A couple thoughts on a couple issues raised recently on this wonderful SCREEN-L. Not all film and video courses need to be offered for the purpose of training professionals to work in the various industries of film and television. Auditory and visual imagery of non-verbal discourse is now the primary form of mass discourse in our civilization. Why not teach people how (and why or why not) to communicate in them as well as in speech and writing? Consumer audio-visual production instruments are now so sophisticated and (relatively) cheap that it is quite possible to anyone who will learn the craft to achieve quite high levels of rhetorical effectiveness and artistic quality. For less than the price of a new car, a person can put together a video production facility which is as good as what the networks had 20 years ago. Everyone needs to be cinematically literate, and college film and video courses ought to be very nearly the (post-)modern conterpart of freshman composition. 16mm and video offer economic alternatives which can be used widely throughout the country, and for a very wide spectrum of the population, not just for future professionals in an industry which some think is choking on its own digestive juices. On the issue of "Jargon" this thought occurs to me. Perhaps after a little time has passed, some of the academics and /or professionals on this list might cooperate to create a glossary and/or a collection of informational resources for the use of others on the list less sophisticated in some aspect of interest to members of the list. As a linguist and semiotician I would be happy to contribute to such a cooperative venture. As a tenured professor I wouldn't even care if I got credit in the way of citation for my contributions. As an independent videomaker I would devour anything and everything others on this list would be willing to teach me. Spence