On Friday, February 18, 2000 2:24 PM, Katherine Goff [SMTP:Katherine_Goff@ceo.cudenver.edu] wrote:
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu writes:
> >I do have to admit though I am a little confused with the message that
> >began
> >the thread,
> >
> >"Can anyone who has used activity triangle diagrams in their work tell me
> >what software or plug-in was used to create and annotate the triangles for
> >inclusion in a word processing document?"
> >
> >I am confused how this is not request for help, or how it would be seen as
> >confrontational. My goal is understanding nothing more.
>
> i never said that i did not understand this as a request.
> i wanted to use it as an example of how language "styles" can support or
> detract from building relationships that are more or, sometimes, much less
> equal.
> >
> >Kathie mentioned the the politeness of please. For me, please has very
> >strong class (and racial) connotations such as the yes mam, yes sir
> >legislation. We tell children to say please because we want to reinforce
> >some division of power. If I am talking to an equal I would not expect a
> >please, but that is my frame of reference. So, for me, please would
> >connotate respect, but not the kind between equals.
>
> please is neither here nor there. i don't know what the answer is, there
> probably isn't one. i am much more certain that there is a question here,
> but i think how it gets asked and who gets to ask it is more important
> than the content of the question.
>
> Can anyone help me . . .?
>
> can just as easily denote a relationship of unequality.
> the unspoken meaning being if anyone _can_ (as in has the ability)
> why then, of course s/he _will_ (for who could refuse to help _me_).
> if the addressee feels on equal footing with the requestor, then there
> will be a different unspoken meaning than when one person feels obligated
> to be of service in order to be allowed to participate.
>
> i never intended to weigh down this one question with so many
> possibilities...
> then again, doesn't every human interaction carry multiple, fluid meanings
> at many levels and time scales?
> >
> >I guess what I'm asking for is clarification of what is confrontational,
> >offensive about the request for info on the activity triangles. To me, it
> >seemed in line with the various questions that have been thrown out on
> >xcma
> >over the years.
>
> this is the "traditional" argument, isn't it?
> all i can say is that the one posting, the one request, was not in itself
> necessarily confrontational or offensive.
> i keep hearing echoes of Culture and History in this particular Activity,
> Theoretically, anyway.
> (does humor help?)
>
> i have been trying desparately, and not too successfully to avoid the
> hierarchical struggles that bill b. describes.
> but they do exist, and they do shut out people's voices and limit what
> might be said
> and i don't want to escalate an aggressive dynamic, although if i don't
> just shut up, that may be how whatever i write will be perceived...
>
>
>
> kathie
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> .........Our words misunderstand us..............................
> .....We are our words, and black and bruised and blue.
> Under our skins, we're laughing....................................
> .........................Adrienne Rich..................................
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Katherine_Goff@ceo.cudenver.edu
> http://ceo.cudenver.edu/~katherine_goff/index.html
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 07 2000 - 17:54:08 PST