Miscommunication

Outline

Introduction

William Lutz's essay "The World of Doublespeak" extricates how information can be misleading and misunderstood. Men and women often do not seem to speak the same language, and people, in general, use confusing words to mislead

Thesis

People often miscommunicate to prevent and conceal thoughts to distort, inflate, mislead, circumvent, deceive and obfuscate.

Body

Point 1

Double-speak is used as a defensive language in politicking.

Point II

It helps some speakers exploit the fragile human psyche to make bad experiences feel good.

Point III

Men often miscommunicate while engaging women at the workplace confusing. Tannen's article indicates that men always work by disregarding people's feelings in the workplace while women strive to maintain equality.

Conclusion

Lutz argues that double-speak used to change or skew opinions irresponsibly is a dangerous type of communication that should be noticed by the public. At the same time, Tannen considers miscommunication among men and women is amusing.

 

Kendal Carey

English 1 (1238)

01/20/2021

 

Miscommunication

 Introduction

There are different forms of miscommunication. People miscommunicate intentionally or unintentionally. William Lutz's essay "The World of Doublespeak" extricates how information can be misleading and misunderstood. The article was meant to educate and enlighten people about the impacts and consequences of double-speak and how it is applied by individuals and organizations to mislead. William Lutz defined double-speak as a "language that pretends to communicate but doesn't." According to Lutz, double-speak makes the negative appear positive, the good seem bad, and the unpleasant appear attractive. Double-speak shifts or avoids responsibility, and it is a language that is at variance with its meaning. People often miscommunicate to prevent and conceal thoughts to distort, inflate, mislead, circumvent, deceive and obfuscate. This often leads to cunning and repulsive utilization of language to communicate with other people.

Double-speak is used as a defensive language in politicking. In this case, speakers pretend to communicate but, essentially, offer nothing. This is not a mistake or a slip of the tongue. Instead, it is a sophisticated and intelligent way of using language and communicating to be defensive and defend themselves. In the political arena and national and public policy matters, double-speak should not be tolerated or accepted. This is because the democracy within government depends on its citizens' active participation, and in case double-speak is used, it can result in resentment and cynicism. Language is power, and the political class has prevailed over it, which means they can control the way people see the world. The political class has mastered the art of knowingly and instinctively using double-speak when, how, where, and to what degree. Whether it comes from politicians, lawyers, businessmen, or any other individual, double-speak helps people cover their track when they generate backlash.

Double-speak helps some speakers exploit the fragile human psyche to make bad experiences feel good. Even though double-speak is a revolving and dishonest practice, it is helpful to other individuals helping them tend to the fragile human psyche. For instance, if a person dies, using the words 'no longer with us,' 'passed away,' or gone to a better place' helps ease the bereaved family. Lutz defined this approach as a euphemism, where words are used to disguise the real meaning helping avoid hurting people's feelings, although other times, it is used to cover up harsh contents and facts. Lutz also discusses inflated language as a form of double-speak where complex forming of phrases are used to speak about an object or a simple subject. This language is used to make people look smart and intelligent than they are. Jargon is also another form of speech that Lutz defines as a 'specialized language of trade and profession.' This can be seen as an advanced versing of inflated language. Even though the layman might not understand this jargon language, its words can be simplified down for each individual to understand. Jargon language is more applicable in lawyers and doctor's profession. Gobbledygook is the last double-speak described by Lutz, characterized by long sentences and big words to confuse people. Gobbledygook is confusing, does not have meaning, and distracts from actual rhetoric.

Deborah Tannen has discussed the same ideology of double-speak in the article "But What Do You Mean?" Tannen's reviews how men and women understand each other in the workplace. Men always care about their leadership, while women care about others feeling when speaking. When women are communicating, they tend to apologize as a way of maintaining an air of equality. Still, when they share with men, they do the opposite because they know men do not apologize. Tannen indicates that men perceive apologies as weak, reaffirming different ways of communicating between men and women. Tannen's indicates that men always work by disregarding people's feelings in the workplace while women strive to maintain equality. Tannen aims to define the variance between men's and women's communication styles. Consequently, she can outline the common misconceptions surrounding men and women communications. For instance, the author observes that women are more receptive to structured and thoughtful communication because they can easily comprehend the contents of the conversation. Whenever issues are systematic, women tend to believe every word the speaker says hence increased credibility. For instance, the application of Tannen's communication grouping gives the readers a better perspective of her knowledge on various forms of communication styles. In other words, words are to be spoken in a certain manner and tone if the women are to comprehend and believe the words that come from the speaker’s mouth. One can consider turn-taking as one of the key aspects needed to create a structured form of conversation.

 Interaction within the workspace environment is normally known for its specified constellate restraints- official frameworks in which people are ranked and can only speak based on their ranks; also men are known to be more outspoken in such surroundings than women. Occasionally external assessments in terms of the pay rise, promotions, and duty designation and performance appraisals force people to socialize constantly. Therefore, the office creates a unique challenge to gender and linguistic investigations. Workplace language is centered on task-related conversations between workmates and other people. According to Tannen, informal communication is important because it entails laid back conversations and enhances the ability of both women and men to work and get immediate results. It is vital to note that informal language should not be made up of sexual or forceful language that would make women uncomfortable and timid. The language should respect the wishes of both male and female genders.

 Both men and women consciously select suitable mechanisms to assist them in the accomplishment of various tasks. This normally occurs while interacting with other people. These selections are created from sociocultural standards. Most sociocultural norms define men's and women's mannerisms and conversation styles. Personal linguistic selections through local socializations trigger these gender standards which in turn demonstrate women and men's identities. Gender framing in this particular context refers to women and men confining the cultural norms to communicate messages they deem suitable to people around them.

 According to Tannen, women take part in give-and-take communication styles. A woman is more likely to make use of her experiences to cement her relationship with other people she is communicating with. Her personal experience enables her to connect or relate with other people. For example, if something is negative she is more likely to refer to her experience as a way of warning others of the impending danger. On the other hand, men who are risk-taking during communication are more likely to make use of accurate occurrences.  For example, women tend to be more responsive towards tonal variation and word choice.  Thus, whenever met with a challenge will tend to revisit negative experiences. As demonstrated through the edit scenario when a person anticipates two or more outcomes, then they are biassed towards women. Therefore, the conversation is organized in a ritual manner that has to combine the thought process with the actual words being uttered at the moment. For instance, a greeting is meant to inform the other person of their wellbeing. After a salutation, it is normal for both men and women normally have various ideas on how to proceed with the conversation. Most of the conversations are well known among women as they are organized to spot emotions and actions. Somehow the actions and emotions should match the actions before a woman can find a conversation to be sincere and unbiased. Therefore in an office setting, women are disadvantaged than men because most of the time women communicate well in an informal setting but in places where women only communicate based on ranks, then, the communication is bound to be irrelevant. Also, workplace communications are one-sided and do not need the incorporation of feelings. Due to the sympathetic nature of women, they might tend to apologize. Sometimes, the empathetic nature of women makes them self-appreciate themselves and also promote teamwork through the creation of conducive communication styles within the workspace.

 In terms of criticism, the nature of women does not allow other people communicating with her to be straight or even harsh with giving criticism. Generally, women are placed as more receptive and sensitive than their fellow men. This is sometimes is termed as soft and ineffective for the sake of coming up with more ways of communicating with people who come into contact with women. Also, women have to be more watchful than men because someone might take advantage of them, unlike men who are always deemed as strong and aloof with the wording and mannerism of the people around them. The ideology and word arrangement of most women and men's conversation depends on ideas and the end objective. Men tend to be more active and aggressive hence make hurried communication between them and other people.

Lutz and Tannen have all demonstrated different forms of communication that are significantly important. They have used the classification method to detail and extricate the intensity of their positions. Tannen looks at how communication between men and women takes them into incidents without being aware of their differences. Tannen reviews this as an unintentional miscommunication while Lutz looks at the intentional one. Lutz indicated that language gives the public a different perspective through jargon and euphemisms. This is reaffirmed by exploring inflated and bureaucratese language. This, according to Lutz, are two hazardous types of double-speak used to change or skew opinions irresponsibly. Double-speak is a dangerous type of communication that should be noticed by the public, while miscommunication among men and women is amusing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

William Lutz. “The World of Doublespeak”

Deborah Tannen. “But What Do You Mean?”