Saturday, December 3, 2011

Is a Written Audience a Constructed Audience?

Walter Ong (1982) argues that writing demands a constructed audience pointing to the work of  Maurice Merleau-Ponty who states in Phenomenology of Perception (1962) that words do not derive the fullness of their meaning and expression in the abstract, but rather reach their fullest expression and meaning in relation to the human body and its surroundings (pp. 181-184). So for Ong and Merleau-Ponty, the meaning in oral communication is present in the “now,” or the present context. Meaning is constitutive of and determined by all of the variables within the present communication environment. For Ong (1975, 1982), this “circumambient” context is not present in written discourse (p. 10), and therefore, written discourse demands a fictional or constructed audience to whom and for whom a writer “ projects” the piece of writing. It is the lack of verifiable context that makes writing, as Ong (1982) describes, a “more agonizing” activity than oral discourse (p.102).
As a teacher of writing and public speaking, I am confronted with the differences in projected audiences between the two communication genres.  In academic writing, present-day pedagogy focuses on the necessary construction of what Ong would call a fictional audience to aid the writer in being able to select, as Aaron, Kennedy and Kennedy (2009) state “ what approach to take, what evidence to gather, how to arrange ideas, [and] even what words to use" (p.35). As authors of a high-school composition textbook, Aaron, Kennedy and Kennedy (2009) advise high-school writers to “conceive of your audience generally—f or instance, your classmates, the readers of a particular newspaper, or members of the city council” (p.35). It is this aspect of the writing process—the conception of a general and not specific audience—that is the most difficult element to teach high school writers, and which is the most difficult for high school writers to grasp.  It is what gives high-school academic writing a disconnected quality.  There is often little heart in it. Public speaking, however, is as Beebe and Beebe (2006) state, an audience-centered activity (p.4). In other words, a public speaker has a clear audience in mind, a present audience of real, and not imagined people for the benefit of whom the presentation is being delivered. Because the audience is real, and present, and has something at stake in the hearing of the presentation, the discourse is more fluid, and perhaps more impactful.
References
Aaron, J. E., Kennedy, D.M., and Kennedy, X.J., The Bedford reader (2009 ed.). Boston, MA:
            Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Beebe, S. A., & Beebe, S. J. (2006). Public speaking: An audience-centered
            approach (2006 ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc. (Original work
            published 1991).
Ong, W. J. (1982). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. New
     York, NY: Methuen.
Ong, W. J. (1975). The writer’s audience is always a fiction. PMLA, 90(1), 9-21.



Thursday, November 24, 2011

Toward a Systematic Hunch About Daily Communication, Part Two

In my previous posting, I developed a framework and a taxonomy for making a systematic hunch as to the percentage of time spent communicating during a twenty-four hour period. Table 1 illustrates the taxonomy, my estimated averages of time spent communicating during a twenty-four hour period, and my actual time spent communicating during that same twenty-four hour period.  As mentioned in my previous posting, I chose Friday, September 2, 2011 as the day to run this experiment. Table 2 illustrates the actual communication log I kept on the date in question.

Table 1
Estimated Communication Percentages and Actual Communication Percentages
Communication Level
Estimated Percentage
Actual Percentage
Intrapersonal
     Crafted Verbal
     Crafted Nonverbal
     Preprogrammed Verbal
     Preprogrammed Nonverbal
40%
58%
Interpersonal
     Crafted Verbal
     Crafted Nonverbal
     Preprogrammed Verbal
     Preprogrammed Nonverbal
25%
23%
Public
     Crafted Verbal
     Crafted Nonverbal
     Preprogrammed Verbal
     Preprogrammed Nonverbal
30%
12%
Mass
     Crafted Verbal
     Crafted Nonverbal
     Preprogrammed Verbal
     Preprogrammed Nonverbal
5%
7%
Group
     Crafted Verbal
     Crafted Nonverbal
     Preprogrammed Verbal
     Preprogrammed Nonverbal
0%
0%











Table 2
Communication Log
Time
Activities
Communication Levels
4:48 A.M-5:02A.M
Self-talk. Setting the day’s agenda
Intrapersonal, Crafted Verbal
(4 minutes)
5:02A.M.-5:24A.M.
Working out while watching a workout DVD.
Mass, Crafted Verbal
(22 minutes)
6:04 A.M.-6:05 A.M.
Waking up my son to tell him I will be leaving for work.
Interpersonal, Crafted Verbal
(1 minute)
6:07 A.M.-6:20 A.M.
While driving to work, I engage in self-talk setting the day’s agenda. I also listen to the radio, and after being cut off in traffic, I respond with a one-finger salute.
Mass, Crafted Verbal
(13 minutes)
Intrapersonal, Crafted Verbal
(13 minutes)
Interpersonal, Crafted Nonverbal
(.08 minutes)
6:30 A.M.
While making copies, a colleague asks me if I have seen her keys. I respond, “Haven’t seen ‘em.”
Interpersonal, Crafted Verbal
(.17 minutes)
6:30 A.M.-7:10 A.M.
While making copies, I engage in a combination of self-talk, and conversations with several colleagues.  During the conversations my body language (kinesics), and tone of voice (paralanguage) help to communicate my frustration with the glitch in the copier.
Intrapersonal, Crafted Nonverbal
(40 minutes)
Interpersonal, Crafted Verbal and Preprogrammed nonverbal (10 minutes)
7:10 A.M.-7:45 A.M.
While preparing for classes to begin, I engage in conversations with students about projects coming due, and self-talk about the day’s agenda.  My body language, tone of voice, and personal distance (proxemics) help to communicate my frustration carried over from the glitch in the copier.
Interpersonal, Crafted Verbal
(15 minutes)
Intrapersonal, Crafted Verbal
(20 minutes)
Interpersonal, Preprogrammed Nonverbal
(15 minutes)
7:50 A.M.-8:33 A.M.
Teaching Sophomore Honors English.  Combination of checking school emails, sending attendance electronically, lecturing, and Q & A. Body language, tone of voice, and personal space all communicate simultaneously with verbal messages.
Mass, Crafted Verbal
(2 minutes)
Interpersonal, Crafted Verbal
(16 minutes)
Interpersonal, Preprogrammed Nonverbal
(16 minutes)
Public, Crafted Verbal
(25 minutes)
Public, Crafted Nonverbal
(25 minutes)
8:47A.M.-9:30 A.M.
Teaching Senior Honors English. Combination of lecturing, and Q & A. Body language, tone of voice, and personal space all communicate simultaneously with verbal messages.
Interpersonal, Crafted Verbal
(18 minutes)
Interpersonal, Preprogrammed Nonverbal
(18 minutes)
Public, Crafted Verbal
(25 minutes)
Public, Crafted Nonverbal
(25 minutes)
9:34 A.M.-10:17 A.M.
Supervising Study Hall. Students ask me to sign passes to go to various places.  For the rest of the period, I grade papers (verbal feedback), and do self-talk setting the day’s agenda.
Interpersonal, Crafted Verbal
(23 minutes)
Intrapersonal, Crafted Verbal
(20 minutes)
10:17-A.M.-12:18 P.M.
No teaching. Planning periods and lunch.  The majority of the time is spent in self-talk, thinking about and setting agendas for the day and for the following week.  I have an occasional conversation with a student and colleague.  I text my girlfriend, “I NEED A VACATION!!!!!”
Intrapersonal, Crafted Verbal
(100 minutes)
Interpersonal, Crafted Verbal
(21 minutes)
12:22 P.M.-1:05 P.M.
Teaching Senior College Prep. English. Combination of lecturing, and Q & A. Body language, tone of voice, and personal space all communicate simultaneously with verbal messages.

Interpersonal, Crafted Verbal
(18 minutes)
Interpersonal, Preprogrammed Nonverbal
(18 minutes)
Public, Crafted Verbal
(25 minutes)
Public, Crafted Nonverbal
(25 minutes)
1:09 P.M.-1:52 P.M.
Teaching Junior Honors English. Listening to and providing feedback on original Old English poem presentations. Body language, tone of voice, and personal space all communicate simultaneously with verbal messages.
Interpersonal, Crafted Verbal
(15 minutes)
Interpersonal, Preprogrammed Nonverbal
(43 minutes)
1:56 P.M.-2:40 P.M.
Teaching Senior College Prep. English. Combination of lecturing, and Q & A. Body language, tone of voice, and personal space all communicate simultaneously with verbal messages.

Interpersonal, Crafted Verbal
(18 minutes)
Interpersonal, Preprogrammed Nonverbal
(18 minutes)
Public, Crafted Verbal
(25 minutes)
Public, Crafted Nonverbal
(25 minutes)
2:45 P.M.-3:00 P.M.
Driving home. Listening to the radio.
Mass, Crafted Verbal
(15 minutes)
3:05 P.M.- 3:30 P.M.
Reading snail mail, checking email, checking the GU Blackboard, responding to COML 508 discussion board threads
Mass, Crafted Verbal
(10 minutes)
Interpersonal, Crafted Verbal
(15 minutes)
3:30 P.M.-5:00 P.M.
Riding my motorcycle to the school’s football game eighty miles away. An occasional thought about the weekend.
Intrapersonal, Crafted Verbal
(10 minutes)
5:00 P.M.-10:00 P.M.
Watching the j.v. and varsity football games. An occasional short conversation.
Interpersonal, Crafted Verbal
(10 minutes)

10:00 P.M.-11:30P.M.
Riding my motorcycle home. An occasional thought about the weekend.
Intrapersonal, Crafted Verbal
(10 minutes)
11:45P.M. 6:00 A.M.
Sleeping. I estimate five hours of dreaming during my sleep.
Intrapersonal, Preprogrammed Verbal and Preprogrammed Nonverbal
(300 minutes)


This experiment provides several new insights regarding aspects of my daily communication. The first insight is rather obvious.  My job requires an inordinate amount of communication. A number of instances occur throughout my workday during which I am simultaneously engaged in a number of different levels of communication. We tend to think of the levels of communication as being distinct; however, my log clearly indicates movement from level to level within a communication transaction, and simultaneous engagement in more than one level of communication. This insight illustrates that the levels of communication are not static, but are rather, dynamic structures.
            The second insight is similar to the first. Just as we might tend to think of the levels of communication as distinct and static, we also might tend to think of verbal and nonverbal messages as distinct and separate communication systems. My log would indicate that just the opposite is true. Verbal and nonverbal messages work in concert as one message system.  When we read Griffin’s (2009) description of Barthes’ work in semiology (pp. 323-333), we might tend to conclude that certain visual cues, such as sweat on one’s brow, or perhaps tears running down one’s cheek operate as a distinct messaging system apart from the verbal cues that may accompany them.  However, unless the receiver of the message also has access to the sender’s verbal cues and has some knowledge of the sender’s history (context) with sweat or tears, the receiver might easily misinterpret the nonverbal cue. In such a case, we might turn to Griffin’s (2009) paraphrase of I.A. Richards’ theory that meaning is not in words or in actions, but rather meaning is in people (324-325).



Toward a Systematic Hunch About Daily Communication

Developing a prediction based on communication theory at this point in our nascent careers as graduate communication students is like probing a teenager for advice on how to fix the downturned American economy. We might get an answer; however, the answer is certain to exude theoretical naïveté. Admission of theoretical naïveté aside, the task at hand is to predict quantitative values of  communication during a twenty-four hour period. To accomplish this task, one must have at least a rudimentary understanding of theory---its role and function in the prediction phase of this project. I turn to Griffin (2009) for this necessary foundation. In Communication: A First Look at Communication Theory (2009), Griffin culls from the work of Judee Burgoon, who defines theory as a “set of systematic hunches about the way things operate” (p. 2). The emphasis on “systematic hunches” spotlights the predictive nature and value of effective, and therefore, valid theory. We should notice, however, that Burgoon carefully chooses the word “systematic” to modify the hunches. These hunches are not simply whims of fancy. Hunches are to be systematic, or, what we might also call orderly, methodical, or rigorously organized predictions.
            Having developed a working paradigm for how to go about the business of predicting, I now focus on what we are to predict: communication. I turn to Griffin’s working definition of communication: “Communication is the relational process of creating and interpreting messages that elicit a response” (p. 6). As I perused the discussion board thread dedicated to this project, I noticed how a good number of students  have been focusing on two aspects of this definition—relational process, and an elicited response—as a way to exclude sleeping, or rather dreaming, from their predictions. I, on the other hand, do not discard dreaming from Griffin’s working definition. Griffin’s working definition does not mention specifically that communication demands a sender and a receiver. Some communication scholars such as George L. Grice and John F. Skinner (Mastering Public Speaking, 2010, p. 5) necessitate the dyadic nature of communication. Griffin (2009), on the other hand, leaves the issue of dreaming within the paradigm of communication open to debate by her use of “relational process.”  To some, a relational process conjures connotations of two or more people relating to each other. To others, myself included, “relational process,” in addition to including two or more people relating to each other, also includes one person as he/she relates to him/herself. A good example might be the intrapersonal form of communication we call daydreaming. Daydreaming can be purposeful or whimsical. It is not a stretch to accept purposeful daydreaming as having effects on how one relates to oneself and the outside world. Being the “cousin” of daydreaming, dreaming while sleeping may have similar effects. At the very least, Griffin’s working definition accounts for the possibility of dreaming as a relational process.
            The second aspect of Griffin’s working definition of communication one might use to exclude sleeping from the act of communicating is the elicited response. One might conclude since dreaming does not elicit a response, dreaming is not a form of communication. This conclusion fails to recognize that elicited responses may either be immediate or delayed.  If one is startled from a dream, bolting uprightly and crying out, “AHHHHHH!” the response is immediate. However, one, who, weeks after having had a dream has an insight that may have been present in an image in that dream illustrates how the elicited response of a dream might be delayed. So, I am accepting dreaming as part of the communication process.
            In addition to setting the parameters for predicting and what we are predicting, namely, communication, several other parameters must be set before I can begin the work of predicting. The first of these parameters is the various levels of communication in which one might find oneself on a daily basis. I turn once again to Grice & Skinner (2010) for their distinction between five such levels of communication: interpersonal (Grice & Skinner, p. 8), intrapersonal (p.9), group (p. 9), public (p.10), and mass (p. 10). Grice and Skinner (2009) define interpersonal communication as dyadic or one-to-one communication (p. 8).  The classic example of interpersonal communication is the casual conversation.  They define intrapersonal communication as “communication with yourself” (p. 8). As we have seen above, this “self-talk” can either be purposeful or whimsical. Grice and Skinner define group communication as “three or more people interacting and influencing each other to pursue a common goal” (p. 9). The classic example of group communication is a committee meeting. Grice and Skinner define public communication as one person speaking face-to-face with an audience (p. 10). The classic example of public communication is public speaking. Grice and Skinner define mass communication as print or electronic media (p. 10). The classic example of mass media is television. I set my systematic hunch into a taxonomy with the five levels of communication as the headings.
            Now that I’ve set my taxonomy headings, I need to develop subcategories within the headings. Anyone who has taken an undergraduate communications course knows that messages delivered and received during the communication process are either of the verbal (spoken or written words) or nonverbal (proxemics, haptics, paralanguage, kinesics, appearance) variety. So I will divide my taxonomy between the five levels of communication, and whether the communication that happens in each level is verbal or nonverbal. But I am still lacking a key component in my taxonomy. As mentioned above, communication can either be purposeful or whimsical. Griffin (2009) rightly notes that communication can either be “crafted” (p. 7), implying that the communicator makes a “conscious choice of message form and function” (p.7), or “preprogrammed” (p. 7), implying that the communicator is on “cruise control” (p.7), and may be unaware of the messages he/she is sending.
            Based on this discussion of theory and communication, I have constructed the following taxonomy and predictions.  I chose Friday, September 2, a typical work day, during which to complete the experiment. Readers must know that I teach English at a private high school; consequently, communication on a daily basis is fast and furious.
My  Communication-Prediction Taxonomy
Interpersonal                                                                                                               25%
            crafted verbal (conversation, texting, responding to questions)
            crafted nonverbal (purposeful tone of voice, purposeful body language)
            preprogrammed verbal (ritualistic greetings and salutations)
            preprogrammed nonverbal (subconscious body language and tone of voice)

Intrapersonal                                                                                                               40%
            crafted verbal (verbal spoken and unspoken self-reminders, verbal dream images)
            crafted nonverbal (verbal daydream images)
            preprogrammed verbal (nonverbal dream images)
            preprogrammed nonverbal (nonverbal daydream images)
Group                                                                                                                          0%
            crafted verbal (agenda setting, problem solving)
            crafted nonverbal (purposeful tone of voice, purposeful body language)
            preprogrammed verbal (ritualistic greetings and salutations)
            preprogrammed nonverbal (subconscious body language and tone of voice)
Public                                                                                                                          30%
            crafted verbal  (lecture notes, question-and-answer sessions)
            crafted nonverbal (purposeful tone of voice, purposeful body language)
            preprogrammed verbal (ritualistic greetings and salutations)
            preprogrammed nonverbal (subconscious body language and tone of voice)
Mass                                                                                                                            5%
            crafted verbal (watching television, reading, watching movies, listening to the radio)
            crafted nonverbal (instrumental music under television dialogue)
            preprogrammed verbal (subliminal advertising images)
            preprogrammed nonverbal (subliminal advertising images)