Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Unit 5: Oral Communication. Elements and Rules. Routines and Formulaic Language. Oral Communication Strategies
Unit 5: Oral Communication. Elements and Rules. Routines and Formulaic Language. Oral Communication Strategies
1. ORAL COMMUNICATION
Semiotics is the study of different symbols and signs as means of communication. It is essential to
look into oral communication within the wider perspective of the different signs, symbols and modes
of communication human beings use. Although oral communication is primary and distinctive to all
human beings, especially in the use of the verbal code and its realization in speech and writing, we
must be aware that there are other means whereby human beings communicate.
We shall therefore attempt to undercome the study of oral communication bearing in mind that
communication among human beings is mainly realized by means of the verbal code (Language)
through oral auditory signs. The use of oral auditory channel is primary in human beings although
there are other channels or modes of communication such as the visual (writing). Nevertheless, this
use of language through the oral tract (speech) as we shall see, will be aided by other modes or
channels mainly through the use of the so called non-verbal communication (body language).
Oral communication can therefore be defined as a two-way process in which both speaker and hearer
must be present in the same situational context, unless we talk about special cases of oral
communication such as telephone conversations. We are therefore talking about an interactive
situation directly related and dependent on the communicative function and the speech situation
involving speaker and hearer.
In a communicative event both speaker and hearer perform highly complex processes. They must
encode and decode messages under time pressure always bearing in mind their purposes for
interaction. The oral message unlike the written language where the sentences are carefully structured
and linked together, is often characterized by incomplete and sometimes ungrammatical utterances,
and by frequent repetitions and overlapping.
The apparently chaotic oral message would be difficult to interpret as M. Geddes (Johnson, K et al
1981:70) points out, without the help of the prosodic features such as stress, rhythm, intonation,
pitch, etc., which as we shall see are essential aspects of oral communication.
2
1. 1. SPOKEN vs. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
Now let's study the main differences between writing and speech. The most obvious is the contrast in
physical form. Speech uses phonic substance typically in the form of air-pressure movements,
whereas writing uses graphic substance, typically in the form of marks on a surface. As writing can
only occasionally be thought of as an interaction, we can establish the following points of contrast:
1) The permanence of writing allows repeated reading and close analysis. The spontaneity and
rapidity of speech minimizes the chance of complex pre-planning, and promotes features that assist
speakers to think standing up.
2) The participants in written interaction cannot usually see each other, so they cannot make clear
what they mean. However, in speech interactions feedback is possible.
3) The majority of graphic features presents a system of contrasts that has no speech equivalent. Many
genres of written language, such as tables, graphs and complex formulae, cannot be conveyed by
reading aloud.
4) Some contractions may only be found in writing, others only occur in speech, such as in slang and
swear words.
5) Finally we can say that writing tends to be more formal and so it is more likely to provide the
standard that society values. Its performance provides it with a special status.
1.1. 1. Supremacy of speech
Speech was traditionally the original object of Linguistics, while writing was only considered a means
of representing the primary form, based on sounds which were the first manifestation of human
communication. This consideration derives mainly from the studies of Ferdinand de Saussure, who
did not consider writing worthy of synchronic study, because it had not independent life, its only
function was to represent the system of sounds which form a language.
Saussure distinguishes three different kinds of linguistic objects: the language system (La langue),
speech (la parole) and writing. The real object of study for him was the abstract system of signs
which find their expression in the actual examples of speech used by people (la parole). But neither
speech nor writing can be the object of linguistic study because speech is transient, unpredictable and
completely context dependant, while writing is not really part of the language, but a means of making
manifest the sound system.
On the same line as Saussure is Leonard Bloomfield, who regarded writing simply as a means of
recording language like a 'phonograph' or a 'radio'. His arguments for the primacy of speech are that
it precedes writing chronologically in both the history of people and a person.
Noam Chomsky, considers writing more in the context of memory processing limitations, to be used
when the sentence is too complicated and can only be understood with the aid of additional memory
(writing).
3
1.1.2. Writing and speech on the same level
In contrast with the linguists who consider writing as only a representation of speech, which is the
genuine expression of Language and the only object of study, some others have given writing
independence from speech; while accepting the existence of an underlying language system.
Josef Vachek supported the idea that the written form should be at the centre of linguistic study. He
thinks that speech and writing have complementary language functions. The spoken form carries out
dynamic functions, and the written form static ones and the difference in function makes it impossible
to say the same thing in a different medium.
M. A. K. Halliday, in his book Spoken and Written Language, follows this same line. He sees them
both as emanating from the same source, the underlying language system, and he focuses on their
differences in form and function. He considers the development of writing systems as the product of
changes in society, so the functions of writing were not intended to replace those of speech; speech
and writing serve different purposes and this leads to structural differences.
1.1.3. Supremacy of writing
Brian Stock in The Implications of Literacy suggests that the advent of writing in oral cultures can
break their patterns of behaviour, while Linnea C. Ehri suggests that the influence of print on our
language perception is similar to that of calendars and clocks on our perception of time.
In general, what lies at the back of all these ideas is that writing is the necessary prerequisite for
analytic thought, and that logical thought can only be carried out in literate societies; but, though this
was an important tendency, it seems to have passed in favour of the more logical idea that the need
for literacy is part of the development of a society which puts it into contact with new experiences
and modes of thought.
Today, a compromise exists whereby vocal and visual language are generally considered as two
equal but very different means of communication. However, any study of language must first consider
speech.