1 Emma Rogers 10/4/12 Dr. Langan COMM 301 The Interactional Vie The Interactional Vie is com!

rise" o# #o$r %e& a'ioms. The one that I ill (e e'!an"ing on is the conce!t o# )One Cannot *ot Comm$nicate+. Man& see this a'iom as (eing the most researche" an" re,ie e" a'iom o# them all. -at.la ic% #oc$ses mainl& on ,er(al comm$nication an" the non,er(al c$es that e sen" hile tr&ing to not comm$nicate. /e gi,es the e'am!le o# a (o&s #ace (eing his )immo(ile mas%+ 01ri##in !.1233 an" that hile tr&ing to not comm$nicate (& remaining silent4 o$r #ace an" this silence are their o n #orms o# comm$nication. Digging "ee!er into this !artic$lar a'iom4 I ant to loo% at the m$lti!le "i##erent s$( categories that are ithin comm$nication an" ho (eing $na(le to not comm$nicate a!!lies to each o# these. The s$( categories are o#ten "i,i"e" into ,er(al4 non,er(al4 an" ritten comm$nication. Each o# these categories ha,e (een (ro%en "o n (& man& researchers to sho the a&s that the& relate (ac% to this a'iom o# one cannot not comm$nicate. 5igni#icant research has also (een "one on the o!!osite an" that one in"ee" can not comm$nicate i# a message is not recei,e". This is a ,er& inter!reti,e theor& ith a lot o# ties to !s&cholog&. 6e#ore e'!an"ing on these three categories4 I ant to "e,elo! the core tho$ght o# it #irst so that there is a soli" ($il"ing (loc%. The theor& is a""resse" in the (oo% entitle" Pragmatics of Human Communication that there is no o!!osite o# (eha,ior. I# there is no o!!osite o# (eha,ior4 then one cannot not (eha,e. The& go on to sa& that in an interactional state4 hether alone or ith others4 there is some sort o# message (eing #orme". This message is also %no n as comm$nication so there#ore i# one

2 cannot not (eha,e then one cannot not comm$nicate4 (eca$se the& are tie" together. This means that hether e are s!ea%ing4 rea"ing4 riting4 or silent4 o$r actions still ha,e a #orm o# comm$nication attache" to them hether ith others or alone. I# e are ith others4 the& also ha,e no choice ($t to re!l& to this comm$nication ith one o# the a(o,e actions4 an" are there#ore comm$nicating as ell. Man& e'am!les o# the attem!ts to not comm$nicate can (e #o$n" in schi.o!hrenic (eha,ior. -at.la ic%4 6a,elas4 an" 7ac%son sai"8 9the schi.o!hrenic tries not to communicate. 6$t since e,en non:sense4 silence4 ith"ra al4 immo(ilit& 0!ost$ral silence34 or an& other #orm o# "enial is itsel# a comm$nication9 0!g. ;03 -hether tr&ing to not comm$nicate or $nintentionall& comm$nicating4 there are still messages (eing sent to others4 hich are !ro,en #orms o# comm$nication. *e't e are going to loo% "ee!er into each o# the s$(:categories o# comm$nication an" $n"erstan" h&4 ithin each o# these categories4 one cannot not comm$nicate. Loo%ing at the ,er(al si"e o# this a'iom o# one cannot not comm$nicate4 it seems rather sel#:e'!lanator&< &o$ either tal% or &o$ "on=t tal%. >es4 this is correct ($t hat i# &o$ merel& $se a one: or" ans er in res!onse to the ?$estion ho as &o$r "a&@ 6& re!l&ing ith )goo"+ an"

then lea,ing the con,ersation4 e are "oing something that -at.la ic% calle" the symptom strategy. This s$ggests that )I o$l"n=t min" tal%ing to &o$4 ($t something stronger than I4 #or hich I cannot (e (lame"4 !re,ents me.+ 01ri##in 2012 !g 1233 -hat this is sa&ing is that there are things that are more im!ortant to me at this moment than ha,ing this con,ersation ith &o$ . I am still in ,er(al comm$nication ith them (& gi,ing them this one or" ans er4 ($t not in the a& that the& inten"e". Man& researchers ha,e gi,en the e'am!le o# #l&ing on a !lane. -hen on

3 a !lane4 the !assengers ha,e t o things that the& cannot "o. The #irst is lea,e the !lane< !h&sicall&4 &o$ ha,e no a& o# lea,ing the sit$ation i# &o$ "i" not ant to comm$nicate ith them< &o$ are st$c% on a !lane tho$san"s o# #eet in the air. The secon" is that &o$ cannot not comm$nicate. 0-at.la ic%4 6a,elas4 7ac%son 1ABC3 Dor e'am!le4 let=s sa& &o$ are seate" ne't to someone ho ants to chat the entire #light. Eccor"ing to -at.la ic% &o$ ha,e three "i##erent o!tions4 the #irst is to reFect this comm$nication4 hich #alls into the non:,er(al categor&. 5econ"4 &o$ can acce!t this comm$nication (& res!on"ing to this !erson an" ma%ing con,ersation. Dinall&4 there is "is?$ali#ication o# comm$nication. -at.la ic% "e#ines this in Pragmatics of Human Communication as he or she ma& )comm$nicate in a a& that in,ali"ates his o n comm$nications or those o# the other.+ 0!g CB3 -at.la ic% goes on to sa& that this can (e #o$n" in things li%e incom!lete sentences4 contra"ictions4 inconsistencies4 s$(Fect s itches4 etc. 01ABC3. I# ans ering all o# the ?$estions that this !erson is as%ing an" !artici!ating in the con,ersation4 &o$ ha,e the o!tion to either engage in the ?$estions or to gi,e meaningless ans ers. >o$ ha,e the o!tion o# gi,ing an e'c$se< let=s sa& &o$ tell them &o$ ant to go to slee!. >o$ are again con,e&ing to them this s&m!tom strateg& an" sa&ing that something else ta%es !rece"ence to the con,ersation the& are tr&ing to ha,e. -ith all o# these "i##erent o!tions4 the en" res$lt o# each o# them is ,er(al comm$nication4 sho ing that one cannot not comm$nicate. *on:,er(al comm$nication can ha!!en in #ace:to:#ace 0#t#3 interactions as ell as ,er(al messages sent thro$gh the tele!hone. 5tic%ing ith this same !lane e'am!le ($t mo,ing to non: ,er(al comm$nication ith #ace:to:#ace interactions4 there are man& "i##erent messages someone can (e comm$nicating to the other !assenger tr&ing to comm$nicate on the !lane. 5a& #or

4 instance !assenger E intro"$ces himsel# or hersel# to !assenger 64 an" once the intro"$ction is o,er4 !assenger 6 t$rns their (ac% to !assenger E an" goes to slee!. 6& "oing this4 !assenger 6 is comm$nicating to E man& "i##erent things4 s$ch as that he or she is tire" or "oes not ant to tal%. -hat 6 is "oing is !olitel& sa&ing that he or she "oes not ant to tal%4 instea" o# ,er(all& telling them that4 hich o$l" (e seen as r$"e. *on:,er(all& this goes (ac% to the symptom strategy "isc$sse" earlier. Gassenger 6 is con,e&ing to E that his or her tire"ness4 hich he or she cannot (e (lame" #or4 is !re,enting the con,ersation #rom contin$ing 0-at.la ic%4 7ac%son 20103. *on:,er(all&4 6 co$l" (e comm$nicating that the& "o not care a(o$t the con,ersation an" ant nothing to "o ith the comm$nication !assenger E is tr&ing to sen". This co$l" (e intentional or $nintentional ($t either a& 6 is sen"ing a non:,er(al message to E. This sit$ation co$l" (e !$t into man& "i##erent e'am!les4 sa& &o$ come (ac% to &o$r a!artment a#ter classes one "a& an" are not in the moo" to tal% to &o$r o,er the to! an" incre"i(le !e!!& roommate. -hen &o$ al% in she instantl& sa&s hi an" ants to %no all a(o$t &o$r "a&4 &o$ al% straight !ast her an" close the "oor to &o$r room. Eltho$gh nothing as ,er(all& sai" to her4 &o$ ere non:,er(all& comm$nicating that &o$ "i" not ant to s!ea% #or hate,er the reason ma& (e. This can also (e seen in small a&s4 sa& &o$ are sitting in a room listening to a lect$re #rom &o$r !ro#essor an" &o$ &a n. >o$r !ro#essor ma& see this an" thin% that &o$ are (ore" or not intereste" in hat she is sa&ing hen in realit& &o$ might ha,e F$st not gotten eno$gh slee! the night (e#ore an" are incre"i(l& tire" ($t &o$ act$all& #in" the lect$re #ascinating. It is im!ossi(le to not comm$nicate non:,er(all&. -e are constantl& sen"ing o$t non:,er(al messages to those aro$n" $s hether e reali.e it or not. There are also the ,er(al messages sent hile on the tele!hone that ha,e non:,er(al

; messages attache" to them4 hich tie to the a'iom o# one cannot not comm$nicate. 6a,elas4 6lac%4 Cho,il an" M$llet (rea% "o n this ,er(al comm$nication o,er the !hone into t o "i##erent categories in their (oo% calle" Equivocal Communication. The #irst is the s!o%en non,er(al !ortion s$ch as )tone o# ,oice4 em!hasis4 rh&thm4 rate o# s!eech4 an" hesitations+. These are all #o$n" ithin the ,er(al message (eing sent4 ($t there is also a non,er(al !h&sical !ortion4 hich is )#acial e'!ressions4 gest$res4 (o"& mo,ements4 an" "irection o# ga.e+. 01AA03 These are onl& seen ithin the #t# interactions. O,er the !hone one o$l" not !ic% $! on things s$ch as #acial e'!ressions or (o"& mo,ements4 ($t the& ill !ic% $! on hesitations or the tone o# ,oice. -hile on the !hone someone co$l" (e comm$nicating one thing to the !erson on the other en"4 ($t comm$nicating something com!letel& "i##erent to those aro$n" him or her at the same time. Let=s sa& &o$r (est #rien" is tal%ing on the !hone to his or her (o&#rien" or girl#rien" hile &o$ are in the room. The& seem to (e ha,ing a normal con,ersation #rom hat &o$ can tell (& the so$n" o# their ,oice an" hat he or she is sa&ing to the other4 ($t all o# a s$""en &o$ notice there are tears coming "o n the !ersons chee%s. >o$ "on=t %no hat as sai" on the other en"

o# the !hone4 ($t &o$ %no something $!set &o$r (est #rien" (eca$se o# the tears. This is a non,er(al an" $nintentional comm$nication to &o$ that something is not o%4 altho$gh the !erson on the other en" o# the !hone ma& not %no (eca$se the& cannot see hat &o$ are seeing. There ha,e also (een st$"ies "one on hether e non:,er(all& comm$nicate more hen e are #t# or hen there is a (arrier s$ch as on the tele!hone. 6a,elas4 1er ing4 5$tton an" Gre,ost "i" a st$"& on )1est$ring on the tele!hone8 In"e!en"ent e##ects o# "ialog$e an" ,isi(ilit&. The& teste" !eo!le in three "i##erent gro$!s4 one as #t#4 one o,er the tele!hone4 an" one ta!e: recor"e". The& #o$n" that #t# an" the tele!hone con,ersation ha" a m$ch higher gest$re rate than

B "i" the ta!e recor"er. The reason #or this as (eca$se there as "ialog$e ith (oth o# these sit$ations an" not ith the ta!e:recor"er. These gest$res are #orms o# non,er(al comm$nication an" can (e #o$n" e,er& time e comm$nicate. The last o# these three categories is riting4 hich is also tie" to this a'iom o# one cannot not comm$nicate as ell. -or"s hol" "i##erent s&m(ols an" meanings #or each !erson "e!en"ing on their (ac%gro$n" conte't that has sha!e" this or". In a st$"& "one (& 7anet 6a,elas an" *icole Cho,il4 the& "isc$sse" ho !eo!le $se "is?$ali#ication in comm$nication. This can (e translate" to mean that there are messages that artic$late something4 itho$t act$all& artic$lating it4 hich is also %no n as the symptom strategy "isc$sse" earlier. -hat 6a,elas an" Cho,il "i" as #o$r e'!eriments here the& ga,e in"i,i"$als a comm$nicati,e con#lict an" as%e" them to rite their res!onse message too in or"er to i"enti#& these "is?$ali#ie" messages. The& #o$n" that )these messages ere signi#icantl& higher in ?$antitati,e meas$res o# "is?$ali#ication than ere the messages ritten in control con"itions.+ 01A2B !g C03 In s$mmar&4 the& #o$n" that "is?$ali#ie" comm$nication is logical re#lection o# the setting the sen"er ma& (e in. I# someone is attem!ting to a,oi" comm$nicating a certain message4 the& o#ten ill en" $! generating the $ninten"e" message. The& ma& (e $nintentionall& comm$nicating something thro$gh their ritten or"s that other !eo!le ill !ic% $! on. Dinall&4 I ant to (rie#l& to$ch on the co$nter arg$ment to this4 hich sa&s that it is !ossi(le #or one to not comm$nicate an" gi,e a #e reasons as to h& this is not !ossi(le. Michael T. Motle& states that there are a #e reasons as to h& this is !ossi(le4 one (eing that comm$nication is an interacti,e or t o: a& !rocess. This means that all comm$nication

C re?$ires an acti,e contri($tion #rom (oth a sen"er an" a recei,er. Motle& inter!rets this to mean that8 hen a recei,er inter!rets anotherHs (eha,ior in the a(sence o# the Isen"erHsI goal or s$(: goal to ha,e that (eha,ior inter!rete"4 0i.e. in the a(sence o# other "irecte"ness3 then the recei,er is engage" in a one: a& !rocess that is less than interacti,e. 0!. 103 /e is sa&ing that e,en i# a message is sent4 i# it is not inter!rete" in the a& that the sen"er is inten"ing #or it to (e sent4 it is not consi"ere" a t o: a& !rocess o# comm$nication. Loo%ing at the re,erse si"e o# this4 F$st (eca$se someone is in a #aile" comm$nication ith someone "oes not mean that this is not comm$nication. >o$ are still sen"ing a message an" there#ore creating some sort o# comm$nication4 e,en i# it is one that "oes not ma%e sense to another !erson. Eltho$gh it is im!ortant that the message sent is recei,e" or not recei,e"4 it )is an im!ortant ($t "i##erent or"er o# anal&sis4 as it m$st res$lt $ltimatel& on e,al$ations o# s!eci#ic9 s$(Fect: re!orte" "ata9+ 0-at.la ic% 1ABC3 Enother co$nter arg$ment that Motle& $ses is that one o# the com!onents o# comm$nication is enco"ing. This means that e,er& message has (e translate" or constr$cte" in a a& #or the recei,er to ma%e sense o# it. *o 4 Motle& arg$es that this is tr$e an" that i# this is tr$e that it is !ossi(le to not comm$nicate. I agree ith Motle& that this statement is tr$e4 ($t he goes on to sa& that this is onl& tr$e i# comm$nication as an interacti,e !rocess is seen as #alse. There#ore it is !ossi(le #or one to not comm$nicate4 accor"ing to Motle&4 i# comm$nication is not seen as an interacti,e !rocess an" it is also not enco"e". 6$t since it is alrea"& !ro,en that comm$nication is in"ee" an interacti,e !rocess4 it is also tr$e in sa&ing that one o# its com!onents is also enco"ing.

2 The a'iom o# one cannot not comm$nicate #o$n" in -at.la ic%=s Interactional Vie has (een an" ill contin$e to (e i"el& an" hea,il& researche". -ith the man& "i##erent com!onents o# ,er(al4 non,er(al an" riting #o$n" in comm$nication4 e see that one o# these ill al a&s (e comm$nicating an" sen"ing o$t a message. Ver(all&4 &o$ ha,e the choice to s!ea% or not to s!ea%. -hen choosing to s!ea%4 e can (e sen"ing not F$st one4 ($t m$lti!le messages to those e are s!ea%ing too. Messages are o#ten enco"e" to ha,e more than one meaning to them. I# e chose not to s!ea%4 e ill (e sen"ing a non,er(al message. This can (e in the #orm o# (o"& gest$res4 e&e mo,ement4 a!!earance4 !h&sical to$ch an" man& more things. O#ten these can (e $nintentional things that the message sen"er "oes not !ic% $! on ($t the recei,er "oes. There is also ,oice tone4 or" em!hasis4 rh&thm an" rate o# s!eech4 an" hesitations that im!act ho the recei,er "eco"es the comm$nication. Dinall& there is riting4 hich has (een hea,il& researche" to sho that there is a high $sage o# "is?$ali#ication ithin ritten messages. This means that ithin ritten messages4 !eo!le are o#ten tr&ing to con,e& more than one thing. -hether or not another recei,es these comm$nication messages4 the& still remain a #orm o# comm$nication. -e are constantl& sen"ing o$t "i##erent messages4 intentionall& or $nintentionall&. -at.la ic%=s a'iom o# one cannot not comm$nicate has !ro,en to (e tr$e an" tie" to man& "i##erent #orms o# comm$nication as ell. Eltho$gh it ill contin$e to (e teste" in attem!ts to !ro,e it rong4 -at.la ic% has "one a great Fo( co,ering all !ossi(le gro$n"s to sho that this is a st$r"& theor& an" ill not (e ta%en "o n.