So on the 1st few classes of Human Communication and Public Relations I tried to talk as much crap as possible. And it came to use as I thought.
When these 4 models came out in the 1st chapter, at first it came to me as "this is nonsense", because it is so basic. But then came the realization that this is so unnoticed in reality everyday.
I hope I am right on these concepts:
On Linear Model of Communication, today I told teammate Marcus a lame joke that I would sabotage his post by adding an 'h' to his word 'sitting' or deleting his post alltogether. He chose not to respond. This is Linear Model of Communication, where the relationship is SPEAKER SPEAKS AND LISTENER LISTENS.
What I do not get: Marcus took that joke seriously. Do I look that Joker-ish? "WHY SO SERIOUS?!" (Joker from the movie "Batman: The Dark Knight")
Next is Interactional View of Communication, where the note says: SPEAKER SPEAKS AND LISTENER LISTENS, and the role of listener and speaker switches, and then the now-speaking listener speaks, and the then-speaker listens. This would have happened, if Marcus replied to my taunt by daring me to do it (Of course I won't). So I taunted him and he listened, then it was my turn to listen to his dares. Does this count as Interactional View of Communication?
What I do not get: If I got a weird look as a reply/response, would that still be Interactional View of Communication? You cannot actually "listen" to a weird glance, can you?
Transactional View of Communication: I checked the dictionary and cleared my doubts of "Why interactional is not the same as transactional?".
Interact can mean 1. to act or have an effect on each other or 2. To work together or communicate. And to communicate is to 1. make something known, or 2. to exchange information, ideas and so on with somebody.
Transact is to conduct or carry out business, especially involving two parties.
So maybe I will do some stupid inferencing here and guess that:
1. - Interactional View of Communication may be the speaker telling the listener Topic A but when the role changes, the then-listener will tell the then-speaker a completely different Topic B.
- Transactional View is when the two parties exchange information that is related to each other and it continues, for example two people are exchanging information about Topic C and so I am guessing that
2. - Each party in the Interactional View of Communication will take a longer time to finish their side of the story in one go, while
- In Transactional View, two parties will share their information bit-by-bit on the same topic until both sides are satisfied.
3. And I am guessing that Transactional View of Communication is "a conversation" in common language, and the most desirable and popular, since great chit-chatting and discussing is probably under this category.
What I do not get: If Singh told a joke in the middle of the conversation, would that be him having Linear Model of Communication with us? Only I won't give him weird glances.
Essentials Model
From notes:
This picture explains enough. But I would like to add that this is a great illustration. If the NOISE part gets louder, as you can see the arrows pushing the arrows and other elements outwards, it means that the louder the noise is, the longer the time needed to transfer messages, deliver and recieve message. I guess it is "essential" because of the impossibility of not mentioning "noise" in a conversation. It's either "no noise" or "got noise". I think. OR this model shows the basic and unexemptable elements in communication.
What I do not get: Can the "NOISE" part be replaced by "DISCTRACTION"? I may see the muted video behind you and it takes me some time to focus and deliver or recieve your message completely.
Linear is when I am shouting my piece of mind into your ear.
Interactional View of Communication is long for each speaker's turn.
Transaction View is where you, yak and yak until the topic is renewed.
Essentials Model is made up so you'll know the elements of Communication well.
Total nonsense, I know. I'll stop starting from today. If not I will be the Joker and our lecturer the Batman, and all my lame jokes will be ended by you-know-who and when the hero saves the day, it surely will ruin the villians', if you know what I mean.
References:
"Copyrights":
"Why So Serious?" Joker from "Batman: The Dark Knight"
Picture referenced from Lecturer Murali's class notes. If it came from yet another source: source unknown/ask him.
"Copylefts":
Every other crazy thing that I wrote all belong to ME!!! Muahahaha.
JWCD
No comments:
Post a Comment