I been thinking about the problems of communication a lot lately. A friend I'm living with currently has aphasia from a stroke which affects his ability to understand speech. We can have conversation, but I have to be very careful to minimize the number of words I use as much as I possibly can without loosing the meaning entirely. But this seems to be the case with most people who DON'T have aphasia. I had a discussion with a friend a few months ago about communication in general and he said I was participating in the decline of communication by "dumbing down" for people which I admitted to doing. I'm having a hard time making up my mind about that. On one hand, it's true that eloquence and complexity is draining out of language at an alarming rate. But are eloquence and complexity over rated? I've been dazzled by the fluent complexity of a good translation of Dostoyevsky and the skill with which the language of words is used to it's fullest, but I also have the growing feeling of what Lao Tzu (ancient master of pithiness) said about more words counting less. Words that add complexity and eloquence often, take the feeling being communicated out of the accessible touchable space and put it behind glass and a fancy frame. Words can be an escape into head oriented intellectuality that somehow separates us from both ourselves and from others with all the fluff of words that detach from the direct expression of simple feelings. But then again, there are ideas, such as the one expressed in the last sentence that I would have a bitch of a time putting in a simple five word sentence. We humans live complex lives and we often need complex expressions of thoughts to handle those complex lives effectively. So it would seem to me that ideally it's best to simplify where possible and practical, but still be able to use long complex sentences when the job calls for it. But that really isn't how we humans tend to operate. I mean I cant think of anyone I know or have EVER known who is really like that to model that style. People seem to be either habitually verbose, or habitually monosyllabic; the middle road is seldom (if ever) traveled. I suspect that the reason is that language skill is one of those use-it-or-lose-it kind of things. At least I know it seems to be for me. After long periods of isolation I tend to find myself struggling for words more often than during periods of a lot of social interaction. If I dumb down, both for the sake of not loosing peoples short attention span and for the sake of more direct and accessible communication, I'm afraid I may end up loosing my ability to communicate in more sophisticated expressions when necessary. What do you think? Is it better to keep honing your language skill at the risk of becoming remote, over-intellectual and overcooked as opposed to being simple and accessible, or is it better to risk not having communication skills when you need them for the sake of keeping it easy and real?
There was a study several years ago by the Massachusetts General Hospital which concluded that Aphasics have an almost uncanny ability to detect when someone is lying There’s something about the way their brains are reconfigured that literally converts them into human lie detector machines Hotwater
I haven't noticed anything being dumbed down, my kids are learning a large vocabulary in school and they use it. If I use a word they don't know in conversation, I explain the meaning, I don't just substitute simpler words. Maybe it's all in where you live.
you are not talking about talking, you are rambling about how intelligent you are. you wont be needing to dumb down any conversation as long you stop thinking about yourself and what you mean to others. the fact you mention lao tze as the master of pithiness is an example of what little consideration you take on what others are saying.
I agree with use 'em or lose 'em.I use the words I know when called for and if they aren't understood,then it's up to the listener to ask or to find out what a particular word means.I guess one could sound pedantic in some cases,but so be it.I know folks that will try to explain an idea or concept---don't have the words to do so and get very upset.Actually,I'm a man of few words but I'll use the ones I have in any given situation.I do not dumb down for anyone--it's patronizng
There is a voice for talking and a voice for writing. And they aren't the same voice. What's appropriate for writing is often pretentious for talking, and what's adequeate for talking is often too simple or boring for writing.
Yeah, blah, blah, blah, rambling, intelligent blah blah Lao Tzu, blah pithiness, blah, blah. Yack, yack, yack. Sorry, I just wasn't about to take the time to read that whole three sentences, but if you can shorten it up a bit I'll see if I can slog through it.
It's actually not so much a vocabulary issue though as an attention span issue. It's also a mindset issue. People like neim hear more than a few short words and they instantly assume the person talking is some pretentious ass. If I really was intelligent I wouldn't have opened my mouth to say more than three words. PS. Sorry for the grumpiness...wasn't directed at you. It was neim that made me feel depressed about human interaction..neim and the rest of the hypocritical hoards.
This is true. I actually would never say what I said in my op verbally the way I wrote it. But even without the literary imbellishments of writing and even using common words, it seems like if you can't get your point accross in fifteen seconds or less, people just start hearing blah, blah, blah, like the grownups in a peanuts cartoon.
