Human Communication - Term Paper Example

 «Human Communication» Human communication is a complex process. It can involve many elements such as face to face communication, nonverbal communication and numerous other forms of written and verbal communication. Despite the changes new technology has introduced to the process, for many people, face to face communication is the best means of interacting with another person. This is true for a variety of reasons. Face to face communication obviously occurs in a real-time format. This means that the communication is taking place at the same time for the individuals involved in the encounter as they are able to look at each other. When the verbal element of the conversation reaches a point where greater clarification or further discussion is required for understanding, this clarity or discussion can happen immediately through more verbal communication or through non-verbal cues such as body language or facial expressions. This concept of give and take that occurs in face to face interaction is called synchronicity. Adler et al (2007) says this synchronicity attribute is the first of three significant features of oral face to face communication. The second significant feature is the depth of information that can be obtained through this mode of communication. When two people are looking at each other, they are communicating. This is true whether they are saying something or not. Their ideas, thoughts and feelings can be conveyed through spoken words, eye movements, body gestures and numerous other non-verbal clues. Non-verbal responses on the part of the listener to the speaker’s words can provide valuable feedback as to how those words are being received. These reactions help to direct the conversation in ways that avoid misunderstanding and illustrate greater depth. However, there are drawbacks to the face to face conversation. These types of conversations do not leave participants with any record of the topics discussed. They rely on the accurate memory of each participant. Should one participant fail to make their needs known or fail to remember what those needs were, communication breaks down. As the conversation takes place, it can quickly extend into a subtopic without ever returning to the important details and participants can easily forget or confuse information that was shared. Face to face communication also provides no means by which an individual might learn of clues in their speech that direct the discussion. Unfortunately, it is only by studying the language they use that individuals can come to understand how their communication choices both reflect and reinforce their interpersonal relations with others. It is helpful to start a discussion of this nature with a shared definition of the term being discussed. A rather specific definition of language suggests that “a language is a system, used for communication, comprising a finite set of arbitrary symbols and a set of rules (or grammar) by which the manipulation of these symbols is governed. These symbols can be combined productively to convey new information, distinguishing languages from other forms of communication.”(“Language”, 2007). Under this definition, language can be considered to be anything from a set of drawn symbols in the sand to specific organization of vocalizations to delicate tracings of motions in the air. When discussing elements of interpersonal communication, it is important to keep in mind that all of these attributes come into play during face to face communication, whether they are intended or not, but language will be the primary focus of this discussion. People use language to communicate with others. The language choices made during this process influences the meaning intended by the speaker and the perception of others regarding what that speaker is trying to convey. Language has such a strong influence on meaning because language is inherently subjective. The subjective nature of language is that the meaning of the words being used has a highly unique meaning for each individual hearing them spoken and as they are shaped or nuanced by the words around them. How the listener interprets the words will be affected by a number of factors such as the individual’s age, social groups, knowledge base, native language and culture. Knowledge of language rules will also influence meaning and perception. A person who does not know the now-unspoken rule that people should lower their voice when speaking in the library or in hospital waiting rooms will be considered rude and boorish by others if they speak in normal tones. This automatic perception then throws a negative impression on the individual and the ideas being expressed causing others to tend to side against him. Constitutive rule knowledge, or knowing how and what to communicate in a given situation, conveys an automatic sense of understanding, respect, affection and professionalism. These elements of language can be traced in the given discourse recorded between two students and an instructor prior to a tutorial session. In the transcript, there are several places where the action of the various speakers is given as people drift in and out of the conversation. There are other places where tone of voice is described – Ninnette speaks with “not an overly enthusiastic tone of voice” at one point and Mr. A speaks with “a smile-voice and with a chuckle”. These are examples of when the interpersonal communication is taking place in more than just the words being spoken back and forth but is also carried through other aspects of communication that are not necessarily verbal. The subjective nature of language is also revealed in the conversation as the joking teacher responds to his students’ playfulness with a deliberate redefinition of the word ‘anything.’ Although Ninnette was indicating on a subjective level that any subject would be better than the subject they had been discussing before, she did not specifically state this. What she actually said was “Better than anything.” This highly generalized statement enabled Mr. A to quickly respond with a tease that went well beyond the confines of the conversation up to this point as he asked her if it would be “better than free food?” The way in which the teacher interprets the meaning and translates it back to the student reflects his age and interests as he suggests the best thing would be to have free food made available. His statement indicates he is still thinking within the school setting as a common feature of professor staff meetings and lectures is an offer of free food, but is outside of the context of the students’ experience. This contrast is brought forward more clearly with the interpretation of the younger student Joanne, who introduces ‘party’ in place of ‘free food,’ taking the conversation completely out of the academic setting the teacher had in mind but remaining fixed in the student’s perception of the college experience. Finally, the concepts of constitutive language rules are also expressed in the dialogue. Mr. A brings the conversation back to the serious by asking another student what she thinks. When Joanne breaks in with more joking, she breaks the constitutive language rules that indicate respect and deference should be given to the teacher. This rule is enforced by the teacher and everyone else when they essentially ignore Joanne’s bad behavior and continue to discuss the potential topics for the class. Communication through language can also shape perception in another way through the process now identified as labeling. When we assign a label to an individual, it becomes increasingly difficult for us to change our perception of that individual to reflect new knowledge learned about that person. For example, if Joanne from the above conversation is labeled as a troublemaker, it would be more difficult for classmates accustomed to thinking of her in those terms as someone with a valid point in a heated discussion. At the same time, if Ninette is considered to be straight-laced and serious – a ‘good student’ – it might be difficult for others to understand when she is making a joke. The longer a label is held in place, the more limiting it becomes on the person labeled as well as the person who assigned the label. A person labeled as negative by her family as a child will have a difficult time proving her optimistic outlook as an adult no matter what her family knows about her outlook or activities. What’s interesting about this process is that the woman may have a very difficult time accepting her natural optimism after being labeled negative by her family. According to Bruce Link, a psychologist who has done extensive study on the issue, people who are given a negative label “are constantly being rejected from society in seemingly minor ways but that, when taken as a whole, all of these small slights can drastically alter their self concepts. They come to both anticipate and perceive negative societal reactions to them, and this potentially damages their quality of life” (Link et al, 1989). We use language as a means of communicating not only our inner feelings, but our impressions of other people. Engaging in this communication helps to cement these ideas in our heads, causing us to identify with the ideas expressed more and more until they become reality. This concept functions on many levels. For example, discussing the various negative personality traits of Joanne with Ninette might cause me to decide that Joanne is an irresponsible student and potentially a person without morals, a concept that will be transferred to Ninette who might not have met Joanne before or who might have had a completely different impression of her. This discussion may not change Ninette’s opinion, but it might cause her to look more closely at the negative aspects of Joanne’s personality until Ninette also decides Joanne is not worth knowing. If enough people’s opinions are shaped in this way, Joanne may eventually come to view herself in this negative light through the various small cues she receives from others. Finally, she may begin to act on these assumptions as if they were a part of her personality to begin with. This demonstrates the power of communication to shape who we are and how we perceive the world as well as the importance of face to face communication in making these labels stick. Language organizes our perception of the world because language allows room for abstract thought as well as a means of expressing it. However, this also means our language can be stereotyped. Stereotypes are closely related to the concept of labels as described above, but they can be equally applied to people as well as ideas. Stereotypes make it possible for us to use a single word or phrase to convey meaning without the need to fully define what we are discussing each time. When discussing ideas with people sharing the same native language, this method of verbal shorthand can be effective without causing unnecessary confusion, but non-native speakers frequently have difficulty following the ideas in these types of discussions because they are not familiar with the commonalities of the stereotype. In some cases, this leads to the native speakers labeling the non-native speaker or their native language as inferior because it is assumed that their language would be incapable of expressing such complex ideas in this way. In spite of these perceptions, there are several ways in which languages can be considered as neither superior nor inferior to other languages regardless of the number of speakers or the limitations of the language. The first of these relates to the concept of the ‘mother tongue’. It makes sense that the language a person learns and uses in the home is the language by which they are most able to communicate their ideas to the fullest extent possible within their understanding. This is because it is the language they are most familiar with and the language in which they likely have the largest vocabulary. In other words, a native English speaker will be able to clarify and communicate their ideas to a much greater extent in English as compared to trying to express these same ideas using the Spanish they learned in high school. There are nuances to the words selected that are heightened or tempered by the other words used in the communication that require years of practice to understand. This does not make Spanish an inferior language to English or English a superior language to Spanish except in the context of the individual speaker’s knowledge. This is true regardless of the native language being discussed as it is clear that these roles would be reversed in the case of the native Spanish speaker who learned English in high school. The importance and equality of all languages is emphasized in the words of an ancient Chinese sage. His emphasis was on the idea that the correct use of language was the most important thing for human relations: “If language is not used correctly, then what is said is not what is meant; if what is said is not what is meant, then what ought to be done remains undone; if this remains undone, morals and art will be corrupted; if morals and art are corrupted, justice will go astray; if justice goes astray, the people will stand about in helpless confusion” (Fann, 1978). As this statement makes clear, the equality of languages extends even beyond the realm of the individual’s ability to fully communicate because it conveys important cultural clues as to the heritage and morals of a people. “All languages meet the social and psychological needs of their speakers, are equally deserving of scientific study, and can provide us with valuable information about human nature and society.” (Crystal, 1997). Since languages develop alongside the development of the people who use it, it is natural that it should place stress on things that are deemed important to that culture while de-emphasizing things that are considered trivial. For example, if money and commerce is important to the cultural group, there will be many ways for native speakers within that group to discuss these issues with a great variety of nuance in the different meanings of words. The Eskimos have many different words that they use to refer to the concept of snow because there are important distinctions to be made in their world regarding the type of weather occurring outside. By contrast, people who have to deal with snow only occasionally use a single word to describe the weather phenomena regardless of whether it’s dry, packed, wet or icy. Thus, even when it is no longer in use, the language of a group can provide important cues regarding the culture that used it on a regular basis. However, this does not mean that everyone using a language to communicate is able to use it equally. Throughout the known history of the world including regions where the English language originated and was developed, society as a whole has been dominated and controlled by patriarchal rule. This means the men were usually in charge and the language developed in a way that reflects that. This is done through the various ways that language categorizes the realities of society. At its core, language establishes the boundaries of perception. Everyday speech in English and most other languages as well are dominated by male references simply because males have historically dominated society. This hasn’t changed much both because of the length of time required for language to evolve and because of the fact that men still largely dominate the public sphere. As it has developed, then, the English language reflects a highly sexist bias because it balances the strengths and positives of the male against the weaknesses and negatives of the female as part of the inherent nature of its development. This is perhaps best understood in a modern context by studying the discourse of 1950’s television programs, which were ripe with examples of sexist language. The ‘boob tube’ as it was called then simply reflected life and language as it was yet even in the euphemism used to describe the television set was designed to reflect the passive attitude of its watchers in terms of uniquely female attributes. Women even at this late date in history were considered second class citizens as was illustrated by the casual use of the words ‘dame,’ and ‘broad’ on television. Examples of sexist language can be found in any program that aired at that time, causing many women today to flinch in anger or disgust at the implications. In the TV show The Honeymooners, for example, Ralph Cramden was the ‘king of the castle,’ and ‘wore the pants’ in his family (of two). It was expected that supper would be on the table when he arrived home from work as a bus driver. If his wife Alice ever got too flippant on him or refused to live up to the expectations society had set on her, he threatened to ‘send her to the moon’ meaning to hit her in the face as hard as the 300+ pound man could. Although this kind of language and interpersonal communication was considered highly acceptable and even comic in the 1950s, this same type of sexism in language persists even today. Generally speaking, sexist language can be classified as deliberate, concealed or controlled. The deliberate form of sexist language refers to obvious and overtly derogatory sexist terminology. This type of expression is generally considered blatantly discriminatory and reflects a patently unfair treatment of women as compared to men. The intention of concealed sexism is also deliberate and discriminatory, but the delivery is of a covert nature so as to either get away with its use or as an intention to hide the real views of the speaker. “Subtle sexism is particularly interesting from both theoretical and practical perspectives because it may be quite prevalent, and may have an insidious impact on its victims” (Benokraitis & Feagin, 1999). However, there remain numerous cases in which these forms of sexist language are used by a speaker who is unaware of the implications of its meaning. Sexism as it exists in language is a controlled manner of speaking that perpetuates gender stereotypes and reinforces status disparities between men and women (Parks & Robertson, 1998). Those less sensitive to sexism as a whole tend not to define the demeaning terms they use as sexist language and tend to misunderstand or under-appreciate the import of what they are saying and the effect it can have on the people they are conversing with. These people are typically of the opinion that sexist language does not exist or are either consciously or subconsciously trying to safeguard traditional patriarchal social hierarchies. Those persons more receptive to sexism and the harm it causes do attempt to adjust their speech patterns so as not to offend (Segerstrom, 2001). However, this is not always as easy as it might seem because so much of the language is based on these concepts to begin with. People may use sexist language simply because the use is habitual and they find it hard to alter terms or phrases used most or all of their lives. Additionally, people are continually exposed to sexist terms in spoken and written language encountered in their everyday lives. To avoid disrupting a normal, rhythmic and understandable conversation, some people opt to use these terms without a thought of their inappropriateness simply because they are caught up in larger ideas inherent in the actual conversation. “Conversational sexism is learned at an early stage, from the time a child is learning to speak” (Parks & Roberton, 1998). An example of this might be the tendency for a man to call a woman ‘sweetie’ as a part of the discussion, perhaps intending it as a term of affection and not realizing that to the woman it sounds like a dismissal of her relevancy to the discussion. Working on the principles of stereotyping or labeling, this term may also unconsciously signal to the man that the words and ideas coming from the woman have less weight and import simply because she is a woman. When this occurs, it becomes a significant barrier to communication yet remains a barrier difficult to break down. Language is learned at an early, impressionable age and the sexism permeating it is transmitted with the sound. However, just as people suffering from inappropriate labeling can overcome the perceptions of others in order to become the person they feel inside, studies have shown that the use of sexist terms in everyday speech can be altered depending on the sensitivity level a person possesses regarding sexism in their discourse and their thinking. This is a difficult process because what is learned even early on in development can be re-learned or adjusted only to an extent if the person is aware of the disparity in language usage and makes conscious effort to change. According to one study’s findings, males of high school age were, not surprisingly, more likely to use sexist language than were their female counterparts. (Matheson & Kristiansen, 1987). The sexism present in language is seldom spoken with careful consideration of its meaning or implications. Instead, it is a significant aspect of the culture that is passed down from one generation to the next, typically also without any type of intention of subverting one gender under another. It is a process that occurs as a natural function of interpersonal communication. Children can only learn language habits from what they hear around them, coming from those people they communicate with who are already comfortable with their language patterns. Well before a child enters school, they are already developing knowledge of gender-related stereotypes and roles that will stay with them for a lifetime unless they make conscious effort to stop it. “By the age of three, children are able to distinguish males from females, and by the age of five, many children have already formed strong gender stereotypes. These gender stereotypes are constructed, shaped and maintained by societal values” (Serbin, Powlishta & Gulko, 1993). They are perpetuated in the way that we speak, the tone of voice, the attitudes expressed through body language and facial expressions and, of course, the words we choose. Literature, by way of having stories read to them along with what they observe from their parents’ words and actions are the primary methods by which children learn social standards. Gender biases contained in books such as the fairy tales of the Brothers Grimm or Disney shape the way children formulate self image and how they view other people as well. Books have served to reflect and define people’s concept of feminine and masculine roles in society for a long time. The types of words used most often to describe men include fierce, terrible, great, proud, furious, horrible and big. Descriptive adjectives used for females frequently include words such as sweet, frightened, weak, beautiful and frightened (Turner-Bowker, 1996). The female’s lower position of social rank is reflected in how they are referred to by others, including other females. Language patterns also affect the way women express themselves. (Dodson Gray, 1981). For example, boys are often referred to as men once they have accomplished something significant no matter how young they are. Women, on the other hand, are often referred to as girls no matter what they’ve accomplished or how old they become. The English language illustrates an implied inferiority of women in society such as in the titles Mrs. and Miss. It is unimportant for men to be identified as married or not as their status does not change in either case. When a woman is identified as Mrs., they now belong to a man and are deemed more important to society albeit in a subordinate role. Though in recent years this particular type of labeling has all but disappeared, the historical significance is relevant as the subordination of women as identified in the ‘Mrs.’ and ‘Miss’ categorizations remains apparent in language usages. The stereotypical imagery in these types of words is rooted from the generalized and simplified behaviors of men and women as seen through the eyes of a patriarchal based society. The images portrayed in language are inaccurate and impede how the evolving functions of women are typically characterized by both males and females. (Liu, 2005). These inaccurate terms are confusing and demean women. Language closely reflects the attitudes of a society and determines the patterns of our interpersonal communications or the effectiveness of these communications. The prevalent sexism that permeates society has resulted in a sexist language, but this can be overcome when one understands the limitations this places on others and when conscious effort is made to overcome these difficulties. This is also true when communicating with people who do not share the same native language or when engaging in discourse with someone who is somehow associated with a particular label. We can improve our language if we follow certain guidelines such as engaging in dual perception. This means we should be thinking not only about ourselves, but about others too, when we are engaged in an act of communication. Second, it is necessary to own your feelings and thoughts by considering carefully which words you use and how you use them. Third, respect what others have to say about their feelings and thoughts regardless of nationality, gender or proficiency in the language being spoken. This is truly the most important aspect of successful interpersonal communication because it is the only way of learning how others really think and feel. This shows our interest and demonstrates respect from us to others. Finally, we should always strive for accuracy and clarity in our communications. We should use our language very accurately because all our words come to others and reflect on other feelings.In conclusion, language is a very great tool and we should use this tool to the best of our ability for clear communication. To do this, we need to be careful and respectful of others because we all live together in one world. References Adler, R.B., Rosenfeld, L.B., & Proctor II, R.F. (2007). Interplay. The Process of Interpersonal Communication. (10th. ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Benokraitis, N.V. & Feagin, J.R. (1999). Modern Sexism. (2nd Ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Crystal, David. (1997). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dodson Gray, Elizabeth. (1981). Green Paradise Lost. Wellesley, MA; Roundtable Press. Fann, K.T. (1978). Ludwig Wittgenstein: The Man and His Philosophy. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press. “Language.” (January 10, 2007). Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Link, Bruce G.; Francis T. Cullen; Elmer Struening; Patrick E. Shrout & Bruce P. Dohrenwend (June 1989). “A Modified Labeling Theory Approach to Mental Disorders: An Empirical Assessment.” American Sociological Review, Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 400-423 Liu, Xiaolan. (December 16, 2005). “Sexism in Language.” E-writer Magazine. Matheson, K. & Kristiansen, C. M. (1987). “The Effect of Sexist Attitudes and Social Structure on the Use of Sex-Biased Pronouns.” The Journal of Social Psychology. Vol. 127, pp. 395-398. Parks, J.B. & Roberton, M.A. (1998). “Contemporary Arguments Against Nonsexist Language: Blaubergs (1980) Revisited.” Sex Roles. Vol. 39, pp. 445-461. Parks, J.B. & Robertson, M.A.. (1998). “Influence of Age, Gender, and Context on Attitudes Toward Sexist/Non-sexist Language.” Sex Roles. Vol. 38, pp. 477-494. Segerstrom, S.C. (2001). “Optimism and Attentional Bias for Negative and Positive Stimuli.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Vol. 27, pp. 1334-1343. Serbin, L. A.; Powlishta, K. K.; & Gulko, J. (1993). “The Development of Sex Typing in Middle Childhood.” Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development. Vol. 232, I. 58 Turner-Bowker, D. M. (1996). “Gender Stereotyped Descriptors in Children’s Picture Books: Does ‘Curious Jane’ Exist in the Literature?” Sex Roles. Vol. 35, pp. 461-488. Read More