Importance of a closing

One of the topics I found interesting in our reading was the topic of conversational closings in chapter four. In the topic it explains the importance of a closing in your speech or conversation. In the text it says, “Endings play an important role in conversation. They signal that interaction is about to wind down, establish a sense of closure, reassure participants that the interaction has been successful, and establish conditions for future interaction.” (Page 84)

I do agree with this, you have to have a good closing that leaves the listener with a sense of understanding about what you have said and they feel good about the conversation. Not only is a good closing good for conversation, but also essays or papers. I know when it comes to a closing in your school paper or essay it leaves the reader with a sense of the stance you stand on with the subject or topic. It also gives the reader the option to think of their own stance on the subject or better understanding of the topic. 

Men VS Women Language

I definitely agree that men and women use language differently. Women we sometimes have this thing where we say one thing, but it means another. This is just an example and I know men will most likely agree, but the way men may communicate with their friends not the same way they would a woman. The same goes for women, I feel like we have this thing with gossip and we definitely gossip way more than men.

For example, when I speak to my boyfriend and I try to elaborate about an outfit or start talking about colors like cobalt blue or mint he does not understand.  If I were to explain this to my girlfriend she would know exactly what I meant by these colors. Women and men will forever have different languages. I know when my boyfriend starts talking about his cars or football it’s definitely like listening to a different language. I do believe men and women have a common ground when it comes to certain subjects, but we will always have some misunderstandings. 

Making Judgments. .

I honestly do not think it is an easy task to not judge others. I can always try and say I will give someone a chance, but that doesn’t mean I have not made my own opinion on someone already before getting to know them. I think everyone is judgmental in a sense. For example, when I walk into a interview I am already being judged. I have already been judged by my time management and my appearance from the minuet I walk in the door.

I think the only way to make our judgments fairer would be to not take that judgment and place it over the person’s head. What I mean by that is that we should give them a chance and let them show us themselves before we confirm or deny our judgment on them. It is the only fair way to let your judgment be wrong or right. I know that even when I do judge someone I have to give them the benefit of the doubt and let them show me who they are. I have always been a person not to listen to the he/she say just because it could definitely be another’s judgment. 

A Well Known Speaker

The person I chose to critique their public speaking skills is former president Bill Clinton. I had recently watched the 2012 Democratic National Convention on September 6^th and watched how he spoke with such confidence. I think some of his strongest characteristics would be his calmness in his voice and his preparedness. He seemed so confident in his words and even brought a little humor in his speech. I thought he did an excellent job at his persuading and getting the crowd amped and excited for the campaign voting.

I believe Bill Clinton does possess credibility, attractiveness, and power. Bill Clinton used to be our president for two full terms and I believe he has the credibility from his own elections. I do believe he has the power to attract attention to his words and he has the right attitude and words of persuasion. Bill Clinton is a smart man and I believe he knows exactly how to get the followers involved and knows exactly how to get their minds thinking.

Private Sphere and Public Sphere

When reading through Chapter 9, I found the two different spheres of communication very interesting. I wouldn’t have thought there was a term for two different types of public communication.

The private sphere is when you are solely speaking about our own interests in mind. Since the book did not elaborate on the private sphere I did a little bit of my own research. It is said that when you are in your private sphere of communication that you are most likely speaking in the comforts with your family or friends. The communication here would most likely be our of comfort ability with the people that you already know and that would help you gain.

The term public sphere is when you are speaking on behalf of our community in a chance to connect with others or bring awareness. I liked how the book used examples of how people used their own life experiences and reached out to our community to create awareness and get others involved in greater issues in our communities.

Best and Worst Speaker

I have once been inspired by a speaker. The best speaker I ever had was my tenth grade English teacher. He actually has made English my favorite subject since my tenth grade in high school. The one thing that made his speeches memorable is the way he would connect to the students. He would use examples or personal experiences that made him more relatable to our own experiences. He always had a way with words and the motivational speeches he would give us at least weekly. He wanted to see us all do our best in school and achieve the grades we deserved if we worked hard enough.

The worst speaker I ever heard was another female teacher from my senior year of high school. It wasn’t necessarily the words or speech she was giving us it was the deliverance. She had no motivation in them nor was she ever prepared. I could tell she didn’t like speeches when she had to give them. Usually she would pass out papers to the class with whatever information she wanted to give us for the week and we would “popcorn read” it out loud. When speaking she didn’t have the confidence, she would stumble over words, and even be unprepared. I feel like if you are nervous or unsure of what to say to make notecards and always be prepared. PRACTICE!

Intentional Communication

In our reading the one interesting topic was the theories if communication was intentional or not. I found the argument between not meaning to send communication messages or if communication is unintentional behavior.

I have to agree with the side that says, “Communication is a process whereby people assign meanings to stimuli in order to make sense of the world”. I feel like when we are communicating we say what is on our minds and any behavior that follows those words is how we feel.  I don’t think you can send messages by accident. I believe the first reaction is the reaction that you made unintentional because that’s the way you felt at the time. It might not be the right one, but it is the first that came from a reaction.

In the example the book uses between Brianne and Brennan where Brianne frowns and didn’t know that she was being watched so her reaction was not considered communication, I feel is wrong. Some people will try and change their reaction or say they were kidding because of the embarrassment of their reaction.

Pragmatic Perspective

The pragmatic perspective explains that communication is patterned. It does make sense to think of communication as a pattern. I believe when people are nervous when they have to communicate or even make speeches they have their own forms of ways to get around that nervousness. Not only does this have to do with nervousness it’s just the specific movements or gestures one may use when communicating with others.

For example, I noticed that some singers, Mariah Carey in particular, when she is singing her high notes and put emphasis on that particular note or lyric she has this hand movement that she uses. I feel like when she does it she is signaling that the part is coming up. This kind of reminded me of the pragmatic perspective.

Communication is like a game because I feel like sometimes when you get around certain people you may use different tones or words that you wouldn’t use around others. For example, I would not speak to my parents how I speak to my friends. It’s all about knowing when to use the right words or type of specific gestures and tones when speaking to certain people. A way it’s not like a game because you’re not really looking to win anything.

Social Constructionist

According to our text the social constructionist perspective is when people use communication tools from their culture. This perspective makes it clear on how the culture you are brought up in influences your communication. One thing that I noticed that we talk about in our culture that others may not be an issue in other cultures is how we emphasize the importance of the money you make with your success.  I believe we focus on wealth to make us happy and feel successful. In other cultures, they us other forms to show their success and not with money!

Defend Yourself

The one concept that I found interesting about this week’s reading was about how the Sophists came about.  Sophists were teachers who were professional speakers.  For many years Greek had a ban on professional lawyers and so the Greek people had to defend themselves and come up with their own evidence to win their case. That’s when sophists came up with the idea to advertise their services to people who needed help in court. You still had to defend yourself they would just help you write up a persuasive speech to the courts.

I think this is awesome, in this time you had to use the resources that you could. So basically you were getting outside help to state your case. I mean its word against word with whatever evidence you could to win your case. It makes me wonder how many cases actually won against the court system when you had to defend yourself without help from someone who knows the law regulations and the proper way to defend a case. 

Orator's With Good Morals

Greeks believed that if you were an orator you had to be morally good. I do agree with that, if someone you want to follow or elect (ex. President) doesn’t have the morals that you believe are right for your wellbeing why listen or agree with them? I do believe this is a connection to goodness, truth, and public communication. You do want someone who is speaking a speech to give the truth and speaking from the goodness of their heart.

With my example of a president, you want to believe everything they’re giving a speech about. If a president is promising your country and the people things that can help everyone you want them to deliver. Speeches are a way for the president to get others involved and their way of communicating with the public.

In my opinion, the Greeks believed in the speeches of the orators and it was only right that if an orator was going to speak to them that their morals were good. If we had that option we would be able to weed out the ones who weren’t giving speeches that were truth.