Human Communication Theory and Research - Essay Example

Human Communication Theory and Research Introduction The world is very big and made of people from different social backgrounds. The world is also made of people from different cultures that have distinct values from one another. However, some aspects of culture make people identify themselves with the values and attributions. One of such cultural elements is a language or communication. Communication makes people understand one another and fits in the social sub-groups. Similarly, communication differentiates people or culture from one another making it play an important role in the everyday society. Therefore, it is vital to understand the importance of communication and ways people assign meaning to words they communicate. Different scholars including philosophers have developed theories to help understand ways people communicate and assign meaning to what they say and hear. One of such theories is Referential Theory. The paper will discuss the theory by outlining its assumptions, strengths, and weaknesses. Introduction and theoretical assumptions of Referential Theory Referential theory of meaning has its roots from the work of Aristotle, and he was the first person to expound on it in the 4th century BC (Hobbs, 2012). He had an assumption regarding words that people spoke and believed they had a meaning attached to them. According to his view, the meaning of a word consists in what it refers to (Hobbs, 2012). He gave several examples to prove his argument and as a justification that meanings are denoted by the words referred. For instance, the word "dog" is used to refer to all the dogs in the world and dogs are mammals that human beings rear at homes. Therefore, it is in order for one to hold that dog refers to all the animals who share the same similarities in the world. Similarly, knowing what dog refers to makes it easy for people to know the meaning of the word. Besides, Aristotle argued by giving other additional examples towards justifying his statements. For instance, the meaning of a tree is the same one known, meaning of a joke is the same joke we practice every day same to automobiles used in everyday life (Hobbs, 2012). Because of this, proponents of the theory believes that meaning of a term consists in its reference class. This implies that it falls into the category that the words refer. Strengths of the theory Referential theory is cherished because of the identity it gives objects it refers to. The theory holds because of its ability to point to references class that is used in explaining the meaning of words used (UNC, 2015). Hence, it contributes to understanding of the concept that people do not know by pointing at them. For instance, somebody who don’t know what a mountain means can use this theory to get the meaning. It explains the meaning by pointing at the mountain and explaining that they vary in sizes and locations but means the same thing. From this point, it helps an individual to understand and know the meaning because the theory point of the concept and define the meaning. Secondly, the theory is important in justifying the socialization process (UNC, 2015). For instance, the society plays a crucial role in socializing its young ones by informing them the names of things they use and well as norms in the society. This makes them denote certain names with objects they come across in the society. For instance, children or young ones associate the name, “Mum”, with caregiver who breastfeeds them. Similarly, they know the word “dad” and symbolize it with the second caregiver who also lives in the house. Moreover, the theory links to socialization because it assigns meaning to children and help in associating certain practices with meaning. Frequent shouting to children conditions them to learn. For instance, frequent shouts symbolize to children that they are approaching danger hence assign the meaning. Therefore, the theory is significant as it apply in the learning process of the young children as well as people learning second language. People assign the meaning because of the references they denote. Limitations/Weaknesses Referential theory is very meaningful and puts a strong point in associating things or state of affairs in everyday life. It is also important in explaining the understanding of human beings on sentences in term of what it refers to (Heath & Bryant, 2000). Because of this, it is regarded as having a natural and appealing view in any context it is used or applied. It is also not easy for one to deny that referential theory has a familiar and close relationship between the words spoken and the real world (Heath & Bryant, 2000). This is so because the words are linked to objects that people use and interact with in their daily life activities. Despite all these strengths, the theory has placed forward; it has many weaknesses, which render it inapplicable in some cases in defining or explaining the meaning of certain words. It also has some limitation in obtaining the meaning of certain words that do not exist and the subjects do not know about them. First limitation of Referential theory is that not every word denotes an actual object (Heath & Bryant, 2000). Referential theory bases on the argument that any spoken word has a meaning to the receiver, and they denote something. However, this argument is misleading because not all words denote a meaning of the actual object. For instance, there are names of non-existing items and they do not denote anything in life that an individual can believe it. Such includes “Pegasus” denotes nothing in the real world because there is no a winged horse to denote (Heath & Bryant, 2000). Second example can be in the word, “I saw nobody". It makes very little, or no sense denoting the word "nobody” to any object because it is abstract hence has meaningless. Other examples may include words like “John is fat”. In this example, John may be a noun that names a person or object contrary to the word “fat” which is not tied to any individual (Heath & Bryant, 2000). The word used does not name but describes. Moreover, referential theory does not consider the implications of words that are nouns. For instance, words like “sake”, “dint”, and “behalf” do not have their meanings through referring to certain objects. They have a meaning only when used in longer constructions or long sentences (Lavery & Hughes, 2013). Hence, they cannot stand alone and pass any meaning to the reader though they are words. Lastly, some parts of the speech do not refer to anything at all apart from the nouns. For instance, the use of ‘very’, “and”, “the” among others did not portray or denote any object as the theory assumes. However, these words are meaningful and occur in sentences that people use in their daily life. The second weaknesses of the theory are that it assumes that a sentence is a list of names (Heath & Bryant, 2000). This becomes a weakness because it is obvious that list of names portray no meaning since it is difficult for an individual to assign a meaning to such names. For instance, listings names such Michael, Faith, Calve, Vincent cannot be used to denote or assert anything even in case some are abstracts. However, connecting the name of an individual with a name of a quality such as fatness may have some meanings (Lavery & Hughes, 2013). For instance, Vincent is fat may have a subject-predict meaning, but grammatically wrong. In order to correct the grammar mistake, inserting a verb is necessary to make it read, “Vincent has the fatness”. From the above example, it is evident that some cases or assumption of the theory misleads since they do not denote anything in the real life situation. Moreover, list of names cannot make a sentence if it does not have verbs. It misleads when one list down a very long list of names without adding adverb on them to denote the meaning. Similarly, names alone have no meaning when there is no action, hence misleading. Because of these faults, there is a need to revise some of the assumptions and have real meaning in life. This implies that arranging names is not a proof to make them assign the meaning if the reader in unable to understand the meaning. Words are not words unless they portray a meaning, which is real and can be attributed to everyday practices. Therefore, the theory is misleading on assumption that sentence is made from listing names, and it does not prove to be practical due to loss of meaning. Lastly, referential theory has a weakness because there are more of meaning than reference (Heath & Bryant, 2000). This implies that similar terms are not synonymous and have different meaning, and they can share the same term but have different meanings. For instance, “Barack Obama” and “US President” are two different things. Although someone can assume that they mean the same thing as per the theory, they are different. US presidency is an institution that is there to stay and anyone who find more vote to take it as the president. Similarly, those who enter the presidency as president do not stay there forever, and they leave upon the expiry of their term. On the other hand, “Barack Obama” is the president of US whose term is soon expiring. Therefore, it is misleading to assume that the two words have the same meaning and can be used synonymously. Another proof is that it will be irrelevant using the terms or words interchangeably after some years because Obama will not be the president of US and someone else will assume the office. Moreover, there are other words, which are used interchangeably with the assumption that the reader or speaker understand the meaning. For instance, different cultures assign different meanings to spoken words making them different. What I believe or assign a meaning, as a vehicle is not perceived the same by the next person. Different communities have different forms of houses, and they vary across the board. What the Africans call houses are shanties in America. This difference refutes the assumption of referential theory that words are assigned a meaning and denotes something, which is accepted. Most words are not synonymous and portray different meaning to people as well as ways they are used. Conclusion Referential theory is very efficient in giving a reference point to what happens in the world as well as naming of things. It also justifies the process of socialization and ways people assign meaning to what they see in their environment. However, a number of weaknesses are also recorded as it refers to sentences as a list of names and assume that every word denotes a meaning. The theory assumes the role of abstract objects, which do not portray any meaning in real life. Therefore, there must be a way of bringing meaningful expression other than referring or naming something as postulated in the theory. References Heath, R. L. & Bryant, J. (2000). Human communication theory and research: concepts, contexts and challenges. (2nd ed). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Hobbs, C. L. (2012). Rhetoric on the margins. Illinois: SIU Press. Lavery, J. & Hughes, W. (2013).Critical thinking: an introduction to basic skills. New York: Routledge UNC. (2015). The Referential Theory. Retrieved from http://www.unc.edu/~ujanel/ReflTh.htm Read More