How did “to draw” shift to mean “to depict with lines”?
"To draw" originally meant "to drag, pull", and it's pretty easy to make sense of the many meanings of the verb with that in mind.
Draw a sword, draw a card, draw water from a well, draw breath, a drawer, withdraw, ...
Even for the most farfetched ones, I can see the figurative stretch. But not for the main meaning of the verb.
What does "to produce artwork" have to do with pulling or dragging?
btw I'm not sure if I cann technically call it a semantic shift if the original meaning is still in use.
meaning etymology semantic-shift
asked Feb 6 at 14:48
Teleporting GoatTeleporting Goat
20527
add a comment |
"To draw" originally meant "to drag, pull", and it's pretty easy to make sense of the many meanings of the verb with that in mind.
Draw a sword, draw a card, draw water from a well, draw breath, a drawer, withdraw, ...
Even for the most farfetched ones, I can see the figurative stretch. But not for the main meaning of the verb.
What does "to produce artwork" have to do with pulling or dragging?
btw I'm not sure if I cann technically call it a semantic shift if the original meaning is still in use.
meaning etymology semantic-shift
asked Feb 6 at 14:48
Teleporting GoatTeleporting Goat
20527
. etymonline.com/word/draw#etymonline_v_15889 'to make lines" is c. 1200.
– Cascabel
Feb 6 at 15:02
7
Similar to how 'drive' is for cars now but was earlier about directing cattle. The history of the word 'post' is like metaphor after metaphor after metaphor.
– Mitch
Feb 6 at 19:27
Take a piece of string, put chalk on it, draw it taught, and snap it. You have just drawn a line.
– Phil Sweet
Feb 6 at 22:18
2
You're dragging ink/graphite/etc. from the writing instrument?
– jamesdlin
Feb 6 at 23:24
add a comment |
"To draw" originally meant "to drag, pull", and it's pretty easy to make sense of the many meanings of the verb with that in mind.
Draw a sword, draw a card, draw water from a well, draw breath, a drawer, withdraw, ...
Even for the most farfetched ones, I can see the figurative stretch. But not for the main meaning of the verb.
What does "to produce artwork" have to do with pulling or dragging?
btw I'm not sure if I cann technically call it a semantic shift if the original meaning is still in use.
meaning etymology semantic-shift
asked Feb 6 at 14:48
Teleporting GoatTeleporting Goat
20527
"To draw" originally meant "to drag, pull", and it's pretty easy to make sense of the many meanings of the verb with that in mind.
Draw a sword, draw a card, draw water from a well, draw breath, a drawer, withdraw, ...
Even for the most farfetched ones, I can see the figurative stretch. But not for the main meaning of the verb.
What does "to produce artwork" have to do with pulling or dragging?
btw I'm not sure if I cann technically call it a semantic shift if the original meaning is still in use.
meaning etymology semantic-shift
meaning etymology semantic-shift
asked Feb 6 at 14:48
Teleporting GoatTeleporting Goat
20527
asked Feb 6 at 14:48
Teleporting GoatTeleporting Goat
20527
edited Feb 6 at 20:36
Teleporting Goat
asked Feb 6 at 14:48
Teleporting GoatTeleporting Goat
20527
asked Feb 6 at 14:48
Teleporting GoatTeleporting Goat
20527
asked Feb 6 at 14:48
Teleporting GoatTeleporting Goat
20527
20527
. etymonline.com/word/draw#etymonline_v_15889 'to make lines" is c. 1200.
– Cascabel
Feb 6 at 15:02
7
Similar to how 'drive' is for cars now but was earlier about directing cattle. The history of the word 'post' is like metaphor after metaphor after metaphor.
– Mitch
Feb 6 at 19:27
Take a piece of string, put chalk on it, draw it taught, and snap it. You have just drawn a line.
– Phil Sweet
Feb 6 at 22:18
2
You're dragging ink/graphite/etc. from the writing instrument?
– jamesdlin
Feb 6 at 23:24
add a comment |
. etymonline.com/word/draw#etymonline_v_15889 'to make lines" is c. 1200.
– Cascabel
Feb 6 at 15:02
7
Similar to how 'drive' is for cars now but was earlier about directing cattle. The history of the word 'post' is like metaphor after metaphor after metaphor.
– Mitch
Feb 6 at 19:27
Take a piece of string, put chalk on it, draw it taught, and snap it. You have just drawn a line.
– Phil Sweet
Feb 6 at 22:18
2
You're dragging ink/graphite/etc. from the writing instrument?
– jamesdlin
Feb 6 at 23:24
. etymonline.com/word/draw#etymonline_v_15889 'to make lines" is c. 1200.
– Cascabel
Feb 6 at 15:02
. etymonline.com/word/draw#etymonline_v_15889 'to make lines" is c. 1200.
– Cascabel
Feb 6 at 15:02
7
7
Similar to how 'drive' is for cars now but was earlier about directing cattle. The history of the word 'post' is like metaphor after metaphor after metaphor.
– Mitch
Feb 6 at 19:27
Similar to how 'drive' is for cars now but was earlier about directing cattle. The history of the word 'post' is like metaphor after metaphor after metaphor.
– Mitch
Feb 6 at 19:27
Take a piece of string, put chalk on it, draw it taught, and snap it. You have just drawn a line.
– Phil Sweet
Feb 6 at 22:18
Take a piece of string, put chalk on it, draw it taught, and snap it. You have just drawn a line.
– Phil Sweet
Feb 6 at 22:18
2
2
You're dragging ink/graphite/etc. from the writing instrument?
– jamesdlin
Feb 6 at 23:24
You're dragging ink/graphite/etc. from the writing instrument?
– jamesdlin
Feb 6 at 23:24
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Emerging ca. 1200, draw in the graphic sense comes from drawing some implement or material — pen, pencil, chalk, etc. — across an appropriate surface:
Draw thanne by thi rewle a lyne fro the hed of aries to the hed of libra.— Equatorie of the Planets, Ms. Cambridge, Peterhouse 75, ca. 1392.
(A rough translation into modern English, from the comments: "Draw then using your ruler a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra.")
edited Feb 7 at 19:51
Tom Church
10312
answered Feb 6 at 16:23
KarlGKarlG
22.7k63261
5
For those of us who don't read Middle English, could you provide a translation?
– p.s.w.g
Feb 6 at 23:33
11
@p.s.w.g "Draw then by the rule a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra"? IANGC (i am not geoff chaucer), but that's my guess.
– jkf
Feb 6 at 23:49
5
@jkf possibly 'your' rule
– mcalex
Feb 7 at 5:06
5
"thi" is aalmost certanly "Thy". Texts like this are written as an instruction to a student, so the familiar form of the 2nd person pronoun would be used. "Draw then, by your rule(r?), a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra."
– Rowan Ingram
Feb 7 at 10:39
2
@TeleportingGoat: That which is drawn, line, drawing, design, etc. is still the direct object; the ink, pencil, or chalk is the means. But you can still say, He drew the pencil rapidly across the paper.
– KarlG
Feb 7 at 10:57
|
show 4 more comments
There is not really a significant semantic shift, given that to produce a "drawing" one must still drag/pull the pen/pencil/chalk across a surface. The real issue is the appropriating of physical metaphors[1] for digital artifacts (window/file/folder/drawing)[2]. This also occurs when referring to digital representations as their physical counterpart (such as when a user might say they are "viewing the drawings of DaVinci" online, when they are, in fact, viewing digital representations of photos of the drawings). This has led to any type of visual representation in digital form to be referred to as if it were the original, physical thing itself, such as when a program that produces a visual output consisting of lines is referred to as a "drawing". This is not specific to "draw", but occurs across a wide range of terms.[3]
[1]: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/155776687.pdf see chapter 2.2
[2]:https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=17685&context=rtd see chapter 1.2
[3]: http://prior.sigchi.org/chi95/Electronic/documnts/tutors/ams_bdy.htm see the lists of terms
answered Feb 6 at 18:00
enharmonicenharmonic
812
I feel your argument is sort of similar to the "C'est n'est pas une pipe" idea; that is, the photo of a drawing created by DaVinci (or rather the digital representation of that photo) is not, in fact, the original drawing, but it does convey the drawing. You wouldn't point at the arrangement of pixels on the screen and claim you possessed the original artwork; but it would nonetheless "be" the art that DaVinci created. Although, in any such case, this topic is not really related to the question at hand; this is a separate, interesting discussion, but not what the asker was asking about.
– Florrie
Feb 6 at 19:05
1
@Florrie yes, I did have the "C'est n'est pas une pipe" idea in mind, but not for the purpose of philosophy as such, but for the purpose of showing how the term "drawing" is used in contexts where no dragging or pulling has taken place in reality (which begs the OP's question of how that term has come to mean "produce artwork"). Historically, the only way to produce a drawing was by pulling/dragging, but with computers, artworks can be produced without any true "drawing" (pulling/dragging) taking place, yet they are still referred to as "drawings" because of the referred/referent blurring.
– enharmonic
Feb 6 at 19:19
1
To me there is a shift on the object. You draw a picture, not a pencil. See my comment on KarlG's answer.
– Teleporting Goat
Feb 7 at 10:47
1
And I really don't think there's an issue when it gets digital, physical metaphors for digital things or action are very, very common.
– Teleporting Goat
Feb 7 at 10:49
@enharmonic wrote "Historically, the only way to produce a drawing was by pulling/dragging" Actually, if I recall, before the removable-type printing press was used, people would carve an entire page into a block and have a stamp that represented that page. This allowed rapid printing long ago, but since it was detailed and very time consuming work in a time when many people did not benefit from books, it was only done for very important texts which needed to be mass produced, such as religious or classics. These did include pictures, though they were probably not called drawings.
– Aaron
Feb 7 at 17:02
|
show 5 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f484375%2fhow-did-to-draw-shift-to-mean-to-depict-with-lines%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Emerging ca. 1200, draw in the graphic sense comes from drawing some implement or material — pen, pencil, chalk, etc. — across an appropriate surface:
Draw thanne by thi rewle a lyne fro the hed of aries to the hed of libra.— Equatorie of the Planets, Ms. Cambridge, Peterhouse 75, ca. 1392.
(A rough translation into modern English, from the comments: "Draw then using your ruler a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra.")
edited Feb 7 at 19:51
Tom Church
10312
answered Feb 6 at 16:23
KarlGKarlG
22.7k63261
5
For those of us who don't read Middle English, could you provide a translation?
– p.s.w.g
Feb 6 at 23:33
11
@p.s.w.g "Draw then by the rule a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra"? IANGC (i am not geoff chaucer), but that's my guess.
– jkf
Feb 6 at 23:49
5
@jkf possibly 'your' rule
– mcalex
Feb 7 at 5:06
5
"thi" is aalmost certanly "Thy". Texts like this are written as an instruction to a student, so the familiar form of the 2nd person pronoun would be used. "Draw then, by your rule(r?), a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra."
– Rowan Ingram
Feb 7 at 10:39
2
@TeleportingGoat: That which is drawn, line, drawing, design, etc. is still the direct object; the ink, pencil, or chalk is the means. But you can still say, He drew the pencil rapidly across the paper.
– KarlG
Feb 7 at 10:57
|
show 4 more comments
Emerging ca. 1200, draw in the graphic sense comes from drawing some implement or material — pen, pencil, chalk, etc. — across an appropriate surface:
Draw thanne by thi rewle a lyne fro the hed of aries to the hed of libra.— Equatorie of the Planets, Ms. Cambridge, Peterhouse 75, ca. 1392.
(A rough translation into modern English, from the comments: "Draw then using your ruler a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra.")
edited Feb 7 at 19:51
Tom Church
10312
answered Feb 6 at 16:23
KarlGKarlG
22.7k63261
5
For those of us who don't read Middle English, could you provide a translation?
– p.s.w.g
Feb 6 at 23:33
11
@p.s.w.g "Draw then by the rule a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra"? IANGC (i am not geoff chaucer), but that's my guess.
– jkf
Feb 6 at 23:49
5
@jkf possibly 'your' rule
– mcalex
Feb 7 at 5:06
5
"thi" is aalmost certanly "Thy". Texts like this are written as an instruction to a student, so the familiar form of the 2nd person pronoun would be used. "Draw then, by your rule(r?), a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra."
– Rowan Ingram
Feb 7 at 10:39
2
@TeleportingGoat: That which is drawn, line, drawing, design, etc. is still the direct object; the ink, pencil, or chalk is the means. But you can still say, He drew the pencil rapidly across the paper.
– KarlG
Feb 7 at 10:57
|
show 4 more comments
Emerging ca. 1200, draw in the graphic sense comes from drawing some implement or material — pen, pencil, chalk, etc. — across an appropriate surface:
Draw thanne by thi rewle a lyne fro the hed of aries to the hed of libra.— Equatorie of the Planets, Ms. Cambridge, Peterhouse 75, ca. 1392.
(A rough translation into modern English, from the comments: "Draw then using your ruler a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra.")
edited Feb 7 at 19:51
Tom Church
10312
answered Feb 6 at 16:23
KarlGKarlG
22.7k63261
Emerging ca. 1200, draw in the graphic sense comes from drawing some implement or material — pen, pencil, chalk, etc. — across an appropriate surface:
Draw thanne by thi rewle a lyne fro the hed of aries to the hed of libra.— Equatorie of the Planets, Ms. Cambridge, Peterhouse 75, ca. 1392.
(A rough translation into modern English, from the comments: "Draw then using your ruler a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra.")
edited Feb 7 at 19:51
Tom Church
10312
answered Feb 6 at 16:23
KarlGKarlG
22.7k63261
edited Feb 7 at 19:51
Tom Church
10312
edited Feb 7 at 19:51
Tom Church
10312
edited Feb 7 at 19:51
Tom Church
10312
10312
answered Feb 6 at 16:23
KarlGKarlG
22.7k63261
answered Feb 6 at 16:23
KarlGKarlG
22.7k63261
answered Feb 6 at 16:23
KarlGKarlG
22.7k63261
22.7k63261
5
For those of us who don't read Middle English, could you provide a translation?
– p.s.w.g
Feb 6 at 23:33
11
@p.s.w.g "Draw then by the rule a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra"? IANGC (i am not geoff chaucer), but that's my guess.
– jkf
Feb 6 at 23:49
5
@jkf possibly 'your' rule
– mcalex
Feb 7 at 5:06
5
"thi" is aalmost certanly "Thy". Texts like this are written as an instruction to a student, so the familiar form of the 2nd person pronoun would be used. "Draw then, by your rule(r?), a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra."
– Rowan Ingram
Feb 7 at 10:39
2
@TeleportingGoat: That which is drawn, line, drawing, design, etc. is still the direct object; the ink, pencil, or chalk is the means. But you can still say, He drew the pencil rapidly across the paper.
– KarlG
Feb 7 at 10:57
|
show 4 more comments
5
For those of us who don't read Middle English, could you provide a translation?
– p.s.w.g
Feb 6 at 23:33
11
@p.s.w.g "Draw then by the rule a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra"? IANGC (i am not geoff chaucer), but that's my guess.
– jkf
Feb 6 at 23:49
5
@jkf possibly 'your' rule
– mcalex
Feb 7 at 5:06
5
"thi" is aalmost certanly "Thy". Texts like this are written as an instruction to a student, so the familiar form of the 2nd person pronoun would be used. "Draw then, by your rule(r?), a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra."
– Rowan Ingram
Feb 7 at 10:39
2
@TeleportingGoat: That which is drawn, line, drawing, design, etc. is still the direct object; the ink, pencil, or chalk is the means. But you can still say, He drew the pencil rapidly across the paper.
– KarlG
Feb 7 at 10:57
5
5
For those of us who don't read Middle English, could you provide a translation?
– p.s.w.g
Feb 6 at 23:33
For those of us who don't read Middle English, could you provide a translation?
– p.s.w.g
Feb 6 at 23:33
11
11
@p.s.w.g "Draw then by the rule a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra"? IANGC (i am not geoff chaucer), but that's my guess.
– jkf
Feb 6 at 23:49
@p.s.w.g "Draw then by the rule a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra"? IANGC (i am not geoff chaucer), but that's my guess.
– jkf
Feb 6 at 23:49
5
5
@jkf possibly 'your' rule
– mcalex
Feb 7 at 5:06
@jkf possibly 'your' rule
– mcalex
Feb 7 at 5:06
5
5
"thi" is aalmost certanly "Thy". Texts like this are written as an instruction to a student, so the familiar form of the 2nd person pronoun would be used. "Draw then, by your rule(r?), a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra."
– Rowan Ingram
Feb 7 at 10:39
"thi" is aalmost certanly "Thy". Texts like this are written as an instruction to a student, so the familiar form of the 2nd person pronoun would be used. "Draw then, by your rule(r?), a line from the head of Aries to the head of Libra."
– Rowan Ingram
Feb 7 at 10:39
2
2
@TeleportingGoat: That which is drawn, line, drawing, design, etc. is still the direct object; the ink, pencil, or chalk is the means. But you can still say, He drew the pencil rapidly across the paper.
– KarlG
Feb 7 at 10:57
@TeleportingGoat: That which is drawn, line, drawing, design, etc. is still the direct object; the ink, pencil, or chalk is the means. But you can still say, He drew the pencil rapidly across the paper.
– KarlG
Feb 7 at 10:57
|
show 4 more comments
There is not really a significant semantic shift, given that to produce a "drawing" one must still drag/pull the pen/pencil/chalk across a surface. The real issue is the appropriating of physical metaphors[1] for digital artifacts (window/file/folder/drawing)[2]. This also occurs when referring to digital representations as their physical counterpart (such as when a user might say they are "viewing the drawings of DaVinci" online, when they are, in fact, viewing digital representations of photos of the drawings). This has led to any type of visual representation in digital form to be referred to as if it were the original, physical thing itself, such as when a program that produces a visual output consisting of lines is referred to as a "drawing". This is not specific to "draw", but occurs across a wide range of terms.[3]
[1]: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/155776687.pdf see chapter 2.2
[2]:https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=17685&context=rtd see chapter 1.2
[3]: http://prior.sigchi.org/chi95/Electronic/documnts/tutors/ams_bdy.htm see the lists of terms
answered Feb 6 at 18:00
enharmonicenharmonic
812
I feel your argument is sort of similar to the "C'est n'est pas une pipe" idea; that is, the photo of a drawing created by DaVinci (or rather the digital representation of that photo) is not, in fact, the original drawing, but it does convey the drawing. You wouldn't point at the arrangement of pixels on the screen and claim you possessed the original artwork; but it would nonetheless "be" the art that DaVinci created. Although, in any such case, this topic is not really related to the question at hand; this is a separate, interesting discussion, but not what the asker was asking about.
– Florrie
Feb 6 at 19:05
1
@Florrie yes, I did have the "C'est n'est pas une pipe" idea in mind, but not for the purpose of philosophy as such, but for the purpose of showing how the term "drawing" is used in contexts where no dragging or pulling has taken place in reality (which begs the OP's question of how that term has come to mean "produce artwork"). Historically, the only way to produce a drawing was by pulling/dragging, but with computers, artworks can be produced without any true "drawing" (pulling/dragging) taking place, yet they are still referred to as "drawings" because of the referred/referent blurring.
– enharmonic
Feb 6 at 19:19
1
To me there is a shift on the object. You draw a picture, not a pencil. See my comment on KarlG's answer.
– Teleporting Goat
Feb 7 at 10:47
1
And I really don't think there's an issue when it gets digital, physical metaphors for digital things or action are very, very common.
– Teleporting Goat
Feb 7 at 10:49
@enharmonic wrote "Historically, the only way to produce a drawing was by pulling/dragging" Actually, if I recall, before the removable-type printing press was used, people would carve an entire page into a block and have a stamp that represented that page. This allowed rapid printing long ago, but since it was detailed and very time consuming work in a time when many people did not benefit from books, it was only done for very important texts which needed to be mass produced, such as religious or classics. These did include pictures, though they were probably not called drawings.
– Aaron
Feb 7 at 17:02
|
show 5 more comments
There is not really a significant semantic shift, given that to produce a "drawing" one must still drag/pull the pen/pencil/chalk across a surface. The real issue is the appropriating of physical metaphors[1] for digital artifacts (window/file/folder/drawing)[2]. This also occurs when referring to digital representations as their physical counterpart (such as when a user might say they are "viewing the drawings of DaVinci" online, when they are, in fact, viewing digital representations of photos of the drawings). This has led to any type of visual representation in digital form to be referred to as if it were the original, physical thing itself, such as when a program that produces a visual output consisting of lines is referred to as a "drawing". This is not specific to "draw", but occurs across a wide range of terms.[3]
[1]: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/155776687.pdf see chapter 2.2
[2]:https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=17685&context=rtd see chapter 1.2
[3]: http://prior.sigchi.org/chi95/Electronic/documnts/tutors/ams_bdy.htm see the lists of terms
answered Feb 6 at 18:00
enharmonicenharmonic
812
I feel your argument is sort of similar to the "C'est n'est pas une pipe" idea; that is, the photo of a drawing created by DaVinci (or rather the digital representation of that photo) is not, in fact, the original drawing, but it does convey the drawing. You wouldn't point at the arrangement of pixels on the screen and claim you possessed the original artwork; but it would nonetheless "be" the art that DaVinci created. Although, in any such case, this topic is not really related to the question at hand; this is a separate, interesting discussion, but not what the asker was asking about.
– Florrie
Feb 6 at 19:05
1
@Florrie yes, I did have the "C'est n'est pas une pipe" idea in mind, but not for the purpose of philosophy as such, but for the purpose of showing how the term "drawing" is used in contexts where no dragging or pulling has taken place in reality (which begs the OP's question of how that term has come to mean "produce artwork"). Historically, the only way to produce a drawing was by pulling/dragging, but with computers, artworks can be produced without any true "drawing" (pulling/dragging) taking place, yet they are still referred to as "drawings" because of the referred/referent blurring.
– enharmonic
Feb 6 at 19:19
1
To me there is a shift on the object. You draw a picture, not a pencil. See my comment on KarlG's answer.
– Teleporting Goat
Feb 7 at 10:47
1
And I really don't think there's an issue when it gets digital, physical metaphors for digital things or action are very, very common.
– Teleporting Goat
Feb 7 at 10:49
@enharmonic wrote "Historically, the only way to produce a drawing was by pulling/dragging" Actually, if I recall, before the removable-type printing press was used, people would carve an entire page into a block and have a stamp that represented that page. This allowed rapid printing long ago, but since it was detailed and very time consuming work in a time when many people did not benefit from books, it was only done for very important texts which needed to be mass produced, such as religious or classics. These did include pictures, though they were probably not called drawings.
– Aaron
Feb 7 at 17:02
|
show 5 more comments
There is not really a significant semantic shift, given that to produce a "drawing" one must still drag/pull the pen/pencil/chalk across a surface. The real issue is the appropriating of physical metaphors[1] for digital artifacts (window/file/folder/drawing)[2]. This also occurs when referring to digital representations as their physical counterpart (such as when a user might say they are "viewing the drawings of DaVinci" online, when they are, in fact, viewing digital representations of photos of the drawings). This has led to any type of visual representation in digital form to be referred to as if it were the original, physical thing itself, such as when a program that produces a visual output consisting of lines is referred to as a "drawing". This is not specific to "draw", but occurs across a wide range of terms.[3]
[1]: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/155776687.pdf see chapter 2.2
[2]:https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=17685&context=rtd see chapter 1.2
[3]: http://prior.sigchi.org/chi95/Electronic/documnts/tutors/ams_bdy.htm see the lists of terms
answered Feb 6 at 18:00
enharmonicenharmonic
812
There is not really a significant semantic shift, given that to produce a "drawing" one must still drag/pull the pen/pencil/chalk across a surface. The real issue is the appropriating of physical metaphors[1] for digital artifacts (window/file/folder/drawing)[2]. This also occurs when referring to digital representations as their physical counterpart (such as when a user might say they are "viewing the drawings of DaVinci" online, when they are, in fact, viewing digital representations of photos of the drawings). This has led to any type of visual representation in digital form to be referred to as if it were the original, physical thing itself, such as when a program that produces a visual output consisting of lines is referred to as a "drawing". This is not specific to "draw", but occurs across a wide range of terms.[3]
[1]: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/155776687.pdf see chapter 2.2
[2]:https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=17685&context=rtd see chapter 1.2
[3]: http://prior.sigchi.org/chi95/Electronic/documnts/tutors/ams_bdy.htm see the lists of terms
answered Feb 6 at 18:00
enharmonicenharmonic
812
edited Feb 6 at 18:59
answered Feb 6 at 18:00
enharmonicenharmonic
812
answered Feb 6 at 18:00
enharmonicenharmonic
812
answered Feb 6 at 18:00
enharmonicenharmonic
812
812
I feel your argument is sort of similar to the "C'est n'est pas une pipe" idea; that is, the photo of a drawing created by DaVinci (or rather the digital representation of that photo) is not, in fact, the original drawing, but it does convey the drawing. You wouldn't point at the arrangement of pixels on the screen and claim you possessed the original artwork; but it would nonetheless "be" the art that DaVinci created. Although, in any such case, this topic is not really related to the question at hand; this is a separate, interesting discussion, but not what the asker was asking about.
– Florrie
Feb 6 at 19:05
1
@Florrie yes, I did have the "C'est n'est pas une pipe" idea in mind, but not for the purpose of philosophy as such, but for the purpose of showing how the term "drawing" is used in contexts where no dragging or pulling has taken place in reality (which begs the OP's question of how that term has come to mean "produce artwork"). Historically, the only way to produce a drawing was by pulling/dragging, but with computers, artworks can be produced without any true "drawing" (pulling/dragging) taking place, yet they are still referred to as "drawings" because of the referred/referent blurring.
– enharmonic
Feb 6 at 19:19
1
To me there is a shift on the object. You draw a picture, not a pencil. See my comment on KarlG's answer.
– Teleporting Goat
Feb 7 at 10:47
1
And I really don't think there's an issue when it gets digital, physical metaphors for digital things or action are very, very common.
– Teleporting Goat
Feb 7 at 10:49
@enharmonic wrote "Historically, the only way to produce a drawing was by pulling/dragging" Actually, if I recall, before the removable-type printing press was used, people would carve an entire page into a block and have a stamp that represented that page. This allowed rapid printing long ago, but since it was detailed and very time consuming work in a time when many people did not benefit from books, it was only done for very important texts which needed to be mass produced, such as religious or classics. These did include pictures, though they were probably not called drawings.
– Aaron
Feb 7 at 17:02
|
show 5 more comments
I feel your argument is sort of similar to the "C'est n'est pas une pipe" idea; that is, the photo of a drawing created by DaVinci (or rather the digital representation of that photo) is not, in fact, the original drawing, but it does convey the drawing. You wouldn't point at the arrangement of pixels on the screen and claim you possessed the original artwork; but it would nonetheless "be" the art that DaVinci created. Although, in any such case, this topic is not really related to the question at hand; this is a separate, interesting discussion, but not what the asker was asking about.
– Florrie
Feb 6 at 19:05
1
@Florrie yes, I did have the "C'est n'est pas une pipe" idea in mind, but not for the purpose of philosophy as such, but for the purpose of showing how the term "drawing" is used in contexts where no dragging or pulling has taken place in reality (which begs the OP's question of how that term has come to mean "produce artwork"). Historically, the only way to produce a drawing was by pulling/dragging, but with computers, artworks can be produced without any true "drawing" (pulling/dragging) taking place, yet they are still referred to as "drawings" because of the referred/referent blurring.
– enharmonic
Feb 6 at 19:19
1
To me there is a shift on the object. You draw a picture, not a pencil. See my comment on KarlG's answer.
– Teleporting Goat
Feb 7 at 10:47
1
And I really don't think there's an issue when it gets digital, physical metaphors for digital things or action are very, very common.
– Teleporting Goat
Feb 7 at 10:49
@enharmonic wrote "Historically, the only way to produce a drawing was by pulling/dragging" Actually, if I recall, before the removable-type printing press was used, people would carve an entire page into a block and have a stamp that represented that page. This allowed rapid printing long ago, but since it was detailed and very time consuming work in a time when many people did not benefit from books, it was only done for very important texts which needed to be mass produced, such as religious or classics. These did include pictures, though they were probably not called drawings.
– Aaron
Feb 7 at 17:02
I feel your argument is sort of similar to the "C'est n'est pas une pipe" idea; that is, the photo of a drawing created by DaVinci (or rather the digital representation of that photo) is not, in fact, the original drawing, but it does convey the drawing. You wouldn't point at the arrangement of pixels on the screen and claim you possessed the original artwork; but it would nonetheless "be" the art that DaVinci created. Although, in any such case, this topic is not really related to the question at hand; this is a separate, interesting discussion, but not what the asker was asking about.
– Florrie
Feb 6 at 19:05
I feel your argument is sort of similar to the "C'est n'est pas une pipe" idea; that is, the photo of a drawing created by DaVinci (or rather the digital representation of that photo) is not, in fact, the original drawing, but it does convey the drawing. You wouldn't point at the arrangement of pixels on the screen and claim you possessed the original artwork; but it would nonetheless "be" the art that DaVinci created. Although, in any such case, this topic is not really related to the question at hand; this is a separate, interesting discussion, but not what the asker was asking about.
– Florrie
Feb 6 at 19:05
1
1
@Florrie yes, I did have the "C'est n'est pas une pipe" idea in mind, but not for the purpose of philosophy as such, but for the purpose of showing how the term "drawing" is used in contexts where no dragging or pulling has taken place in reality (which begs the OP's question of how that term has come to mean "produce artwork"). Historically, the only way to produce a drawing was by pulling/dragging, but with computers, artworks can be produced without any true "drawing" (pulling/dragging) taking place, yet they are still referred to as "drawings" because of the referred/referent blurring.
– enharmonic
Feb 6 at 19:19
@Florrie yes, I did have the "C'est n'est pas une pipe" idea in mind, but not for the purpose of philosophy as such, but for the purpose of showing how the term "drawing" is used in contexts where no dragging or pulling has taken place in reality (which begs the OP's question of how that term has come to mean "produce artwork"). Historically, the only way to produce a drawing was by pulling/dragging, but with computers, artworks can be produced without any true "drawing" (pulling/dragging) taking place, yet they are still referred to as "drawings" because of the referred/referent blurring.
– enharmonic
Feb 6 at 19:19
1
1
To me there is a shift on the object. You draw a picture, not a pencil. See my comment on KarlG's answer.
– Teleporting Goat
Feb 7 at 10:47
To me there is a shift on the object. You draw a picture, not a pencil. See my comment on KarlG's answer.
– Teleporting Goat
Feb 7 at 10:47
1
1
And I really don't think there's an issue when it gets digital, physical metaphors for digital things or action are very, very common.
– Teleporting Goat
Feb 7 at 10:49
And I really don't think there's an issue when it gets digital, physical metaphors for digital things or action are very, very common.
– Teleporting Goat
Feb 7 at 10:49
@enharmonic wrote "Historically, the only way to produce a drawing was by pulling/dragging" Actually, if I recall, before the removable-type printing press was used, people would carve an entire page into a block and have a stamp that represented that page. This allowed rapid printing long ago, but since it was detailed and very time consuming work in a time when many people did not benefit from books, it was only done for very important texts which needed to be mass produced, such as religious or classics. These did include pictures, though they were probably not called drawings.
– Aaron
Feb 7 at 17:02
@enharmonic wrote "Historically, the only way to produce a drawing was by pulling/dragging" Actually, if I recall, before the removable-type printing press was used, people would carve an entire page into a block and have a stamp that represented that page. This allowed rapid printing long ago, but since it was detailed and very time consuming work in a time when many people did not benefit from books, it was only done for very important texts which needed to be mass produced, such as religious or classics. These did include pictures, though they were probably not called drawings.
– Aaron
Feb 7 at 17:02
|
show 5 more comments
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f484375%2fhow-did-to-draw-shift-to-mean-to-depict-with-lines%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
. etymonline.com/word/draw#etymonline_v_15889 'to make lines" is c. 1200.
– Cascabel
Feb 6 at 15:02
7
Similar to how 'drive' is for cars now but was earlier about directing cattle. The history of the word 'post' is like metaphor after metaphor after metaphor.
– Mitch
Feb 6 at 19:27
Take a piece of string, put chalk on it, draw it taught, and snap it. You have just drawn a line.
– Phil Sweet
Feb 6 at 22:18
2
You're dragging ink/graphite/etc. from the writing instrument?
– jamesdlin
Feb 6 at 23:24