User talk:Ched/communication
any suggestions or edits welcomed:
 | Welcome to Ched's talk page. I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your talk page (or the article's talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or let me know where specifically you'd prefer the reply. |
Peer Review Comments
[edit]Contribution by Buster7
[edit]Language
[edit]Most of the following prose is taken almost directly from various pages in: American English in its Cultural Setting, by DH Lloyd and HR Warfel, 1956. with very little change. I offer it only as an addendum to the above, to be incorporated, if possible, as time goes on. For the most part, italics indicate my, Buster7.s thoughts on the matter....
- Language is the instrument we use to communicate.
- Language is a channel through which messages flow with the least friction and the most significance.
- Language is the clear, clean, adequate conveyance of meaning.
- ...with conscious control of their effect on the people we address.
- In writing, we don't just "blurt" it out like we may do in speaking. Writing is a decisive act. Decisions are made on the words we choose and their meanings and the effect we wish to accomplish. This brings into play the issue of swearing on the talkspace. Swearing, not by vandals, but by editors to make a point or give emphasis. But it (swearing) brings with it its negative connectors and responses and the conversation starts downward.
writing
[edit]- Reading and writing are not a mystery anymore than proper civil behavior is a mystery.
- Writing is only a loose parallel to verbal speech.
- writing lacks "vocalizations'...
- no inflections--no shouting or whispering---no pitch or tempo...no rasping voice or volume
- no gestures...no body emphasizers...hand, head, body movement
- no musical score to tell the reader HOW TO READ ALOUD the prose.
- writing is a less effective transmission of what we mean...
- The persons whom we address (when we write) are not in our presence;they do not meet our eyes with theirs;
- they do not lean into the communication and "help" coax it into being; the do not talk over, alongwith, along side, at the same time, etc. Writing lacks the face-to-face immediacy (and intimacy) of conversation; it lacks the SUPPORT of our ACTUAL presence, the reinforcement of our vocal qualifiers and our gestures and our ability to hear and be heard with the help of our "hear-ers" (and "here-ers")
On page 70 is the quote that I remembered when I read you communication the other day and asked if I could edit this page.
- What we do will echo down the Halls of time
That certainly speaks to the Wikipedia experience. And confronts the need (and some might claim the obligation) of WikiEditors to work together. The subtle almost un-noticed drift into incivility is always so obvious when we observe it as bystanders but it is hard to resist when we are on the playfield.
- Off do do some snow-shovelling. Let me say here for what it.s worth that I am a "chatter". I have 14 grandchildren. I chat alot. I dont mind, in fact I appreciate, the little personal touches that are available here. I Know that most editors frown on the growing blog factor and I certainly support a Clean Encyclopedic site. Having said that, please delete this little personal "tetetete'...it's not meant to echo down the halls of time...:-)