The baskets often had designs that in someway told a story about how the earth came to be or something about the past. There were often symbols that represented the past generations of the tribes, but was there ever a design that in someway talked about future generations, and what they are now? Would there have been some sort of design that would predict the struggles Native Americans would have with the Europeans that would eventually drive them out of their homeland?

By looking at the richness of cultural, religious, and social significance that Mohegan basketry embodies, it is difficult to imagine why these baskets where not considered in historical significance.

The rich history that the baskets hold surpass many other forms of writing. Through illustration, the design, and the patterns the engulf the baskets, many stories can be told. The sheer use of the basket in multiple events including religious purposes, ceremonies, transportation, and games show the importance of these baskets in all facets of life.

Though the Mohegans utilized the baskets in multiple ways, it was neglected by outside societies and perceived as a mere object of only agricultural significance and neglected the greater significance of the baskets and their impact on Mohegan life.

The Mohegan tradition of utilizing art as a way to preserve memories of their culture has long been categorized outside of the genre of "writing". As the text stated earlier, Mohegans utilized the same worded for writing as the word for painting, further exploring the idea of defining what writing can be. Since their culture did not have an established alphabet, they utilized symbols, shapes, and signs to express their ideas. Since the tradition was held by the Mohegans long before the settlers recognized them as objects of cultural expression, it is understandable that this foreign practice was not considered as forms of records of early history and writing, though they told great stories, folklore, and cultural history.

Material culture is our worlds abundant interaction with objects. This is significant to the text because material culture is everywhere, and we use these objects to observe and formulate words associated with the objects in the material world. Building a better understanding of the language we use. ![]https://images.pexels.com/photos/374894/pexels-photo-374894.jpeg?w=1260&h=750&auto=compress&cs=tinysrgb()

a formal proposal of a research project developed to convince a reader. It's significant because it gives you a clear insight into what about your object you should be interpreting. Which is a very important feature of this document.

Does having a more complex relationship to and object improve ones language?

How does one become more self-conscious?

The supplemental text states that people who believe in the maker movement have embraced a "naively apolitical, techno-economic, capitalist utopia" by believing that 3D printing won't be used by corporations. According to the main text these people must "move from a narrow focus on the object itself to focus on the relationship between the object and oneself." Both readings believe that this "narrow focus" must be changed.

The main text agrees with the supplemental text, by stating that visual analysis and verbal expression go hand in hand. Since the supplemental text is concerning 3D printing of objects and the main text regards using objects to expand language both texts are a fusion of visual analysis and verbal expression.

What is nominative language?

What is considered technically accurate language?

The supplemental text I am applying is "3D print your way to freedom". This text unlike the "Hallman" text is an online news article discussing the affects of 3D printing on both society and the economy. Whereas Hallman's is an anthology of essays, used to help build a better understanding of things.

Both my primary and supplemental text mention polarity. The Hallman text mentions them in object metaphors in the same way my supplemental text uses the expression of makers and takers as a metaphor for what is to come with the use of 3D printing.

Think this was the coolest sentence in the whole paper when talking about how we really should see objects and how they really do have an effective meaning.

Subtle shade of meaning or expression

Pleasure when trying to translate an object into narrative description i think is one of the reasons the people have that are against the Makers movement. When giving an example they talk about the printing of a 3D gun which is something that would be a big topic in the world if it was allowed.

Giving reasons as to why it might be so important to you and the certain components that are most important to you. People that have an object that they have had for years might not be replaceable through a 3D printer because it wont have the same value.

When reading this in comparison to the online 3D printing article it shows more of how a person comes and believes in an object culturally. Rather than printing an object because you dont have to go to the store and you just want it from scratch. Like the makers movement this is one of the problems they were facing from people.

Things that could be printed through a 3D printer but wouldnt be as authentic to the culture as if it were its normal self. This relates to material culture and how objects help people understand certain things about a culture.

To think and visualize what is actually going on in their stories instead of being told about an epidemic through a website with multiple opinions.

The supplemental text i chose to incorporate with this text was "3-D print your way to freedom and prosperity". Tis online article involves pictures,and can be updated and accessed by whoever. While the Hallman text is online its on a link you would have to look up or randomly come across.

This is important to think about when starting a research project but it is not the easiest thing to do.

Who is Prown?

What is "material culture"?

Basically is just creating new objects that are 3 dimensional through a printer to replace old items or to just make more of what you need without going shopping for it.

In this way, the description of an object is much like the creation of an object. All items underwent a specific set of circumstances to orchestrate their creation. Without those very specific circumstances, the exact object in question wouldn't exist.

In relation to the Jathan Sadowski article about 3D printing and the MAKER movement, each object created by a maker has their own unique expression represented within that object. This can not only express the creator, but the culture behind the creator and the society in which the item finds a use.

Remember to use this hashtag

Wow, this doesn't seem like very man points.