This theory deals with the relationship between women and language. It argues that the language of our culture is "man-made" and thus, is is not well-suited to be used in communication by women, who communicate differently from men. Because the language was not created by women, this theory argues, women are a "muted group" - unable to speak their minds except in terms defined by those who created the language (i.e. men). As a result of this, women have to "translate" into another language when they speak.
An example of this theory can be found in the fact that sports analogies are frequently used in our society. With sports largely being a male domain, these analogies are not created from more "feminine" terms and are not well-suited for use by female communicators.
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
Chapter 34: Standpoint Theory
This theory deals with the standpoints of different individuals in a society, and argues that one's position on the social hierarchy affects one's perceptions of reality. The theory also argues that groups that are more marginalized by society have more objective viewpoints than those in power. This is because those in power seek to maintain the status quo (as it is in their own interest), but those not in power are more aware of society's problems (because they affect them) and seek change in order to give themselves more power and take power away from those higher up in the hierarchy.
An example of this theory in action in the real world would be where one part of a country has a significant amount of institutionalized racism, while another region does not. Those in the region without the same level of racism may be unaware of what is occurring in the other part of the country and mistakenly believe that it is the same in that region. However, members of the race that is being discriminated against in the other region would be much more aware of what is going on and be better able to explain the situation than those not living in that region.
An example of this theory in action in the real world would be where one part of a country has a significant amount of institutionalized racism, while another region does not. Those in the region without the same level of racism may be unaware of what is occurring in the other part of the country and mistakenly believe that it is the same in that region. However, members of the race that is being discriminated against in the other region would be much more aware of what is going on and be better able to explain the situation than those not living in that region.
Chapter 33: Genderlect Styles
This theory deals with communication between men and women, and argues that because men and women communicate differently, communication between them is a form of cross-cultural communication. Much like certain regions of a country may have particular dialects, this theory argues that men and women have different "genderlects". The theory states that in male communication, men seek status through "report talk", and women seek conncection with others through "rapport talk" in their communications.
An example of genderlects in daily life would be a woman trying to tell a story of something that happened at her job to her husband. She may spend time discussing all of the social and emotional contexts surrounding the events in order to make the story more personal and establish a stronger connection between her husband and the events of the story, while her husband may feel anxious and impatient, wanting her to simply get to the point and tell him what actually happened.
An example of genderlects in daily life would be a woman trying to tell a story of something that happened at her job to her husband. She may spend time discussing all of the social and emotional contexts surrounding the events in order to make the story more personal and establish a stronger connection between her husband and the events of the story, while her husband may feel anxious and impatient, wanting her to simply get to the point and tell him what actually happened.
Chapter 31: Face-Negotiation Theory
Face-Negotiation Theory deals with the kinds of conflict-management techniques people will use in a given culture. This is in large part affected by the concept of "face", which is a person,s public persona, and the way they want others to see them. People engage in "facework" to mainatain and repair face, as well as promote positive face. The type of conflict management strategies used depend on the type of culture (individualistic vs. collectivistic), a person's self-construal (independent or interdependent) and the type of face management strategy a person uses. In more collectivistic cultures, the face of others is more important, and vice versa for individualistic cultures.
An example of this would be the actions of Japanese kamikaze pilots during World War II. More concerned for their country than themselves, these pilots flew their planes into American ships in an attempt to sink them, sacrificing their own lives in the process. Such an action would likely not be taken by people from a more individualistic culture, such as the United States.
An example of this would be the actions of Japanese kamikaze pilots during World War II. More concerned for their country than themselves, these pilots flew their planes into American ships in an attempt to sink them, sacrificing their own lives in the process. Such an action would likely not be taken by people from a more individualistic culture, such as the United States.
Chapter 30: Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory
Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory deals with intercultural communication, and how different cultural factors can influence how two people from different cultures interact when they encounter each other. The interaction between two people of different cultures depends on how different their respective cultures are in terms of four "dimensions" of culture. The first of these is power distance. Cultures with a low power distance see each person in society as being more equal, without much difference between the average person and a person in power. Cultures with a high power distance view those in power as being very seperate from those not in power. The second dimension of culture is a culture's level of "masculinity" or "femininity". More "masculine" cultures favor strong sex roles, and their values focus on money, success, and dominance. In more "feminine" cultures, sex roles are not strictly defined, and men and women are equally encouraged to participate in society. The third dimension of culture is the culture's level of uncertainty avoidance. This refers to the culture's tolerance or intolerance for uncertainty and how threatened its people feel by ambiguity. Finally, the fourth dimension of culture is individualism. This refers to whether the culture focuses more on the individual or the collective.
A real-world example of Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory would be a person traveling to a foreign country such as France or Germany, where the language contains more than one form of the word you - one for more formal interactions, and another for more informal interactions. The French "vous" and German "Sie" are the more formal forms of address, with "tu" and "du" as their informal counterparts. A person who is new to one of these two cultures may have difficulty knowing when to use each one, and this could create a significant amount of uncertainty in his or her interactions with people in those cultures.
A real-world example of Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory would be a person traveling to a foreign country such as France or Germany, where the language contains more than one form of the word you - one for more formal interactions, and another for more informal interactions. The French "vous" and German "Sie" are the more formal forms of address, with "tu" and "du" as their informal counterparts. A person who is new to one of these two cultures may have difficulty knowing when to use each one, and this could create a significant amount of uncertainty in his or her interactions with people in those cultures.
Sunday, April 22, 2007
Chapter 29: Spiral of Silence
The Spiral of Silence deals with people's fear to speak up in situations of public opinion. The theory states that people fear being isolated, and as a result of that fear, they are unlikely to voice their opinion if they believe they are in the minority. According to the theory, the farhter a person perceives their opinion to be from that of the majority, the less likely they are to speak out. The fear that one's opinion is in the minority can be compounded by the media if it presents only a limited range of opinions on a particular issue.
An example of the Spiral of Silence would be if a group of friends was trying to decide whether to see a movie or go bowling. Although there are seven people in the group, only three want to go bowling, but they are the first to speak up as well as the most vocal. The other four members may begin to believe they are in the minority even though they are not, and might be likely to keep silent about what they would prefer to do.
An example of the Spiral of Silence would be if a group of friends was trying to decide whether to see a movie or go bowling. Although there are seven people in the group, only three want to go bowling, but they are the first to speak up as well as the most vocal. The other four members may begin to believe they are in the minority even though they are not, and might be likely to keep silent about what they would prefer to do.
Chapter 28: Agenda-Setting Theory
Agenda-Setting Theory deals with the media and its effects on the public agenda and public discourse. There are two levels to this theory. The first level states that although the media may not tell us what to think, it does tell us what to think about. The media's decisions on what to cover can influence the public agenda; if people see a particular issue getting a lot of exposure in the media, they may view it as being more important than other issues. The second level of the theory revises the original theory and states that the media can have an effect on how people think. This can be done through "framing" - by presenting the story in a certain way, the media can affect how and what people think about an issue.
I saw an example of this while watching "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" one time. Jon Stewart was discussing Fox News and their possible political bias, and was showing clips from the channel's reports. In the clips, the topic being discussed was written near the bottom of the screen, in a box directly above the "ticker". The topics that Jon Stewart was discussing were those that used a question mark; one in particular said "George Bush: The Greatest President Ever?" Jon Stewart's point was that by framing statements as questions, Fox News could say anything it wanted (and therefore set whatever agenda it wanted) while maintaining a kind of deniability by being able to say "We were just asking a question!" I thought this was an excellent example of how framing can be used to influence how people think about something.
I saw an example of this while watching "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" one time. Jon Stewart was discussing Fox News and their possible political bias, and was showing clips from the channel's reports. In the clips, the topic being discussed was written near the bottom of the screen, in a box directly above the "ticker". The topics that Jon Stewart was discussing were those that used a question mark; one in particular said "George Bush: The Greatest President Ever?" Jon Stewart's point was that by framing statements as questions, Fox News could say anything it wanted (and therefore set whatever agenda it wanted) while maintaining a kind of deniability by being able to say "We were just asking a question!" I thought this was an excellent example of how framing can be used to influence how people think about something.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)