Writing is not just putting into language the spoken word. Speaking and writing differ in spatial, temporal, and relational ways. Conversational relational space has a quality of immediacy. In normal discussions we are physically immediately present to the other person’s speaking. The telephone, too, retains a sense of this immediacy. This temporal-spatial immediacy also means that the speaker cannot erase what has been said. One cannot restart a conversation in the way that one can restart a written text. One cannot edit out a phrase and replace it with a more appropriate one. One cannot step back reflectively from one’s spoken word to monitor and adjust the effects that selected words and phrases seem to exercise on other words we utter. The spoken word is irrevocable in a manner that is rarely true of the written word. Of course, we can apologize for some things that may have slipped our tongue. We may try to deny that we said what has been heard. We may correct ourselves, and say what it is that we “really meant to say.” We may add meaning through a certain tone of voice or physiognomic expression. We may repeat or paraphrase our earlier points when we feel that we are being misunderstood or when we feel that our words do not seem to have their intended or hoped-for effect. And yet, what has been heard has been heard; therefore, what we say can never be completely revoked. Indeed, our spoken words someday may be brought back to us, to remind us of things we may wish forgotten. Of course, all of this is even more true when our words have been electronically recorded.