Misunderstanding and Misinformation When Interpreting The Written Text PDF

Preview

Summary

© Stefan Nicholson 2008 Can We Recognise Misunderstanding and Misinformation When Interpreting The Written Text? Introduction The act of public speaking is the most feared form of communication, for fear of embarrassment, showing your nervousness, making mistakes, being unprepared and presenting poo...

Description

© Stefan Nicholson 2008 Can We Recognise Misunderstanding and Misinformation When Interpreting The Written Text?

Introduction The act of public speaking is the most feared form of communication, for fear of embarrassment, showing your nervousness, making mistakes, being unprepared and presenting poor information. Once the presentation is over, your performance sinks into history, ignored by your attendees. At least, during the presentation, you can explain your points, expand on concepts and create interesting diversions with charts, film, activities and other time-fillers. Verbal communication is transitory and has a limited audience. A good speech should always be well prepared and written down - either in full, or as points to be discussed for later presentation. However, the stand-alone text may not explain itself correctly to someone reading it, without further discussion and explanation. The same goes for reading email, letters, tutorials, examinations, advertising, and in fact – any written text. Another characteristic of the written text is its permanency. Many people can read that text over a long time period and in many different ways. It can be analysed and deconstructed by the reader to present many varied interpretations, to further the interests of that reader. Similarly, the writer may want to create a false understanding of the text for the reader in order to persuade or bias the reader, possibly for financial or political gain. The writer of non-fiction may want to enhance a lifeless description, to produce greater feeling and depth within the writing – to sell more books, or get revenge. Misinformation or false facts in a written text, placed there by the writer, constitutes a special case of misunderstanding, as the facts may be wrong (intentionally or mistakenly) or out of context with the situation being written about. I have found that generally we can recognise these situations, by putting a name to these elements of misunderstanding, which we know well, if only by their effect on us. This paper will look at the elements used intentionally by the writer to deliberately change the meaning of what would normally be deduced from a text, when considering only the mechanics of reading. This means deciphering each word and sentence from dictionary definitions, and constructing an interpretation, much like a foreign migrant would do, in interpreting a new language. Of course, if the mechanisms used by writers to create a misunderstanding are known to the perceptive audience, then there is no longer a misunderstanding.

What is the mechanism for understanding the written text? Before we can misunderstand a written text, it is imperative that we know the mechanisms of how to understand it correctly. Purely from a language point of view and using English for the examples, we must take the written text as a whole, and break it down into its parts – the paragraph, the sentence and the word. Starting with the simplest element - there are five main functional classes to describe how a word may be enacted 1, as shown in Table 1 below. Page: 1 of 6

© Stefan Nicholson 2008 Word Function Class

Definition of the Function of Word

Stipulative

Freely assigns meaning to a completely new word – creating a usage that had never previously existed. An example is if I create a new word “SMOLIDAY” to represent a Summer Holiday. Represents the way in which a word is already used within a language – such as found in a reputable dictionary. This class combines the previous two – by taking the lexical definition and narrowing it down by stipulating limits on its use. An example would be using the term “ABC Foundation Member”, where the definition of such a member is defined within narrow limits. These are special cases of Stipulative or précising definitions – by using the term within the context of a broader intellectual framework – usually linked to a theory. An example would be the term “inertia” that is linked in part to the definitions within Sir Isaac Newton’s theories. This class attempts to attach emotive meaning to words – often confusing the literal meaning of the word. An example would be to use “Intelligent Chip” to describe a computer processing circuit module. It is also an example of the Stipulative class.

Lexical Précising

Theoretical

Persuasive

Table: 1

Without a common definition of the words used in a text, even one word may be misunderstood. Checking a dictionary will enable a common understanding of the word, but perhaps not a true understanding of what it means in the text – if taken out of context. The words are joined together to form a sentence, representing a train of thought. The sentence is also subject to having a wide understanding, based on intention, tone, style, clarity, grammar, and again – can be misunderstood if taken out of context or has an element of misunderstanding attached to it (intentionally or by mistake). A paragraph is constructed of one or more sentences, to generally group similar information, in order to present that information logically and clearly. The elements of misunderstanding within individual sentences of a paragraph may be explained satisfactorily by having the additional information within the paragraph. It can also be the vessel for constructing a more convincing web of deceit and illusory story telling. We read text (as if speaking out aloud), and according to our knowledge of language, the world around us, our previous exposure to the subject matter and other experiential elements. A knowledgeable, creative writer can expose and share the feelings and true meanings of their texts. With the postmodernist reading of the text using deconstruction and cultural theory, the original meanings may be “rewritten” and understood in a different way. Anyone reading a postmodernist analysis of such a text is truly reading a new text – far removed from the original, creating a “twice removed” thought process. The basic mechanics of reading a text creates a sequence with which to work. I will now explain the elements of misunderstanding, which concentrate on higher levels of interpreting a writer’s intentions, where misunderstanding can take place due to complexity and lack of experience.

Page: 2 of 6

© Stefan Nicholson 2008

Elements of Misunderstanding, of the Written Text There are two broad categories leading to the misunderstanding of the written text – intentional and unintentional. This paper will focus on the intentional, to avoid written texts containing honest factual mistakes and typographical errors by printers and publishers – as these belong to the subset that we call misinformation. Deliberately changing the meaning of part of a text, does not always produce a negative effect on the reader, as is first imagined. The effect may be funny, embarrassing, informative beyond normal meaning, as well as sinister, misleading, and many other emotional outcomes. Different people may have different reactions, based on life experience and importance of the information to them. The end result of following business information from text that has been misunderstood, may lead to financial loss and emotional stress. In technical writing for oil, mining and aviation maintenance, misunderstanding may lead to serious accidents or even fatalities. I will now give some specific examples of elements of misunderstanding, and again emphasise that some elements are both positive and highly regarded, when their mechanism is known. To an “outsider” interpreting their meanings, they may well be misunderstood.

Humour, Sarcasm, Wit and Figurative Language Australia is the land of the larrikin and humour permeates every layer of the culture. We call ginger heads “Bluey” to use another bright colour, and call workers who fly in and out of mine sites “seagulls”, to project a feeling that they are impermanent and have casual work ethics. This form of misrepresenting words and images for fun and exaggeration of normal description is collectively called figurative language. The figurative language of creative writers is “littered with throw-away” lines and clichés, decorative and descriptive comment, and skilled use of combining just the right words to paint the desired enhanced picture. Here are some examples: Personification: “The door stood tall, groaning drunkenly out loud and long, for a drop of oil” – gives human characteristic to the door. We all know this to be figurative. Allusion: “Pauline Hanson became Boudicca at the moment of her decision to form a new party” – makes a casual reference to the ancient Queen Boudicca, who united the Britons against invaders. Malapropism: Kath and Kim on television produced a recent example of this figurative play on language, when Kim says: “I am effluent Mum” – instead of using the correct word – affluent. Oxymoron: This is the combination of two apparently contradictory words, to produce an exaggerated effect: “Black humour”, “Twisted sensibility” and “Exhausted vitality” are examples. Pun: Probably the most overused form of figurative speech, especially by journalists in their headlines. It is a play on words: “Copper lead radon gold – Security personnel suspected in gold refinery theft”. Page: 3 of 6

© Stefan Nicholson 2008 Metaphor: Often used by poets and biographers for comparison of one thing to an unrelated thing, to express similarity of action or form: “Her eyes glowed like giant raindrops reflecting the sun’s rays”.

Obstacles of Clarity Writers are often guilty of using poor construction of paragraphs, hinting at muddled thinking. Lack of clarity may also be associated with the writer’s intention to confuse and create misunderstanding. This is generally employed to avoid answering direct questions (politics and reply letters), or to make unpalatable information present itself for legal reasons, but hidden awkwardly within the text. Prejudice: This manner of writing is very emotive, and combines the writer’s own judgement about an issue, with a one-sided generalisation of the issue being discussed. Prejudice is the starting point for propaganda, which focuses on specific elements of prejudice and bias – and which follows this section. Clear expression of logic and thought: Long-winded sentences and trains of obscure thought, create misunderstanding through confusion, and too much processing of information. Ideally, a writer should use short sentences, lively language, and logical statements. Ambiguity: There are pros and cons for this class, as it may be used intentionally to create humour, or unintentionally to confuse and make statements illogical. The humorous side is often employed by journalists and editors, to promote and highlight a story, using a ‘hook’, using an incomplete sentence: “Fruit-fly Conference”. This suggests that the conference will be attended by fruit-flies. This take on the title, could be correctly explained as “Conference on Fruit-fly Problem”. Poor grammatical logic may lead to ambiguity in a writer’s text, such as: “Having eaten the apple, my thoughts turned to going home”. It was not the thoughts that ate the apple, and the sentence should be written as: “My thoughts turned to home, after I had eaten the apple”.

Propaganda Almost paralleling the previous class of obstacles of clarity, the elements of propaganda serves the sole purpose of misleading a reader and confusing by deception – leading to a misunderstanding of the true nature of the topic being discussed. Rationalisation: Many examples of this element can be found in Aesop’s Fables 6. It is generally found in fictional stories and verbal snipes, to retaliate against a set of circumstances where nothing can be changed, and some sort of reasoning is needed to explain and rationalise the point. A good example is where the fox in Aesop’s Fables cannot reach a bunch of grapes, and retaliates with the statement: “They were sour anyway!” Generalisation: Well we’ve all seen and used this element, especially as children. “Everyone’s got one!” or “All my friends are going there!” Generalisation is the most common form of propaganda. In the written text reporting on crime, a writer may comment: “Our prisons are full of dangerous and mentally unstable introverts” – when statistics show that many are simply fine defaulters. Page: 4 of 6

© Stefan Nicholson 2008 A compound effect of this is called the bandwagon, where statements are linked to a generality. Examples which are used often: “This is completely un-Australian”, “Good business owners will see that I am right”. Irrelevance: This element appeals to writers who are responding to a question or letter, when they have no answer. The aim is to write around the answer and introduce side issues, refer to the weight of the majority (like generalisation), and appealing to the emotions. Omissions: Selecting facts and comment to include in a piece of writing, omitting valid information because it is not in the interest of the writer. At a later stage the writer may even state that the omissions were valid because they were unimportant or a special case – perpetuating the act of misleading, causing a misunderstanding. Exaggeration: Exaggeration is used to make sweeping statements that are not accurate, either for gain (as in resumes and advertising), or by mistake, like in this example: “The Persians annihilated the Greeks at Thermopylae” – when in fact it was only the 300 Spartans who were sent to defend the pass. Labelling: This is powerful case of generalising by association, linking unconnected images to a subject by labelling them with a connected term. An example could be if an efficient engineer who works within a professional firm of engineers, and who prefers the practical field work to office work, may be maligned by a comment that he is “like a first year apprentice plumber who has lost his tools”. Labelling is generally negative. Arbitrariness: Off-hand statements like: “She’s not a bad sort”, creates a vague picture of the person’s character, and is quite an ill-defined description. Connection of ideas and name-calling: Sounding rather like name-calling, this element uses terms to suit the writer, so that connotations beyond the true nature are formed in the mind of the reader. Examples showing two choices for each word: A teenager may be described positively as an exuberant youth, or negatively as a juvenile delinquent. A Member of Parliament may be described positively as a “statesman”, or negatively as a “politician”.

Cultural Theory and Deconstruction Critiques of books and other written text may be subjected to analyses using the tools of postmodernism by the writer. This involves deconstructing the original text, which has been critiqued, and re-reading the material through a different viewpoint. The reader of the critique is then subjected to another interpretation of that original text. To understand the matter fully, the reader should read both the original text and the critiqued text(s), to form their own opinion. If you can, ask the writer!

Conclusion I have presented some of the elements that change the written text so that a reader may not understand the true meaning, without knowing the purpose of these elements – only gained through a study of language and the art of writing. To conclude this paper, I would like to quote from the ancient Chinese text, “The Book of Leadership and Strategy” – by Huainanzi, translated by Thomas Cleary 11 Page: 5 of 6

© Stefan Nicholson 2008 “Deceptive writers are deliberately prolix and confusing in order to appear wise; competing with sophistry, their interminable reflections are inconclusive, without benefit to social order”. Did he really mean that?

Bibliography: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.

Page: 6 of 6

http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/d2.htm#def by Garth Kemerling Oxford Dictionary – University Press Textbook of Psychology – D. O. Hebb Writing Your Life – Dr. Lou Willett Stanek Essentials of Communication – P. G. Kemeny The Fables of Aesop Effective Technical Communications – Hicks & Valorie The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of Language – Crystal Sociology – Broom & Selnick Writing, The Story of Alphabets & Scripts – Georges Jean The Book of Leadership & Strategy – Translations from Huainanzi The Art of War – Sun Tzu Elementary Statistics – James Lumbden Literary Theory – Mary Klages The Postmodern – Simon Malpas...