Ethnicity and Group Rights - Essay Example

Ethnicity and Group Rights Group communication refers to a procedure in which members of a group are helped to learn on the diverse nuances of mutual communication. This process enables facilitates insight understanding on the diversity of people in ability, vision, wisdom, cultural background in a collective comportment, which is aimed at achieving the set goals in an objective approach. It is imperative to note that, group communication can be used in determining the extent of commitment of the group members (Pattatucci, 24). In addition, group meetings enhance personal knowledge and development in presenting ideas consequently a functional and effective group is created. The term public has elicited numerous definitions from researchers in diverse fields of study. The socialists define it as a group of individuals who share a universal interest either in an office or the general public, and once a problem arises, they converge together to explore for a solution. This definition serves this study (Pattatucci, 26). A public group meeting refers to such a gathering of individuals drawn together due to similar circumstances and objectives. Such meetings include those of student governing council, PTA meeting and city council. This study intends to examine the Harvard University student council meeting based on the Dell Hymes’ speaking model. The fundamental basis of Hymes’ model is the aspect of ethnography of communication. Ethnography of communication refers to the description and structural analysis of the societal and cultural behavior that navigates and aids in sharing knowledge, morals, and beliefs amongst members of a society. The ethnography of communication considers the communicative event as the basic unit of analysis (Brewer, 120). This study analyses Hymes SPEAKING model using public meeting of the student leaders of Harvard University. The event of communication was student leaders meeting held at the student centre boardroom in the fall of summer of the present year. The participants were homogenous in speech character, religion and occupation (Undergraduate students). The conversation of the meeting continued for about two hours. The agenda of the meeting included, Student affairs, particularly security concerns Academic tours Any other business Scene/setting The setting was at the Harvard student centreboard room situated at MCC Street opposite the Western Kitchen. A round table was in the boardroom with metal office chairs. A window with appropriate curtain is open and numerous pictures of the student leaders at various activities within and without the university covered the walls (Brewer, 117). A silver-lining clock was hanged on the wall just immediately after the exit door. The council president was present at the centre. Participants The meeting comprised of a homogenous group of individuals with six members attending (Brewer, 117). Four members requested to give their opinion on the agenda. The chairperson provided an equal opportunity of four minutes for representation of views on the agenda. The participants addressed the president who chaired the meeting as Mr. Chairman. It was noticed that, no member used the term honorable to address the chairperson. Ends The talk commenced with a short speech from the chairperson and according the seniority of the positions held by the members, each gave speeches on the listed agenda. Act The acts of speech in the conversation were characterized by most habitually discussed expressions of interest of the speaker. In addition, the communicative speech indicated an affable and joking mood (Brewer, 127). The meeting formally started at 2pm and downed the curtain at 4pm. Instrument The participating members met face to face, and the secretary of the student council took the minutes of the meeting (Bryman, 232). Norms The diversity of the students revealed numerous norms, which the members maintained them cautiously (Bryman, 233). Genre The treasurer did not bring out his opinion on the meeting agenda, but the assistant secretary general assisted in expressing what he meant (Bryman, 234). Technique applied. It is fundamental to note that, the basic ethnographic technique of observation was used in conducting this conversation analysis. Observation refers to a scientific instrument for data gathering (Bryman, 235). Observation used to serve a formulated research purpose should be symmetrically planned and recorded subject to checks, controls, validity, and reliability (Shapiro, Ian and Will, 13). Majority of the meetings observes participant observation. Participant observation refers to a situation whereby the observer makes other members aware that, observation is on so that, experience of what is happening can be attained (Shapiro, Ian and Will, 15). The discourse study in Ethnography of communication can be well articulated, analyzed and interpreted by participant observation. Essentially, participant observation forms a fundamental tool in any clear-cut analysis of the Ethnography of communication (Bryman, 235). It is imperative to note that, the present study had triggered on this technique. Findings of the conversation The previously mentioned study vividly indicates the importance of Ethnography of communication since all the participants manifested their self-statements. The break down of the present study represents a table with the participant’s occupation and basic cultural profile. Executive Non-executive Regular Self- sponsored A1 A2 A3 S1 B1 (Chairperson) B2 B3 Executive =1, Non executive =2, Regular=3, self sponsored= S Participants Age Sex Designation A1 24 M Secretary A2 23 F Assistant secretary A3 22 M Treasurer B1 24 M Chairperson B2 23 F Vice chairperson B3 22 F Hall representative S1 24 M Sports representative Statement scenario B1, the chairperson of the student council proposed that, the student academic tours should be sponsored by the university administration to reduce student expenditure consequently making the university education affordable. A3- Did not give a clear explanation on the academic tours, but instead supported the chairperson’s view. B1- clearly expressed that, more security CCTV satellites to be installed to monitor events in the university consequently reduce insecurity issues. SI- Did not express any speech aspect since she just said that she agreed with B1’s statement. It is notable, that all the statements of the meeting had built a strong communicative bridge among the members. On the same note, it can be assumed that the members in this meeting were employees of the University, but through a democratic process of student election (Shapiro, Ian and Will, 13). Furthermore, it is noticeable that, the opinions on the meeting’s agenda were well clarified. English was widely used in this meeting for the exception of the council’s treasurer who used few French statements. The use of English provided a clear-cut communication space in this meeting. Conclusion The central rationale of the study was to scrutinize the Hymes speaking model. The result of the current study indicates that language relates to the cultural and societal dregs, which influence communication. This study examined that, the participants constantly presented their opinions and demands (Shapiro, Ian and Will, 13). The group’s camaraderie and cordial relations were evident. The mode of speech and high compactness of network reflected the diversity shared amongst the participants. It is imperative to note that, each statement of the conversation was delightful and presented in a jovial mood (Brewer, 114). This study indicates that, the social and occupational status immensely influenced the language used, mode of speaking, perceptibility of communication and variability of communication. In addition, this study indicates the habitual interlocking of ethnography, language and communication. The three aspects have played a fundamental role in the human cultural space in relation to humanity (Brewer, 117). A group bounded by solidarity, finds it easy to control individualism and social status, through communication. This study has aided in revealing that, ethnography and space serve as cognitive instruments of clarifying human social and cultural identity (Bryman, 235). On the same note, Ethnography has successfully defined rural lifestyle through the people’s mode of communication and the attached statements (Bryman, 235). Conversely, the urban setting reflects a complex nature to the mode of communication. In essence, group communication is a central facet in building the culture of an association. Communication helps individuals to know their strengths and the weaknesses consequently finding efficient ways of correcting them for proper and timely attainment of the set goals. Bibliography Brewer, John D. Ethnography. Buckingham: Open University Press, 2000. Print. Bryman, Alan. Ethnography. London: Sage, 2001. Print. Shapiro, Ian, and Will Kymlicka. Ethnicity and Group Rights. New York: New York University Press, 2007. Print. Pattatucci, Angela M. Women in Society: Appreciating Career Challenges. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications, 1998. Print. Read More