More information about speaking

 

Speaking is a complex business with a huge number of pitfalls if we are not aware of some of the possible issues.

Rules - through living and learning in social environments we all learn a range of ways of communicating, usually without realising it (unless we move into a different culture and start to be aware of our assumptions about the meanings embedded into communication). Nazra was puzzled when Jean asked her about her experiences of communicating with men in distress. This was because she had not had to think about this before.

One of the 'rules' of speaking is 'turntaking'. In the formal environment of supervision, we observed Jean and Nazra adhering to this rule in a strict way, neither individual interrupted the other. In less formal settings, this 'rule' will not be followed in this way, and Nazra in her work with children will have experienced this very differently, and she might have been engaged in assisting children to learn to take turns in talking.

Power - who is allowed to speak? The French philosopher Michel Foucault (1972) argued that by looking at discourse (that is, ideas and practices) it is possible to identify power and how it works. We have already noticed that in the supervision meeting, it was Jean who held the agenda. This seemed OK for this early stage of the practice learning, but should not be allowed to become a pattern which cannot be shifted.

Power isn't just about who is allowed to speak though. It is also about what can be said, and not said. From Nazra's point of view, she cannot say that she is absolutely terrified of Paul - after all, what will Jean think of her if she does? It has to be acknowledged that Nazra will be acutely aware in all her communications with Jean that she has the power to pass or fail her practicum. This will have an effect on all her dealings with Jean throughout the period of practice learning, no matter how democratic or warmhearted Jean may appear to be.

Phatic communication - this is a linguistic phrase which refers to the small talk that we engage in, often to lead in and out of more formal communication. In our scenario we did not see this aspect between Jean & Nazra, however the presupervision process involved in getting a hot drink and 'small talk'- 'phatic communication'.

For example, Jean might have asked about something social that Nazra had been involved in - as long as this was a non-threatening topic for Nazra. Thompson (2003) notes that phatic communication in Britain can often focus around the weather.

Essentially the purpose of this communication is to start in a shallow way to indicate 'friendliness' before moving into more depth of communication. Nazra will need to learn - if she does not already do this - to engage in this way with service users. The end of supervision (and contacts with service users) will also be marked by 'phatic communication'.

Meaning - Thompson (2003) talks about the three interrelated levels of the personal, cultural and structural contexts for each individual impacting on the meanings that 'we seek to convey and to those we receive'. At the personal level he talks about 'identity and emotion' (which we look at in other places); at the cultural level he considers the 'the shared meanings, assumptions and understandings which have developed historically in a given community (geographical community, community of interest, or a professional community)'.

One of the aspects of meaning around which any student/learner needs to develop an understanding is that of 'workplace culture'. For example, the way that humour is used within a workplace can be confusing for a student/learner - does it convey disrespect for service users?, is it a way of relieving stress within the private space of an office? In Jean's workplace it will be important that she is able to be objective, stand back and notice the way different 'meanings' could be attached to how her colleagues behave, and to talk to Nazra about these meanings.

Thompson's third level is the structural - that is the ways in which power and life chances are distributed in line with social divisions such as 'class, race and gender' (this relates power as described previously).

'Politically correct' language - one of the ways in which efforts to challenge discrimination and inequality is often resisted is through deriding the language used within these efforts towards change. Clearly, changes in language in themselves do not change the life chances of communities on the receiving end of unequal treatment, but language is a symbolic part of change processes. In the process between Jean and Nazra there could be a number of areas of difficulty. For example, if Jean has not received, or made use of, education around race equality she could feel nervous about how to talk to Nazra about her ethnic minority identity - language could become a barrier instead of a source of exploration and developed understanding.

For Nazra, if Jean, for example,referred to having a 'night out with the girls', and Nazra had specific views about the way women can be infantilised through the use of language and reacted negatively to this phrase, a distance could be created which neither is able to talk about. The way through these difficulties is one that requires an understanding of the way language conveys meaning and that it is a political matter in the sense that it is one of the contested areas in the struggle to define the world.

Para-language - this refers to the pitch, volume, speed, tone and sound effects which accompany spoken words. You may have noticed that points in supervision where Nazra's speech slows down or becomes quieter she is communicating something to Jean beyond the words she is using.

As well as these aspects which accompany speech, there can be different meanings attached to the same words, and learning within specific disciplines requires the development of different understandings about particular words. For example, if Nazra had not studied psychology she might not have understood the phrase 'hearing voices' as anything other than what the actual words suggest, she could have interpreted another worker talking about this as Paul hearing his neighbours next door, rather than an internal process associated with a particular diagnosis within some schools of mental health knowledge.