{"id":118,"date":"2019-01-16T00:13:20","date_gmt":"2019-01-16T00:13:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-oneonta-communication\/chapter\/3-2-functions-of-language\/"},"modified":"2019-01-16T00:13:20","modified_gmt":"2019-01-16T00:13:20","slug":"3-2-functions-of-language","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-oneonta-communication\/chapter\/3-2-functions-of-language\/","title":{"raw":"3.2 Functions of Language","rendered":"3.2 Functions of Language"},"content":{"raw":"\n
\n

Learning Objectives<\/h3>\n
    \n
  1. Identify and discuss the four main types of linguistic expressions.<\/li>\n
  2. Discuss the power of language to express our identities, affect our credibility, control others, and perform actions.<\/li>\n
  3. Discuss some of the sources of fun within language.<\/li>\n
  4. Explain how neologisms and slang contribute to the dynamic nature of language.<\/li>\n
  5. Identify the ways in which language can separate people and bring them together.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\n

    What utterances make up our daily verbal communication? Some of our words convey meaning, some convey emotions, and some actually produce actions. Language also provides endless opportunities for fun because of its limitless, sometimes nonsensical, and always changing nature. In this section, we will learn about the five functions of language, which show us that language is expressive, language is powerful, language is fun, language is dynamic, and language is relational.<\/p>\n

    \n

    Language Is Expressive<\/h2>\n

    Verbal communication helps us meet various needs through our ability to express ourselves. In terms of instrumental needs, we use verbal communication to ask questions that provide us with specific information. We also use verbal communication to describe things, people, and ideas. Verbal communication helps us inform, persuade, and entertain others, which as we will learn later are the three general purposes of public speaking. It is also through our verbal expressions that our personal relationships are formed. At its essence, language is expressive. Verbal expressions<\/a><\/span> help us communicate our observations, thoughts, feelings, and needs (McKay, Davis, & Fanning, 1995).<\/p>\n

    \n

    Expressing Observations<\/h2>\n

    When we express observations, we report on the sensory information we are taking or have taken in. Eyewitness testimony is a good example of communicating observations. Witnesses are not supposed to make judgments or offer conclusions; they only communicate factual knowledge as they experienced it. For example, a witness could say, \u201cI saw a white Mitsubishi Eclipse leaving my neighbor\u2019s house at 10:30 pm.\u201d As we learned in Chapter 2 \"Communication and Perception\"<\/a> on perception, observation and description occur in the first step of the perception-checking process. When you are trying to make sense of an experience, expressing observations in a descriptive rather than evaluative way can lessen defensiveness, which facilitates competent communication.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    Expressing Thoughts<\/h2>\n

    When we express thoughts, we draw conclusions based on what we have experienced. In the perception process, this is similar to the interpretation step. We take various observations and evaluate and interpret them to assign them meaning (a conclusion). Whereas our observations are based on sensory information (what we saw, what we read, what we heard), thoughts are connected to our beliefs (what we think is true\/false), attitudes (what we like and dislike), and values (what we think is right\/wrong or good\/bad). Jury members are expected to express thoughts based on reported observations to help reach a conclusion about someone\u2019s guilt or innocence. A juror might express the following thought: \u201cThe neighbor who saw the car leaving the night of the crime seemed credible. And the defendant seemed to have a shady past\u2014I think he\u2019s trying to hide something.\u201d Sometimes people intentionally or unintentionally express thoughts as if they were feelings. For example, when people say, \u201cI feel like you\u2019re too strict with your attendance policy,\u201d they aren\u2019t really expressing a feeling; they are expressing a judgment about the other person (a thought).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    Expressing Feelings<\/h2>\n

    When we express feelings, we communicate our emotions. Expressing feelings is a difficult part of verbal communication, because there are many social norms about how, why, when, where, and to whom we express our emotions. Norms for emotional expression also vary based on nationality and other cultural identities and characteristics such as age and gender. In terms of age, young children are typically freer to express positive and negative emotions in public. Gendered elements intersect with age as boys grow older and are socialized into a norm of emotional restraint. Although individual men vary in the degree to which they are emotionally expressive, there is still a prevailing social norm that encourages and even expects women to be more emotionally expressive than men.<\/p>\n

    <\/p>

    \n
    \n
    \n \"3.2.0N\"<\/a>\n

    Expressing feelings is often the most difficult form of verbal expression.<\/p>\n

    \n

    Lucas - emotion icon<\/a> - CC BY-NC 2.0.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

    <\/p><\/div>\n

    Expressing feelings can be uncomfortable for those listening. Some people are generally not good at or comfortable with receiving and processing other people\u2019s feelings. Even those with good empathetic listening skills can be positively or negatively affected by others\u2019 emotions. Expressions of anger can be especially difficult to manage because they represent a threat to the face and self-esteem of others. Despite the fact that expressing feelings is more complicated than other forms of expression, emotion sharing is an important part of how we create social bonds and empathize with others, and it can be improved.<\/p>\n

    In order to verbally express our emotions, it is important that we develop an emotional vocabulary. The more specific we can be when we are verbally communicating our emotions, the less ambiguous our emotions will be for the person decoding our message. As we expand our emotional vocabulary, we are able to convey the intensity of the emotion we\u2019re feeling whether it is mild, moderate, or intense. For example, happy<\/em> is mild, delighted<\/em> is moderate, and ecstatic<\/em> is intense; ignored<\/em> is mild, rejected<\/em> is moderate, and abandoned<\/em> is intense (Hargie, 2011).<\/p>\n

    In a time when so much of our communication is electronically mediated, it is likely that we will communicate emotions through the written word in an e-mail, text, or instant message. We may also still use pen and paper when sending someone a thank-you note, a birthday card, or a sympathy card. Communicating emotions through the written (or typed) word can have advantages such as time to compose your thoughts and convey the details of what you\u2019re feeling. There are also disadvantages in that important context and nonverbal communication can\u2019t be included. Things like facial expressions and tone of voice offer much insight into emotions that may not be expressed verbally. There is also a lack of immediate feedback. Sometimes people respond immediately to a text or e-mail, but think about how frustrating it is when you text someone and they don\u2019t get back to you right away. If you\u2019re in need of emotional support or want validation of an emotional message you just sent, waiting for a response could end up negatively affecting your emotional state.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    Expressing Needs<\/h2>\n

    When we express needs, we are communicating in an instrumental way to help us get things done. Since we almost always know our needs more than others do, it\u2019s important for us to be able to convey those needs to others. Expressing needs can help us get a project done at work or help us navigate the changes of a long-term romantic partnership. Not expressing needs can lead to feelings of abandonment, frustration, or resentment. For example, if one romantic partner expresses the following thought \u201cI think we\u2019re moving too quickly in our relationship\u201d but doesn\u2019t also express a need, the other person in the relationship doesn\u2019t have a guide for what to do in response to the expressed thought. Stating, \u201cI need to spend some time with my hometown friends this weekend. Would you mind if I went home by myself?\u201d would likely make the expression more effective. Be cautious of letting evaluations or judgments sneak into your expressions of need. Saying \u201cI need you to stop suffocating me!\u201d really expresses a thought-feeling mixture more than a need.<\/p>\n

    <\/p>\n

    \n

    Table 3.1<\/span> Four Types of Verbal Expressions<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
    Type<\/th>\nDescription<\/th>\nExample<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
    Observation<\/td>\nReport of sensory experiences or memories<\/td>\n\u201cPauline asked me to bring this file to you.\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Thought<\/td>\nConclusion about or judgment of experiences and observations<\/td>\n\u201cStudents today have much less respect for authority.\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Feeling<\/td>\nCommunicating emotions<\/td>\n\u201cI feel at peace when we\u2019re together.\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Need<\/td>\nStating wants or requesting help or support<\/td>\n\u201cI\u2019m saving money for summer vacation. Is it OK if we skip our regular night out this week?\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n
    \n

    Source: Adapted from Matthew McKay, Martha Davis, and Patrick Fanning, Messages: Communication Skills Book<\/em>, 2nd ed. (Oakland, CA: New Harbinger Publications, 1995), 34\u201336.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    Language Is Powerful<\/h2>\n

    The contemporary American philosopher David Abram wrote, \u201cOnly if words are felt, bodily presences, like echoes or waterfalls, can we understand the power of spoken language to influence, alter, and transform the perceptual world\u201d (Abram, 1997). This statement encapsulates many of the powerful features of language. Next, we will discuss how language expresses our identities, affects our credibility, serves as a means of control, and performs actions.<\/p>\n

    \n

    Language Expresses Our Identities<\/h2>\n

    In the opening to this chapter, I recounted how an undergraduate class in semantics solidified my love of language. I could have continued on to say that I have come to think of myself as a \u201cword nerd.\u201d Words or phrases like that express who we are and contribute to the impressions that others make of us. We\u2019ve already learned about identity needs and impression management and how we all use verbal communication strategically to create a desired impression. But how might the label word nerd<\/em> affect me differently if someone else placed it on me?<\/p>\n

    <\/p>

    \n
    \n
    \n \"3.2.1N\"<\/a>\n

    Telling people what state you are from may give them a sense of \u201cwho you are.\u201d<\/p>\n

    \n

    Jimmy Emerson, DVM - Welcome to Texas<\/a> - CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

    <\/p><\/div>\n

    The power of language to express our identities varies depending on the origin of the label (self-chosen or other imposed) and the context. People are usually comfortable with the language they use to describe their own identities but may have issues with the labels others place on them. In terms of context, many people express their \u201cIrish\u201d identity on St. Patrick\u2019s Day, but they may not think much about it over the rest of the year. There are many examples of people who have taken a label that was imposed on them, one that usually has negative connotations, and intentionally used it in ways that counter previous meanings. Some country music singers and comedians have reclaimed the label redneck<\/em>, using it as an identity marker they are proud of rather than a pejorative term. Other examples of people reclaiming identity labels is the \u201cblack is beautiful\u201d movement of the 1960s that repositioned black<\/em> as a positive identity marker for African Americans and the \u201cqueer\u201d movement of the 1980s and \u201990s that reclaimed queer<\/em> as a positive identity marker for some gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people. Even though some people embrace reclaimed words, they still carry their negative connotations and are not openly accepted by everyone.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    Language Affects Our Credibility<\/h2>\n

    One of the goals of this chapter is to help you be more competent with your verbal communication. People make assumptions about your credibility based on how you speak and what you say. Even though we\u2019ve learned that meaning is in people rather than words and that the rules that govern verbal communication, like rules of grammar, are arbitrary, these norms still mean something. You don\u2019t have to be a perfect grammarian to be perceived as credible. In fact, if you followed the grammar rules for written communication to the letter you would actually sound pretty strange, since our typical way of speaking isn\u2019t as formal and structured as writing. But you still have to support your ideas and explain the conclusions you make to be seen as competent. You have to use language clearly and be accountable for what you say in order to be seen as trustworthy. Using informal language and breaking social norms we\u2019ve discussed so far wouldn\u2019t enhance your credibility during a professional job interview, but it might with your friends at a tailgate party. Politicians know that the way they speak affects their credibility, but they also know that using words that are too scientific or academic can lead people to perceive them as eggheads, which would hurt their credibility. Politicians and many others in leadership positions need to be able to use language to put people at ease, relate to others, and still appear confident and competent.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    Language Is a Means of Control<\/h2>\n

    Control<\/em> is a word that has negative connotations, but our use of it here can be positive, neutral, or negative. Verbal communication can be used to reward and punish. We can offer verbal communication in the form of positive reinforcement to praise someone. We can withhold verbal communication or use it in a critical, aggressive, or hurtful way as a form of negative reinforcement.<\/p>\n

    Directives<\/a><\/span> are utterances that try to get another person to do something. They can range from a rather polite ask<\/em> or request<\/em> to a more forceful command<\/em> or insist<\/em>. Context informs when and how we express directives and how people respond to them. Promises are often paired with directives in order to persuade people to comply, and those promises, whether implied or stated, should be kept in order to be an ethical communicator. Keep this in mind to avoid arousing false expectations on the part of the other person (Hayakawa & Hayakawa, 1990).<\/p>\n

    Rather than verbal communication being directed at one person as a means of control, the way we talk creates overall climates of communication that may control many. Verbal communication characterized by empathy, understanding, respect, and honesty creates open climates that lead to more collaboration and more information exchange. Verbal communication that is controlling, deceitful, and vague creates a closed climate in which people are less willing to communicate and less trusting (Brown, 2006).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    Language Is Performative<\/h2>\n

    Some language is actually more like an action than a packet of information. Saying, \u201cI promise,\u201d \u201cI guarantee,\u201d or \u201cI pledge,\u201d does more than convey meaning; it communicates intent. Such utterances are called commissives<\/a><\/span>, as they mean a speaker is committed to a certain course of action (Crystal, 2005). Of course, promises can be broken, and there can be consequences, but other verbal communication is granted official power that can guarantee action. The two simple words I do<\/em> can mean that a person has agreed to an oath before taking a witness stand or assuming the presidency. It can also mean that two people are now bound in a relationship recognized by the government and\/or a religious community. These two words, if said in the right context and in front of the right person, such as a judge or a reverend, bring with them obligations that cannot be undone without additional steps and potential negative repercussions. In that sense, language is much more than \u201cmere words.\u201d<\/p>\n

    <\/p>

    \n
    \n
    \n \"3.2.2N\"<\/a>\n

    Judges\u2019 words perform actions ranging from holding someone in contempt of court to sentencing someone to death.<\/p>\n

    \n

    Brian Turner - My Trust Gavel<\/a> - CC BY 2.0.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

    <\/p><\/div>\n

    Performative language can also be a means of control, especially in legal contexts. In some cases, the language that makes our laws is intentionally vague. In courts all over the nation, the written language intersects with spoken language as lawyers advocate for particular interpretations of the written law. The utterances of judges and juries set precedents for reasonable interpretations that will then help decide future cases. Imagine how powerful the words We the jury find the defendant\u2026<\/em> seem to the defendant awaiting his or her verdict. The sentences handed down by judges following a verdict are also performative because those words impose fines, penalties, or even death. Some language is deemed so powerful that it is regulated. Hate speech, which we will learn more about later, and slander, libel, and defamation are considered powerful enough to actually do damage to a person and have therefore been criminalized.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    Language Is Fun<\/h2>\n

    Word games have long been popular. Before Words with Friends there was Apples to Apples, Boggle, Scrabble, and crossword puzzles. Writers, poets, and comedians have built careers on their ability to have fun with language and in turn share that fun with others. The fun and frivolity of language becomes clear as teachers get half-hearted laughs from students when they make puns, Jay Leno has a whole bit where he shows the hilarious mistakes people unintentionally make when they employ language, and people vie to construct the longest palindromic sentence (a sentence that as the same letters backward and forward).<\/p>\n

    The productivity and limitlessness of language we discussed earlier leads some people to spend an inordinate amount of time discovering things about words. Two examples that I have found fascinating are palindromes and contranyms. Palindromes, as noted, are words that read the same from left to right and from right to left. Racecar is a commonly cited example, but a little time spent looking through Google results for palindromes exposes many more, ranging from \u201cLive not on evil\u201d to \u201cDoc, note I dissent. A fast never prevents a fatness. I diet on cod.\u201d[footnote]\u201cNeil\/Fred\u2019s Gigantic List of Palindromes,\u201d accessed June 7, 2012, http:\/\/www.derf.net\/palindromes\/old.palindrome.html<\/a>.[\/footnote] Contranyms are words that have multiple meanings, two of which are opposites. For example, sanction<\/em> can mean \u201cto allow\u201d and \u201cto prevent,\u201d and dust<\/em> can mean \u201cto remove particles\u201d when used in reference to furniture or \u201cto add particles\u201d when used in reference to a cake. These are just two examples of humorous and contradictory features of the English language\u2014the book Crazy English<\/em> by Richard Lederer explores dozens more. A fun aspect of language enjoyed by more people than a small community of word enthusiasts is humor.<\/p>\n

    There are more than one hundred theories of humor, but none of them quite captures the complex and often contradictory nature of what we find funny (Foot & McCreaddie, 2006). Humor is a complicated social phenomenon that is largely based on the relationship between language and meaning. Humor functions to liven up conversations, break the ice, and increase group cohesion. We also use humor to test our compatibility with others when a deep conversation about certain topics like politics or religion would be awkward. Bringing up these topics in a lighthearted way can give us indirect information about another person\u2019s beliefs, attitudes, and values. Based on their response to the humorous message, we can either probe further or change the subject and write it off as a poor attempt at humor (Foot & McCreaddie, 2006). Using humor also draws attention to us, and the reactions that we get from others feeds into our self-concept. We also use humor to disclose information about ourselves that we might not feel comfortable revealing in a more straightforward way. Humor can also be used to express sexual interest or to cope with bad news or bad situations.<\/p>\n

    We first start to develop an understanding of humor as children when we realize that the words we use for objects are really arbitrary and can be manipulated. This manipulation creates a distortion or incongruous moment in the reality that we had previously known. Some humor scholars believe that this early word play\u2014for example, calling a horse a turtle and a turtle a horse\u2014leads us to appreciate language-based humor like puns and riddles (Foot & McCreaddie, 2006). It is in the process of encoding and decoding that humor emerges. People use encoding to decide how and when to use humor, and people use decoding to make sense of humorous communication. Things can go wrong in both of those processes. I\u2019m sure we can all relate to the experience of witnessing a poorly timed or executed joke (a problem with encoding) and of not getting a joke (a problem with decoding).<\/p>\n

    <\/p>

    \n
    \n
    \n \"3.2.3N\"<\/a>\n

    Comedians make a living by making language fun, but humor is contextual and not always easy to pull off.<\/p>\n

    \n

    Gavin Golden - Comedian<\/a> - CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

    <\/p><\/div><\/div>\n

    \n

    Language Is Dynamic<\/h2>\n

    As we already learned, language is essentially limitless. We may create a one-of-a-kind sentence combining words in new ways and never know it. Aside from the endless structural possibilities, words change meaning, and new words are created daily. In this section, we\u2019ll learn more about the dynamic nature of language by focusing on neologisms and slang.<\/p>\n

    \n

    Neologisms<\/h2>\n

    Neologisms<\/a><\/span> are newly coined or used words. Newly coined words are those that were just brought into linguistic existence. Newly used words make their way into languages in several ways, including borrowing and changing structure. Taking<\/em> is actually a more fitting descriptor than borrowing<\/em>, since we take words but don\u2019t really give them back. In any case, borrowing is the primary means through which languages expand. English is a good case in point, as most of its vocabulary is borrowed and doesn\u2019t reflect the language\u2019s Germanic origins. English has been called the \u201cvacuum cleaner of languages\u201d (Crystal, 2005).Weekend<\/em> is a popular English word based on the number of languages that have borrowed it. We have borrowed many words, like chic<\/em> from French, karaoke<\/em> from Japanese, and caravan<\/em> from Arabic.<\/p>\n

    Structural changes also lead to new words. Compound words are neologisms that are created by joining two already known words. Keyboard<\/em>, newspaper<\/em>, and giftcard<\/em> are all compound words that were formed when new things were created or conceived. We also create new words by adding something, subtracting something, or blending them together. For example, we can add affixes, meaning a prefix or a suffix, to a word. Affixing usually alters the original meaning but doesn\u2019t completely change it. Ex-husband<\/em> and kitchenette<\/em> are relatively recent examples of such changes (Crystal, 2005). New words are also formed when clipping a word like examination<\/em>, which creates a new word, exam<\/em>, that retains the same meaning. And last, we can form new words by blending old ones together. Words like breakfast<\/em> and lunch<\/em> blend letters and meaning to form a new word\u2014brunch<\/em>.\n

    Existing words also change in their use and meaning. The digital age has given rise to some interesting changes in word usage. Before Facebook, the word friend<\/em> had many meanings, but it was mostly used as a noun referring to a companion. The sentence, I\u2019ll friend you<\/em>, wouldn\u2019t have made sense to many people just a few years ago because friend<\/em> wasn\u2019t used as a verb. Google<\/em> went from being a proper noun referring to the company to a more general verb that refers to searching for something on the Internet (perhaps not even using the Google search engine). Meanings can expand or contract without changing from a noun to a verb. Gay<\/em>, an adjective for feeling happy, expanded to include gay<\/em> as an adjective describing a person\u2019s sexual orientation. Perhaps because of the confusion that this caused, the meaning of gay<\/em> has contracted again, as the earlier meaning is now considered archaic, meaning it is no longer in common usage.<\/p>\n

    The American Dialect Society names an overall \u201cWord of the Year\u201d each year and selects winners in several more specific categories. The winning words are usually new words or words that recently took on new meaning.[footnote]\u201cAll of the Words of the Year 1990 to Present,\u201d American Dialect Society, accessed June 7, 2012, http:\/\/www.americandialect.org\/woty\/all-of-the-words-of-the- year-1990-to-present<\/a>.[\/footnote] In 2011, the overall winner was occupy<\/em> as a result of the Occupy Wall Street movement. The word named the \u201cmost likely to succeed\u201d was cloud<\/em> as a result of Apple unveiling its new online space for file storage and retrieval. Although languages are dying out at an alarming rate, many languages are growing in terms of new words and expanded meanings, thanks largely to advances in technology, as can be seen in the example of cloud<\/em>.\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    Slang<\/h2>\n

    Slang is a great example of the dynamic nature of language. Slang<\/a><\/span> refers to new or adapted words that are specific to a group, context, and\/or time period; regarded as less formal; and representative of people\u2019s creative play with language. Research has shown that only about 10 percent of the slang terms that emerge over a fifteen-year period survive. Many more take their place though, as new slang words are created using inversion, reduction, or old-fashioned creativity (Allan & Burridge, 2006). Inversion is a form of word play that produces slang words like sick<\/em>, wicked<\/em>, and bad<\/em> that refer to the opposite of their typical meaning. Reduction creates slang words such as pic<\/em>, sec<\/em>, and later<\/em> from picture<\/em>, second<\/em>, and see you later<\/em>. New slang words often represent what is edgy, current, or simply relevant to the daily lives of a group of people. Many creative examples of slang refer to illegal or socially taboo topics like sex, drinking, and drugs. It makes sense that developing an alternative way to identify drugs or talk about taboo topics could make life easier for the people who partake in such activities. Slang allows people who are in \u201cin the know\u201d to break the code and presents a linguistic barrier for unwanted outsiders. Taking a moment to think about the amount of slang that refers to being intoxicated on drugs or alcohol or engaging in sexual activity should generate a lengthy list.<\/p>\n

    When I first started teaching this course in the early 2000s, Cal Poly Pomona had been compiling a list of the top twenty college slang words of the year for a few years. The top slang word for 1997 was da bomb<\/em>, which means \u201cgreat, awesome, or extremely cool,\u201d and the top word for 2001 and 2002 was tight<\/em>, which is used as a generic positive meaning \u201cattractive, nice, or cool.\u201d Unfortunately, the project didn\u2019t continue, but I still enjoy seeing how the top slang words change and sometimes recycle and come back. I always end up learning some new words from my students. When I asked a class what the top college slang word should be for 2011, they suggested deuces<\/em>, which is used when leaving as an alternative to good-bye<\/em> and stems from another verbal\/nonverbal leaving symbol\u2014holding up two fingers for \u201cpeace\u201d as if to say, \u201cpeace out.\u201d<\/p>\n

    It\u2019s difficult for my students to identify the slang they use at any given moment because it is worked into our everyday language patterns and becomes very natural. Just as we learned here, new words can create a lot of buzz and become a part of common usage very quickly. The same can happen with new slang terms. Most slang words also disappear quickly, and their alternative meaning fades into obscurity. For example, you don\u2019t hear anyone using the word macaroni<\/em> to refer to something cool or fashionable. But that\u2019s exactly what the common slang meaning of the word was at the time the song \u201cYankee Doodle\u201d was written. Yankee Doodle isn\u2019t saying the feather he sticks in his cap is a small, curved pasta shell; he is saying it\u2019s cool or stylish.<\/p>\n

    \n

    \u201cGetting Plugged In\u201d<\/h4>\n

    Is \u201cTextese\u201d Hurting Our Verbal Communication?<\/p>\n

    Textese, also called text-message-ese and txt talk, among other things, has been called a \u201cnew dialect\u201d of English that mixes letters and numbers, abbreviates words, and drops vowels and punctuation to create concise words and statements. Although this \u201cdialect\u201d has primarily been relegated to the screens of smartphones and other text-capable devices, it has slowly been creeping into our spoken language (Huang, 2011). Some critics say textese is \u201cdestroying\u201d language by \u201cpillaging punctuation\u201d and \u201csavaging our sentences\u201d (Humphrys, 2007). A relatively straightforward tks<\/em> for \u201cthanks\u201d or u<\/em> for \u201cyou\u201d has now given way to textese sentences like IMHO U R GR8<\/em>. If you translated that into \u201cIn my humble opinion, you are great,\u201d then you are fluent in textese. Although teachers and parents seem convinced that this type of communicating will eventually turn our language into emoticons and abbreviations, some scholars aren\u2019t. David Crystal, a well-known language expert, says that such changes to the English language aren\u2019t new and that texting can actually have positive effects. He points out that Shakespeare also abbreviated many words, played with the rules of language, and made up several thousand words, and he is not considered an abuser of language. He also cites research that found, using experimental data, that children who texted more scored higher on reading and vocabulary tests. Crystal points out that in order to play with language, you must first have some understanding of the rules of language (Huang, 2011).<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. What effects, if any, do you think textese has had on your non-text-message communication?<\/li>\n
    2. Overall do you think textese and other forms of computer-mediated communication have affected our communication? Try to identify one potential positive and negative influence that textese has had on our verbal communication.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n
      \n

      Language Is Relational<\/h2>\n

      We use verbal communication to initiate, maintain, and terminate our interpersonal relationships. The first few exchanges with a potential romantic partner or friend help us size the other person up and figure out if we want to pursue a relationship or not. We then use verbal communication to remind others how we feel about them and to check in with them\u2014engaging in relationship maintenance through language use. When negative feelings arrive and persist, or for many other reasons, we often use verbal communication to end a relationship.<\/p>\n

      \n

      Language Can Bring Us Together<\/h2>\n

      Interpersonally, verbal communication is key to bringing people together and maintaining relationships. Whether intentionally or unintentionally, our use of words like I<\/em>, you<\/em>, we<\/em>, our<\/em>, and us<\/em> affect our relationships. \u201cWe language\u201d includes the words we<\/em>, our<\/em>, and us<\/em> and can be used to promote a feeling of inclusiveness. \u201cI language\u201d can be useful when expressing thoughts, needs, and feelings because it leads us to \u201cown\u201d our expressions and avoid the tendency to mistakenly attribute the cause of our thoughts, needs, and feelings to others. Communicating emotions using \u201cI language\u201d may also facilitate emotion sharing by not making our conversational partner feel at fault or defensive. For example, instead of saying, \u201cYou\u2019re making me crazy!\u201d you could say, \u201cI\u2019m starting to feel really anxious because we can\u2019t make a decision about this.\u201d Conversely, \u201cyou language\u201d can lead people to become defensive and feel attacked, which could be divisive and result in feelings of interpersonal separation.<\/p>\n

      <\/p>

      \n
      \n
      \n \"3.2.4N\"<\/a>\n

      Verbal communication brings people together and helps maintain satisfying relationships.<\/p>\n

      \n

      Matus Laslofi - Talk<\/a> - CC BY-SA 2.0.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

      <\/p><\/div>\n

      Aside from the specific words that we use, the frequency of communication impacts relationships. Of course, the content of what is said is important, but research shows that romantic partners who communicate frequently with each other and with mutual friends and family members experience less stress and uncertainty in their relationship and are more likely to stay together (McCornack, 2007). When frequent communication combines with supportive messages<\/a><\/span>, which are messages communicated in an open, honest, and nonconfrontational way, people are sure to come together.<\/p>\n

      Moving from the interpersonal to the sociocultural level, we can see that speaking the same language can bring people together. When a person is surrounded by people who do not speak his or her native language, it can be very comforting to run into another person who speaks the same language. Even if the two people are strangers, the ease of linguistic compatibility is comforting and can quickly facilitate a social bond. We\u2019ve already learned that language helps shape our social reality, so a common language leads to some similar perspectives. Of course, there are individual differences within a language community, but the power of shared language to unite people has led to universal language movements that advocate for one global language.<\/p>\n

      Serious attempts to create a common language, sometimes referred to as a lingua franca<\/em> or auxiliary language, began in the 1600s as world exploration brought increased trade and Latin was no longer effective as the language of international business. Since then, hundreds of auxiliary languages have been recorded but none have achieved widespread international usage or been officially recognized as an international language (Crystal, 2005). While some such movements were primarily motivated by business and profit, others hoped to promote mutual understanding, more effective diplomacy, and peaceful coexistence. Esperanto<\/a><\/span>, which means \u201chopeful,\u201d is the most well-known and widely used auxiliary language that was intended to serve as a common international language. Esperanto was invented by a Polish eye doctor at the end of the 1800s and today has between one and two million fluent speakers worldwide. Many works of literature and important manuscripts like the Bible and the Qur\u2019an have been translated into Esperanto, and many original works of literature and academic articles have been written in the language. Some countries also broadcast radio programs in Esperanto. Several barriers will have to be overcome in order for an auxiliary language like Esperanto to gain international acceptance. First, there would have to be a massive effort put into a period of simultaneous learning\u2014otherwise it is difficult to motivate people to learn a language that is not necessary for their daily lives and that no one else speaks. Second, as we have learned, people take pride in their linguistic identity and find pleasure in playing with the rules of language, creatively inventing new words and meanings that constantly change a language. Such changes may be impossible to accommodate in an auxiliary language. Lastly, the optimism of an internationally shared language eventually gives way to realism. If a shared language really brings peaceful coexistence, how do we explain all the civil wars and other conflicts that have been fought between people who speak the same language?<\/p>\n

      As new languages are invented, many more languages are dying. Linguists and native speakers of endangered languages have also rallied around so-called dying languages to preserve them. In the United States, Cajun French in Louisiana, French Canadian in Maine, and Pennsylvania Dutch are examples of language communities that are in danger of losing the language that has united them, in some cases for hundreds of years (Dorian, 1986). Although American English is in no danger of dying soon, there have been multiple attempts to make English the official language of the United States. Sometimes the argument supporting this proposition seems to be based on the notion that a shared language will lead to more solidarity and in-group identification among the speakers. However, many of these movements are politically and ideologically motivated and actually seek to marginalize and\/or expel immigrants\u2014typically immigrants who are also people of color. The United States isn\u2019t the only country that has debated the merits of officially recognizing only certain languages. Similar debates have been going on for many years regarding whether French, English, or both should be the official language in Quebec, Canada, and which language(s)\u2014French, Dutch, or Flemish\u2014should be used in what contexts in Belgium (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). In such cases, we can see that verbal communication can also divide people.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

      \n

      Language Can Separate Us<\/h2>\n

      Whether it\u2019s criticism, teasing, or language differences, verbal communication can also lead to feelings of separation. Language differences alone do not present insurmountable barriers. We can learn other languages with time and effort, there are other people who can translate and serve as bridges across languages, and we can also communicate quite a lot nonverbally in the absence of linguistic compatibility. People who speak the same language can intentionally use language to separate. The words us<\/em> and them<\/em> can be a powerful start to separation. Think of how language played a role in segregation in the United States as the notion of \u201cseparate but equal\u201d was upheld by the Supreme Court and how apartheid affected South Africa as limits, based on finances and education, were placed on the black majority\u2019s rights to vote. Symbols, both words and images, were a very important part of Hitler\u2019s rise to power in the 1930s and \u201940s in Europe. Various combinations of colored stars, triangles, letters, and other symbols were sewn onto the clothing or uniforms of people persecuted by the Nazis in order to classify them. People were labeled and reduced to certain characteristics rather than seen as complete humans, which facilitated the Nazis\u2019 oppression, violence, and killing (Holocaust and Human Rights Education Center, 2012).<\/p>\n

      At the interpersonal level, unsupportive messages<\/a><\/span> can make others respond defensively, which can lead to feelings of separation and actual separation or dissolution of a relationship. It\u2019s impossible to be supportive in our communication all the time, but consistently unsupportive messages can hurt others\u2019 self-esteem, escalate conflict, and lead to defensiveness. People who regularly use unsupportive messages may create a toxic win\/lose climate in a relationship. Six verbal tactics that can lead to feelings of defensiveness and separation are global labels, sarcasm, dragging up the past, negative comparisons, judgmental \u201cyou\u201d messages, and threats (McKay, Davis & Fanning, 1995).<\/p>\n

      Common Types of Unsupportive Messages<\/strong>\n

        \n
      1. \nGlobal labels.<\/strong> \u201cYou\u2019re a liar.\u201d Labeling someone irresponsible, untrustworthy, selfish, or lazy calls his or her whole identity as a person into question. Such sweeping judgments and generalizations are sure to only escalate a negative situation.<\/li>\n
      2. \nSarcasm.<\/strong> \u201cNo, you didn\u2019t miss anything in class on Wednesday. We just sat here and looked at each other.\u201d Even though sarcasm is often disguised as humor, it usually represents passive-aggressive behavior through which a person indirectly communicates negative feelings.<\/li>\n
      3. \nDragging up the past.<\/strong> \u201cI should have known not to trust you when you never paid me back that $100 I let you borrow.\u201d Bringing up negative past experiences is a tactic used by people when they don\u2019t want to discuss a current situation. Sometimes people have built up negative feelings that are suddenly let out by a seemingly small thing in the moment.<\/li>\n
      4. \nNegative comparisons.<\/strong> \u201cJade graduated from college without any credit card debt. I guess you\u2019re just not as responsible as her.\u201d Holding a person up to the supposed standards or characteristics of another person can lead to feelings of inferiority and resentment. Parents and teachers may unfairly compare children to their siblings.<\/li>\n
      5. \nJudgmental \u201cyou\u201d messages.<\/strong> \u201cYou\u2019re never going to be able to hold down a job.\u201d Accusatory messages are usually generalized overstatements about another person that go beyond labeling but still do not describe specific behavior in a productive way.<\/li>\n
      6. \nThreats.<\/strong> \u201cIf you don\u2019t stop texting back and forth with your ex, both of you are going to regret it.\u201d Threatening someone with violence or some other negative consequence usually signals the end of productive communication. Aside from the potential legal consequences, threats usually overcompensate for a person\u2019s insecurity.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
        \n

        Key Takeaways<\/h3>\n