So I'm posting Karen's response to this week's reading because unfortunately, she is unable to post the entry (it seems she doesn't have access to do so):
Hypothetically: you Skype your best friend who is overseas and haven't seen in ages. You two engage in a conversation, and end up catching up for hours without noticing the time. By now, it's dark outside (for you), and morning (for her) and just when you're signing off, you say: "We'll finish catching up through text". You finally leave, text your friend, and anxiously await her response. Given this scenario, you've just experienced synchronous communication. According to Sternberg, "Synchronous communication happens in what is often called 'real time,' when participants communicate with each other simultaneously. This involves being together in time (regardless of time zone), or...being temporarily co-present". Some modern day examples of this communication are Skype, FaceTime, etc.
Now it's been a week, and your friend still hasn't responded to your texts, You're in the process of reevaluating everything you've said in hopes that you haven't said anything too aggressive, offensive, or blunt. After your reevaluation, she randomly texts "Sorry, I've been so busy" and you decide to ignore the text (although knowing you'll reply later). This is asynchronous communication. You're choosing to respond to your friend whenever you please, and you're not actively being synced with her "thereness".
Sternberg's argument is pointing out that we have different levels of attentiveness to when things are happening in a synchronous versus asynchronous manner through computer mediated communication, and I agree. How awkward would it be if you're having a conversation with that SAME friend, and she says: "I apologize to inform you, but I will have to respond to that questions next week"? Not only is it too formal, but it's irrelevant, and it totally catches you off guard! Given this, it's obvious to say that social situations dictate how we use technology. Synchronicity plays into our understanding of communication and perceptive of permanence because it allows us to reassure some module of interaction (whether it be face to face conversations, text, email, etc.). Although all mediums are not used this way, one can still understand why humans have more synchronic encounters as opposed to asynchronous ones.
As for chapter 2, in Crystal, he emphasizes internet language as being identical to neither speech nor writing, but selectively and adaptively displaying properties of both. If you relate this back to what Sternberg was saying, CMC is like instant messaging. You're with that person in 'real time', and you send an instant text for the addressee to respond instantly because you're both together (not literally, but hypothetically). From a psychological perspective, we respond differently when we believe that person is actually with us, and vice versa. We tend to use emoticons, acronyms, tagging/latching markers like (mhm, yeah, right, etc.), and bad grammar when having these texting conversations because we're mocking speech. Although we're "typing", it's being portrayed as "writing", and although we're "speaking (consciously)", it's being portrayed as "texting". We're mocking speech in a sense that makes speech differ from writing, because it allows us to play with language in a way that is more convenient for us. I don't speak in exceptionally well grammar (although I try), hence why it gives me the ability to show off my grammar skills while texting, and writing papers. From my experience, I catch myself saying LOL (el-oh-el) and ASAP (a sap) in actual conversations only because the abbreviations are so much more convenient as opposed to articulating the whole phrase, but what do you think? Do you agree with Crystal's point on internet language having "the best of both worlds" of speech and writing, or, how does our understanding of these concepts relate to our thought of permanence?
Internet as a medium has a larger outreach to an audience than does speech or writing. With speech, your voice or opinions only go as far as the audience that surrounds you. You are only as loud as you speak. In writing, your words and ideas are limited to the audience that your writing is intended for. You are only as wide-known as you are read. In contrast, the internet not only allows you to be known from around the world but it also gives you the ability to be able to hide who you are in terms of vocabulary, tone, and the accent of your voice. Through my texts or tweets would you be readily able to tell if I was a female college student from New York? With the increase of the use of the internet as a medium do we lose validation in what we actually say? Anyone from around the world can have the opportunity to have a voice on the internet but that does not necessarily mean that that voice in of reason or validation.
ReplyDeleteInstant messages allow us to multitask while holding different conversations simultaneously as we juggle to maintain our relationships. It allows us to appear present in the conversation and topic without having to actually be present as we switch from one conversation to another. The internet allows us to have a lot more control over our responses and participation within an interaction. We are able to lie in order to cover certain emotions, allotted an amount of time to think over our responses, and a delete button to change our answer without the recipient ever knowing. If there is a misunderstanding we could easily say that the auto-correct changed the words or that message was meant for another person. With all that power, it might be interesting to pay attention to the authenticity of our relationships.
In terms of "thereness", it's true what Jen says about Instant Messages: they allow us to both multitask and have other conversations. But when you really think about it, is that necessarily a good or bad thing? Let's say that you're IM'ing two different people at the same time. By mistake, you answer to person A when in reality you wanted to talk to person B (also keep in mind that the topics of the conversations are different). So person A has no idea what you meant and says "what?" Of course, you apologize and say "wrong person." Person A may feel as if you're really not paying attention to the conversation you're having with them. It's happened to me a few times and I tend to feel bad because I don't want that other person to think that I'm not paying attention to them. Real answer: IM has it's good and bad - like everything else!
ReplyDeleteNow Karen, I find it true when you say that "we respond differently when we believe that person is actually with us, and vice versa." I've noticed that when I'm not really engaged in a conversation, I'll say "yeah" a ton, and I'll use a lot of emoticons (because seriously, how long can you keep "sayin'" [ aka texting!] "yeah"?).
It's also painstakingly obvious that "social situations dictate how we use technology." Reverting back to a few weeks ago when we spoke about how we're constantly reminded [by someone] on how to email your professors (greeting, body, closing, correct grammar, etc., etc.), we know what's the ideal electronic medium to use when we decide to reach out to people. With close friends and family, we can use text messages and FaceTime; With higher-ups and professors, email is the best mean of communication.
Lastly, yes the Internet is an amazing tool. It enables people to have a voice and for others to find out about breaking news around the world, something that was not possible a few years back. But also, there can be much miscommunication and errors in publicizing that information. An example of this is when a lot of people were broadcasting videos that they said took place during the protests in Venezuela. In reality, they were old footage from previous protests that occurred in other countries.
I agree with Crystal, in that we are playing in both worlds because we just can't get enough of communication. Although we are using synchronous and asynchronous communication, we definitely get away with using CMC to surpass some awkward situations. In that way, this is not fair to the listener/reader. I much rather have a conversation with whom is not responding to my messages frequently, even though I know they will act differently or act a bit embarrassed for not responding. So for this point I don't understand why people choose not to respond, it is embarrassing. Majorly, violating the principles of politeness and not showing compassion to the sender. In par, I cant dismiss that when we get caught up in CMC we miss out on a lot in our lives, especially using our articulators.
ReplyDeleteConsidering that Sternberg's paper was written in 1998, her premonition on the linguistic evolution of CMC was very good.CMC is very similar to speech; the way we refer to different text threads as "conversations" and "chatting" connects speech to our silent social media. I think that Crystal hits the bullseye in chapter 2 by saying social media is neither and both speech and writing. Although both authors make valid points, an occurrence happened the other day at my job that interested me. A customer told her friend in Spanish about a reply she made via text, but instead of saying "yo dije" which means "I said" (which is how an English speaker would refer to a text message), she said "yo escribi" which means "I wrote." Are Crystal and Sternberg's data only true about English?
ReplyDeleteNow, the attribute of synchronicity is amazing. I personally don't think it is offensive to take a long time to reply to a text or email (although mixing up conversations is a bad thing). I think its a good thing because it gives us more room to multitask. I work fulltime and go to school fulltime so the ability to research homework, hold conversations with people i don't have physical time to talk to, and email professors homework or take care of what needs to be is incredible to me.
From my experience anyone that knows me well knows that when I do reply to a message quick it's because I am not doing anything at the time. Yes I do agree texting to certain people should be synchronous messages. But theirs no rules to texting; it is a little more respectful the tell the person on the other end I will be right back or I gotta go. But sometimes you simply can not do that. I am one of those that reply very late, late to the point it's awkward or even forgotten about when I do reply. Thank God for text history; a person can see what we were last speaking about. Texting gives me that option to think about what I am going to say with out explaining that. If I have nothing to say while a person is around its going to seem rude or as if I'm ignoring you. Alot of businesses use asynchronous messages. For example chase sends me texts about my account and they say don't reply. I love my phone but not for texting.
ReplyDeleteAs for chapter 2 Crystal, I totally agree that texting is a combination of speech and writing. I personally write a message differently if I know a person is at work or not going to read my message immediately. For example I would send a text to a friend saying hey the location is going to be at Starbucks on 42nd St at 2pm. That's more of a closed statement it doesn't really leave room to continue.
I'd like to go off with what Jen and Laura said about multitasking while holding multiple conversations. Even though I believe in this day and age most of the time people answering via CMC are asynchronous. It's something that comes with the technology. The internet especially is a place where you can find anything that you can leave plenty of comments everywhere and eventually will have an answer. Personally, I am a person that needs instant gratification so I need synchronous communication. For instance when I have a few questions about any bill, I like when the website offers LIVE CHAT! Yes, I can talk to someone directly and not have to wait on the phone or send an email. I get linked to someone and I able to do some laundry,cook dinner and blasting my music. It's great for multitasking when you're busy doing life chores. Also, when writing emails I do appreciate a quick response. I do find it rude if you take more than a couple business but there's always limits. You don't want to send another message or poke because they were busy doing their lives as you wait for their response.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Crystal 'the language of the internet cannot be identified with either spoken language or written language,even though it shares some features" I agree that it's some what of a hybrid and it's becoming the way we communicate. It's always interested to find how formal or informal may write to you in any CMC. Would it be the same if it was in person?
Sidenote: I know people can read an email and then just get back to you at a later time. Sometimes those people forget.
I am doing synchronous communication every week with my grandma and my parents. I am in the United States as you all know, and my family is in Hong Kong. During daylight saving time, we are 12 hour different from each other. I usually wake up at 6 in the morning(kind of early to me), which is 6pm to them. We talk to each other disregard the time difference every week. In the past, I did use asynchronous communication for most of the time. Whenever I need to talk to my family and my friends, I sent them an e-mail. However, now, most of the people are getting smartphone, so as my family and friends, we can talk to each other through the applications on smartphone which is really convenient.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Crystal that internet language display the properties of writing and speech. When we are doing texting, it is another way of “talking”. We try to make the conversation as similar to a chat as possible. Using abbreviation to ease the typing, display emoticons to express how you say the sentence and how you feel. As long as the participants on both sides understand each other, grammar does not a matter.
Yomaris
ReplyDeleteWell I really do not know anyone who lives really far from me, although when my dad visits PR and I can't go because of school or something, we video chat with him. In PR, they are either an hour ahead or an hour behind. I know its not much of a difference, but my dad is an early bird and he "be tryna" call at 6:30 am for us when in PR it could be 7:30 am for them...I'm like uhhh...its 6:30 am over here on a SAT and he says "oh that's right...so what you doing?" Seriously!! :)
Delayed response is not such a big deal, I think if people know how busy your day can be especially if the people you communicate with are really close to you, they would understand. I guess it also depends on what you think of as an "important" convo. If its something like, "are you still sleeping?" I can take forever to answer because they might assume I'm sleeping...but if the text is in need of an immediate reply then you would respond right away.
Yomaris
ReplyDeleteWell I really do not know anyone who lives really far from me, although when my dad visits PR and I can't go because of school or something, we video chat with him. In PR, they are either an hour ahead or an hour behind. I know its not much of a difference, but my dad is an early bird and he "be tryna" call at 6:30 am for us when in PR it could be 7:30 am for them...I'm like uhhh...its 6:30 am over here on a SAT and he says "oh that's right...so what you doing?" Seriously!! :)
Delayed response is not such a big deal, I think if people know how busy your day can be especially if the people you communicate with are really close to you, they would understand. I guess it also depends on what you think of as an "important" convo. If its something like, "are you still sleeping?" I can take forever to answer because they might assume I'm sleeping...but if the text is in need of an immediate reply then you would respond right away.
Yomaris
ReplyDeleteWell I really do not know anyone who lives really far from me, although when my dad visits PR and I can't go because of school or something, we video chat with him. In PR, they are either an hour ahead or an hour behind. I know its not much of a difference, but my dad is an early bird and he "be tryna" call at 6:30 am for us when in PR it could be 7:30 am for them...I'm like uhhh...its 6:30 am over here on a SAT and he says "oh that's right...so what you doing?" Seriously!! :)
Delayed response is not such a big deal, I think if people know how busy your day can be especially if the people you communicate with are really close to you, they would understand. I guess it also depends on what you think of as an "important" convo. If its something like, "are you still sleeping?" I can take forever to answer because they might assume I'm sleeping...but if the text is in need of an immediate reply then you would respond right away.