The Relationship Between Visual And Verbal Elements

1285 Words6 Pages
From the beginning there are comparisons, pro and cons, communication channel and important role about the visual elements. Next would be the relationship visual and verbal elements. The relationship between the visual and verbal element is a complete mutual. Verbal elements in advertising are very important when we want people to recognize the product and associate it with good attributes. In other words, verbal elements may get the most attention getting and memorable to decide and implement in advertising. The image and text are potentially equal contributors to meaning, even though the specific examples might give emphasis to one or the other modality. Visual and verbal information may contain structural and functional elements (MacInnis…show more content…
Within a structure, an element cannot be broken down into parts of different kinds for example beam or column. While the functional element is mean by the process of responding to the needs or desires of those who will use an item in a way that allows their needs or desires to be met. Hence when there are visual on every advertisement there are also verbal elements which appear. There are no doubt there is visual and verbal is related to each other. The concept of visual-verbal mutually beneficial relationship is rooted in the idea that visuals support verbal and vice versa. Moreover, the function of advertising is to identify the maker of goods and create a demand for the advertised a product. The questions to be asked would include, how influential is verbal and visual information to consumers, what makes advertising with the application of verbal or visual information effective? What is effect of visual and verbal elements? What is the need of the study? What is the benefit of this element could bring? The details of the discussion will be discussed afterwards with further elaboration and findings from previous…show more content…
The stakes for evolving cross-modal meaning as a rhetorical move are quite high, because language alone is not always enough to communicate shared understanding. These personal connections can support engagement with the text because they help the reader establish a known context for that engagement. But when an audience does not have the experience to imagine, or when an idea has not enough features that imagining can fail to present a basic problem with language, as the carrier of thought, surfaces. That’s why the cross modal meaning might be more rhetorically useful. On top of that, Müller-Brockmann, the father of the grid, championed this idea. He believed that typography and grid elements should present content in a neutral fashion (as cited in Susan M.hagan 2007). The typographic interplay, on the other hand, identifies the meaning potential between typographic shape and text. This is because typographic interplay emerges when the characterized by tie, the blend interacts with the perceptual tie. Also, shared location results in the tightest relationship between text and image. Blends and shared location might seem to be nearly the same meaning as another in the
Get Access