Lev Manovich uses Dziga Vertov's film to propose his "language" for new media.
Manovich assures us that he does not mean,
"that there is a single language of new media." He "use[s] 'language' as an umbrella term to refer to a number of various conventions used by designers of new media objects to organize data and structure the user’s experience" (7).
Abbie Garrington explores the haptic dimensions of the cinema in its modernist context:
"Associated primarily with the visual, cinema—with only a flat screen, and without the benefit of galvanic knobs [lke those of the 'feelies' from Aldous Huxley's Brave new World]—is able to stimulate the whole human sensorium. As Siegfried Kracauer established, film treats the viewer as a 'human being with skin and hair’, presenting ‘material elements' that 'directly stimulate the material layers of the human being: his nerves, his senses, his entire physiological substance'" (40).
Walter Benjamin states that the greatest power of language is in the "name," for,
"Man is the namer; by this we recognize that through him pure language speaks. All nature, insofar as it communicates itself, communicates itself in language, and so finally in man...Man can call name the language of language...and in this sense certainly, because he speaks in names, man is the speaker of language, and for this very reason its only speaker" (65).
If we consider the ways in which code is similarly "the language of language" then its names are almost certainly in English.
A review of Stein's book at the time from the Louisville Courier Journal judges that,
"'The words in the volume entitled Tender Buttons are English words, but the sentences are not English sentences according to the grammatical definition. The sentences indicated by punctuation do not make complete sense, partial sense, nor any other sense, but nonsense'" (36).