Christian Speech

A speech community is a group of people who share a set of norms and expectations regarding language.  There are so many speech communities that you can be in hundreds in your life time, and at one point in time you can overlap and be experiencing several communities in one interaction. 

I read an article called "Christian Speech" from families.com, which spoke on this exact topic.  The article talked about how Christians should be different in the way they use language than the way the world uses language.  There are certain things that are held from Christian's speech as well as certain things that should be present in their language.  The article spoke more on the way Christians should speak to be different to strengthen the speech community.  It said that Christians should cleanse their speech of curse words and using God's name in vain.  It also stated that our speech should be full of love and encouragement.

The is a prime example of a speech community, because this group (Christians as a whole) share the same ideals and values in the way they use language in everyday life.  If someone who was not part of the Christian speech community came into a group of interacting Christians, they might be confused.  The Christians may use words or phrases that they understand but others may have never heard.  There are terms that correlate with each speech community.  For example, Christians might use the phrase "born-again" or talk about different activities within the church like "AWANA", and if you were not familiar with that language and that social group, you would not understand the meanings of those words and phrases. This is the same in any speech community.  This is the same for white groups, black groups, Indian groups, UW-Parkside students, etc.  Each of this mentioned groups has a specific way of speaking and has specific language that they use that is particular to them only.

It is easy to become wrapped up in many different speech communities in one setting.  For example, if I am talking to a girl from my church about what we are going to do this weekend, I am using language from my Christian speech community, as well as the white language and the female language.  If a black man walked into our conversation, he would have a hard time understanding us, because he is not apart of our speech communities. 

Do you think the different speech communities really draws lines in our society?  Is it harmful to have these speech communities, because they keep us separate instead of bringing us together?

The Power of Body Language

This video was very interesting to me, as we I compared it to Chapter 4 of Chaika on kinesics.  "Kinesics is the technical term for all aspects of this silent language" (Chiaka, p.108).  Kinesics is a combination of so many things, including: smiles, lying, proxemics, gestures, eye contact, and touching. 

In this video she discusses the power we hold by solely using our body movements.  For example, the way we stand during a conversation can tell the person we are talking to how interested we are in the current conversation.  You can also tell who holds the power in the relationship by their stances or the way they touch, or don't touch.  One part of the video I found interesting was that of difference between gender body language.  She spoke on women being more perceptive to body language and men needing to see the movement repeated to understand what the female was saying.

She also spoke on proxemics.  In Chiaka, it discusses the difference in cultural proxemics, but here she discusses it as an out from the conversation.  I think proxemics does, however, have a lot to do with culture.  Even if the cultures aren't as different as Americans and Middle Eastern, there can be a great difference between the cultures of males and females.  For example, in the video she shows a man and women talking, and the man moves closer to the woman, the woman doesn't like the movement so she steps back, he doesn't understand so he takes another step closer.  Within a woman's culture, we need our space and will take if it uncomfortable, but in a male's culture, he thinks they like each other and wants to get closer as fast as possible.  Both of these people have completely different ideas of what is going on in this interaction with causes problems when reading into each others body language. 

The last thing I want to discuss is the overall message a person sends on a daily basis without using any words.  In the video she discusses the basics like if your shoes are shined, your wearing clean and ironed clothes, or if you carrying a nice purse or briefcase. as things that people perceive and make judgments about.  It is human nature to look at someone and have an opinion, and judge what that person is all about.  It may not be right, but it's not going to change, so we have to be aware of it.  The things you put on your body, tattoos or piercings, and the way you present yourself will determine who you interact with and where your future will go. 

So I ask you, what are you showing the world about yourself today? Do you think it's true that people judge you on the basis of appearance and body language? 

Foreshadowing in Language

           

            In this clip, Scott Walker is discussing the new bill that is arising and his upcoming actions.  He tells the public that the National Guard is prepared to come in if the situation arises.  He says you have to plan for the worst, but expect the best.  This was a controversial interview, as many people were upset that he would do something that he apparently knew would cause problems. 

            In my eyes, he was just preparing for the possibility, and maybe using this as a warning so no one would riot or cause havoc.  I think him using this interview is a type of pre-sequence.  In language, a pre-sequence is an opening sequence to prompt an upcoming sequence or event.  I think this is a type of verbal foreshadowing.  He is using this type of language as a warning, and he decided to say it before the bill was announced to cover for any upcoming actions. 

            It is necessary to discover the frame of this interview.  The frame is the structure of the interaction to make sense of things.  The frame of this particular interview would be the new bill and the implications that it has on fellow Wisconsinites.  If you didn’t know the frame, you wouldn’t understand why the National Guard would even need to be considered.  You need to understand where the conversation has been to understand where it’s going. 

            When I watched this interview, I thought about the pre-sequence and the frame in the language that Scott Walker used.  I was glad he used the pre-sequence in his language to warn people of what’s to come, so they can better understand why he is doing what he’s doing.  But I have to ask, is this a necessary part of language?  Why do we feel the need to set up a situation before the situation actually arises?  Are we to afraid to let something just…happen?

How do you "save face"?

In this clip from Modern Family, Mitch is trying to make Cam see how much Cam’s mother is invading Mitch’s space.  Mitch is looking for negative face from his mother-in-law but he isn’t receiving it, and feels awkward and uncomfortable so he can’t tell her.  Mitch just wants his space respected.  Mitch tries to make Cam visually see it happening so he will believe Mitch, but it isn’t working, so he has to take Cam aside and tell him he is feeling uncomfortable. 

            To further understand this interaction, I will use the SPEAKING method by Dell Hymes.  The setting is in Mitch and Cam’s home while Cam’s mother is visiting.  The participants would be Mitch and Cam, and Cam’s mother.  The event is Cam’s mother visiting and being too touchy feely with Mitch, when he wants his space.  The action would be Mitch feeling uncomfortable and violated by Cam’s mother, Mitch then tries to let Cam see it happen in action and fails, so then Mitch takes Cam aside to discuss the issue.  The key is one of the most important in understanding any interaction.  In this particular interaction, the key changes.  Overall, it has a humorous undertone because of the show, but it also has a tone of urgency Mitch is uncomfortable.  But once Cam finds out the key changes again to a somber, hurt tone.  The instrumentality or the medium of this interaction was simply open, one-on-one conversation.  The norms for this interaction would be understood as the difference between the way Mitch interprets his mother-in-law’s actions, and the way the mother interprets her own actions.  She thinks it is a way of showing her love and affection for her family, while he feels violated and thinks it is an inappropriate way to treat a son-in-law.  Finally, the genre of the interaction is, once again, a simple one-on-one conversation between Mitch and Cam. 

            I thought this was an interesting way to look at gaining negative face.  It is not always easy to get the point across that you need space, especially in this kind of touchy situation.  What can you do to show you need negative face in these tricky situations?  How do you use your words or non-verbal communication to get that point across without hurting someone’s feelings?

Fear in Words

                I recently watched a Barbara Walters special called “A Matter of Life & Death”, which discussed heart disease in America and celebrities who have had open-hear t surgery.  Barbara Walters spoke to six celebrities, including herself, who have undergone open-heart surgery, and have stories to tell.

                The celebrities included: Barbara Walters, Regis Philbin, David Letterman, Charlie Rose, President Bill Clinton, and Robin Williams.  Each had their own stories and warnings to tell fellow Americans.  It was interesting to hear each of their own speech in the way they told their individual stories.  But one word stood out to me.  Most of the participants said that the aftermath of the surgery was an “assault” on their body.  The word “assault” really stood out to me, especially that more than one person described the recovery that way, and they were all interviewed separately. 

                The word “assault” is defined as “a sudden violent attack”.  I guess I was expecting them to say it was painful and it was a long road, but each day got better; to have a positive spin on the whole experience.  However, they were not holding back and they used strong language.  The word “assault” got to me because I view that word as violent and bold.  Because of our society, I view that word as not only a physical attack, but an emotional and mental attack as well.  These celebrities were saying a lot by using one small word: “assault”. 

                I think the intention of the celebrities using that word was to place fear in the viewers.  They want them to be aware that heart disease is the number one killer of Americans, and we need to be keeping up with our doctor appointments and making sure we are healthy.

                The words mean nothing without the society placing meaning behind them.  Do we as a society do this more than we think?  Do we use our language to place fear in others?  Do we have that much power with only words? 

Can Society Talk?

This is an interesting interview with Sarah Palin, as she voices her opinion on abortion and evolution.  The most interesting aspect of this interview to me was the way she used rhetoric to get around the questions.  She never straight out answers the questions.  In this situation Palin needed to stand up for what she believes and say it so people will respect her.  She eventually answers the question but because she takes her time to get to the point, people will view her as weak and unfit to run our county. 

She does, however, use certain words and ideas in her speech to connect with Americans.  She uses God terms like “support” and “life” to appeal to young Americans who may be in the situation concerning abortion.  She wants the viewers of this interview to feel connected to her and come out with a positive outlook on her anti-abortion view.  Palin wants them to feel supported and recognize the importance of life. 

Sarah Palin stays away from Devil terms so no one watching will get a negative view of her.  She wants Americans to know where she stands, but she doesn’t want to come off too strongly, so she always says she “personally” believes these things so viewers still believe there is hope for things to change.   She stays away from negative terms involving abortion and only speaks on supporting those victims of such things as rape or incest. 

Concerning evolution, Palin confuses the viewers by stating two opinions.  She over talks herself in this interview.  She states that she supports teaching evolution in schools, but follows that comment by stating her belief in God’s creation of the Earth.  You can tell she is trying to make everyone happy in this interview, but ends up loosing sight of what she wants to stand up for. 

What does this say about society’s ability to stand up for their beliefs?

Sarah Palin on Abortion and Evolution