Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: communicating

Probably Dan and John are both getting close to the mark here (and even
Dewey's ghost-like presence in John's post!).
....

Finally, and most importantly, correct reception requires processing of
the signal as it arrives. In the teaching / learning context, I'd call
this _engagement_ with the material / concepts / ideas / themes, so that
the learner actively recreates his or her personal ownership of these
things - I just felt a rush of cold air and a far-off voice wailing
"constructivism" in the room ;-)

Allen
ooooo
A voice from 'beyond' .... oooo oooo ...and skirl of the pipes... :^)

Actually in Communications, as a discipline with inputs from linguistics
and anthropology, there is something called the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. My
understanding of it is that while the person-on-the-street view of
communications is that meaning is transmitted or received via words,
gestures, or symbols, such a transmission or conduit model does not stand
up well to analysis when languages are comparatively analyzed or when
failures in communication are looked at closely. I think it is safe to say
the hypothesis suggests that not all communications problems can be easily
'chalked up to' failures in transmission and/or failures in reception. On
the other hand the warrant is that this hypothesis is able to describe not
only those communications problems that can, but many which cannot be
explained in terms of the conduit model of communication.

According to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, what seems to better explain what
is seen is a different description of communication. In this explanation
meaning is *not* transmitted via words, gestures or symbols. Instead the
meaning which appears to arise in a listener (reciever in the other model)
is assembled by the listener out of pieces the listener already has which
appear to the listener to fit or be consistent with the sounds, gestures,
symbols used by the speaker. With a sufficient amount of taken-as-shared
common experience and convention and/or luck, the meaning assembled by the
listener results from the listener a response which 'translated' back by
the original speaker subject to the same conditions results in the belief
that they share a common meaning for the original communication. Arriving
at a taken-as-shared meaning is enhanced by negotiation and testing each
other until both people decide they have sufficient feedback to decide so.

In this view, the notions of 'correct' and 'reception' and even to a
certain extent 'ownership' are not particularly useful because they all in
some way can be consistent with 'meaning' as being able to exist in the
communication (words, gestures, symbols).

As can be imagined this explanation would suggest that there is a lot of
room for two people to hold different ideas but believe they are working
with the same ideas and not notice anything to the contrary for quite some
time. It does not rule out that two people might in fact be holding the
same idea, but it suggests that we should not be so sure or quick to
assume. Hence, communicating meaning is not so simple as stating a
definition and then assuming that everyone will be working with the same
meaning for a word.

Is this an example of an exclusively constructivist view? Well, it is
entirely possible for a non-constructivist to work with such a notion of
communication, so one cannot call the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis a
constructivist notion. I'm not an expert and have only read a little by
either person, but I doubt that either Sapir or Whorf could be considered
radical constructivist from their writings. So, no it is not a
'constructivist' view.

On the other hand, I know of a few thoughtful radical constructivists who
find this Sapir-Whorf hypothesis very fitting with their notions about the
nature and origins of human knowing. So, such constructivists might be
seen to agree with the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.

Dewey


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dewey I. Dykstra, Jr. Phone: (208)385-3105
Professor of Physics Dept: (208)385-3775
Department of Physics/SN318 Fax: (208)385-4330
Boise State University dykstrad@varney.idbsu.edu
1910 University Drive Boise Highlanders
Boise, ID 83725-1570 novice piper

"Physical concepts are the free creations of the human mind and
are not, however it may seem, uniquely determined by the external
world."--A. Einstein in The Evolution of Physics with L. Infeld,
1938

"Don't mistake your watermelon for the universe." --K. Amdahl in
There Are No Electrons, 1991.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++