquatic Environment
Figure1 encounters virtual reality. Four linguistic elements integrate togenerate a form of real-world experience: the sound, graphics,video, and GPS information. The concept is is tangential to theoverall concept is known as mediated reality where individuals’perception of reality gets modified by either diminishing orenhancing it through a computer. Considered wholesomely, the elementsgenerate a hybrid act of experience that revolves around formality ofreal, tangible experience that constitutes of a wholesome assortmentof visual and sound experiences all of which result from virtuallygenerated sensory input. Worth mentioning also is the typographyalong with the disguised ideal or enhanced “reality” (Bjorgan,2005). In arguing how discourse and linguistic features influencetechnological advancements, Higgs, Light, and Strong (2000) hold thattechnological advancements typically function to augment people’sability to realize the idealized “perfect life,” through themanipulation of reality. The baseline of the argument in this placeis “said to be a perfect life,” meaning that the ideology ofperfection, which is socially generated and disbursed, tends toinfluence the particular elements of augmented reality technology.
Figure2: Augmented Reality in Computer Games
Theanalysis of the Figure 2 indicates the presence of an assortment ofvisual and sound elements, graphics and videos which act informulating the complex appeal of reality and others affectsincluding sounds, smell, and touch that enhance the experience. Thesame could be conceptualized as one multimodal experienceencompassing of a complex mix of sensations that work together toprovide meaning. Taking the first approach compels sequencing whatis experienced in a single moment, and hypothesizes successivecomputer-generated simulations directs the experience of theindividual towards the ultimate experience that emulates that of thereal world. The approach would mean that the viewer sees the trend asframed by a form of elaboration, where the significance of theexperience stand out as a mild of the stimulus that communicates thesame message (Berger & Luckman, 1967). Even so, the practicalequivalent of the augmented reality would lead to a differentconclusion, where experience is likely to be perceived as one,multimodal, multilayer encounter, whose effect come out through theintegration of each element semiotic modes: adding sounds, hapticfeedback, smell, and graphics, to the typical world as it exists(Mullen, 2011).
Meanwhile,it is arguably agreeable to note augmented reality, as a significantcyber breakthrough, results into two forms of evolutions: one beingthe symbiotic advancement that people experience as implemented inthe narratives shared with listeners, and the next being theevolution of people’s own perceptions and further comprehension ofthe virtual communities and virtual worlds (see Figure 3) (McLuhan,1964).
Figure3: Augmented Reality as a Symbolic Advancement of People’sExperience
McLuhan(1964) for example, argues that people make symbolic transformationsof the transformation of their material surrounding and realproblems. Below is a conversation that was borrowed from Harry PotterAlliance and Empty Bowels project, which shows how people use thevirtual world to perceive various transformations of problems such asmistreatments associated with location, ethnicity, and skin colordisparities in academic disciplines.
Theabove text illustration presents a scenario where people madefigurative transformations by creating connections, acquiringeducation, education others, and building bridges, which Huang, Alem,and Livingston (2013) assume to impact social justice. Augmentedreality technology adds computer object recognition and vision, thismaking information concerning the real world environment of the userbecome digitally manipulated and interactive. This possibility allowspeople to overlay artificial information concerning the real-worldenvironment and its constituents on the real environments (Huang,Alem, & Livingston, 2013).
Figure5: Augmented Reality in facilitating Engagement in New-MediaDiscussions
Thesecond, as implied in Text 5, evolution that is likely to beencountered in the virtual environment-oriented cyberperfprmance thatengaging people in new media discussions that emphasize thatintroduce solid education potentials and value on the importance onvirtual reality (Mullen, 2011). The majority of individuals getmotivated to take up performance challenges that are yet to beexperienced in the physical world once they engage in cyberperformance festivals. Huang, Alem, and Livingston (2013) underscorethis argument by noting that utilizing cyber platforms makepossibilities out of impossibilities.
Figure6: Augmented Reality as a Narrative
Finally,as implied in Figure 6, augmented reality technology can beconceptualized as a narrative that functions to persuade humanity,thereby influencing their discourse. As per Mullen’s (2011)argument, a narrative presents a powerful strategy to attain brainengagement because such provide a framework through which the humanbrain encodes information. Stories, whether scientific or not,generate authentic experience, and this explains how people pass onecultural values, beliefs, and norms through generations Storiesjumpstart the particular characteristics of technology n bygenerating a comprehensive encounter that includes all levels of thebrain: identity, emotional, and instinctive (Huang, Alem, &Livingston, 2013). Augmented reality, as a narrative, preventscognitive difficulties and enhances the potential for persuasiveeffects. One can describe augmented reality as a narrative (generatedthrough discourse) above the content the act of involvementintroduces the content into users’ reality and individual story.Narratives occur imaginatively, but their experience in multifacetedbecause the brain encodes imaginative experiences by applying similarneural and physical mechanism as of practical ones developing anauthentic emotion and experience of space n augmented realityapplication (Mullen, 2011). The development of narrative augmentindividuals’ capacity to identify relevance (shared meaning), andemotions (connection) and enter an experience as in the form of acharacter (identity) (Huang, 2013).
Thecorrelation between discourse and technology is not a new concept,bearing in mind the long-standing correlation between augmentedreality and the transformation of discourse and perceptions amongindividuals.. Witnessed today is the notion that discourse andaugmented reality shape each other, blurring the line between realityand the virtual world experiences concerning possibilities,abilities, and identity.
Berger,P. L., & Luckman, T. (1967). The social construction of reality.London.
Bjorgan,J. C. D. (2005). Sharpening Albert Borgmann`s notion of "focalthings and practices" through the insights of AlasdairMacIntyre`s moral philosophy.
Higgs,E., Light, A., & Strong, D. (2000). Technology and the goodlife?. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Huang,W., Alem, L., & Livingston, M. A. (2013). Human factors inaugmented reality environments. New York: Springer..
McLuhan,M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man.
Mullen,T. (2011). Prototyping augmented reality. Indianapolis, Ind: Wiley.