Analysis of Communication Ethnography - Literature review Example

Communication Institution Name Course Instructor’s name Date of submission I chose this friend exactly (MONIF), because I know him very well and he has three kids. The little one is deaf now. He was born in Canada, that time he wasn’t deaf as reported in the hospital report and as his parents said.   BANDER  : ASALAAM  ALAIKOM Peace upon you     MONIF :WA  ALAIKOM  ALSALAAM Peace upon you too     BANDER  : WASH  AKHBARAK  ALYOM How is it going?     MONIF : ALAHAMOOD  LLAAH  TAMAM Praise be to God, Good,     MONIF : TMAM Good,   BANDER  : TAEEB,  HAL  TABAAT  AHKER  AKHBAR  ALSHARQ  ALAWSAT. What is the latest news in the Middle East?     MONIF : ANA  MOTABA BASSTMRAR KAL SAHA,         KASAWSAN SYRIA. I am watching everything constantly. Especially Syria    BANDER  : HL TAM  ALBADA FI TATBIQ MOAAHADA ALHODNA FI SOWRIA. Have they started in the implementation of the armistice agreement?   MONIF : ANA LA ATAQID, HASSAB AHKEER ALAKHBAR. LAM YANSSAHAB ALJAISH ALSOWRI MIN ALMODAN. I do not think so. The latest news said, the Syrian army still occupies the cities   MONIF : ALWAQT ALMUTABAQI  FAQAT YAWMAIN, WA ALJAISH  MA ZAL FI NAFFS ALAMAKEN.             Two days left. The military still in the same places.    BANDER  : TAIIB,  HAL TATHAN AN HATHI ALMOAHADA SAWF TAFSHL Do you expect this treaty will fail?   MONIF : ALYAWM QRAT MAQALAT KATHEERA AN HATHA ALMAWDAW, KMA ATAQID AN ALHKAWMA ALSOWRIA LA TAHTAM. LAN RWSSIA WA ASSIN YQFAN FI SAFAHA. Today, I have been read some articles, which said: Syria government does not care, because Russia and china support Bashar Al Assad.   BANDER  : WALAKIN MIN NAHIA AKHRA, ITHA LM TWAFIQ ALHAKAWMA ALA HATHI ALHADNA FA INHA TAKWWN QABIIA GEDAN. On the other way, it`s stupid if Syrian government don`t accept this chance,   BANDER  : LAN HATHI ALFARSSA LAN TATAKARRAR, WA AIDAN HADI ALFARSSA MOFIDA LAHOM FI TARTIB  ALAMOR. This change will not be repeated. This is the latest chance for them- Syria government-   BANDER  : WA  AIDAN  LATANSSA  AN  DAMMASHQ  WA  HALAB   BADAAT FI  ALTADAHWR. Also, don`t forget that residents of Damascus and Halab, began in the revolution.   BANDER  : AIDAN  SHAI MOHAM. IRAN  LA  TORID  AN  TAKHSAR  SOWRIA. LAN SAOWRIA HIA  HALIFATAHA FI  ALMANTGA. There is important think. Iran does not want to lose Bashar Al Assad. Therefore, they are trying to let Bashar Al Assad accept this armistice   MONIF : ANA  IRAF   DAWR  IRAN  FI   ALMANTQA, WA  ANHA   LATWRID  IN  TAKHSSER  ALHAKWMA  ALSAWRIA. I know that. I know Iran do not want to lose Bashar Al Assad and his government.   MONIF :  WALAKEEN  KAL  ALAMOASHR  TADWL  ALA  SQAWT  ALNADAM FI SAWRIA. Nevertheless, all indications show that the Syrian government will fall down so far.   BANDER  : ANA  ARA AN  SAOWRIA  HIA  NOQTA MOHAMA FI  ALMANTAQA. ITHA  SAQAT ALHAKAWMA ALSWRIA, HAD SHAI  QAEER GAEED LASRAEEL However, I see that, Syria is the important point in Middle East. If Bashar Al Assad and his government fall down that will change the whole region, and it`s trouble for Israel.   MONIF : AMWMAN  ,  KHALEENA  NTABA  BOKRA  ALAKHBAR  WANSHAWF. Anyway, let us see tomorrow what will happen.   BANDER  : TAIB, ATMANA  TAHDH  ALAMWR, AN SHAALAH. OK. I hope everything’s will go down.   BANDER  : SAAWF  AKALAMAK  ITHA  KAN  FIH  GADEED. TAIB I`ll call you if there is a new news.   MONIF : TAIB. MA  ALSALAMA               OK. Good bay   BANDER  : MA  ALSALAMA. Good bay   I called my friend ( MONIF) and I told him:  I recorded our conversation yesterday, and I`ll use this record  in my assessment 1. I asked him if that Ok with him. He said: No worries, go ahead  Introduction Communication is often perceived as the passing of messages and ideas from one person to the other through a variety of mediums. However, communication is not tangible, it cannot be seen or heard but can only be perceived. The definition of communication as the transmittal of a signal between the sender and the receiver cements this fact. Pagin (88) says a process of communication is what is called a communicative event. He defines an event as “a process that starts with some inner state of the sender and ends with some inner state of the receiver. This means that people can communicate without their knowledge and send different messages to other people intentionally or unintentionally. This could be the reason why a people say that one’s dress code or image communicates a lot about them. The messages that the ‘communicator’ in such a case sends out is diverse depending on the people receiving it and how they interpret. Their interpretation is influenced by many things among them their personal experiences and cultural background. In such a case, if a way of dressing sends out different messages, then dressing can qualify to be a communication event? Holmes (2005) defines communication as “an instrumental act where the sending and receiving of messages in ways which individual actors are largely in rational control of” (p. 6). Culture and behaviour cannot be separated from communication as disclosed by further examination of what is a communicative event. This is because communication takes places within given boundaries and acceptable behaviour. These boundaries need to be identified in understanding what a communicative event is. Such boundaries could be anything from the ringing of the telephone to the hanging it. In the case of a communicative event through dress code, it can be said that the conversation is bounded by the start and end of visual contact of the observer to the desired object. The communicative event in the transcription was started by dialling and ended by hanging up the call. This conversation extract will be used as the main references in discussing and applying Hymes ethnographic model and also other models by Savile-Troike (1992) and Holmes (2008). Analysis using the Hymes ethnographic model This model was developed by Dell Hymes in 1964 which he called the S-P-E-A-K-I-N-G model. This word speaking is an acronym for setting and scene, participants, ends, act sequence, key, instrumentalities, norms and genre. Each of the circumstances brought forward by the model have a significant bearing on the communicative event. The setting and scene refers to the time/day, the act and the prevailing physical circumstances (Hymes, 55). In the current conversation, the situation in Syria is the setting for the story. A lot has been happening in the country and has been making headlines all over the world. Being a Muslim ad having originated from the Middle East implies that Mr Monif and I have the necessary interest in the issue to strike up a conversation. The ‘participants’ in the model refer to any actors or persons who receive the communication signal. In the CE, the participants are only two, Mr. Monif and I. The ‘ends’ in the model refers to the outcomes of the communicative event (Hymes 56). In the CE, the objectives of the conversation were to check on Mr. Monif and get the latest views and news on the situation in Syria. However, it must be noted in a line with my culture, there is a particular way of starting a conversation with anyone which mostly is greetings. Furthermore, other issues may crop up in an informal conversation depending on a number of factors such as the relationship between the participants. In the current, no other issues crop up to disorient the objective of the CE. The “act sequence” in the model refers to how events unfold and how a conversation starts and develops. This also captures any possibilities of interruptions in the conversation. The “key” in the model refers to the hints and clues understood by the receiver with a hidden or obvious message. In some cases, there might be mimicking or imitation of voice. From the key, participants also understand the tone or the spirit of the communicative event, in this case the CE (Hymes 56) For example, a smile from could imply friendliness on the part of the receiver. The instrumentalities refer to the forms and styles of speech. For instance, the sender might be forced to use formal language in a formal conversation or use jokes in a social conversation. Norms in the model explain the social rules that apply to the specific communicative event and the participants, actions and reactions to them. For instance, in a formal conversation, interruptions might not be welcome. The genre on the other hand refers to the speech act or event. The Norms in the current CE are cultural and religious. In one of the responses, Mr. Monif says “Alahmood llaah tamam” (Praise be to God, Good). It must also be noted that the conversation is held in the Arabic language which according to Kramisch (206) is a strong tool of nationalism. The author notes that language is a strong element of patriotism and nationalism. Holmes (3) greetings and compliments in conversations are culture determined. Analysis using Holmes (2008) and Saville-Troike (1992) A communicative event, as per the transcription above is commenced by the skype call that I made to Mr. Monif and hanging up the call. According to Holmes, a communicative event must have one or more active participants. Pagin (88) on the other hand says that an organism or person cannot communicate with itself. This could be considered to one of the qualifying factors of identifying a communicative event. While a communicative event has actors, there is also the issue of the success of a communicative event. Pagin (90) expounds on this to say that there is no theory that can be used to verify the success of a communicative event other than judging the event from the context. This implies that the communicative event cannot be judged using theory whether it was successful or not. The participants, who happens to be Mr. Monif and I can only judge whether the communicative event was successful depending on whether the message intended to be passed through or the message to be received was received and understood. Type of event The topic of the event in the current communicative event about the development in the Middle East. Crovet (116) says that communication between two or more individuals is strongly rooted in their common or different cultures. Where culture is common, communication is deemed to be much easier as there is common understanding of the language and use of one language. Crovet highlights the role of language in communication by saying the “culture is embedded in language as an intangible, all pervasive and highly variable force” (p 116). Therefore, this implies that the current communicative event is characterised by the culture of the communicating entities. From the transcription, the common language is obvious, Arabic. The common language between Mr. Monif and me indicates the cultural background of the communicators. The type of communicative event in this case is a conversation. A conversation must be guided by a specific protocol and is structurally organised (Gardner 101). For instance, all actors in conservation cannot talk at the same time. Some people ask questions and the others respond to the questions. Another protocol that guides a conversation as is the case with the current conversation in the cultural backgrounds of the actors (Saville-Troike 138). Language in this case is not the only cultural dimension. Religious (Islamic) protocol dictates how a normal conversation starts. In this case, the conversation was started by greetings, “Asalaam alaikom.” Havening initiated conversation, I was the one who greeted Mr Monif and he in turn responded to the greeting by saying “Wa alaikom alsalaam.” The conversation continues using a social undertone which quickly switches to political matters in the Middle East. I asked Mr. Monif about the latest developments in the Middle East to which he responded aptly. This demonstrates the issue brought forward of conversation protocol where questions are asked and responded to with time allowed for asking and answering questions. Purpose/function and Rules of interaction Any communication event must have a purpose of intended function. As earlier said, actors in a communication event can communicate intentionally or unintentionally (Saville-Troike 139). Similarly, a communicative event may have unintended actors. This can happen when people overhear a conversation or they read messages not intended for them. Furthermore, non-verbal communication such as facial expressions and body language might be received and interpreted by unintended recipients. In the current conversation, there is common understanding that governs interaction as Gardner says (113). When Mr. Monif says “Anyway, let us see tomorrow what will happen”, I “respond OK. I hope everything’s will go down.” The Ok was used to show shred agreement on the waiting part. Setting and message form The setting of any communication event is very important in achieving its objectives. The setting of a communicative event refers to the environment in which the communicative event is taking place. In the current conversation, the environment of the conversation is mainly determined by the communication channel used and the medium. The medium used, Skype, allows the video call whereby the caller is able to see in real time the person they are talking to over the phone. By using headphones, the conversation is more private though the internet makes it vulnerable to the public. Headphones on the other hand only protect eavesdroppers from one direction only because the use of a microphone attached to the headphones implies that a person standing next to me or Mr. Monif could overhear the conversation. Though the conversation is general it assumed to be personal. That is why Mr. Monif steers away from making extreme comments on the Middle East issue. The sensitivity of the topic is a shared thing among Middle Eastern people. Richards and Schimidt (119) capture this by saying that “when people take part in a conversation, they bring to the conversational process shared assumptions and expectations” which are imposed on the topic of discussion. The other setting that is vital in the current conversation is the live video aspect. This allows communicators to see facial expressions. The conversation is also held in my native Arabic language which I share with Mr. Monif. This is nothing unusual as I always communicate in Arabic with my Arabic friends. This concurs with what Li (8) says that multilingual purposes use different languages for different types of communication. The other setting that is benefited by a video call is ability to see Mr. Monif. Crozet and Liddicoat (115) write that facial expressions and gestures are heavily rooted in one’s culture. For instance, a head bob among the Indian people is a very acceptable form of communication while in Australia it is not. Holmes (153) comments on this by saying that “the way you speak is usually a good indicator of your social background with many speech features that can be used as clues”. This implies that the setting of a communicative event can allow multidimensional communication where other things other than the voice are used for communicating and fostering understanding of the intended and unintended message. In the current case, communication took place as verbal communication and facial expression and gestures. It is important to note that some expressions and feelings which could not be transmitted by other means are transmitted. For instance, emotions such as sadness, happiness and excitement, are easily transmitted by a video telephone as opposed to the normal telephone conversation that is only audio. Key and act sequence The sequence refers to the progression of the conversation from start to end. A key refers to the understanding of certain things that the participants have. Kramsch’s (216) study on how people from different nationalities respond and understand one particular advert views weight to this key issue in communication. The author writes the different understanding that Americans and Russians have in response to one advert. However, in the CE there is a common culture between Mr. Monif and I that give us a common key in understanding particular hints and clues. For instance, I understand that the Middle East question is very tricky and ordinary people like Mr. Monif and I can only stand aside and watch. Participants and norms of interpretation As aforementioned, there must be actors in any communicative event. While some authors argue that there must be a receiver and sender of a communicative message, Paigin (89) claims that an actor can participate in a communicative event as a standalone. This implies that an individual can be both the actor and recipient of a message. For instance, a person can make a mental note of something or even create a reminder either in writing or setting an alarm reminder. However, this is not the case in the current conversation where there are two actors. Mr Monif on one hand responds aptly to my call and agrees to participate in the conversation by being friendly and even following my cue. When I ask him about the situation in Syria, he is so swift in that he keeps the response formal and acceptable. He does not let his personal emotions tell over the issue. In some situations, people may be tempted to use abusive and vulgar language. Beal (43) says this is important in preserving social harmony in what he says is the desire of nice people such as Mr. Monif. Holmes adds that (270) such rules of behaviour vary across cultures. Such ways of speaking are some of the considerations that employers look for in prospective employees (Holmes, 354). Conclusion The manner of conversing from the conversion is a function of many elements and mostly culture. The conversation also abides by a number of rules and theories explained by the literature reviewed above. The conversation has served its academic and practical purpose of understanding the rules and procedures that follow communication. The issue of language and how it is affected by culture, setting and the participants has been discusses. The Hymes ethnographic model and the Saville-Traoke model have been widely used in the discussion. The models are complementary with some stages such as setting overlapping. References Beal, C. (1992). 'Did you have a good week-end? Or why there is no such thing as a simple question in cross-cultural encounters', Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 23-52. 1992 Crozet, C. & Liddicoat, A.J. (1999). 'The challenge of intercultural language teaching: Engaging with culture in the classroom', in Striving for the Third Place: Intercultural Competence Through Language Education, ed.J. Lo Bianco, A.J. Liddicoat & C. Crozet, Language Australia, Melbourne, pp. 113-125. Holmes, J. (2008). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics (3rd Edition) Sydney: Pearson Longman Hymes, D., (1974). Foundations in Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, Kramsch, C. (1993). 'Teaching language along the cultural faultline', in Context and Culture in Language Teaching, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 205-232. Li, Wei. (2000) 'Dimensions of bilingualism' In Wei, L. (eds) The bilingualism reader London : Routledge, 2000. pp. 3-25 Pagin, P. (2008). “What is Communicative Success?” Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 38(1), 85-116 Richards, J.C. & Schmidt, R.W. (1983), 'Conversational analysis', in Language and Communication, Longman, London, pp. 116-154. Saville-Troike, M. (1989), 'The analysis of communicative events', in The Ethnography of Communication: An Introduction, 2nd edn, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, pp. 107-180. Read More