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