Exam Review Questions

Exam Review Questions - COMM250 Exam 1 Review Questions and...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
COMM250 Exam 1 Review Questions and Answers 1. 1. Dean Barnlund insists that "communication occurs whenever meaning is assigned to internal or external stimuli." To what sort of position on intentionality in communication does this commit Barnlund, and why? Radically non-intentional because intention is irrelevant and whatever the speaker thinks counts as intention 2. 2. Barnlund distinguishes between consummatory and instrumental communication. What is the difference? What are some examples of each of these categories of communication? The difference between consummatory and instrumental communication is that consummatory communication is “when man discovers meaning in nature, or in insight in his own reflections” (aka communication unto himself). On the other hand, instrumental communication deals with social situations such as when “messages are exchanged in the hope of altering the attitudes or actions of those around” (creating meaning based on linguistic interaction). Examples of consummatory communication : waiting alone outside a waiting room, watching skyline disappear at dusk, introspecting about a doubt, contemplating a dream 3. 3. According to Barnlund, what is the aim of communication? According to Barnlund, the aim of communication is to “increase the number and consistency of our meanings within the limits set by patterns of evaluation that have proven successful in the past, our emerging needs and drives, and the demands of the physical and social setting of the moment” 4. 5. 4. Barnlund argues that any exchange of words involves an interference with meaning creation. To what categories of communication does he resort in attempting to analyze types of interference with meaning creation? What are the characteristics of these categories? What ethical conclusions does Barnlund draw from his analysis and characterization of interference with meaning creation? Are these ethical conclusions entirely consistent with his meaning-centered theory of communication?
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
The categories of communication are coercive, exploitative, and facilitative Coercive – “meaning is controlled by threatening the interpreter so that the interpreter can only conceive one meaning” (blind to alternative meanings) Exploitative – “meaning is narrowed by words that filter information and obscure consequences so that only one meaning is attractive or appropriate” (words are arranged to filter information, narrow the choices, and obscure consequences) Facilitative – “informs, enlarges perspective, depends sensitivity, removes external threat, and encourages ‘independence of meaning’” In coercive communication, the values of the listener are ignored In exploitative communication, the values of the listener are subverted (undermined) In facilitative communication, there is consistent protection and improvement of man’s symbolic experience (nothing is forced on the listener) ONLY FACILITATIVE IS MORAL (according to Barnlund) No, these ethical conclusions are not consistent with his meaning-centered
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 33

Exam Review Questions - COMM250 Exam 1 Review Questions and...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online