Once upon a time, an educated eye detected a new trend in UI designs, particularly, in Dribbble. It was a conceptual proposition, not an actual design for a customer or an app. Trying to explain the characteristics of this new trend, a new word emerged: neumorphism.

從前，有教養的人發現了UI設計的新趨勢，尤其是在Dribbble中 。 這是一個概念性主張，而不是針對客戶或應用程序的實際設計。 為了解釋這種新趨勢的特征，出現了一個新詞：同態 。

Several articles, stories, and posts have been published around the first educated eye that point to it — Michal Malewicz. The texts are about how-tos or tutorials to reproduce the style in design, to criticize or correct the lack of accessibility, or to debate the scope of the trend or style.

圍繞著第一個受過良好教育的眼睛Michal Malewicz發表了幾篇文章，故事和帖子。 這些文字是關于如何重現設計中的樣式，批評或糾正缺乏可訪問性的方法或討論趨勢或樣式范圍的方法指南或教程。

Everybody in UI/UX design has seen neumorphism—and even used it—but nobody has formally defined it. This article is about the elephant in the room.

UI / UX設計中的每個人都看到過變態，甚至使用過，但是沒有人正式定義它。 本文是關于房間里的大象的。

缺乏對亞態的定義 (The lack of a definition for neumorphism)

No precise definition was offered, only a demonstrative one: this is neumorphism, look at the influence of skeuomorphism with a fresh and modern approach.

沒有提供精確的定義，只是一個說明性的定義：這是同種同態，用一種新穎而現代的方法觀察擬態的影響。

But there was no intentional definition — what makes a design neumorphic?

但是，沒有故意的定義 -是什么使設計變態？

For that kind of definition we usually specify the genus or family which the word defined belongs, and the differentia to the other objects within the genus.

對于這種定義，我們通常指定所定義單詞所屬的屬或科，以及與該屬內其他對象的區別 。

The classic example is this: A triangle is a plane figure that has 3 straight bounding sides. The genus or the set which the triangle belongs is “plane figures”. What makes it different to other plane figures is that “has 3 straight bounding sides”.

經典示例如下：三角形是具有3個筆直邊界的平面圖形。 三角形所屬的屬或集合是“平面圖形”。 與其他平面圖不同的是“具有3個筆直的邊界邊”。

So, what is the genus of neumorphism? A style? A look? A framework? A library? A design? I think it is clear that we are talking about a style. Or to be more specific, a UI design style.

那么，什么是亞態呢？ 風格？ 看看？ 一個框架？ 圖書館？ 設計？ 我認為很明顯，我們正在談論一種風格。 更具體地說，是一種UI設計風格。

Ergo, in a definition of neumorphism, the genus is a UI design style. We have the first part.

因此，在定義同態時， 屬是UI設計風格。 我們有第一部分。

The next question is “what is different in this UI design style?”. That’s where the emergence of a new concept in any knowledge field becomes interesting and relevant.

下一個問題是“這種UI設計風格有何不同？”。 這就是在任何知識領域出現新概念都變得有趣和相關的地方。

And this is also why it’s important a written definition. In design, as in any visual art, it is too easy to define something just pointing to it. Examples — and their descriptions — are not definitions. I love design and visual arts, but this is one of their limits.

這也是為什么它是一個書面定義很重要的原因。 在設計中，就像在任何視覺藝術中一樣，定義指向它的東西太容易了。 示例(及其描述)不是定義。 我喜歡設計和視覺藝術，但這是他們的局限之一。

(The lack of an intensional definition is the reason why this article doesn’t use illustrative examples or pictures — except for the one you already saw above and the elephant. I’m trying to avoid the temptation to look at an example of the concept instead of understanding the concept. If you are late to the topic of neumorphism, follow the links.)

(缺乏內涵的定義是本文不使用示例性示例或圖片的原因-除了您在上面已經看到的示例和圖片之外。我試圖避免嘗試著迷于概念的示例)而不是理解這個概念。如果您對神經變態的話題遲到了，請點擊以下 鏈接 。)

類比超現實主義 (The analogy to surrealism)

As I said before, new concepts are as important as necessary, even if they are not well defined at the beginning, or they fail to encompass reality at the end. Concepts construct knowledge and develop understanding and learning.

正如我之前說過的，即使新概念在開始時定義不清，或者在最后沒有包含現實，新概念也是如此。 概念建構知識， 發展理解和學習 。

The concept of neumorphism ignited a discussion about issues related to UI design and new trends that were resting in our minds and needed some trigger to be expressed.

變形的概念引發了關于UI設計和新趨勢的討論，這些問題一直存在于我們的腦海中，需要表達一些觸發條件。

The specific UI design designed as neumorphism can have variations and different points of view. It doesn’t have to be well defined or with a determined technique.

設計為神經變態的特定UI設計可能會有變化和不同的觀點。 它不一定要很好地定義或采用確定的技術。

The same happens in fine arts. Surrealism is a good example. Even when it was defined through a “manifesto” by André Breton, we can find surrealist art before it was defined as such. And sometimes it is difficult to establish if a piece of art is surrealist, dadaist, or if it just has an influence.

美術領域也是如此。 超現實主義就是一個很好的例子。 即使通過安德烈·布雷頓(AndréBreton)的“宣言”對它進行定義，我們也可以在它被定義之前找到超現實主義藝術。 有時很難確定一件藝術品是超現實主義，達達主義還是僅具有影響力。

For André Breton could be easy to point to written examples or describe paintings. But it's not. He wrote definitions:

對于安德烈·布雷頓(AndréBreton)而言，可以輕松地指出書面實例或描述繪畫。 但事實并非如此。 他寫了定義：

“Surrealism, n. Pure psychic automatism, by which one proposes to express, either verbally, in writing, or by any other manner, the real functioning of thought. Dictation of thought in the absence of all control exercised by reason, outside of all aesthetic and moral preoccupation.” *

“超現實主義，n。 純粹的心理自動主義，人們提議用這種語言自動地以口頭，書面或其他任何方式表達思想的真實功能。 在沒有所有審美和道德關注的情況下，在沒有理性控制的情況下進行思想聽寫。” *

This is important because surrealism is not about writing or painting dreams but writing or painting as if you were dreaming, without control, for no reason, automatically. In other words, you can’t define a surrealist painting by watching it, you have to know how it was painted. You need context and intention.

這很重要，因為超現實主義不是在寫作或繪畫夢，而是在寫作或繪畫，就像您在做夢一樣，沒有理由，沒有理由，自動地。 換句話說，您無法通過觀看來定義超現實主義繪畫，必須知道它是如何繪畫的。 您需要背景和意圖。

我們為什么需要一個概念？ (Why do we need a concept?)

The most important approach to neumorphism is as a concept.

變態最重要的方法是作為一個概念。

• Concepts are maps of reality.
  概念是現實的地圖。
• Concepts are very important in the development of knowledge.
  概念在知識的發展中非常重要。
• Concepts help to have a common language among professionals.
  概念有助于在專業人員之間使用通用語言。
• Concepts try to clarify the past and point to the future.
  概念試圖澄清過去并指向未來。
• Concepts can be organized hierarchically, allowing categories and classification.
  可以按層次結構組織概念，從而可以進行分類和分類。
• Concepts allow comparison and reflection.
  概念允許比較和反思。
• Concepts generate discussion.
  概念引發討論。

New concepts emerge when there is something new in reality and we don’t have a word to define it. Like any map, a concept is not the reality either pretends to be it. In the era of satellite photography we perhaps forget that a map is constantly updating, not just because reality changes but because we always find differences.

當現實中有新事物出現時，就會出現新概念，而我們無話可說。 像任何地圖一樣，概念也不是真實的。 在衛星攝影時代，我們也許會忘記地圖在不斷更新，這不僅是因為現實在變化，而且因為我們總是會發現差異。

A hypothesis is a concept to be proof. A system is a concept expressed in its intrinsic networks and relations. A framework is a concept in the aim to help us go through the unknown — as a tourist map.

假設是要證明的概念。 系統是用其固有的網絡和關系表達的概念。 框架是一個概念，旨在幫助我們穿越未知的世界-作為旅游地圖。

In Aristotelian logic, a concept has a definitional structure and a list of features. But in Wittgenstein a concept is a prototype with specific properties that members of a class tend to possess — a family resemblance. A concept doesn’t have to be deterministic but prototypical.

在亞里士多德邏輯中，一個概念具有定義結構和一系列特征。 但是在維特根斯坦，概念是原型，具有類成員傾向于擁有的特殊屬性- 家庭相似 。 概念不一定是確定性的，而是原型的。

The “user experience” is now a concept. It has a special meaning in a special field. It has several definitions depending on who is defining, but the general idea is the same for everyone. The concept of UX helps us to map humans, emotions, attitudes, affections, products, systems, services, and their interactions.

現在，“用戶體驗”是一個概念。 它在特定領域中具有特殊含義。 它有幾個定義，具體取決于誰在定義，但總體思路對每個人都是相同的。 UX的概念有助于我們繪制人類，情感，態度，情感，產品，系統，服務及其交互的地圖。

There are big and complex concepts like “surrealism” or “user experience”. Not all concepts are the same in magnitude or entanglement.

有一些大而復雜的概念，例如“超現實主義”或“用戶體驗”。 并非所有概念的大小或糾纏都相同。

“Skeuomorphism” is a simpler and smaller concept. Even so, we can see the recent UI made by a designer, for example, and tell her or tell him “it looks s little skeuomorphic”, and s/he is going to understand what we mean. We can even argue if that is bad or good for the user.

“擬態”是一個更簡單，更小的概念。 即使這樣，我們仍然可以看到例如設計師最近制作的UI，并告訴她或告訴他“它看起來有點像擬人”，他/他將理解我們的意思。 我們甚至可以爭論這對用戶是好還是壞。

那么，什么是同態？ (So, what is neumorphism?)

Let’s try to define neumorphism. Like any definition of a new concept, it’s a working hypothesis.

讓我們嘗試定義同態。 像任何新概念的定義一樣，這是一個可行的假設。

1.As we have established, neumorphism is a UI design style.

1.正如我們已經建立的，神經變態是一種UI設計風格。

2. In UI design we have a genealogy of styles. Design has fluctuated between skeuomorphism, abstraction, minimalism, and functionalism.

2.在UI設計中，我們有樣式的家譜。 設計已在擬態，抽象，簡約和功能主義之間波動。

3. Even in the last three, there is a tendency to use a previous reference — for practical, functional, and convenient reasons.

3.即使在后三個中，出于實用，功能和方便的原因，也傾向于使用以前的參考。

4. There is no “pure design” or design from “zero” because design needs to be understood since we start using it. Design needs previous reference. Art is different: it can propose something new to the grade and risk being unintelligible.

4.沒有“純設計”或“零設計”，因為自從我們開始使用它以來，就需要理解設計。 設計需要先前的參考。 藝術是不同的：它可以為年級提出一些新的建議，并且存在難以理解的風險。

5. Newness in design is aesthetic but it’s also a way to call for attention. Getting attention is important for a new product but it’s also important to trigger consciousness and learning for users.

5.設計的新穎性是美學的，但這也是引起注意的一種方式。 獲得關注對于新產品很重要，但對于用戶來說，激發意識和學習也很重要。

6. Designers and people involved in UX design are always looking for new forms of presentation, but as soon as we see a new kind of UI we immediately find the previous reference or references. When we are too involved in something, we tend to see new things and think “it looks like X”, or “it looks like a mix of X and Y”.

6.從事UX設計的設計人員和人員一直在尋找新的表示形式，但是一旦我們看到一種新的UI，我們便會立即找到以前的一個或多個參考。 當我們過多地參與某些事物時，我們傾向于看到新事物并認為“它看起來像X”或“它看起來像X和Y的混合體”。

7. If some person involved in UX and UI design calls something “new”, it is because s/he didn’t find an obvious previous reference. If in addition to calling it new, s/he requires a new word, it’s because s/he is dealing with something new in reality — in some grade, at least.

7.如果涉及UX和UI設計的人員稱某事為“新”，那是因為他/她沒有找到明顯的先前參考。 如果他/她除了要稱其為新詞之外，還需要一個新詞，這是因為他/他正在處理現實中的新事物，至少在某種程度上。

8. According to Michal Malewicz, neumorphism is a style that uses or resembles part of skeuomorphism but with a more fresh and modern look. Alexander Plyuto, the designer in Dribbble, called his proposition “skeuomorph”, perhaps because of the texture reference. But the resemblance to skeuomorphism is not clear in all the examples by Plyuto or Malewicz. What is visible in all is the soft texture.

8.根據米哈爾·馬列維奇(Michal Malewicz)的說法，神經變態是一種使用或類似于擬態的一部分的樣式，但外觀更為新鮮和現代。 Dribbble的設計師Alexander Plyuto稱他的命題為“ skeuomorph ”，這可能是因為其紋理參考。 但是，在Plyuto或Malewicz的所有示例中，都不清楚與擬態相似。 可見的是柔軟的質地。

“The main benefit of this style is the “freshness” (at least for as long as it lasts). It brings that “new feel” to the interface and make it stand out. It can also be mixed with other styles, so it’s not overwhelmingly “soft extruded plastic” everywhere.”*

“這種風格的主要好處是“新鮮”(至少持續了很長時間)。 它為界面帶來了“新感覺”，并使其脫穎而出。 它也可以與其他樣式混合使用，因此并沒有到處都壓倒性地“軟擠出塑料”。 *

The fact that it looks “soft extruded plastic” doesn’t make it skeuomorphic. A card in Material Design looks like paper or cardboard but that doesn’t make Material Design skeuomorphic.

它看起來像“軟質擠出塑料”，但這并不使它成為類同。 “材料設計”中的卡片看起來像紙或紙板，但不會使“材料設計”成為擬態。

9. Ergo, the resemblance to skeuomorphism is functional, not aesthetical, or technical. Skeuomorphism is not relevant in neumorphism.

9.因此，與擬態相似是功能性的，而不是美學或技術上的。 類同態與中同性無關。

10. If the main and only characteristic of neumorphism was the “soft extruded plastic” look, we were in front of a minor style. But no. There is more.

10.如果說同質性的主要和唯一特征是“軟擠壓塑料”外觀，那么我們處于次要風格的前面。 但不是。 還有更多。

11. Don’t forget the “new feel” part of the description. And, more important, let’s rescue the description of the technique and intention in neumorphism that Michal Malewicz establishes in one of his recent articles about it.

11.不要忘記描述中的“新感覺”部分。 而且，更重要的是，讓我們對米歇爾·馬列維奇(Michal Malewicz)在其最近的一篇文章中建立的有關同態的技術和意圖進行描述。

“It’s like building a UI from play-doh. It forms itself nicely, is soft to the touch (figuratively) and is supposedly non-toxic, but you shouldn’t eat it.[…] We should smile a bit more, play with our play-doh and sometimes — just sometimes — twist the concept of the interface towards something new.”*

“這就像從play-doh構建UI一樣。 它形成的很好，觸感柔軟(似)，無毒，但您不應食用它。[…]我們應該多微笑一點，與我們的玩偶一起玩，有時-有時-將界面的概念轉向新事物。” *

12. The essence of neumorphism is more in the newness than in the morph. Its essence is more in the intention and the technique. And by technique I mean the process, the how, the context and intension, not the step-by-step tutorial.

12.同質性的本質在于新穎性，而不是形態。 它的本質更多地在于意圖和技術。 我所說的技術是指過程，方法，上下文和內涵，而不是分步教程。

13. André Breton defined surrealism as an intention and a way to create. Neumorphism can be defined in the same terms — for logical reasons, not because it can be compared to surrealism as an art.

13.安德烈·布雷頓(AndréBreton)將超現實主義定義為意圖和創造方式。 出于邏輯上的原因，可以用相同的術語來定義神經網絡，并不是因為可以將它與超現實主義作為一種藝術進行比較。

14. New, playful, and fresh are subjective. But so “psychic automatism” or “dictation of thought”. To recognize new styles in design or art you usually need an educated eye that knows the context and intention.

14.新的，好玩的和新鮮的是主觀的。 但是“心理自動主義”或“思想命令”如此。 要識別設計或藝術中的新樣式，您通常需要受過良好教育的，了解上下文和意圖的眼睛。

15. Putting it all together:

15.放在一起：

Neumorphism is any UI design style that playfully proposes and brings freshness and new feel to the interface twisting the concept of the interface itself towards something new or different to previous references.

Neumorphism是任何一種UI設計風格，它都會巧妙地提出建議并為界面帶來新鮮感和新感覺，從而將界面本身的概念轉向與以前的參考文獻不同的事物。

一個簡單但重要的概念 (A simple but important concept)

Like any other field, first is a new object and its application, then, the experts point to it, define it, and build a concept or a theory.

像其他任何領域一樣，首先是一個新的對象及其應用，然后，專家指出，定義它并建立概念或理論。

The relationship between humans and electronic interfaces was born in the pragmatics of engineering and software design. In the process, some experts were defining and building the new concepts that became human-computer interaction, usability, user-centered design, user experience, affordances, stages of action, etc.

人機界面和電子界面之間的關系源于工程和軟件設計的實用性。 在此過程中，一些專家正在定義和構建新概念，這些新概念已成為人機交互，可用性，以用戶為中心的設計，用戶體驗，能力，行動階段等。

Neumorphism might be a small or simple concept and not a big or a complex one — at the moment is just about UI design styles. But it deserves the denomination as a concept and to have an intensional definition and not just a demonstrative or descriptive one.

神經態可能是一個很小或簡單的概念，而不是一個大或復雜的概念-目前僅涉及UI設計風格。 但是，它應該將其命名為一個概念，并具有內涵的定義，而不僅僅是說明性或描述性的定義。

UI design — and perhaps UX design — needs playfully propositions, freshness, new feels, twisting the concept of the interface, and looking towards something new or different from previous references.

UI設計(可能還有UX設計)需要有趣的主張，新鮮感，新的感覺，扭曲的界面概念以及與以前的參考文獻有所不同的新事物。

UI design needs neumorphism.

UI設計需要同態。