My definition of Echo

Wikipedia defines echo like this:

In audio signal processing and acoustics, an echo is a reflection of sound that arrives at the listener with a delay after the direct sound.

Wikipedia

In common use of the word, this definition works well. But today, while writing my thesis on échosophy, I reached for a more phenomenological definition. This is what I came up with:

An echo is the observation of a sensation returning in time and space.

The definition consists of a couple of elements that I felt were necessary. First, echo needs an observing subject. Second, an echo is not necessarily tied to sound, but can relate to any sensation. One can, for example, listen to one’s emotions, or physical vibrations that are outside the scope of normal aural hearing. Third, the experience consists of a returning, which implies that the subsequent appearance of the sensation is perceived as the same as the first one (even if altered). And finally, this experience is tied to both space and time.

I’m still exploring other forms of this definition. For example, following Jean-Lucy Nancy’s terms, the definition could take this form:

An echo is the observation of a resonance returning in time and space.

Even though my thesis is based on Nancy’s philosophy of listening, I feel a tiny hesitation to embrace his term of resonance in my definition of echo. Maybe I don’t fully understand the full depth of resonance as Nancy means it, or maybe I’m drawn more towards sensing. But I do like this formulation, too.

Nancy also talks about sense, but I’m writing in Finnish, and don’t like to make the poetic dimension any more complicated than it already is, so I’m leaving that topic for others to ponder on.

(And while we are on the topic of language, I’m writing this blog in English because I believe that figuring these topics out in a foreign language will force myself towards a more clear understanding of these topics.)