{"title":"Pragmatics of Human Communication 50 Years Later","authors":"J. Bavelas","doi":"10.1521/jsyt.2021.40.2.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Pragmatics of Human Communication (1967) was one of the first books on interpersonal communication and became a standard theory book in communication, psychotherapy, and other fields. Face-to-Face Dialogue (in press) by one of the original co-authors presents subsequent decades of research that revealed both similarities and differences; hence, this article. The goals and frame of reference are the same, focusing on interaction rather than on individuals and on dialogic rather than intrapsychic processes. However, advances in theory and research have modified the explicitly tentative axioms of the original book. Examples of these are: (i) theoretical refinement and microanalysis have rejected “all behavior is communication” in favor of a more precise, less inferential focus on co-speech gestures; (ii) “one cannot not communicate” has fared better; the situational context that leads to “disqualification” (equivocation) has strong support; and (iii) the synchrony of digital and analogic elements in dialogue produces integrated messages rather than separate channels.","PeriodicalId":245719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Systemic Therapies","volume":" 25","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Systemic Therapies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1521/jsyt.2021.40.2.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Pragmatics of Human Communication (1967) was one of the first books on interpersonal communication and became a standard theory book in communication, psychotherapy, and other fields. Face-to-Face Dialogue (in press) by one of the original co-authors presents subsequent decades of research that revealed both similarities and differences; hence, this article. The goals and frame of reference are the same, focusing on interaction rather than on individuals and on dialogic rather than intrapsychic processes. However, advances in theory and research have modified the explicitly tentative axioms of the original book. Examples of these are: (i) theoretical refinement and microanalysis have rejected “all behavior is communication” in favor of a more precise, less inferential focus on co-speech gestures; (ii) “one cannot not communicate” has fared better; the situational context that leads to “disqualification” (equivocation) has strong support; and (iii) the synchrony of digital and analogic elements in dialogue produces integrated messages rather than separate channels.