1-210601-01 (4 hours)
Lecture plan:
- Communication theory and linguistics.
The theory of speech acts as an area of intersection between communication theory and linguistics.
"Maxims of Communication" by G.P. Grice.
Dialogue theory as an interdisciplinary field of research.
Discourse as a text and as a “communicative event”. Text as an act of communication in the interpretation of Umberto Eco.
Communication models as text-discursive models.
Features of intercultural communication.
Communicative-activity approach to teaching foreign languages actualizes the need for future teachers to master the fundamentals of communication theory, knowledge of its relationship with linguistics, and mastering the basic models of communication as types of text-discursive models.
Communication (lat. Communication - make common, connect, communicate) can be considered as a type of purposeful activity, one of the means of which is speech, and the symbolic, integral form of organization is text. There are many different definitions of communication, and among them there is not one that would satisfy everyone. As noted by E.A. Selivanov (p. 33), “the variety of definitions of communication is due, firstly, to the multiplicity of its methods, only one of which is the verbal-sign fixation of transmitted information, and secondly, to the difference in the purpose of information transmission (information, motivation, prohibition, education, learning, emotional and aesthetic impact, destabilization, etc.); thirdly, the discreteness/non-discreteness of the temporal and spatial parameters of the generation of the text and its perception; fourthly, the method of addressing information (cf.: retial (mass) communication and axial (specifically addressed))".
Communication theory and linguistics are different subject areas. A natural question arises: what is the ratio general theory communication (and there has been quite a lot of talk about it lately) and linguistics as a theory of language? On the one hand, the concept of communication seems to be broader than the concept of speech activity, since communication almost obviously includes areas that go beyond the scope of speech activity - such as, for example, speech influence, argumentation, extra-speech sign means, etc. and so on. On the other hand, communication is already a sphere of linguistics, if we assume that the general theory of linguistics is composed of the theory of the language system, the theory of speech activity as the functioning of the system, and the theory of text as a product of such functioning.
According to many scientists, for example V.B. Kasevich, “the most adequate approach to clarifying the relationship between two spheres and, accordingly, two theories will be functional: if we proceed from functions, then the theory of language - linguistics - studies linguistic means, the process of their use and the product of this process, and the theory of communication is the purpose of using linguistic and non-linguistic means, as well as the result achieved by the relevant processes.
The most significant difference is the following: linguistics, in principle, can build abstract models without asking the question of their adequacy to the natural prototype, but the theory of communication directly bases the modeling of dynamic connections in society, between people, and therefore cannot in any way abstract from the “human factor" (a phrase of dubious semantics, but firmly established in use)."
The area of intersection between communication theory and linguistics is recognized, first of all, as the theory of speech acts in linguistics and, in particular, the theory of illocutionary and perlocutionary functions. The theory of speech acts proceeds from the fact that the basic unit of communication (speech act) is not a sentence or any other linguistic expression, but the performance of a certain kind of action, such as a statement, request, question, order, expression of gratitude, apology, congratulations, etc. Various types Speech acts, examples of which have just been given, are usually called, following Austin, illocutionary acts, contrasting them with acts of another kind - perlocutionary (a term introduced by Austin) and propositional. The perlocutionary act is the effect that a given utterance has on the addressee. What is meant here is not the fact that the addressee understands the meaning of the statement, but those changes in the state or behavior of the addressee that are the result of this understanding. A certain statement, or demand, or question, or threat, etc. can change the addressee’s stock of knowledge (if he believes in the truth of what is being communicated and takes note of the message received), can irritate or amuse him, frighten him, convince him of his wrongness, force him to perform some act or refrain from previously planned actions, etc. Achieving all these results (not necessarily included in the speaker’s intentions) are examples of perlocutionary acts.
Various illocutionary acts, for example a statement, often have as their goal the achievement of a certain perlocutionary effect (for example, a message about something or a statement is intended to convince the interlocutor of something, especially true for a question, request or order aimed at the corresponding verbal or behavioral response of the addressee). However, the theory of speech acts specifically emphasizes that the illocutionary act, which is the speech act itself, should be clearly distinguished from the perlocutionary act, which may, but may not, be achieved using linguistic means. Within illocutionary acts, auxiliary propositional acts are distinguished, such as pointing to an object (reference to a certain object) and expressing a certain proposition. The difference between an illocutionary act and a propositional act is based on the fact that the same reference and expression of the same proposition can occur in different illocutionary acts. For example, in a message about a certain person and in a question concerning the same person, the same act of reference is performed, although the illocutionary acts as such are different. Similarly in the statements Please write him a letter; Will you write him a letter and Will you write him a letter? the same proposition is expressed, although different illocutionary acts are performed - a request, a prediction (or prescription) and a question.
Illocutionary force is not necessarily expressed by explicit linguistic means (as in the above examples). So, for example, the utterance I will leave no later than seven o'clock can be perceived under appropriate conditions as a promise, warning, threat, prediction - in each case this utterance will express the same propositional content in conjunction with one or another illocutionary force, and, therefore we will be dealing with different illocutionary acts.
On the other hand, the explicit expression of illocutionary force is not limited to grammatical means (which include mood, special structure of an interrogative sentence, intonation).
A very interesting class of utterances that contain explicit indicators of illocutionary force are those that Austin called performative, for example: I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth; I congratulate you on the occasion; I give up; I offer a draw; I invite the presidium to take their places; I promise to behave well; Thank you for everything you have done for me; I'm sorry; I recommend for printing; I hereby trust Ivanov to receive the money due to me; I bequeath the library to my grandchildren; I file a protest; I announce a break (reprimand, gratitude); I ask for your daughter's hand in marriage, etc. Performative utterances are represented by formally declarative sentences containing a (performative) verb in the 1 l form. present indicative tense. Unlike ordinary narrative sentences, which report something, in particular (if they contain a 1st person verb) describe the action or state of the speaker, performative utterances do not describe any act, they are the act itself: to say “congratulations to you” is equivalent to congratulation (the act of congratulation usually cannot be performed by other, non-verbal means), saying “I swear” means thereby swearing, saying “thank you” means thereby thanking, etc.
In the theory of speech acts, a distinction is also made between direct and indirect acts. In the first case, the speaker says exactly what he says (in the literal sense, i.e., he means what he says), and in the second, he wants to say something more than he says (different meanings of the verb talk/say). A textbook example of this kind is the formal interrogative sentence Could you pass me the salt?, usually used in a table situation as an expression of a request. Therefore, in the case of an inadequate reaction of the interlocutor, based on a literal interpretation of an indirect speech act, it is not always easy to incriminate him with a deliberate violation of the principle of communicative cooperation (cf., for example, a teacher’s “question” addressed to a student busy with extraneous matters during explanations in class: “ Ivanov, am I not bothering you?” - and the “polite” answer: “No, no, not at all, please continue” or the answer to the “question”: “Can I put some salad on you?” - “You can, but I won’t eat it.” I will" etc.).
The theory of speech acts was developed in the works of Grice, who developed the mechanisms of speech implication. According to Grice, the information conveyed in a speech act is divided into two parts. What is actually said is what is said (in the first meaning of the verb speak / say, which does not mean such a use of this verb, as in examples like: What do you mean by this remark?; or: His remark says that he did not understand anything) represents the logical content of the statement. For all other information that can be extracted by a hearer from a particular utterance, Grice proposed the term "implicature" so as not to confuse the corresponding phenomenon with implication in the logical sense. Implicatures themselves are divided into two varieties - conventional and non-conventional, in particular “communication implicatures”, or “discourse implicatures” (conversational implicatures). Conventional implicatures include all those non-truth-conditional aspects of information that are conveyed by an utterance only by virtue of the meaning of the words or forms it contains. Conventional implicatures (apparently not much different from what are commonly called presuppositions) are closely related to what is said (in the strict sense) in a sentence. In contrast, communication implicatures are related to the linguistic content of an utterance only in an indirect way. They are derived from the content of the sentence, but owe their existence to the fact that the participants in the speech act are connected by the common goal of communicative cooperation.
From general principle cooperation, certain more specific rules of verbal communication follow, which Grice called communicative postulates, or “communication maxima” (conversational maxima):
- the postulate of quantity (“Speak so that your contribution to the conversation is sufficiently informative”; “Do not make it more informative than required”);
quality postulate (“Try to tell the truth”; “Do not say what you do not have sufficient grounds for”);
postulate of relevance (“Speak to the point”);
postulate of the way of expression (“Avoid ambiguity of expression”; “Avoid ambiguity”; “Be brief”; “Avoid confusion”).
The interdisciplinary field of knowledge, called dialogue theory (it should be admitted that it is still completely insufficiently developed, including in the linguistic aspect itself) is especially important for the development of communication theory. After all, the theory of communication is object-centric, it is not interested in monologues directed into space - simply because the latter do not create a communicative field. Communication is always a dialogue; its subject (addressee) generates the text - in the broad sense, i.e. including verbal and non-verbal components, with the aim of changing the information state of a specific object (addressee), single or, more often, multiple, and, as a consequence, usually its behavior. Accordingly, the addresser must have maximum information about the addressee: one cannot pretend to change an unfamiliar object; the “black box” method is hardly productive here. The more adequate and detailed the model of the recipient object, the less effort must be made to provide feedback, because a reliable model makes it possible to fairly accurately predict the effect of communicative efforts. Hence the connection between the theory of communication and the recently deservedly popular theory of reflexive control, which is based precisely on saving the costs of receiving feedback signals due to the predictability of the reactions of the controlled object.
Coordination of speech actions in dialogue occurs at two levels: subject-logical (cognitive coordination) and pragmatic (modal coordination). The nature of cognitive and modal coordination in dialogue depends on the principles and rules of conventional behavior adopted in a given social sphere of communication in general and in a given speech genre in particular. The main factors influencing the nature of coordination of speech behavior are the status-role characteristics of the interlocutors and the degree of formality/informality of the speakers' relationship. In a dialogue with a vertical type of relationship, the main role is in coordination speech behavior belongs to the interlocutor with a higher social status. Thus, in the informative and regulatory genres of communication, the function of unilateral control of the interlocutor’s speech behavior is performed by the addresser, in whose interests this dialogue is carried out. In a dialogue with a horizontal type of relationship (for example, an exchange of opinions), both participants, to one degree or another, depending on their personal and psychological characteristics, take part in its coordination. Usually, the main role in coordinating speech behavior in a horizontal type of relationship is assigned to the addressee, the “second interlocutor,” who, with the help of his reciprocal speech moves, “supports” or “holds” the speech initiative of the first interlocutor.
In the work published 45 years ago by A.A. Reformatsky discussed the coexistence of several sign codes in an oral communicative act and touched upon problems related to the functioning of signs of different natures in the text. A.A. Reformatsky believed that without solving the questions of how the nonverbal communicative activity of a person of a given culture and society occurs and what is the relationship between nonverbal units of dialogue and verbal ones, “modeling of communication systems and the thought process itself is unthinkable.” The scientist emphasized the exceptional importance of gestural, or, in other words, kinetic, human behavior as connecting links between mental and speech activity. According to A.A. Reformatsky, in the act of oral communication, simple coding of meaning or recoding of information is never carried out. In it, different systems for processing sign information coexist in parallel, and “although they somehow compete in principle, they do not overlap each other, but represent a more complex relationship.”
According to the relationship between the verbal and nonverbal components of an oral text, two types of communication and two types of culture are clearly opposed -
high-kinetic and low-kinetic. High-kinetic culture strongly combines verbal expression and bodily sign behavior. Highly kinetic communication is especially characteristic of areas and cultures of the Mediterranean, South America, southeast Europe and some others. In a low-kinetic culture, which is characteristic, for example, of the population of North America, Scandinavia or northern Germany, the verbal component sharply predominates. There are also intercrops. Among the cultures studied to date, these include, for example, the cultures of the Czech Republic, China, and Japan. According to G.E. Kreidlin, Russia also belongs to intermediate crops. Today, representatives of various sciences - linguists, sociologists, psychologists and specialists in the field of nonverbal semiotics, a complex science, one of the tasks of which is precisely to identify and describe the nature and mechanisms of nonverbal sign communication - are conducting field and laboratory research, the purpose of which is to identify the patterns that determine dialogic interaction of verbal and non-verbal sign codes. The action of individual parameters and combinations of parameters that determine human communicative activity comes to the fore, as well as the identification of those semantic areas that gestures serve together with speech. In many communication situations, nonverbal cues and behaviors are more effective than verbal ones for expressing certain types of content and in some situations, for example, when speech is difficult due to high levels of background noise or when communicating with young children who have poor language acquisition. , only they can be used.
R. Dirven and M. Vespur (p. 194) schematically display the relationship between verbal and nonverbal in communication, distinguishing means of expression into verbal (text), nonverbal and paralinguistic (interpretive keys of communication), associated with the interpretative basis of the speaker/listener - the fund of their knowledge , ideas, feelings (see diagram 1).
Verbal communication can be oral and written and printed. In connection with the spread of technical channels of information (television, cinema, radio), oral communication is replenished with new speech genres with properties that are non-traditional for interpersonal oral communication.
Verbal communication in its various forms, taking into account non-verbal communicative factors, is one of the objects of the linguistic theory of text and communication and is considered as a purposeful linguopsychomental activity of the sender and addressee to carry out information exchange.
The text in the aspect of communication is considered as “a holistic semiotic form of psycho-verbal human activity, conceptually and structurally organized, dialogically embedded in interiorized existence, the semiotic universe of an ethnos or civilization, serving as a pragmatically directed mediator of communication” (Selivanova, p. 32). The text participates in the exchange of communicative activities as a subject-sign carrier of exchange” (Sidorov, p. 69).
Umberto Eco builds a more complex scheme, considering the text as an integral act of communication, including various semantic codes, using which the reader interprets it. With this approach, the author and the reader (or rather, the “reader model”, Lettore Modello, or, as it is designated in the translation, “M-Reader”) are included in the framework of the text, however, “not as real poles of the act of communication, but as “actant roles” ” of this message.
The concept of text has significantly transformed due to the introduction of the concept of discourse into linguistic use. It is generally accepted that the concept of discourse was introduced by the founder of transformational and distributive analysis 3. Harris in 1952. As one of the aspects of distribution, discourse was considered by 3. Harris on the basis of a network of equivalence between phrases and chains of phrases as a utterance, a super-phrase unit in the context of other units and the situation associated with them.
In modern linguistics, the term “discourse” is used in various meanings, but the most commonly used are mainly four meanings of this concept.
The first meaning of discourse as a text, a statement immersed in a specific sociocultural situation, is similar to the understanding of discourse by 3. Harris.
In text linguistics of the 70s, the terms “discourse” and “text” were usually identified, which was explained by the absence in some European languages of a word equivalent to the French-English “discourse”; it was forced to be replaced by the name “text”. This terminological identification led to the fact that discourse and text began to be considered as equivalents. Thus, in the “Concise Dictionary of Text Linguistics Terms” by T.M. Nikolaeva’s discourse has the following versions: “coherent text; oral-conversational form of the text; dialogue; a group of statements related to each other in content; speech creation as a given, written or oral” (p. 33). To differentiate the concepts of text and discourse, a distinction was initially made between the aspects they represented: discourse is social, and text is linguistic. This was facilitated by the influence of the concept of E. Benveniste, who considered discourse to be speech inseparable from the speaker, as well as the work of the Dutch scientist T. van Dsijk, who considered the text as a static object, and discourse as a way of its actualization in certain mental and pragmatic conditions. In this meaning, discourse also correlated with a statement: “a statement is a sequence of phrases concluded between two semantic spaces, two stops in communication; discourse is an utterance considered from the point of view of the discourse mechanism that controls it” (Quadrature of Sense, p. 27). Transposing this difference into the opposition of text and discourse, we can say that the text as an utterance, immersed in the conditions of its production and perception, functions as a discourse.
The second meaning of discourse comes from the first. It was the result of T. van Dyck’s development of the concept of the communicative nature of the text. In the early 80s, the scientist chose a different core word for the definition of discourse - a communicative event. He emphasized: “Discourse, in the broad sense of the word, is a complex unity of linguistic form, meaning and action that could be the best way characterized by the concept of a communicative event or a communicative act... The speaker and the listener, their personal and social characteristics, and other aspects of the social situation undoubtedly relate to this event” (1989, pp. 121-122). In relation to written texts, the scientist notes the need to analyze texts from the point of view of the dynamic nature of their production, understanding and actions performed with their help. From his point of view, discourse is an essential component of sociocultural interaction, the characteristic features of which are interest, goals and styles (1989, p. 53). The main features of discourse in the second meaning are contextuality, personality, procedurality, situationality, and isolation.
The contextuality of discourse is associated with its other features and is described as a set of “presented events, their participants, performative information and “non-events,” i.e. a) circumstances accompanying the events; b) background explaining the event; c) assessment of the participant in the events; d) information that correlates discourse with events,” determined not so much by the sequence of sentences as by the world common to the creator of the discourse and its interpreter.
The personality of discourse is two-sided: on the one hand, it is a specific interaction of two individual consciousnesses (sender and addressee), on the other, it is an expression of oneself, one’s individual consciousness in a communicative situation (this problem is actively being developed by discursive psychology). P. Serio, comparing the speaker and the subject of the utterance, notes that the latter acquires existence only in the act of utterance and represents a category of discourse, “the reality of speech” (Quadrature of meaning, p. 16).
The processuality of discourse lies in considering it not as a completed product, but as a process that occurs in the presence of at least two participants who, in spontaneous communication, interpret each other’s statements and jointly develop the structure of discourse at any given moment. In a discrete act of communication, the processuality of discourse is manifested in the activity-based conjugation of the phases of generation and reception based on the text.
The situational nature of discourse is ensured by its temporal and spatial coordinates. A situational, event-based approach to defining discourse allows one to involve many communicative, social and other extralingual factors in the study of the text.
The third meaning of discourse is the most common in modern linguistic literature; it comes from the position of the French semiotic tradition on the identification of discourse with speech, mainly oral. In the “Explanatory Dictionary of Semiotics” A. J. Greimas and J. Courtet define discourse as a concept identical to the text in the aspect of the semiotic process: “To a first approximation, discourse can be identified with the semiotic process, which... should be understood as the whole variety of methods of discursive practice, including linguistic and non-linguistic practices...” (p.488). Correlating discourse with the communicative process and superimposing them on the relationship between language and speech, semioticians viewed discourse as an event strictly tied to the act of speech, which models, varies and regulates linguistic norms and protogrammatical forms of linguistic consciousness, translating it into speech.
The pragmatic differentiation of the entire discursive array of language led to the metonymization of the term “discourse” and its use in the fourth meaning as a type of discursive practice. In this understanding, discourse is a communicative-pragmatic example of speech behavior occurring in a certain social sphere, having a certain set of variables: social norms, relationships, roles, conventions, indicators of interactivity, etc. This meaning of discourse is used in functional pragmatics, which considers it as units, forms of speech, interactions, which can be part of everyday speech activity, but can also manifest themselves in the institutional field. The main property of discourse in this understanding is the regularity of the co-presence of the speaker and the listener (face-to-face interaction). These regular interactions are considered collectively as the interaction of representatives of certain social groups (doctor - patient, politician - citizen) or within a separate area of social relations (teach - learn), etc. In such cases, the discourse may to some extent come closer to the concept of “ functional style"or, rather, a substyle. Yu.S. Stepanov believes that the reason that with the living term “functional style” another one was required - “discourse”, was the peculiarities of national linguistic schools: “while in the Russian tradition... “functional style” meant, first of all, a special type of texts..., but also a lexical system and its own grammar corresponding to each type; in the Anglo-Saxon tradition there was nothing like this, primarily because there was no stylistics as a special branch of linguistics” (Language and Science of the End of the 20th Century, p. 36).
Yu.S. himself Stepanov believes that discourse cannot be reduced to style - discourse is a kind of sublanguage in language, a possible alternative world in the world of language. This, according to the scientist, changes the original thesis about language as a system of systems to the position about language as a system different systems. Yu.S. Stepanov connects discourse with a special world, “behind which stands a special grammar, a special lexicon, special rules of word usage, special semantics,” as well as its own ideal addressee (ibid., pp. 42 – 44).
Discourse in the metonymic meaning of substyle and form of speech is used widely in modern pragmalinguistics and speech science to highlight the totality of discursive implementation of a certain speech genre (socially, culturally, etc. contextualized).
In this lecture we will further use the term discourse mainly in the second meaning - as a communicative situation in the totality of its components.
The model of a communicative situation (discourse) is a systemic correlation of certain components that mediate information exchange and communicative actions, as well as the relationship of certain operations, the result of which is the transfer of information from the source-addressee through its text to the recipient-addressee. IN scientific literature the monolingual communicative situation was modeled differently depending on the focus of its consideration (technical, cultural, philosophical, semiotic, aesthetic, linguistic, etc.) and type (for example, written, oral, artistic, scientific, etc.) . Communication models reflected different numbers of discourse components and different directions of connections between them. However, in general, all communication models were based on one traditional link of communication “addresser - text (message) - addressee”, regardless of the distinction between personal and transpersonal communication.
This leads to the division of communication based on the number of interlocutors, often recipients, into internal (internal dialogue of one person), interpersonal (dialogue of two), communication of small groups (3-5 people), public (20-30 or more), organizational (100 or more), mass (1000 or more) or differentiation of communication into axial (axis - axis), i.e. specifically addressed, and real (gete - network), i.e. mass, where the recipient is the one who is in the transmission zone.
The most widespread (including in linguistics) are information technology communication models (see one of the variants of such a model in Diagram 2 below).
A special place in this model is given to code. The code establishes: 1) a repertoire of symbols opposed to each other; 2) rules for their combination; 3) occasionally one-to-one correspondence of each symbol to one signified. Language and speech with their systematic nature are such a code. One way to complicate the code
2
It introduces elements of redundancy, removing entropy and increasing predictability. The language code has a high degree of redundancy. In any language there are two tendencies: towards redundancy, which increases predictability and reduces the entropy of communication, and towards economy, which also increases predictability, because the removal of non-existent components can increase the speed of information processing.
Another model we are considering belongs to I.P. Susov, who creatively developed the ideas of C. Pierce and C. Morris. The scientist presented a closed multi-relational model, introducing into it two signifiers - content: generated by the addresser and perceived by the addressee - as well as two pragmatics: intention (intention) and interpretant. Important in the model of I.P. Susov is the distinction between one statement (the form of a sign) and two meanings, based on the pragmatic sign concept of C. Pierce. This model, which can be called pragmatic, is based on a triangle, which includes two anthropocentric communicants and a reference situation as the context of the utterance. All components of the meta-scheme are mutually correlated and conditioned (see Diagram 3). Having critically revised the iconic model of C. Morris, I.P. Susov emphasizes that she “does not take into account the fact that signs (both simple and
etc.................
Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Posted on http:// www. allbest. ru/
Characteristics of the main forms of communicative activity
Belykh Elizaveta PP14-14B
Communication is the interaction of two (or more) people aimed at coordinating and combining their efforts in order to establish relationships and achieve a common result. Communication is not just an action, but precisely an interaction: it takes place between participants, each of whom is equally a carrier of activity and presupposes it in their partners.
In order to understand communication as a special type of activity, it is necessary to identify the main structural components of communication. Structural components communication activities look like this:
Subject of communication- this is another person, a communication partner as a subject.
Need for communication consists in a person’s desire to know and evaluate other people, and through them and with their help - to self-knowledge and self-esteem. People learn about themselves and others through a variety of activities, as a person manifests himself in each of them.
Action of communication- this is a unit of communicative activity, a holistic act addressed to another person and directed at him as his object. The two main categories of communication actions are proactive acts and reactive acts.
Communication tasks- this is the goal towards which, in given specific conditions, various actions performed in the process of communication are aimed. The goals (motives) and objectives of communication may not coincide with each other.
Communication means- these are the operations with the help of which communication actions are carried out.
Communication Products- formations of a material and spiritual nature that are created as a result of communication. These include, first of all, the “ overall result", which we mentioned in the definition of communication, but also relationships and, most importantly, the image of oneself and other people - participants in communication.
Concept of communication form.
Changes in individual aspects that characterize the development of various structural components of communication - needs, motives, operations, etc., collectively give rise to integral, holistic formations that represent levels of development of communicative activity. These qualitatively specific formations, which are stages in the ontogenesis of communication, were called by us “forms of communication”
So, we call a form of communication communicative activity at a certain stage of its development, taken as a whole set of features and characterized by several parameters. The main ones among them are the following 5 parameters:
1) the time of emergence of this form of communication during preschool childhood;
2) the place occupied by it and the child’s wider life activity system;
3) the main content of the needs satisfied by children with this form of communication;
4) leading motives that encourage a child at a certain stage of development to communicate with people around him;
5) the main means of communication, with the help of which the child communicates with people within this form of communication.
In the first 7 years of life, there are 4 types of content in the need for communication:
1) needs for friendly attention (0.02 - 0.06);
2) needs for cooperation (0;06 - 3;0);
3) the need for respect from an adult (3;0 - 5;0);
4) needs for mutual understanding and empathy (5;0 - 7;0).
Situational-personal form of communication.
This form of communication appears first in ontogenesis - at approximately 0:02 - and has the shortest time of existence in its independent form - until the end of the first half of life.
Within the framework of this form of communicative activity, infants are able to subtly distinguish between gradations of adult attention and at the same time do not distinguish one adult from another.
Children not older than 6 months. They demonstrate their ability to recognize close adults by the fact that when interacting with them they are more happy and more often take initiative than when interacting with strangers. This means that strangers evoke in them the same attitude as relatives, and the differences are expressed in the degree of pleasure of children within the same quality, i.e. quantitatively.
Lacking independent adaptive behavior, children adapt to the world through adults. The child’s readiness to rejoice at any adult and any sign of attention on his part ensures that he can establish contacts with any person who will look after him.
The leading motive for communication in the described period of children’s lives is the personal motive. This is a very unique type of personal motives, because children reflect adults very vaguely and amorphously; in their person only attentiveness and goodwill are highlighted for the child.
And here we come to a very important uniqueness of the first form of communication - its close connection with emotions. Children's joy and attention to adults change when conditions vary, not according to the laws of passive reaction, but according to the rules of active action: they increase with weak influences from an adult (here you need to attract an adult, hold him, stimulate him to communicate) and weaken with strong ones (the child has already received what , what I was striving for). Therefore, on the mother’s lap, the child is quiet, peaceful, and when he sees her from afar and not yet knowing whether she will approach him, he moves excitedly and screams.
The components included in the revitalization complex ensure that the child successfully distinguishes an adult from the environment (freezing), performs facial (smile) and specific vocal (hum) communication with an adult, and actively attracts the adult to communication (movements of the limbs and body).
Situational business form of communication.
This form of communication appears in the ontogenesis of the second and exists in children from 0 - 06 to 3. But it is very different from the first genetic form of communication. communication communicative child
To begin with, it no longer occupies the place of leading activity - the object-manipulative activity of children is now moving to this place. Communication with adults is woven into the new leading activity, helping and serving it. The main reasons for contacts between children and adults are now related to their common cause - practical cooperation, and therefore the business motive is moving to a central place among all motives for communication. The child is unusually interested in what and how an adult does with things, and the elders are now revealed to children precisely from this side - as amazing craftsmen and artisans, capable of creating true miracles with objects.
The child's need for cooperation with an adult.
When contacts with an adult were included, and the approval of elders meant praise for some achievement of the child (climbed onto the sofa, climbed the steps, did a little Easter cake), it was discovered that the described changes did not mean that children now valued adults less or did not They value their attention so much: no, the importance of adults in their lives is completely preserved, even increases, but qualitatively changes in character. The child now needs an adult to cooperate with him in a task, organizing it, helping in difficult times, encouraging him in case of failure, praising him for achievements.
So, during situational business communication, children need the presence of an adult and his friendly attention, but this is not enough - he needs the adult to be involved in what the child is doing and to participate in this process.
In the middle of the 2nd year of life, many children begin to speak. They manage to subordinate their speech to the situation and in many cases construct their statements in such a way that they can be understood only taking into account immediate circumstances.
Attachment to an adult gives rise to a child’s natural desire to follow in his actions the behavior of his elders as a model. Thanks to personal contact, an adult’s comments - his praises and reproaches - become of great importance for children in mastering the necessary, correct actions with objects. In other words, the existence of situational business communication is the time during which children move from nonspecific primitive manipulations with objects to more and more specific ones, and then to culturally fixed actions with them.
Extra-situational-cognitive form of communication.
In the first half of preschool childhood, the child can observe the following, third form of communicative activity. Like the second, it is mediated, but is woven not into practical cooperation with an adult, but into joint cognitive activity - one might say, into “theoretical” cooperation. Object manipulations of young children were also largely aimed at identifying the properties of objects; The child’s practical “trials and errors” serve as the basis on which his orienting and perceptual actions are then formed. But the primitiveness of early manipulations and elementary forms of cooperation with adults allow children to establish only the most superficial, insignificant properties of things. However, the development of curiosity and the constant improvement of ways to satisfy it (perception, visual-effective, and later visual-figurative thinking on the basis of mastering speech) force the child to pose increasingly complex questions. It is shown that the preschooler is trying to understand, no less, no more, the origin and structure of the world, the relationships in nature, the secret essence of things.
But the ability of a small child to understand such problems on his own is very limited. The only real way to understand them is for him to communicate with the adults around him. “Why-why” children unleash an avalanche of questions on their elders. It is natural, therefore, that the leading motive in the third form of communication is cognitive. An adult appears before children in a new capacity - as an erudite, capable of resolving their doubts, giving them the necessary information, and providing them with the necessary information. And since in the course of “theoretical cooperation” problems are discussed that are far from the context of interaction between children and elders, communication acquires - for the first time after the birth of a child - a pronounced extra-situational character.
Words of encouragement cause disproportionate delight in preschoolers: children jump, clap their hands, let out victorious cries, they are even able to kiss a person they barely know. But even the mildest reproach can be perceived by them with extreme exaggeration: children argue, get angry, some cry, others immediately go to their rooms, and the next time they try to meet, they refuse to go to the experiment.
The non-situational-cognitive form of communication is characterized by the child’s desire to respect an adult. Children want praise and do not want to put up with comments; they perceive them as a personal insult.
Children's need for respect can become the basis for serious violations of the child's behavior and activity: he begins to be stubborn, becomes whiny, and avoids contact. But a gentle joke from an adult, a caring attitude toward a child who has made a mistake, and most importantly, a constant demonstration of one’s confidence in his abilities, talents and good will quickly calm the child, unleash his initiative and restore his desire to cooperate with an adult.
The main means of communication in children with an extra-situational-cognitive (as well as with an extra-situational-personal) form is, of course, speech operations: after all, they alone give children the opportunity to go beyond the limits of a limited situation into an unlimited one. the world. It is interesting that preschoolers not only use the word, but also turn it into a special object of study.
In preschool age, play acquires the main importance among all types of child activity. Special studies have shown that at the initial stages of play development, children try to reflect primarily the external, “material” aspect of adults’ activities, which they work through through acting out.
Therefore they give great importance the use of various substitute items symbolizing “adult” equipment, professional clothing and characteristic attributes.
Extra-situational-personal form of communication.
By the end preschool age Children acquire the fourth and highest form of communication with adults for preschoolers - non-situational-personal. As can be seen from its name (personal), it is similar to the first genetic form of communication and signifies that the development process has thus completed the first turn and, describing the spiral, has moved on to the second turn.
The personal motive of communication - leading in the fourth form of communicative activity - has a completely different character than in the first. An adult appears before children to the fullest extent of his talents, characteristics and life experience. Now for a preschooler he is not just an individual or an abstract person, but a concrete historical and social person, a member of society, a citizen of his country and his time.
Indeed, older preschoolers are characterized by a desire not just for the friendly attention of adults, but for mutual understanding and empathy with them. The new content of the communicative need is expressed in the fact that the child no longer necessarily insists on praise: it is much more important for him to know, but how to do it. And although he is upset if he acted incorrectly, he willingly agrees to amend his work, change his opinion or attitude towards the issues under discussion in order to achieve commonality of views and assessments with an adult. The coincidence of one's position with the position of elders serves as proof for the child of its correctness. A child today is in no hurry to argue with an adult - he is sensitive to their wavelength and tries first to better understand his elders, to find the reason why they think this way and not otherwise.
The desire for commonality of views with elders gives children support when thinking about moral concepts, when forming moral judgments, because by their very origin, the rules of behavior in society, relationships with comrades are social, and only elders who have mastered social experience can help the child determine the right path.
The new form of communication is closely related to the highest levels of play development for preschool childhood. The child now pays less attention to the material side of the reality he reproduces - now he is mainly interested in those difficult relationships, which develop between people in the family and at work. In communicating with adults, the child obtains material for his games and vigilantly observes all shades of behavior of elders when they clash with each other. Contacts with adults and with older children open the child up to the prospect of his future life in the coming years: he learns that he will soon be studying at school.
The most important significance of non-situational-personal communication is that thanks to it the child learns about an adult as a teacher and gradually acquires the idea of himself as a student.
Children most successfully learn new knowledge in conditions close to classes, or in everyday life, if they master an extra-situational-personal form of communication.
Extra-situational-personal communication is the highest form of communicative activity observed in children under 7 years of age. Its role in the life of a child consists, as we tried to show, in children mastering the rules of behavior in the social world, in comprehending some of its laws and relationships.
The significance of situational-personal communication is that it stimulates the formation of perceptual actions in infants in different analytical systems. At first, these actions serve communication, but, mastered in the social sphere, they then begin to be used to get acquainted with the objective world, which leads to an overall significant progress in cognitive processes in children. The most important achievement of the first half of life - mastering grasping - is also associated with the activity of communication, since throwing up the hands is one of the elements of the revitalization complex, and the collisions with objects that occur during this process lay the foundation for the formation of the purposeful action of grasping.
We see the importance of situational business communication mainly in the fact that it leads to further development and qualitative transformation of children’s objective activity (to the transition from individual actions to procedural games) and the emergence and development of speech. But mastering speech allows children to overcome the limitations of situational communication and move from purely practical cooperation with adults to, so to speak, “theoretical” cooperation.
The significance of non-situational-cognitive communication between children and adults is, in our opinion, that it helps children immeasurably expand the scope of the world accessible to their knowledge, allows them to discover the interconnection of phenomena, learn about the existence of cause-and-effect and other relationships between objects and phenomena . Adult support constant help become an important condition development of children's thinking. At the same time, knowledge of the world of objects and physical phenomena soon ceases to exhaust the interests of children. They are increasingly attracted to events taking place in the social sphere, especially since most of the objects surrounding children are also products of the activity of the human mind and hands. The development of thinking and cognitive interests of preschoolers goes beyond the third genetic form of communication, where it received support and incentive, and transforms the general life activity of children, in accordance with which the activity of their communication with adults is also transformed.
We see the importance of non-situational-personal communication in the general mental development of a child in the fact that it introduces the child into the structurally complex world of people and allows him to take an adequate place in this world. The child learns to navigate the social sphere and establishes diverse, complex relationships with people around him. He learns the rules of the community, the concept of his rights and responsibilities. Finally, the child is introduced to the moral and moral values of the society in which he lives. Preschoolers model the acquired experience and knowledge in role-playing games and apply them in their real life practice under the control and guidance of an adult. Thanks to children’s achievements in extra-situational personal communication, they come to a state of readiness for school learning, an important part of which is the child’s ability to perceive an adult in the role of a teacher and take the position of a student in relation to him with all the ensuing consequences.
Results
Of utmost importance in the emergence and development of communication in children are the influences of an adult, whose proactive initiative constantly “pushes” the child’s activity to a new, higher level according to the mechanism of the “zone of proximal development” [L.S. Vygotsky, 1982]. The practice of interaction with children organized by adults contributes to the enrichment and transformation of their social needs. Without the constant support of an adult, especially in the first months and years of life, the development of children's communication with others slows down or even stops. But the active intervention of an adult is capable of relatively short term to cause favorable changes in the communication of children even of older preschool age, to correct defects and deviations in their communicative activities.
Posted on Allbest.ru
...Similar documents
Characteristics of the main approaches to analyzing the concept of communication. The communicative side of communication, the concept and content of communicative competence, ways of its formation. Setting up an experiment to study the communicative competence of an individual.
thesis, added 11/28/2011
Communication training for development communicative competence. The purpose of this training: Developing the ability to establish and maintain psychological contact in communication. Knowing your capabilities and limitations in interacting with other people.
creative work, added 01/20/2009
Three main aspects of knowledge extraction. Basic forms of direct contacts between people. Four basic levels of communication. Loss of information during conversational communication. Structural components of the communication model. Main parameters of the procedural layer.
presentation, added 08/14/2013
Specifics and stages of development of communicative activity in preschool children. Characteristics of age characteristics mental development children with visual impairments. Social position and problem of communication of blind and visually impaired preschool children.
course work, added 08/21/2011
The need for communication for human psychological development, its types and functions. Levels of communication according to B. Lomov. Motivational and cognitive components in the structure of communication. The relationship between the communicative, interactive and perceptual aspects of communication.
test, added 11/23/2010
Communication as one of the most important factors in the overall mental development of a child. Sensory abilities of the fetus. Emotional communication between child and mother. Stages of the process of development of the first speech function in children. The child's need for communication with adults.
abstract, added 01/17/2012
Communicative, interactive and perceptual aspects of communication. Levels of communicative culture. Factors influencing the formation of barriers. Motives for interaction with other people. Methods of influence of a leader on subordinates. Principles of business communication.
presentation, added 12/25/2015
Studying a child’s psychological and communicative readiness for school. Features of the development of arbitrary contextual communication between older preschoolers and adults. Psychodiagnostic study of children preparatory group kindergarten.
course work, added 08/23/2014
Essence and character traits. The influence of domestic work on the development of independence in children. Attitudes of different ages to household work. The main tasks of psychological and pedagogical work in the development of everyday activities of preschool children.
course work, added 01/04/2013
Communication process and features of the communicative side of communication. Verbal communication and the place of natural language among other sign systems. Speech communication, signs and basic functions of speech. The concept and components of nonverbal communication.
mass communicationacts as a certain type of social activity that has its own subject, object of influence, as well as conditions and means of implementation. Analysis of mass communication as a social process using the activity approach helps to identify all its main characteristics. Activities there is a way of existence of a social form of movement, that is, a way in which society exists.
Mass communication, as a social phenomenon, is no exception in this regard. Its most general, substantial characteristic is activity. That is why the theory of mass communication as a type of activity must necessarily have a theory of activity as its basis. To understand the place of mass communicative activity in the system of human activity, resulting from its essence and manifestations of this essence, we need to consider activity as a system.
So, the substance of social life is the process of jointno activity of people. This means that it acts as the ultimate basis social.The substance of mass communication, thus is a social activity. However, substance is only the most profound thing in essence. An essence is an invariant of the content of an object. Therefore, in order to identify the essence of mass communication within the framework of a single substance “social - social activity. An important element of spiritual and practical activity is mass communication, which is a system of broadcasting social assessments of current reality into the mass consciousness, that is, assessments of current events that fall into the field of view of mass consciousness, that is, assessments of the current results of practical activity from the point of view of the interests of certain social groups. mass communication- a type of spiritual-practical activity, that is, the activity of transferring, broadcasting into mass consciousness (public opinion) assessments of current events that are recognized as socially relevant.
Mass communication is a spiritual and practical activity, but not all and not all, but only that variety of it that is associated with the implementation of the necessary operational orientation, and mainly, V ideologically relevant, for example, in important issues of domestic and foreign policy, that is, in essence, “an assessment of current events.”
The essence of mass communication as an activity (mass communication activity) is the impact on society by introducing a certain system of values into the mass consciousness.
In fact subjects of mass communication as such, are social groups that realize their needs related to ensuring the conditions of their own existence, in this case, conditions related to the need to introduce into mass consciousness, that is, into the system of consciousness functioning directly in practice, social attitudes based on their own ideological paradigms expressed in the form of their group ideologies.
Based on these needs, social groups are interested in producing mass information (including in the form of texts) as a way of existence of their own ideological paradigms, a way that exactly corresponds to the social psyche and is realized through the creative activity of journalists, and promoting it into mass consciousness with the help mechanisms, that is, the means of mass communication, again corresponding to this latter.
The problem of freedom of subjects of mass communication activities
The problem of freedom of the press occupies a special place. Since the publication of one of the first works on this topic - the presentation of a speech John Milton in the English Parliament in 1644 - the problem of freedom of the press is at the epicenter of almost all projects of social change. Classic models of this kind for the theoretical understanding of freedom of the press were based, like all subsequent ones, on one basic argument - concern (or rather, from our point of view, the appearance of concern) for the well-being of citizens. The word “freedom” in natural language is very ambiguous. The Russian Language Dictionary contains about a dozen meanings of this word.
But in this case we should be interested in “freedom” in the categorical sense, that is, freedom as a concept of social science, sociology, because the theory of mass communication cannot base its definitions on the understanding of freedom, for example, as “ease, the absence of difficulties in anything.” ", or "relaxation, lack of coherence", or "the state of one who is not imprisoned, in captivity." Indeed, Liberty - it is always freedom of activity, and therefore of the activity of any subject who realizes his own goal in it, the path to which is expressed in the form of a program. Therefore, freedom is the ability of the subject. Such an ability, or property, is inherent only to the subject of activity and cannot belong to anyone other than the subject. In other words, only a subject can be characterized by freedom as an ability. Thus, it is assumed that freedom of speech there is nothing more than the opportunity for any citizen to be heard and heard any information he wishes.
Social consciousness in the system of mass communication. \
Having identified the subjects of mass communication activity, the next logical step is to consider its object.
Any research related to the analysis of spiritual-practical varieties social activities, sooner or later is forced to turn to consideration of the problem of mass consciousness. The layer of consciousness of society in which knowledge functions, transformed into beliefs, traditions, etc., that is, consciousness directly involved in practical activity, is called mass consciousness. Scientists have always been searching for a solution to this problem. There are several areas in which these studies were conducted.
Religious. In this direction, the dominant religion in a given society, constituting the main ideological core, was taken as the basis of mass consciousness.
Accordingly, the mass was understood as the entire body of believers, and the structure corresponded to the hierarchical organization of the church. National,
where national characteristics are used to classify and highlight mass consciousness. A nation is a mass, national consciousness is mass consciousness.
State, based on the understanding that the basis of mass consciousness is the belonging of citizens to one state.
5. In all of the above approaches, approximately the same structure of mass consciousness can be traced: leaders, leaders, recognized authorities plus the masses. This structure gave rise to another approach called elitist. It was based on the thesis that the concept of “mass” should be sought in comparison with the concept of the elite, and the concept of “mass consciousness” is comparable to the concept of “elite consciousness”. It is the prevalence of this approach that underlies the identification of so-called mass culture as something secondary.
There are other approaches and attempts to define and structure mass consciousness. Conventionally, they can be divided into two types.
First- definition of mass consciousness by the subject of reflection. As such, the mass stands out, which is the main element of the study. Representatives of this approach are B. A. Trushin, N. P. Kirillov and others.
Second type - the basis for classification is the object of mass consciousness
It should be noted that the basis of mass (practical) consciousness is knowledge obtained both in the ordinary way and introduced, transferred, adapted from the level of specialized consciousness and transformed into social attitudes, beliefs, social myths, etc. “To correlate consciousness functioning in systems of practical and spiritual activity, the idea of levels can be used. Then the consciousness living in the system of practice acts as practical (mass), and consciousness in the system of spiritual activity acts as specialized.”
Obviously, there cannot be any other result, because the category correlative to “mass consciousness” is not “group consciousness” or “individual consciousness,” but “specialized consciousness,” and, accordingly, the division of consciousness into mass and specialized is not a division By subjects consciousness, and according to him levels, namely, by the levels of his involvement in practice - direct(mass consciousness) and indirect(specialized consciousness).
In defining mass consciousness by highlighting the concept of “mass,” the theory, in our opinion, has two methodological shortcomings. The desire to combine the ontological and epistemological aspects of mass consciousness in the concept of “mass consciousness” is doomed to failure in advance. It is quite obvious that another concept should be introduced into scientific use, reflecting the ontological aspect of mass consciousness, since the correlation of the concept of mass consciousness with specialized, and not with group or individual (which, in fact, is, in our opinion, the elimination of the second methodological lack of existing theories) represents an epistemological cross-section of the problem under study.
Mass consciousness and the main methods of manipulative influence on it.
Public opinion is an indicator of the state of society as a whole. Naturally, sociologists are interested in the question of how public opinion is formed. Understanding the essence of this phenomenon depends on the answer to this question. It should be noted right away that public opinion is a phenomenon characteristic primarily of modern, mass societies. The American sociologist G. Bloomer considered “the public” - the substrate of public opinion - as one of the forms of mass association, which is based on interest in a particular problem. Domestic researcher Yu. Levada proposed to distinguish between “general” and “public” opinion.
“General” opinion is formed within consolidated communities where people have the opportunity to communicate directly.
“Public” opinion is formed in mass societies, among people between whom there is no direct interaction.
Communication in such societies is often indirect. The transition from general opinion to public opinion, as Levada notes, is one of the manifestations of the transformation of traditional societies into modern ones. from total monotony to a multitude of multi-level normative mechanisms (and therefore socially accepted opinions); from particularistic regulatory structures, that is, “norms for one’s own,” to universalist ones (generally valid norms and values);
from the compulsory obligatory nature of “correct” views and assessments to a spectrum of socially acceptable opinions;
from normative (instrumental or ritual) “seriousness” of opinions to “ game"in the field of public opinion, which was mentioned earlier" 1.
Thus, public opinion is formed in mass societies where group ties and group norms are weakened, where in a situation of constant choice and individual autonomy a new mechanism for achieving agreement is required. The mechanisms for achieving this agreement are different than in small, close-knit communities. In particular, the media play a large role in this process. Be that as it may, a person is inclined to voluntarily submit to the dominant opinion - this is manifested both in small groups and in mass forms of behavior (similar to voting in government elections). But how do people know which opinions are dominant and which are not? E. Noel-Neumann speaks of a person’s ability to “perceive the climate of opinions.” But given the dominance of the media, this ability is not surprising. The point of view that dominates the media is considered by a person as characteristic of the majority. The same thing happens with the published results of sociological surveys. Manipulation in mass communication activities is a way of controlling the behavior of a mass audience, carried out through the formation of public opinion. However, this management is not absolute in nature, such as, for example, administrative-legal, which presupposes the absolute subordination of citizens to adopted acts to regulate behavior. Manipulation is a psychological influence that has different effects on both individuals and different social groups.
Mass communication as a social institution
In the structure of sociological knowledge, the study of social institutions is given extremely important importance. There is enough a large number of different approaches to defining a social institution.
“The concept of a social institution has a central place in the systemic-structural analysis of social life. It presupposes the possibility of generalization, idealization and abstraction of the most significant types of social relations from the diverse actions of people, by correlating them with the fundamental goals and needs of the social system. In this sense, the social institution should be understood as the main component social structure, integrating and coordinating many individual actions of people, streamlining social relations in the most important spheres of public life.”
“Institutions of social life are considered to be a special type of integrative (groups - T.N.), the integrity of which is based on impersonal objective connections, the nature and direction of which does not depend on the individual properties of the people included in these institutions. Unlike non-institutional groups (like a friendly company), institutions such as the state or army are not a collection of living people, but a system of interrelated social roles performed by such people and imposing strict restrictions on their possible and acceptable behavior."
A social institution is “historically established forms of organization and regulation of social life (for example, family, religion, education, etc.), ensuring the performance of vital functions for society, including a set of norms, roles, regulations, patterns of behavior, special institutions, control system"
Having analyzed various points of view in the definition of a social institution, we can draw a conclusion about the main characteristics of the latter, which are:
♦ “a role system, which also includes norms and statuses;
♦ a set of customs, traditions and rules of behavior;
♦ formal and informal organization;
♦ a set of norms and institutions regulating a certain area of public relations;
♦ a separate complex of social actions"
Mass communication, understood as a certain social process, as a type of social activity, has its own institutional forms. It performs certain roles assigned to it both in relation to other social institutions and in relation to society as a whole. common system social activities. The type of MC is determined directly by the type of society in which it operates. In one society, mass communication can function exclusively in the form of state QMS, in another - state-public, in a third - both of them, supplemented by commercial QMS. However, with any type of society and, accordingly, with any type of MC, its function, like its essence, remains unchanged, but the forms and methods of functioning can be completely different. MK, fulfilling its function of transferring and introducing assessments of current events and phenomena into mass consciousness, occupies an important place in the structure of social institutions of society. Considering the fact that the type and features of the functioning of mass communication are determined by the type of society, its social, and above all, political structure, the institution of mass communication is most closely related to politics as a social institution and a certain type of social activity. Therefore, it seems necessary to consider the features of the mutual influence of intercultural society as a social institution and other social institutions using the example of its interaction with politics.
Extracurricular activities develops communication skills students, their thinking abilities, talents, inclinations of children, broadens their horizons, cultivates in them high moral qualities. Therefore, extracurricular activities are the most effective means formation of communication skills, as well as the easiest and most age-appropriate junior schoolchildren activities. Also, it should be noted that the effectiveness of the process of developing communication skills depends on the teacher’s choice of appropriate forms of work with primary schoolchildren.
When organizing circle work, many teachers can use such forms of work as pair, group, and individual. In the process of interaction, the student opens up, which allows him to see his personal qualities, how they develop, change and are formed. Working in pairs will help develop the following skills: to hear each other, i.e. understand what you hear; take into account the partner’s opinion, respect his opinion; defend your point of view. The children learn to negotiate, their speech develops, and their vocabulary is enriched.
As part of the new educational standards on the basis of the school, through extracurricular activities, it is possible to create conditions for children in which they themselves, through games, discussions and exercises, discover the patterns and characteristics of relationships, communication and behavior in the human world, and also develop qualities and skills that are important for this.
When organizing group work, they are also relevant various shapes conducting classes, these can be logic games, business games, holding debates on topics that are familiar and interesting to students.
Extracurricular work should not be based solely on the principle of entertainment, but it is desirable that it be accompanied by colorfulness and emotionality. The success of extracurricular work is facilitated by clear planning, organization, and conduct of games, as one of the forms of organizing work on the formation of communication skills in extracurricular activities.
A game- the most accessible type of activity for children, a way of processing impressions received from the surrounding world. The game clearly reveals the characteristics of the child’s thinking and imagination, his emotionality, activity, and developing need for communication. While playing, children learn to apply their knowledge and skills in practice and use them in different conditions.
Business game- this is a form of work organization that involves training in joint activities, skills and abilities of cooperation and building communication. When conducting circle classes, you can use such business games as “Journey to the world of professions”, “Looking into yourself”, “Earth is our common home” (Appendix No. 5).
Debate - it is a formal method of conducting a dispute in which
parties interact with each other, presenting certain points of view, with the goal of convincing a third party. This form of work organization contributes to the development creativity schoolchildren, forms communication skills, broadens their horizons, develops general culture, intellectual development and the formation of positive motivation for cognitive activity. When conducting debates, you need to know the special rules for conducting the discussion, deciding on the winning side, as well as the procedure.
Conducting debates is an effective means of teaching students the ability to clearly and logically formulate their position, find convincing facts and arguments in support of their position. This form of work also develops a sense of confidence in one's ability to influence public opinion or change policies. Moreover, unlike other intellectual, creative and business games, “Debates” provide equal, and most importantly, real opportunities for each participant to develop leadership skills, learn to look at problems from different
points of view, convincingly prove your position, speaking in public. You can use the following debate topics for extracurricular activities in the classroom: “Computer games - good or evil?”, “Is porridge healthy?” (Appendix No. 6).
Lecture 6. Types, levels and forms of communication activities. Razsuditelova Irina Mikhailovna Senior Lecturer, Department of Public Relations 1
2. COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES AND COMMUNICATION 1. Communication actions and their forms 2. Types, levels and forms of communication activities 3. Types of communication activities 3. 1. Microcommunication 3. 2. Midcommunication 3. 3. Macrocommunication 3. 4. Cooperation and conflicts in communication activities 2. 4. Conclusions
Communication actions and their forms We defined communication activities as the movement of meanings in social space. The elementary scheme of communication (Fig. 1) corresponds to communication activity, or more precisely, not to the activity as a whole, but to its elementary part - the communication action. Communication action is a completed operation of semantic interaction that occurs without changing communication participants. COMMUNICATOR, sender, message transmitter, RECIPIENT, addressee, receiver transmitted object Elementary communication diagram
Three forms of communication action. Subjects entering into communication can pursue three goals: 1. the recipient wants to receive from the communicant some meanings that are attractive to him; 2. the communicator wants to convey to the recipient some meanings that influence the latter’s behavior; 3. the communicator and the recipient are interested in interaction in order to exchange some meanings. Accordingly, three forms of communication action are possible - Imitation, Dialogue, Control. The boundaries between different communication forms should not be absolute. Imitation, dialogue, control can merge with each other and complement each other.
1) Imitation is one of the oldest forms of conveying meanings, used by higher animals and birds; It is not without reason that some scientists considered the herd instinct to be the source of imitation. Imitation means the recipient’s reproduction of the communicant’s movements, actions, and habits. Imitation can be voluntary and involuntary (unconscious). Arbitrary imitation (imitation) is used when schooling, mastery of technology, craftsmanship. Involuntary imitation is the main method of primary socialization of preschool children.
Imitation - Object, subject relationship In public life, through Imitation, fashionable innovations, popular ideas and trends spread. At the same time, thanks to imitation, traditions, customs, and behavioral stereotypes are passed on from generation to generation. We can say that imitation is one of the ways of living social memory. The recipient purposefully selects the communicator and uses him as a source of meanings that he would like to assimilate. In this case, the communicator often does not realize his participation in the communication action. Imitation is an object - a subjective relationship, where the recipient plays an active role, and the communicator is a passive object to be imitated.
2) Dialogue - a subjective relationship Dialogue is a form of communication interaction mastered by people in the process of anthropogenesis during the formation of human language and speech. The participants in the dialogue treat each other as equal subjects who possess certain meanings. A subjective relationship develops between them, and their interaction is creative in the sense that a socio-psychological community of partners is achieved, denoted by the word “WE”. Dialogue communication is presented as a sequence of statements by participants replacing each other in the role of communicator and recipient.
A statement is not a word, not a sentence, not a paragraph, but a unit of meaning that makes it possible to answer it. The participants in the dialogue jointly create a dramatic Text that has relative semantic completeness. An unfinished dialogue develops into a communication discourse that covers many subjects and continues indefinitely. Discourse is a multi-subject endless dialogue. Dialogue is close to behavior according to the “stimulus-response” scheme; it does not require the same level of programming and organization as a monologue speech. Therefore, dialogue is considered the original form of speech, which arose among the Pithecanthropes (1500-200 thousand years ago), and monologue speech is a later communication achievement, requiring a higher culture of speech and some oratorical skills.
3) Management - subject-object relations. Management is a communication action when the communicator considers the recipient as a means of achieving his goals, as an object of management. In this case, a subject-object relationship is established between the communicant and the recipient. Control differs from dialogue in that the subject has the right to monologue, and the recipient cannot discuss with the communicator, he can only report his reaction through the feedback channel. “Friendship” between a general and a soldier is unlikely.
The considered forms of communicative actions are systematized according to similarities and differences. It should be noted that the forms of communication actions can include different content, and at the same time, the same meaning can be conveyed in two or even three forms, for example, something can be taught by demonstration (imitation), by dialogic explanation or by instructing (control). Forms of communication actions Recipient in the role Communicative roles of purposeful nikant Commu in the role of the subject of the object of influence of the purposeful subject dialogue imitation of the object of influence control ―
Elementary acts Communication actions are elementary acts, one might say atoms of communication activity, but they are also used in non-communication activities (cognition, work). In almost all types of communication activities, the forms we have considered are found, but one of the forms predominates. This allows communication activity in general to be presented at its various levels in the form of dialogical, managerial, imitative, i.e., to identify the forms of communication activity and the forms of elementary communication acts.
Types, levels and forms of communication activities Three subjects belonging to different levels of the social structure can act as communicants and recipients: 1. Individual personality (I), 2. Social Group (G), 3. Mass aggregate (M). They can interact with each other, for example I - I, G - G, M - M, or with each other, for example I - G, I - M, G - M, etc. This results in 9 types of social communications. As shown before, communication actions can be carried out in the form of Imitation, Dialogue, Control. Dialogue is the interaction of equal partners, which is possible between subjects of the same social level, and not of different levels, because subjects of different levels, for example I and M, are not equal. There can be Imitation or Management between subjects at different levels, but not a dialogue of equal participants.
Types of communication activities Those types of communication activities where I, or G, or M act as an active, purposeful Subject will be called microcommunication, midicommunication, macrocommunication, respectively. Those types where I, or G, or M act as the Object of influence will be called, respectively, interpersonal, group and mass communication, understanding by them the levels of social communications. The resulting two-dimensional classification of types and levels of communication activities is presented in Fig. Designations: I - individual; G - group; M - mass aggregate; R - recipient; K - communicator; n - imitation; d - dialogue; y - control.
7 + 5 + = 15 forms of Communication activities We can distinguish 7 forms of microcommunication, 5 forms of midicommunication and 3 forms of macrocommunication. Each of the forms manifests itself at the interpersonal, group, and mass levels. Let us systematize and designate the resulting 15 forms. To complete the picture of possible forms of communication activity, one should take into account quasi-communication, when the communicant addresses an imaginary subject and gains a sense of dialogue with him. This includes the phenomenon of fetishization. Let us consider in more detail the listed forms of communication activity, distributing them by type of social communication: micro-, midi-, macrocommunication.
Types of communication activities 1. Microcommunication (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) Table 1 presents 7 forms of microcommunication, where individual personality acts as an active recipient (imitation) or an active communicator (dialogue, control); the communication partners can be either another individual, or a social group, or a mass aggregate (society as a whole). The content of microcommunication is quite obvious; at the Interpersonal level - this is either the assimilation of forms of behavior, skills, external attributes of a chosen role model - copying a model, or the exchange of ideas, arguments, proposals between interlocutors - a friendly or business conversation, or instructions for their execution by a subordinate - a command.
At the group level, reference is possible (the same imitation, but not of an individual, but of a social group with which the individual wants to identify himself, for example, the imitation of merchants of the noble class; (note that negative reference occurs when a person consciously avoids the signs of the group he rejects) leadership collective - management, organization, leadership in a group; At the mass level, communication actions serve for socialization - a person’s mastery of generally accepted norms, beliefs, ideals in a given society, in order to “be like everyone else,” authoritarianism, i.e., despotic control of the masses of subordinate people ( absolutism, tyranny, autocracy are political forms of authoritarianism). Note that the dialogue of the individual with the group or mass is excluded.
Mid-communication (8, 9, 10, 11) The five forms of Mid-communication include such social communication phenomena as fashion - based on imitation, the transfer in social space of material forms, patterns of behavior and ideas that are emotionally attractive to social groups; negotiations are a common way of resolving conflicts and reaching agreements between social groups; group hierarchy develops in large institutions (managers - workers), in army units, where contacts between groups are clearly regulated; adaptation to the environment turns into a communication problem for national diasporas living among foreigners; The leadership of society is carried out by creative groups that generate ideological meanings that determine the spiritual (not material!) life of society. Let us dwell in more detail on this form of midicommunication.
Worldview meanings are knowledge that explains observed phenomena, the origin of man and the Universe, the meaning of human life, ideals, norms and incentives for social activity. These centers shift in the course of sociocultural evolution. Archaeoculture is characterized by mythocentrism, while paleoculture is characterized by religiocentrism. Western European neoculture since the 17th century (the century of universal geniuses) developed under the auspices of secular knowledge led by philosophy and in the 19th century gradually moved to science-centrism. Soviet times - the dominance of political centrism, the content of which was determined by a group of leading communist ideologists according to the formula of G and M. Based on Lenin’s principle of party membership, a gigantic propaganda system was created (monologue, centralized control, mobilization of all communication resources) As a result, the high efficiency of the communist education of a person of a new formation - homo soviticus was ensured
Macrocommunication (13, 14, 15) Macrocommunication forms of communication interaction, which are in Table. 2 named borrowing of achievements (M p M), interaction of cultures (M d M) information aggression (M y M), are clearly visible in the thousand-year history of interaction between the Russian state and Europe. Moreover, fluctuations from imitation to dialogue and back are easily noticeable. Information aggression is a relatively new phenomenon, appearing only in the 20th century. The Baptism of Rus' at the end of the 10th century is an indisputable act of macrocommunication imitation. (M p M),
Historical examples Ivan IV, who started the Livonian War for access to the Baltic Sea and was about to marry Elizabeth of England, of course, considered himself not a student of European wisdom, but an equal partner of any monarch. Muscovy was ready for a dialogue of cultures according to the formula (M d M). The 17th century was a time of gradual rapprochement with Europe. Peter's transformations - unconditional apprenticeship, a new “picking under the windows of European temples of wisdom”, a new phase (M and M). The military victory of the USSR, and then the Iron Curtain, the fight against cosmopolitanism and servility before the West, ideologically consistent nationalism in the Soviet style. There is no longer a communication dialogue; this, according to the formula (M y M) is information aggression
Dialogue communication is most consistent with the socio-psychological nature of people and therefore it brings the greatest satisfaction to the participants. Dialogue at the level of microcommunication becomes a form of spiritual friendship and effective business cooperation, which does not deny fundamental disputes and differences of opinion. At the level of midicommunication, dialogical cooperation between different social groups is possible, including dialogue with the authorities, which again does not cancel rivalry and polemical discussions between opponents. To achieve national harmony and international cooperation, macrocommunication dialogue, in which peoples, states, and civilizations become participants, is of decisive importance.
Historical examples Enlightenment and critical realist literature, starting from N. M. Karamzin and ending with M. Gorky, cultivated subject-object relationships with a “friend reader”, which corresponds to the formula cooperation of G y M or G y G. In modernism, shocking the reading public (remember “A Slap in the Face of Public Taste”) and professing self-charmed egocentrism, the control scheme of G and G operates, but with conflicting content. Socialist realism, which propagated party doctrines, belongs to the G and M formula, as do all means of propaganda seeking to establish cooperation with recipients.
Communication as a social psychological and communication category The category “communication” is often identified with the category “communication”. In the “Psychological Dictionary”: Communication, see Communication is defined as “the interaction of two or more people, consisting in the exchange of information of a cognitive or affective nature between them,” i.e., the exchange of knowledge or emotions. Identification of the categories “communication” and “ social communication" would be the easiest and simplest solution, but there is a danger of losing important aspects of the category of "communication" that have been missed by communication theories
Three plans of communication Usually communication is included in the practical activities of people (joint work, cognition, play), although there is also the possibility of isolating communication into an independent activity that satisfies a person’s needs for contacts with other people, i.e., a communication need. In general, there are three sides, or three plans of communication: Perceptual side - mutual perception, the desire to understand the motives of the partners’ behavior; B. Communication side - exchange of statements, sign messages; B. The interactive side is the exchange of not only words, but also actions in accordance with the adopted program of joint practical activities.
Oral communication So, we come to the following conclusions: 1. Oral communication: does not exist outside of communication, while communication may not include verbal communication. 2. The relationship between oral communication and communication occurs in two versions: communication is the spiritual component of material and production communication (part of communication); communication exhausts the content of spiritual communication (is identical to communication). 3. Oral communication activity is the spiritual communication of social subjects. Let us draw attention to the fact that this definition does not contradict the definition of communication activity as the movement of meanings in social space; after all, the spiritual communication of social subjects is nothing more than the mentioned movement. 4. Written communication and electronic communication coincide with written communication, since joint material and production activities are excluded.
Conclusions (1 5) 1. Communication action is a completed operation of semantic interaction that occurs without changing the participants in communication. Depending on the goal of the participants, communication action can be carried out in three forms: imitation, control, dialogue. Communication activity consists of communication actions. The predominant form of communication actions (imitation, or control, or dialogue) becomes the form of the corresponding communication activity. 2. The subjects and objects of communication activity can be: an individual person (I), a social group (), a mass G aggregate, up to society as a whole (M). Those types of communication activities where I, or G, or M act as an active, purposeful subject are called microcommunication, midicommunication, and macrocommunication, respectively. Those types where I, or G, or M act as the object of influence are called those with a responsible interpersonal, group and mass level of communication. Dialogue is possible only between subjects of the same level; management and imitation - between subjects of all levels. .
Conclusions (6 12) 3. Microcommunication activity in all its forms is an art, that is, creatively productive, playful, and not ritually reproductive activity. 4. Mid-communication management is the driving center of the spiritual life of society, appearing at different stages of culture in the form of mythocentrism, religiocentrism, literary centrism, science centrism, political centrism. 5. In the history of all countries, and the Russian state in particular, macrocommunication (borrowing achievements, interaction of cultures, information aggression) served as a source of internal political and socio-cultural revolutions. 6. Communication activity is not a chain of sequential communication actions (operations), but a unity of communication and non-communication acts; and vice versa, any non-communication activity (cognition, work) includes communication actions in its structure. 7. Communication activity includes not one, but two social subjects (in contrast to labor and cognitive activities), having one performer. It follows that communication activity is a social relationship, the poles of which are cooperation and conflict. 8. Oral communication activity is the spiritual communication of social subjects; it never happens outside of communication.
