“Transliteracy is the ability to read, write and interact across a range of platforms, tools and media” . It is “not just about computer-based materials, but about all communication types across time and culture”. Digital media is seen as “manifestation of other similar modes of communication”, for instance “the chitchat of a blog is not dissimilar to campfire stories after a day’s hunting”…We are asking each other for information more through the internet than before. Instead of being polarized between anxiety and euphoria, transliteracy is informed by the transductive relationship between technology and life.

The transliterate lifeworld is “an ecology which changes with the invention of each new media-type”.

Transliteracy means cognition of multimodality, flexibility, willingness to embrace the new.

Transliterate analysis considers the how and the why of a cultural production.

Transliterate reading incudes understanding the aural, the visual and interactive modes simultaneously.

Transliteracy can be employed to understand communication both diachronically(blogging and its relationship to diaries and journals) and synchronically (a holistic viewing of Al Gore sitting at his desk surrounded by various media).

Transliteracy research is interested in how people manage different media and modes of communication in their everyday lives.

My thoughts:
I like the idea that there is no judgement in this text. Every type of communication is seen as equal, whether this is prehistorical or modern. New media is in some ways likened to pre-literate times when there were more oral exchanges going on. I wonder whether how the notion of physical presence comes into this. Eye contact, shaking hands, embraces, physical space issues are also a form of communication and could also be considered in transliteracy.

Thomas, S et al (2007) Transliteracy: crossing divides. First Monday. 12(12). [web site]