PSY409b November 28, 2006
Conversational Strategy
By Paige Kim

 

Instructions for this activity are found at:
http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy25/g25-oral1.htm
Instructor: Dr. Leon James  

 

Tannen, Deborah (1996) Gender & Discourse (New York, N.Y.:  Oxford University Press Inc.) Reviewing pages 161-174

I.               Pragmatic Identity

a.    Is seen when the partners use similar devices to similar ends

                                                     i.     A common tactic is suggesting that a painful subject not be discussed

II.              Pragmatic Synonymy

a.    Avoiding confrontation

                                                     i.     Deflects confrontation by excessive verbiage (Example of Marianne in book)

                                                      ii.     Johan and Marianne collude not to communicate by using different pragmatic devices

b.    Differences of Johan and Marianne

                                                     i.     Johan expresses his sadness by talking in abstract generalizations

                                                      ii.     Marianne expresses her sadness by talking simply and directly about her own feelings

                                                        iii.     Both refuse to “hear” the other’s message

III.            Pragmatic Homonymy

a.    Use the same surface devises to achieve different ends

b.    Johan and Marianne employ barrages of questions 

                                                     i.     This underlying effect is creating a distance between the two because they are avoiding their problems

IV.            Marianne and Johan’s strategy

a.    Marianne

                                                     i.     Asks twice as many questions

                                                      ii.     Asks real questions

                                                        iii.     Uses indirect device of offering assistance in question form

b.    Johan

                                                     i.     Asks rhetorical and superficially designed questions

                                                      ii.     Asks questions to seek information about his belongings

V.             Conclusion

a.    These findings can form a general hypothesis

                                                     i.     Couples who are intermeshed like Johan and Marianne can neither live together compatible or separate cleanly

                                                      ii.     A truly harmonious relationship would “entail matchings at all levels”

                                                        iii.     A discordant one would have conflict at all levels

 

 

 Related Links:

 

1.  Avoiding confrontation

http://www.rnews.com/Story_2004.cfm?ID=24833&rnews_story_type=10&category=10

 

According to this article, women traditionally avoid confrontation.  This is because women are afraid of looking bad.  It also explains how to effectively confront and why it will benefit the woman to engage in confrontation.  I thought this article relates to Tannen’s book because there are obvious gender differences in communication.  In this section she uses an example to show how Johan and Marianne avoid confrontation.  I disagree with this article that women traditionally avoid confrontation.  I think both females and males are guilty of this and avoid confrontation in their own ways whether it be use of excessive verbiage or ignoring the person altogether.  

 

2. Mistakes in conversation

http://www.positivityblog.com/index.php/2006/11/05/do-you-make-these-10-mistakes-in-a-conversation/

 

The topic of asking questions comes up in this section in Tannen’s book.  People use questions in their communication for different purposes (as we have seen in Marianne and Johan’s example).  This article reviews some mistakes people make in communication.  One of these wrongdoings include asking too many questions.  Asking too many questions may make the person feel as if they are being interrogated.  This is an interesting way to look at it.  Some of the other things that the article says are mistakes in communication are not reciprocating, being in the spotlight, and being boring.  Overall, this was an interesting article that gave new ideas to how to be a better communicator.

 

3.  Bridging the communication gap

http://www.microsoft.com/smallbusiness/resources/management/leadership_training/women_vs_men_6_tips_for_bridging_the_communication_gap.mspx

 

This was an interesting article about how women and men should understand how each other talks in business.  This way it will clear the communication gap men and women seem to have.  Although this article relates communication to the workforce, it had similar ideas of why men and women communicate differently.  Some of the reasons it pointed out were that women tend to ask a lot of questions, women tend to use anecdotes while men use metaphors, women are more comfortable talking about their feelings, and women like to hear detailed descriptions while men cut to the chase.  These are all very interesting ideas but as we have learned in class, men should realize that their communication patterns are not helping but rather hurting.  To bridge the communication gap between the genders, men should learn a woman’s conversational style and understand and learn it.

 

My Homepage: http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leon/409bf2006/kim/kim-home.htm

Class Homepage: http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy25/classhome-g25.htm