Analysis of the texts using the SPEAKING acronym devised by Hymes

 Analysis of the texts using the SPEAKING acronym devised by Hymes

            Hymes created a priceless model that aids in the identification along with the labeling of the various elements of the linguistic interactions driven by his perspective that, so as to effectively and correctly speak a language, one should not just learn the grammar and vocabulary but additionally take the contexts under which the words are utilized into consideration (Ebrahimia & Farrokh, 2018). Hymes model has a total of sixteen components that might be employed to a number of discourses and these include; the message content; the message form; scene; settings; sender/speaker; addressor; audience/receiver/hearer; purposes/goals;  purposes/outcomes; addressee; key; channels; speech forms; interaction norms; interpretation norms, as well as genres (Hymes, 2016). This paper has, therefore, been written with the objective of analyzing text using Hymes’ model.

Setting and scene

Analysis of Text 1 discloses that the speech act occurs between an English Language teacher and Trinh, a student. The setting is the school and outside the classroom, and probably in the college cafeteria or restaurant as she wait to be served with coffee and is joined by the teacher.  The scene of the discourse entails a teacher reaching out to his/her student who is an ESL learner to encourage her with regards to her performance in English. The teacher seeks to reach out and encourage Trinh who is highly demotivated by her performance in English language even though the teacher believes she has performed better.

On the other hand, in Text 2, the setting of the discourse is a telephone conversation between a prospective applicant for a tiling course and a customer care services lady at the college in which he wishes to enroll. The prospective applicant is making inquiries on the application procedure, what is required of the applicants and if there are home handy courses for course for a home handyman like him to undertake. With regards to the scene, it can be observed that the discourse is set at a time when enrollments might be taking place and the customer care services desk might be busy handling several tasks leading to the breakdown of communication and the misunderstanding between her and the prospective applicant.

Participants

In text 1, the participants in the discourse include an English language teacher and a student, Trinh. In text 2, the participants in the discourse include a prospective applicant for a college course and a female customer care services representative working at the customer care desk of the college (Neuendorf, 2016).

Ends

In text 1, though the purpose of the conversation was mainly to encourage the demotivated student to perform better and the goal was to ensure that she does not give up on learning English, the outcomes were negative. The purpose and goals of the conversation was not attained as the student could not believe the teacher’s remark that her performance had improved.

In text 2, the purpose of the telephone discourse was to make inquiring on the availability of tiling course at the college while the goal was to enroll for the course. However, the outcome was negative given that there was a breakdown in communication and misunderstanding between the customer care representative and the prospective applicant.

Act sequence

With regards to the act sequence, it can be observed that in text 1 the teacher is seen approaching Trinh in the school restaurant as she waits to be served with coffee (Neuendorf, 2016). The teacher then initiates the talk with regards to Trinh’s performance in English language as she observes that her performance has improved. This is actually in response to Trinh’s recent work or assignment in English class. Though Trinh is not convinced by the remarks, the teacher goes on to convince her about the performance and only leaves the discussion when Trinh fails to believe him.

On the other hand, in text 2, the act sequence entails a prospective applicant for a tiling course making a phone call to the college he wishes to enroll in to inquire about the availability of the course. The phone call is answered by a female customer care agent in response to the inquiry. However, there are miscommunication and misunderstandings between the prospective applicant and the customer care agent leading to the failure to communicate effectively, and as a result, the customer care agent fails to provide the required information and requests the applicant to inquire further from TAFE Information Centre.

Key

In text one, the keys in the discussion include the greetings, and particularly the use of “hi” as a greeting. Hi is mainly used in instances where one would like to have a friendly discussion with the other party. As a result, the teacher used “hi” as a greeting to initiate the discussion (Meszaros, Le Vie & Allen, 2018). This also establishes the friendly tone used in the conversation. Moreover, by looking down, the student offers another key as an indication that she is not ready to discuss her performance and that she might be embarrassed by it.

Consequently, in text 2, the keys to the conversation regard the customer care agent inquiring from the caller how she may assist him. This, therefore, can be seen to establish the tone of the discussion as a serious one given the serious voice with which the inquiry is made.

Instrumentalities

Regarding the instrumentalities, it can be noted that, in text 1, the instrumentality used is spoken, and the language is English, which is conducted on a face-to-face basis (Ebrahimia & Farrokh, 2018). Neither the teacher nor the learner makes use of another language. Similarly, in text 2, the instrumentality involved in the discussion is spoken with the language being English. However, the discussion occurs over the telephone and neither the caller nor the recipient makes use of another language other than English.

Norms

Concerning the norms, it can be noted that the social norms and rules have been adhered to in the two texts (Neuendorf, 2016). For instance, in text 1, the discussion commences with a greeting that is made in a friendly way as an indication of the wish to hold a friendly discussion with the student. The student reacts to the greeting as an indication to welcome the teacher for the impending discussion followed by a moment of silence to articulate what he would like to discuss. Moreover, in text 1, there are no interruptions during the discussion as the two give each other time to respond to what they say.

However, in text 2, even though the discussion commences with the norm of the customer care agent receiving the call from the prospective applicant, there are a number of interruptions that occur during the discussion. For instance, lit is observed that the customer care agent does not let the applicant to finish his statement before speaking even as the applicant also continues to ask questions without concentrating on what the agent is saying. This resulted in miss communication and the failure of the prospective applicant to get the information he was inquiring about.

Genre

            With regards to the genre, it can be considered that in text 1, the speech is an informal speech that occurs in a restaurant setting after classes. In text 2, the speech can be regarded as a formal communication that occurs over the telephone and mainly entails inquiry on the courses offered by a college by a prospective student.

Effectiveness of the Communication

In text 1, the communication can be considered as effective based on a number of factors. These include the observation that the communication adheres to the social rules and norms of communication as seen when the teacher initiates the discussion by greeting Trinh holding a discourse on her performance (Neuendorf, 2016). The communication can also be considered as effective given that there are no interruptions and the parties give each other time to respond and talk. Lastly, the communication can also be considered as effective given the observation that the parties involved use the same language (English) and this enables the parties top fully understand each other.

Consequently, in text 2, the communication is not effective given the observation that there are a lot of interruptions and the parties involved do not understand one another. Though the communication begins by following the social rules and norms involved in communication, interruptions begin immediately after the caller makes the inquiry on the tiling course. The receiver does not seem to understand the course that the caller is inquiring about even as she seems to be preoccupied with other things. This, therefore, result in a communication breakdown between the parties.

Evidence of the dimensions of power, identity, adaptation in the discourse

In text 1, the evidence of power dimension is mainly provided by the positions of the party in the discussion. For instance, the teacher tends to wield more power than the learner as he is able to determine the student’s performance in language. On the contrary, in text 2, the evidence of power dimensions is mainly denoted by the receiver through the inquiry on how she can assist the caller. In this regard, the receiver is more powerful than the caller on the basis that the caller depends on her to gain the information he needs.

Comparison of the two conversations: similarities and differences between the texts

Amongst the notable similarities between the two texts regards the observation that the two conversations commence with the essential social rule and norms of communication (Gallois & Giles, 2015). However, there are a number of palpable differences between the two. For instance, it can be observed that, in text 1, the discussion is informal and mainly involves a teacher and a learner who meet at the school restaurant, which is also another informal setting, over coffee and casually discuss the student’s performance in English language. On the other hand, in text 2, the discussion is formal given that the receiver is a customer care worker employed by the college and the discussion is mainly on an inquiry on the availability of tiling course. That’s, the communication follows the formal communication process throughout and the two parties, in spite of the misunderstandings and miscommunication, come to agreement that the prospective applicant should call TAFE Information Centre for more information on the course he wishes to enroll for.

Lastly, it can be noted that in text 1 the communication is effective even though the teacher fails to attain the goals of the discussion between him and Trinh (Meszaros, Le Vie & Allen, 2018). Thus, in spite of the attempts to encourage Trinh with regards to her performance in English language, Trinh does not believe that she has performed better as the teacher says. There are not interruptions in the discussion as each party listens keenly to what the other says. On the other hand, the communication in text 2 can be considered as ineffective given the breakdown in communication leading to misunderstanding between the two parties. For instances, the communication between the prospective student and the customer service agent at the university is marked by constant interruptions leading to the failure of the two parties to understand what every party is communicating. As a result, the caller fails to get the information he was inquiring about and has to make inquiries elsewhere.

Effectiveness of the communication as speech act or speech event

As both an event and an act, the communication in text 1 can be regarded as effective given the observation that the purpose and goals of the communication have been attained (Gallois & Giles, 2015). For instance, the communication did not experience any interruption or breakdown that might have led to a misunderstanding between Trinh and the teacher. Despite not coming to an agreement that Trinh’s performance had improved, the teacher can be said to have attained the communication goals as the teacher effectively delivered his information despite Trinh not believing him.  Consequently, as both an act and an event, the communication in text 2 was not effectual given the observation that the communication was marked with various instances of misunderstandings leading to breakdown in the communication. The caller and the receiver failed to attain a pragmatic transfer of their communications leading to the decision to call the TAFE Information Centre for information on the course.

References

Ebrahimia, R., & Farrokh, P. (2018). The Effectiveness of Hymesˊ Ethnography of            Communication Theory to Teach English Learnersˊ Reading Comprehension Ability: A             Discoursal Approach.

Gallois, C., & Giles, H. (2015). Communication accommodation theory. The international             encyclopedia of language and social interaction, 1-18.

Hymes, D. (2016). Speaking Model. Communication Institute for Online scholarship, CIOS.

Meszaros, E. L., Le Vie, L. R., & Allen, B. D. (2018). Trusted Communication: Utilizing Speech Communication to Enhance Human-Machine Teaming Success. In 2018 Aviation          Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference (p. 4014).

Neuendorf, K. A. (2016). The content analysis guidebook. Sage.