chapter 5 question 3

One thing I found interesting was the discussion surrounding cultural difference when it comes to concepts of time. One sees this difference when traveling. I go to Mexico and the Caribbean almost every year and there is a more laid back approach to timeliness. I think of it more of an approximation. More often than not 3 o'clock means 3:15 or 3:30. Westerners are viewed as high strung when it comes to our obsession with timeliness. It's a long running joke among my friends, many of whom people of color, that “we” have our own way of looking at time that is different than the dominant culture. I think that perspective is kind of true and can be funny unless one is waiting for a chronically late person, one of my personal pet peeves.

chapter 5 question 2

One thing that comes to mind is the American practice of looking people in the eye when expressing oneself. Overall I tend to look people in the eye because I was raised in this country. But I know in other countries this is deemed as inappropriate and potentially disrespectful especially if one is of a lower social standing than the person one is addressing. American take not looking someone in the eye as dishonesty while other cultures consider it a respectful means of communication. In this country touching someone who is talking to is deemed inappropriate whereas in other country this type of gesturing is okay. One other thing came to mind as I was typing which is the practice of allowing personal space when talking with people. When I was in the Caribbean I noticed that many people would get into my personal space, 18 inches or closer, which was a bit disconcerting. I had to remind myself that different cultures have different norms.

chapter 5 question 1

I remember dating this guy I really liked, we'll call him Andrew. I'm a verbal person; if I'm asked a question I'll respond to it thoroughly or I'll decline to answer but I'll verbalize that. When things were on the decline in our relationship his responses to any inquiries were either tepid or non-committal. Maybe because it was because I'm an optimist or maybe it was because at that point in my life I wasn't very good at reading people's non verbal communication but I didn't know that he was in the process of breaking up with me until I could no longer get in touch with him. I didn't recognize his unwillingness to verbalize certain feelings as a means of communication. I thought it cowardly of him to not simply say something which I guess he did but not verbally. It taught me a valuable lesson in regards to understanding non verbal communication of people when compared to their base line behavior. Andrew's evasiveness was marked by fidgeting which is one means of evaluating someone's message. Overall Andrew was communicative but when it came to making the decision to break up he used non verbal communication to communicate this.

chapter 3/4 question 1

I don't think its possible to perceive others without judging or categorizing them. From my perspective that goes against the basic nature of man. Whenever I meet someone for the first time, I notice diction and physical characteristics. Those things help me make sense of who they might be. For example, if the person is clearly homeless, I might be a bit more guarded in what I talk about and even if the conversation went well, I wouldn't ask to meet up for coffee the following week. I think that evaluating and categorizing helps provide some context as to the type of person they might be. I think it important to realize one's biases before creating fully formed feelings one way or another about someone. And I also think a little compassion and understanding helps as well. For example, if I come across someone who doesn't speak English well it's helpful to give them the benefit of the doubt that they would like to have a better command of the English language, sense it is the official language of this country, but there may be a good reason they do not speak as well as I think they should. But more importantly, that does not make them less than as a person nor does it make them less intelligent. I've traveled a lot and no one enjoys having a poor command of the dominant language.

chapter 3/4 question 2

One concept I found quite interesting was the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis that the nature of our language affects the nature of our thought. I was thinking specifically about the concepts of linguistic determinism and linguistic relativity as applied to people for whom English is not their 1st language. I have a love/hate relationship with the literalism of the English language. For those of other cultures or ethnicities who speak English, it stands to reason there are thoroughly American ideas that they may understand linguistically, but can be difficult to grasp conceptually because they do not really understand the context of the idea. I think of the expression it's as American as apple pie. One might understand the sentence but there can be a gap in understanding the cultural context of the expression.

question2/chapters 3&4

There are no innate characteristics that make men and women use language differently but rather the social construct, gender, plays an important role in the different use of language among men and women. Overall women and men are socialized in ways that have a real impact on the language used by each group. If the stereotypical man is self assured, aggressive and competitive, women are the opposite: passive and group oriented. This in turn has an impact on the language choices of each group and the social dynamics found among the groups. The example used in the text suggests that girls playing with one another place emphasis upon everyone getting a turn and a fairly non competitive environment whereas when boys play the group infrequently suggest fair play for everyone and is generally involved in competitive type sports. The gendered language difference between men and women is exemplified by a women's willingness to reach out and ask for help when lost whereas many men maintain an independent stance and try to find their way without asking someone for help. Oftentimes women will ask more descriptive details from an encounter whereas men are at a loss because they did not notice the details being asked of them.