Not only is communication important for the success of any relationship, but the lack of it can absolutely ruin a relationship. The repercussions of poor communication include feelings of betrayal, fast propagating distrust, misinterpretation of signals and events, accumulation of problems, willing self-isolation, and the deterioration of relationships.
Communication is an excellent means by which all involved parties can work on ailing relationships. About Communication skills” Everyone communicates with someone. It is a function that one learns to do as one travels through life. Part of the communication process involves using language.
However, language in itself also has its own way of functioning. As Ronald B. Adler and Neil Towne put it, language “has its own unique style that distinguishes it from others” Looking Out/Looking In: Ninth Edition 221. It is something that encompasses the use of devices as formality and informality; precision and vagueness; and brevity and detail.
And in terms of verbal communication styles as it pertains to differences among various nations, it is something that may cause miscommunication due to the variable approaches in directness, succinctness, and formality. Insofar as the paper is concerned, topics to be covered include a discussion of low- and high-context cultures, the elaborateness or succinctness of the culture’s language, and additionally its formality or informality, including some suggestions on how to communicate with people who may have a communication style that varies from one’s own.First, let one consider the idea of low- and high-context communication. These two terms differentiate the two ways in which a certain culture may communicate.
As defined by the article entitled “High Context/Low Context Communication” published on the internet by About. com, low-context communication is that system “in which the speaker sends a very direct and explicit verbal message.Conversely, where high-context communication is the system “in which the speaker expects the listener to interpret his intended meaning not only from the verbal message but also from the context of the conversation and other non-verbal channels”
To put things in perspective, consider a comparison among culturally diverse Americans that Marcelle E. DuPraw and Marya Axner speak of in their essay “Toward a More Perfect Union in an Age of Diversity: Working on Common Cross-cultural Communication Challenges. “They say that some white Americans typically consider raised voices to be a sign that a fight has begun, while some black, Jewish and Italian Americans often feel that an increase in volume is a sign of an exciting conversation among friends. Thus, some white Americans may react with greater alarm to a loud discussion than would members of some American ethnic or non-white racial groups. In the example, although not between one in this case, American culture or nationality and another, one is still able to see a difference in communication styles.
Here, the white American considers raised voices as a sign indicating that a fight has begun because his tendency is to come to conclusions that are derived from what he is hearing and what is literally occurring—a rise in voice levels—because the person is part of a low-context culture that, as said by the School Health*Culture Zone website, uses “language to convey a precise message,” and that additionally, that for them “words are the message” “Intercultural Communication & Cultural Competence”
For the other ethnic groups that the example talks about, because those people have a cultural heritage background that is rooted in high context communication—one that values language as a means to sustain society by deriving meaning through context—it is not really an issue. For them, based on their contextual interpretation, they do not see the rise in voice volume as an indicator that a fight has begun. Also, consider DuPraw and Axner’s words about different attitudes toward disclosure:In some cultures, it is not appropriate to be frank about emotions, about the reasons behind a conflict or a misunderstanding, or about personal information.
Keep this in mind when you are in a dialogue or when you are working with others. When you are dealing with a conflict, be mindful that people may differ in what they feel comfortable revealing. Questions that may seem natural to you
- What was the conflict about?
- What was your role in the conflict?
- What was the sequence of events?
The variation among cultures in attitudes toward disclosure is also something to consider before you conclude that you have an accurate reading of the view, experiences, and goals of the people with whom you are working.
Here, they touch on the idea that different cultures, depending on whether they are functioning in a low- or high-context system, will also accordingly have lower or higher levels of disclosure.The importance in understanding this context lies in the ability of a person to be better able to work with other cultures and to promote the creation of partnerships/friendships that are based on mutual respect. With one’s knowledge of such a factor as this that can possibly hinder communication, one is able to help neutralize the possible barrier that may arise. Next, let one consider the idea of elaborateness or succinctness of a culture’s language.
For these people, in cases like ambiguous social situations where the American’s choice is find something to talk about, the solution for them is to remain quiet. Consequently, it is easy to see that with this added possibility in difference in communication styles, how easy it could be to miscommunicate.
The reason for this is so that cultural competence can allow for the understanding of similarities and differences that can lessen miscommunication and misunderstanding and have it instead lead to cultural insight. Lastly, consider the business of the idea of formality and informality. Consider what Adler and Towne say about this third aspect of differences in styles of communication:The informal approach that characterizes relationships in countries like the United States, Canada, and Australia and the Scandinavian countries is quite different from the great concern for using proper speech in many parts of Asia and Africa. Formality isn’t so much a matter of using correct grammar as of defining social position.
In Korea, for example, the language reflects the Confucian system of relational hierarchies. It has special vocabularies for different sexes, for different levels of social status, for different degrees of intimacy, and for different types of social occasions.For example, there are different degrees of formality for speaking with old friends, nonacquaintances whose background one knows, and complete strangers. One sign of being a learned person in Korea is the ability to use language that recognizes these relational distinctions.
When you contrast these sorts of distinctions with the casual friendliness many North Americans use even when talking with complete strangers, it’s easy to see how a Korean might view communicators in the United States as boorish, and how an American might see Koreans as stiff and unfriendly. Here, the authors clearly share the thought that formality clearly can also be a hindrance in communicating if not recognized.
For example, if an American who is used to casualness meets an Argentinean who is used to formal, British mannerisms, then the first encounter probably will not be a very pleasant, communicative one. However, if either one preferably both are aware of the difference in verbal communication styles, then both can better come to accept that each is acting according to the rules each has been raised with and can thus productively continue from there.
So what exactly is the point? Why even write a research paper dealing with the various styles of verbal communication? What real importance does it have for the individual and the greater society? The answers to these questions lies in the fundamental purpose in studying communication to learn how to better interact with others, realizing and respecting similarities and differences so that a society of friendship and camaraderie is promoted and kept.Or alternatively, as the article from queendom. com entitled “About Communication Skills” states, that “the real core of true communication is understanding where the other person is coming from” Moreover, that “the key to communication is more to listen to what the other person is saying then it is to flood him/her with who you are, what you want, and how you feel,” and to remember that “the ultimate goal of communication is most often compromise”.
Until each person, as individuals, realizes the sheer power of being knowledgeable in many subjects and facets of life, in this case dealing with verbal communication and positively applying it, will everyone be able to eventually reach a state of true acceptance and respect for himself and others. It is unbelievably essential that one strives for a better understanding of those people with whom one interacts because ultimately, they are those people who shape and mold one’s character and allows one to better understand oneself.
