Communication by word.

Communication by word is by speech or writing and I believe that we all wish to communicate exactly what we mean. However, to accomplish this wish how many of us are willing to put in the effort?
If we are to communicate exactly what we mean we have to choose the words that will achieve this. There is no purpose in being lax in this regard and then complaining that someone did not understand you although, word communication being what it is, even the best choice of words is often misunderstood! However, I think we would all agree that to do the best [without being lax!] is all we can do.

The English language, though highly complex - perplexing, in fact - has a vast selection of words with precise meaning and therefore lends itself to clear communication as well as wonderfully descriptive communication and the correct choice of words coupled with the proper use of syntax and punctuation facilitates maximum clarity. So, if you want to master clarity of communication by word it is necessary, at least, to get familiar with a dictionary.

In modern times written communication has been changing in some parts of the English speaking world but the changes have only brought poor syntax and punctuation with the result that clarity is suffering through ambiguity.
Of course, in the final analysis it is up to each one of us to decide how well we wish to be clearly understood and, most importantly, how much effort we are willing to make to be clearly understood.

In any event, always remember that no matter how much you try, there will be those who do misunderstand because the pictures words paint for one is not the same as for the other unless both have a high familiarity  with the language.

Another aid to clear communication is correct spelling [use the spell check] and the need to check what you have written to ensure that it is saying what you mean it to say.

Re: Communication by word.

e.e. cummings might disagree with you a bit.

Were communication by word simply a matter of spelling, syntax and grammar, then we wind up with nothing more that fact to be typed into a keyboard, dictation mouthed into microphone.  I've written enough scientific and engineering reports that mechnically accurate use of word and language usually fails to communicate anything to the human spirit.

Communication by word also requires additional cue to humanize it.  For the written word, this is different from this, which is different from this.  Even the humble emoticon serves this function.  What if I were to follow the previous sentence with : ) instead of : (  ?

Human communication requires human emphasis.  Tempo and rhythm, creative misuse of words, tone of voice, facial gestures, metaphor and simile…these all act to complete that which is intended to be communicated because they are the accents that give word and language life, making them more comprehensible.

In my Tai Chi class, I will tell students to take sideways steps toward the left, turning the body toward the left as they place their weight onto the left foot, turning the body to the right as they step in and down onto the right foot.  As they repeat the stepping, I ask them to hold their hand in front of them, letting them float up/down in opposite directions as the step and turn.  It yields some kind of movement.  All correctly explained.  But the moment I tell them that this stepping is called “Wave Hands Like Clouds,” to imagine someone would get the impression of a cloud moving through the sky merely be watching them, what was “only” movement now gives way to gracefulness.

While we are language beings, it's the look, the touch, the smile, the sigh, the wave of the arm, the picture in the imagination that turns word into meaning. 

Re: Communication by word.

I'm glad this subject has been brought up.  Jiddu Krishnamurti put it simply and beautifully: the word is not the thing.  The word is not the thing.  In fact, in examining what language actually is, we find it is a technology, a discovery no more than about 25 - 30,000 years old according to pure linguists.  Spoken language consists of units of sound woven together, sounds that have been agreed upon to represent something.  Written language is nothing more than the spelling of the name of the thing which is being represented!!!  There are layers between what words are attempting to represent and the thing itself into which all manner of ambiguity and distortion have woven themselves in, making communication an increasingly challenging enterprise as the world grows more complex.

I touched on this discussion in a blog entry here.  While they are able to represent things for the purpose of verbal or written communication, words also create boundaries and place limits as well.  I've found English severely limited in its capacity for expressing emotions and feelings, but there are plenty of terms to describe automobiles or cuts of meat.  An inventory of a language will show you what the culture attached to that language values, what it avoids.

Another challenge about written language in particular is in this very environment we find ourselves crossing paths in, cyberspace, virtual reality.  While technology is rapidly advancing to allow us a more animate and visual experience for communicating, written word is still the primary medium for conveying ideas and messages.  In my own experience, I have found this very challenging.  How can I convey myself authentically through words in this medium in such a way that what I really mean is conveyed?  Not everyone has read the dictionary, not everyone's definitions are the same even if the word is.  Some words carry an emotional charge specific to personal experience (the 'mother' example) that can trigger reactions in the receiver different than intended by the deliverer.  Love will elicit reactions ranging from joy and elation to ridicule to fear to anger or sadness.  What does this mean?  It looks to me like it means that listening is as much a part of communicating as speaking is.  Sure, the words are there, but what is really being said?! 

Just as the first glance at a piece of art may reveal a landscape, taking some time with that same piece of art will inevitably reveal more, layers and depth, feeling and emotion, unseen, unspoken, yet filling the space between the objects in the representation, threads weaving the pieces together into a single composition.  So too for written and spoken language.  Words woven together as ideas point towards something, but are never the thing itself.  Communication as a technology, as a tool, needs some work, especially as the world's socio-political boundaries dissolve before hitting cyberspace and we find ourselves in direct contact with each other, and only have words to make a connection with.  Billions of dollars have been invested in developing the technologies that allow us to meet, yet language itself has not received anywhere near the same degree of attention to its refinement and development, to make it efficacious for the needs of the times.  I think there is something here worth looking at.

Any ideas about how we might proceed in the face of this?

Re: Communication by word.

I'm not sure that there is a need to change the “technology,”  not that I consider language to even be that at all.  Language has a way of changing organically anyway, so trying to define and control the technology (in the long run) doesn't seem to be useful.  But if someone has something important to say, they will attempt to say something about it.  Whether they are understood or not depends in part in the listener's desire to understand. 

How to proceed?  Just tell your story, speak your truth.  If it's worthy and compelling, someone will listen.

Re: Communication by word.

Yes, guys, I do not disagree with what you say but I must remind you that my comment was in relation to “communication by word” and one cannot be more specific than that!

Re: Communication by word.

I have spent some time looking for a suitable place to make this comment but could only find this thread. It seems to me that in the case of written communication IT has increased the quantity but decreased the quality.

Re: Communication by word.

Can you give examples of “word sets” that fail and succeed as being what you consider as written communication?

Re: Communication by word.

Hi Kiso,
No my friend, I have said all I intend saying.
Much love,
Ian.

Re: Communication by word.

What if… and this is CWaZY- I know! But… what if… words come into being in a mind as a finite entity- and then this word which is finite and limited on its outside goes into circulation. This word picks up connotations… structures… history… etc. The word influences the way a culture thinks and at the same time is influenced. The word expands…. Forget the spellin’ n’ whatnot fer a moment. Cuz- surely those of ya readin here can quite rightly understand what the hella I’m a talkin bouts. Mark Twain’d be proud.

Words come into being. Brings to mind… Logos.

Words are not THE ‘thing’ but they are surely things themselves. Things which evolve and take on a life of their own. Things with their own funninesses and goofierly uses. Just the difference between the French derived and Germanic derived words and their uses in the English (modern) language are amazing.

What if this entire universe is a Word which when spoken was finite and boundaried. This word expanded internally (still finite from the outide in form and structure) and encompasses the meaning of the all?

Woot!
Dave