Foundations of Communication

THE FUNCTIONS OF LANGUAGE

Functions of Language

    • Instrumental Function – Helps you get what you want to express your needs.  For example: “I’d like a piece of pepperoni pizza, please.”
    • Regulatory Function – Control the actions of others.  Please line up in an orderly fashion.”
    • Informative Function – Provide information to others. For example: Giving directions to a passerby.
    • Persuasive Function – Change someone’s views. For example A campaign ad or a political debate.
    • Relational Function – To establish, define and maintain relationships. Example: Small talk
    • Imaginative Function – To delight or entertainer the speaker and/or listener. Example: Reciting poetry or singing songs.
    • Ritualistic Function – To meet a social convention. Example: Praying in church or delivering a commencement address.
    • Expressive Function – To state personal feelings, attitudes, or thoughts. Example: “I love that you always think of me.”
    • Interpretative Functions
    • Control function
    • Remembering and Thinking
    • Social Functions
    • Creative Functions.

Function # 1. Expressive and Communicative Functions:

The most basic function of language as we can guess is that of the expressive function, an attempt to express a sudden change of state, fear, delight, pain or confusion. Whatever it is, such an expression is not a deliberate, conscious expression, but a spontaneous, immediate response not directed towards any other object.Incidentally, in many cases this also serves as a communication to other members of the group or species, particularly in situations of danger. Most probably, these functions are automatic instinctual functions and found in lower organisms also. However, at the human level, the communicative role assumes more crucial importance

Function # 2. Interpretative Functions:

It may be seen that when a particular occurrence or expression serves as a stimulus to others it also serves a function of becoming aware of interpreting a particular situation. Thus, the cry of one animal in the face of danger is interpreted by other members of the species. The interpretative function is very obvious at the human level. The interpretative function serves to restore a state of cognitive equilibrium. While the stimulus itself creates a condition of uncertainty or novelty, the interpretation serves to clarify the situation and restore the equilibrium. Such an interpretation helps to place the information in an appropriate position or slot in one’s cognitive world.

Thus, when an offspring gets separated from the mother and suddenly finds her again the sound that may be made is different from the one that would have been made if a strange animal is seen. The sounds on the two occasions may be phonetically similar, but there is a difference in the meanings of the two sounds meaning in a very elementary sense.

One may question whether one can attribute qualities like meaning, cognition, etc. to animals. But one may also ask why not? Human bigotry particularly, that of the social scientists have prevented them from being objective and honest. Thus, the second major function of the language is to help the organism to interpret and organize cognitive experiences and position them in one’s cognitive world.

Function # 3. Control Function:

When one talks of the function of control, there emerges a social dimension apart from the individual dimension. Gradually, as associations get established between certain states of existence and a stimulus on the one hand and certain sounds, there results in reproducibility of a reaction. Thus, the child cries when he is hungry or suffering from pain. This cry, in turn, makes the mother, or even the animal mother to rush and help. Here is the beginning of control.

The cry brings the mother’s attention and hope, and in later years the attention of those who are dear and close and those who are in a position to support. This is the first experience of mastering the environment and ability to control. Here it may be seen that at simple levels, this control function may not be deliberate and conscious, but as one grows and the environment becomes more organized, the control function of language becomes more and more central.

All of us feel comfortable to talk to a person if we know his name. Whenever we meet a familiar face, we feel comfortable if we can remember his name. The importance of words, slogans, and ‘clarion calls’ in controlling the people and mob is too well-known to need any extensive discussion.

Function # 4. The Functions of Remembering and Thinking:

Imagine our being able to think and remember without the use of words. It is almost impossible to recall or remember or think without the use of words and therefore, language. It is language, which helps us to encode experiences, store them and retrieve and decode. It is language, which helps us to translate experiences into thought and engage in processes of different types.

Function # 5. The Discovery of One’s Name:

One of the important milestones in the development of the child is the discovery that he or she has a name and, this is the beginning of the sense of self- identity which leads to feelings like me, mine, others, not me, etc. The discovery of one’s name plays a very crucial role in the overall psychological development of the individual.

It is the beginning of self-identity, and an attempt to look at oneself as an object. It is this which essentially makes for a difference between the human organism and the non-human organism and between a very young child and an adult and mentally disturbed adult.

This issue of formation of self-concept and self-identity has been examined in greater detail elsewhere but the important point to remember is the very critical role played by language in the development of the self and overall psychological development.

Function # 6. Social Functions of Language:

In addition to these individual functions, language performs a very impor­tant social function. While promoting a sense of personal identity language also serves to develop a sense of social identity, a sense of belongingness to a particular group, marking out different degrees of social proximity and distance.

All of us belong to social groups speaking the same language. Similarly, the national anthem which is nothing but a set of words creates and maintains a sense of social identity. However, sometimes, this sense of social identity if it is very narrow, can result in social conflicts and confrontations between different groups.

Function # 7. Creative Functions:

Language plays a very crucial role in imaginative and creative activity. Is it possible to think of writing a novel or poetry without language? Language, then not only helps us to control and regulate our cognitions but also enables us to break free and engage in creative imagination. Here again, paradoxically, language also contributes to the emergence of very ‘creative’ delusions and belief systems in the mentally ill.

On the whole, one can see the very critical and crucial role played ‘by language in our life. It is perhaps, impossible to think of any place or situation in life where one can function without the help of language. Apart from the common functions of expression and communication, the psychological and social functions played by language are very crucial and are becoming more and more important in today’s world.

This discussion of the functions of languages is rather brief and has been attempted only to highlight the major functions. Perhaps, one can highlight many more functions of language. No wonder, freedom of speech is regarded as the most fundamental right.

<

Trey Gowdy Fox News Spygate

I am going to write more about this.  This is just a placeholder.

 

REP. TREY GOWDY, R—S.C., CHAIRMAN, HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE: I think there are two things important to understand. Number one, the source of President Trump’s frustration. Brennan say he should be in the dustbin of history. Comey said impeachment is too good of a remedy. Clapper doesn’t like him, Loretta Lynch, said call it a matter, not an investigation.

Schiff said he had evidence of collusion before we even began the investigation, and 60 Democrats have voted to impeach him before Bob Mueller has come up with a single solitary finding. That’s what’s got him frustrated.

What should have him hearten is the fact that Chris Wray, Rod Rosenstein, and all the senior folks at DOJ now were all Trump appointees. So, here is what’s fair to ask, what did the FBI do? When did they do it? What was the factual predicate upon which they took whatever actions they took and against whom were they directed?

But remember, Martha, it was President Trump, himself who said, number one, “I didn’t collude with the Russia but if anyone connected with my campaign did, I want the FBI to find that out.” It looks to me like the FBI was doing what President Trump said I want you to do, find it out. He is not the target. So, when Schiff and others don’t make that clear, they’re doing the disservice to our fellow citizens. He is not the target.

MACCALLUM: But this raises the question that the president raised in this — in this one of those tweets, there were a lot of them. In which we talked about quite a bit here last week, is if that were the case, why didn’t they give him a little briefing?

So, here is what we found out. You know, we do have somebody who asked some questions of George Papadopoulos. We do have somebody who’s asked questions of Carter Page. Here’s what you need to know.

GOWDY: I think, defensive briefings are done a lot. And why the Comey FBI didn’t do it? I don’t know, but Chris Wray and Rod Rosenstein have at least made it clear to us, Donald Trump was never the target of the investigation. He is not the current target of the investigation. Now, keep in mind that can all change depending on what a witness says.

But as of now, I think Chris Wray and Rod Rosenstein are stunned whenever people think Trump is the target of their investigation. I’ll leave it up to them how to brief the president, or how to brief his lawyers.

MACCALLUM: Was that point of view that you’re talking about right now, was that strengthened when you went into this briefing last week?

GOWDY: Yes, I am — I am even more convinced that the FBI did exactly what my fellow citizens would want them to do when they got the information they got. And that it has nothing to do with Donald Trump.

MACCALLUM: All right. So, given the things that were over here on your right hand, all the frustrations, do you think it’s problematic the way the president has — is tweeting about this all the time? Because he feels like he needs to get — he needs to vent. He’s got to get his message out there. Is it legally problematic in your mind what he is doing?

GOWDY: I think any time you create prior statements, you give Mueller or other folks a chance to question you on them and ask what was your factual basis, why did you say that? The president should have access to the best legal minds in the country. And I think he should take advantage of those. And he has got some really good communicators that are on his staff and at his — at his call. If I were his lawyer, and I never will be, I would tell him to rely on his lawyers and his comes folks.

MACCALLUM: All right, here is one of them, Rudy Giuliani, speaking with Bill Hemmer over the holiday weekend. Watch this.

BILL HEMMER, FOX NEWS CO-ANCHOR: What’s wrong with the government trying to figure out what Russia was up to?

RUDY GIULIANI, ATTORNEY TO PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Nothing wrong with the government doing that. Everything wrong with the government spying on a candidate of the opposition party, that’s a Watergate, a spy gate. I mean, and without any warning to him. And now, to compound that, to make it into a criminal investigation bill? That’s why this is a rigged investigation.

GOWDY: There are two things wrong with what the former U.S. attorney said. Number one, no one knows whether this is a criminal investigation. Mueller was told to do a counterintelligence investigation into what Russia did. And number two, President Trump himself in the Comey memos said if anyone connected with my campaign was working with Russia, I want you to investigate it.

And it sounds to me like that is exactly what the FBI did, I think when the president finds out what happened, he is going to be not just fine, he’s going to be glad that we have an FBI that took seriously what they heard. He was never the target, Russia is the target.

MACCALLUM: So, it sounds to me as if you would advise him that there’s no problem with him sitting down with Robert Muller.

GOWDY: Oh, absolutely no. I have always said, I think you want to sit down with Bob Mueller. You’ve told us publicly there was no collusion, you’ve told us publicly there was no obstruction. Say in private what you’ve said publicly, limit the scope to exactly what the — what the Mueller memo is, but if he were my client and I’d say if you’ve done nothing wrong, then you need to sit down and tell Mueller what you know.

MACCALLUM: you know, we had — there was one judge who said that the scope was all over the place. Do you feel comfortable with the scope of this investigation, and do you feel like your committee has been shared with to the extent that, that exists, that the scope exists?

GOWDY: I’m not sure what the scope of the Mueller probe is. But I know this, Rosenstein is the one who created the memo.

MACCALLUM: Right.

GOWDY: It’s not Bob Mueller’s fault.

MACCALLUM: Have you ever seen that memo?

GOWDY: I have — I have. I’ve seen the memo that you’ve seen also. The other memo some of my colleagues want to see is a more narrow admission.

MACCALLUM: I want to basically say, investigate Russia and all — anything related to it.

GOWDY: And as a frontal way line at the end, and of course, if there’s any criminality look at that to me. We run towards the criminality, but I would think everyone would want to know what Russia did. So, I mean, with whom if anyone is the second part? The first question is what did Russia do?

MACCALLUM: All right, we’ll see. Trey, thank you very much.

Brian Kemp Provides More Evidence Conservatives Cannot Govern Effectively

Brian Kemp provides more evidence Conservatives cannot govern.

Apparently Secretary of State Brian Kemp is attacking another Conservative group called Citizens for Georgia’s Furture. Conservatives have to attack everyone.  They trust no one.  No wonder our government is dysfunctional.  It is, not surprisingly, being run by Conservatives.

The latest evidence is a report from Greg Bluestein, AJC Political Insider, that Kemp assailed  “secret donors and shady tactics” from Citizens for Georgia’s Future in a speech at the Cobb County GOP over the weekend.  Kemp was upset that Citizens for Georgia’s Future said they ” could” launch ads to try to influence the race for the No. 2 spot in the May 22 primary.

Kemp is reported as having said:

  • “That’s typical, pathetic, insider politics if you ask me,” ,
  • “I fully expect” to be targeted by pro-Cagle forces in the next two weeks.
  • He said the group will criticize his record as Georgia’s top elections official and question his experience in the private sector.
  • “Cagle’s team will attempt to stop the bleeding he’s experiencing by lashing out at me,”
  • “But you’re smarter than that.”

Just as a reminder we are filling up two big Kemp evidence buckets: 1) Kemp’s role in data breaches and disclosures, 2) The lawsuit claiming he lied to make $500,00.0.

Again, this is evidence that Conservatives just cannot govern.  They don’t trust anyone.

In these critical times for our communities, one would think the GOP would be talking about how to solve the issues.  Particularly how to solve the issues of divisiveness in our communities.  Instead of walking the walk of improved civility they chose to attack in relatively mean ways.  Using phrases like “secret donors and shady tactics” and “That’s typical, pathetic, insider politics if you ask me.”

It is normal political communication to criticize your opponent.  But, Kemp, Cagle, and most Conservatives have raised criticism to a hateful art.

We know they don’t like government.  This is evidence for a possible reason they hate government.  Perhaps they hate everyone that is not them.

Evidence Karen Handel is Not Bipartisan

Evidence Karen Handel is not bipartisan can be found in a Lugar Center and Georgetown University’s McCourt School of Public Policy report.

The study found Karen Handel to be one of the least bipartisan House lawmakers. She was 435 out of 438 in terms of her ability to reach out to others that think differently.

This is important because in my humble perspective, since she only won the District 51% to 48%, she should be more bipartisan.

This evidence suggests Handel is not the right candidate for the 6th District.

Click here to see the report if your interested in the details

Of course, selective perception, confirmation bias, and motivated reasoning affects what conclusions one can draw from the evidence.  Here is a sampling of the conclusions one might draw, given your tribal leanings.

  • Dems would conclude:
    • Handel is indeed a Trump Tool and will do whatever Trump supporters tell her to do.
    • She believes compromising with anyone to her left is a bad thing, not because of any reasonable policy differences, but simply because leftists are bad and you must not compromise with them.
  • Trump Supporters would conclude:
    • It does not matter what the evidence is because Georgetown is a liberal academic center.  Anything they put out is biased, and anything biased from the left has to be completely ignored.
    • Even it is true, even if, in fact, Handel is not bipartisan, well that is a good thing.  We don’t want compromise with the Lefties because they are destroying America and we need to make America Great again, like in the 1950s.  For Trump supporters the ends justifies the means.  Winning is the goal.  Getting their agenda is the goal.  Compromise is not the goal.  If fact, they believe compromise got us to this terrible place to begin with.
  • Libertarians would conclude:
    • The faction within Libertarians that believe in individual freedom and understand Hayek’s writings on Central Planners, would probably agree the evidence is valid and Handel is not bipartisan.  And that should disqualify her in their eyes.  (This faction would follow James Maddison’s advice in Federalist Paper #10 about “factions.”  Madison wrote, “By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.”   I would think Libertarians would want bipartisanship.
    • The racists faction within the larger Libertarian community, who don’t want the Government giving money to blacks, or having blacks in government, would say that Handel lack of bipartisanship is a badge of honor.  The ends justifies the means and Handel should not compromise with those lefties, commies, socialists atheists.

Looking at the report we, the Georgia 6th District, think the report is credible enough to believe it is correct.  We conclude Karen Handel is not “bipartisan.”  And we further think this is a negative.  We think our Representative should have the 6th District top of mind, not GOP, Dem, or Libertarian.

If there are Trump Supporters or Karen Handel supporters that want to help provide evidence that either Karen is bipartisan and the report is wrong, or it is better that she is not bipartisan, here are our questions for Karen Handel:

  • Does she consider the report valid?  Would she say that they missed all the bipartisan things she has done?
  • Would she consider herself bipartisan?  If so, what examples can she provide?
  • What has she done in our Community to reach out the 48% that voter against her?
  • Does she think the ends justify the means?

Of course getting honest answers from Karen, her supporters or Trump Supporters, is not likely.  She/they would lie about this stuff.  She is a politician, after all.

Clowns in the Press Embrace Truthiness Over Truth Because They Can – TheResurgent.com

If your friends are telling you he is an idiot, why is he performing well, where it counts? I think there are too many who rush to judge the President on style, or personality, when they should be judging him on performance. Is it just that many are too caught up in playing like the media and everyone is now their own pundit of personality? I guess many live in the tweet domain of life and choose not to live their own lives. I think most Americans still just want to go and do their jobs, entertain themselves and their family, play with the dog, go out to eat, exercise and go to sleep at night, rather than worry over what the President says on Twitter. I doubt I’ll be buying that book about how crazy he is, or let it bother me. There is just too much else to do. Me? I’m re-grouting the floor in one of the bathrooms, this morning. I’d rather be talking about what the government shouldn’t be doing, than to concern myself, further, with what some gossip novelist says, who can’t be trusted to write or bother with anything, more than gossip.

Source: Clowns in the Press Embrace Truthiness Over Truth Because They Can – TheResurgent.com