GRADED ASSIGMENT 1:(b) Summary of the Article

Title: Talking to Computers: An Empirical Investigation

Journal: Carnegie Mellon University Research Showcase, Computer Science Department

Link :

Link for this journal article

Introduction:

            This research article is written by Alexander G. Hauptmann and Alexander I. Rudnicky from Department of Computer Science Carnegie-Mellon University. Basically, it describes the empirical study of man-computer speech interaction.

The objectives of this study are:

       1)      To study how speech input to a computer differs from interpersonal spoken communication.

       2)      To describe the differences between speech-to-computer mode, speech-to human mode and typing-to-computer mode.

On the other hand, the purpose of this study is:

To compare three types of communication mode; speech-to-computer mode, speech-to-human mode and typing-to-computer mode and also to prove that speech to a computer is not as ill-formed as one would perceive.

Statement of problem:

Differences between three communication modes; speech-to-computer, speech-to-human and typing-to-computer are difficult to be found and the misconception that speech-to-computer is much ill-formed than speech-to-human.

Research questions:

      1)      How does speech input to a computer differs from interpersonal spoken communication?

      2)      What are the differences between speech-to-computer mode, speech-to-human mode and typing-to-computer mode?

Theoretical framework:

There is no specific theory being used for this investigation.

Sample: 

A total of forty subjects were taken from a population of electronic mail users in the Computer Department at C-MU. Ten of them were set up as pilot subjects to test and debug the experimental setup. The remaining thirty subjects were classified as non-proficient users to their electronic mail experience. Furthermore, some of the subjects had no experience with the mail system being used in this study.

Method:

Methodology

There are three modes of communication which are being tested in this investigation; speech-to-computer mode, speech-to-human-mode and typing-to-computer mode. Ten subjects were randomly assigned to each communication mode and each subject completed three sessions. The data was then analysed accordingly to each mode.

In the speech-to-computer mode, subjects were told that the computer could comprehend their utterances with an occasional help by the experimenter. The experimenter was in the adjacent room and transcribed all commands into equivalent system commands, assuming or pretending the system itself had comprehended the utterances. However, when the subjects were in their editing mode, speech input was disabled and subjects had to edit manually using the keyboard. Subjects were asked to speak all commands to the system but the way of speaking is up to the subjects.

In the speech-to-human mode, the experimenter is place in the same room as the subject and translated their utterances into typed commands to the electronic mail system. However, when the subjects were in their editing mode, the speech input is again disabled and subjects had to edit manually using the keyboard.

In the typing-to-computer mode, subjects were left to believe that a computer natural language mail system could interpret their typing. This mode was the same as the speech-to-computer mode except the presence of speech input. The subjects were told to type everything themselves. The system or in other words the invisible experimenter was able to process the subjects input.

Procedure

Subjects were first given a questionnaire designed to determine their level of familiarity with electronic mail. The subjects were given background information and an instruction based on their communication mode. A total of nine tasks were distributed to the subjects and each task has something to with the mail database file the subjects were working on. Task which given included replying to mail, locating information about previously sent mail and adding a carbon copy of some new mail to the file. Each subjects received the same tasks in the same order. The first three sessions were taken as training sessions thus; it is not included in the final analysis as it was meant to double check the equipment and to ensure the subject has understood the tasks. Furthermore, an attitude questionnaire was given to the subjects to assess the subjects’ feedback upon the particular interaction mode. A time stamped time screen image together with the voice commands was recorded in each session and the videotape recordings were transcribed. Besides that, the typed input from the typing mode provided a comparable data. The total time taken for each task was also recorded.

Instruments for data gathering and instruments for data analysis:

The data collected was put into four classifications which are attitude, communication, errors and syntax. Styles of interaction are also emphasized. The data collected are also transcribed and put in a form of summary ANOVA table.

Findings:

            A sample transcript for a subject can be found in Figures 1, 2 and 3. Table 1 summarizes the results of the statistical analyses performed on the quantitative data. A total of 3233 words were spoken by the subjects in 708 utterances. The total vocabulary consisted of 304 distinct words.

• Attitude: Subjects felt positive about the experiment, as indicated by the mean score of 30.3. There was no likely to have influence between the three groups of subjects.
• Communicative Variables: The number of utterances per session and the time to completion were no big different for the three groups. However, the total number of words used to solve the tasks showed major differences. Two speech groups; speak-to-computer takes average of 60.35 words while speak-to-human approximately 65.5 words average. Both considerably using more words than typing group which took up the average of only 36.8 words.  The utterance was also different between groups.  Speech-to-computer contained the longest utterances at average 6.10 words. Speech-to-human average 5.45 words and the typed lines group only 3.21 words average. The number of distinct words used was also different in the three communication modes. The typing condition participants needed only 23.75 distinct words to complete a session. The speech-to- computer and speech-to-human subjects used 32.7 and 36.65 distinct words to complete a session.
• Error Variables: Word repetitions percentage was not significant between the groups. The relative number of noise words like ‘umm’, ‘ahh’ and ‘ohh’ was obvious over the communication modes. The typed mode had zero, the speech-to-computer mode consist 4% per thousand and the speech-to-human mode averaged 15% noise per thousand words.
• Syntax Variables: There was no significant difference between relative frequencies of pronoun usage. The frequency of pronouns, subjects did increase significantly in the speech conditions. The frequency per word spoken went form 0.048 in speech-to-computer group and 0.021 in speech-to-human group down to 0.008 per word in the typing group.

Conclusion:

            In conclusion, some of the findings reported in this paper seem to contradict with the preliminary impressions by Werner. He concludes that computer discourse is much less structured than seen in the present experiment. We believe that these different and somewhat contradictory experiences point to the crucial importance of task definition in the success of a speech recognition system. A successful speech recognition application requires careful task analysis, followed by equally careful language and environment design. Even though people interact with the computer in a more disciplined way, a number of purely speeches related phenomena were still observed. Thus, the subjects were more likely to stick to their familiar set of commands in the familiar (typed) interaction mode, while they used more natural English-like ways of phrasing utterances in the two speech conditions.

Some of these differences in communication modes, like the increased use of pronouns in the discourse, represent a quantitative shift in the use of language. The principles of natural language processing systems can be applied to these phenomena in typed input situations should also be adaptable in the spoken communication mode. This adaptation is by no means trivial, as pointed out by Hayes, Hauptmann, Carbonell and Tomita (1986).

Reflection on Talking to Computers: An Empirical Investigation:

The use of technology in education has closely mirrored the development of the personal computer. Since their introduction in the late seventies, personal computers have developed in speed, power and ease of use. Many early innovations in educational technology grew out of a desire to help students with various physical and learning disabilities overcome barriers to success in school. Among the many innovative tools, programs that converted printed text into audible speech have been among the most popular. Although originally designed for students who were visually impaired or had learning difficulties, educators soon realized that text-to-speech software could benefit students with a wide range of learning needs, including language learners.

Based on this investigation, it is proven that we can use these three approaches; speech-to-computer, speech-to-human and typing-to-computer in learning language especially second language. Nowadays, people are more concerned with speech-to-human as it is the prominent mode in learning language and neglecting the other two modes of learning language. Speech-to-computer can help learners to improve in multiple ways as in their grammar, vocabulary and syntax as the findings of this investigation shows that the subjects are more formal and use the correct ways of speaking with the computer. Thus, learners should be exposed to the use of computer in class to sharpen their speaking skills.

REFLECTION:

Salaam beautiful souls! What do we feel upon getting this assignment (summary of article regarding speaking skill)? Honestly, it is not an easy task. It may seemed simple as it just a summary but after going through the whole process of searching an empirical research and to find a good article which emphasizes on speaking skills; it is quite a tough process altogether. At first, we searched articles on jurn.org but we couldn’t find an empirical yet comprehensive work on speaking skills using computer application (CALL). Then, we started searching using other websites and at last we found this article; Talking to Computers using Google search engines. We thought our job has become easier when we have found the best article to start with but, we were wrong as we found difficulties in comprehending the article itself. The article is too technical so we had to read it many times and highlight the key points. However, after consulting Dr Rozina; we got an idea on to do the summary and we managed to deduce the gist of the article. The article is an investigation of three modes of communication which are speech-to-computer, speech-to-human and typing-to-computer. As a human being, we might think that it is easier to communicate with human beings rather than a tool or a machine but, this investigation shows how human beings can actually produce better speech in terms of vocabulary, grammar and syntax when communicating with a computer than with human interaction. This is because humans tend to think that the computers have insufficient knowledge than themselves so they used proper and formal speech to make the computer understand their commands. Hence, speech-to-computer has the most organized speech than speech-to-human as the subjects know that human can easily comprehend one another even without proper language. In conclusion, this article is a big help in terms of making us as a group aware that speech-to-computer can be a reliable mode to communication especially for second language learners of English. 

Islamization of Pragmatics

            Salaam beautiful readers! Our topic for today is Islamization of Pragmatics, since our blog’s title is Islamization of Pragmatics itself so this will be a long post. Stay tune! We will be posting things regarding four respective topics from Pragmatics which are Grice’s four maxims, speech acts, politeness, and lastly conversation and preference structure… Together with all these four topics, we will include Islamic perspectives as it is the gist of this whole blog. So sit back, relax and have fun reading! 

ISLAMIZATION OF......

              

               Dear our respected readers, language is a very powerful element on everyday life. Interaction, conversation, speech, and written text all are parts of language. The reliance on literal and outer text of the utterance in insufficient to explain many meanings intended by the speaker. Therefore, contexts are needed to fulfill the understanding. The pragmatic approach guides readers in interpretation and explaining their behavior. Relating to this,Crystal (2012) pointed out that “Pragmatics studies the factors that govern our choice of language in social interaction and the effects of our choice on others.”(p.1)

In order to get brief overview of Pragmatics, let us take a look at this short video:

              So, how do you find the video? it is quiet helpful to assist us in understanding some elements discussed in pragmatics. Firstly, we will share about Grice's conversational maxims, H. Paul Grice came out with four conversational maxims which are the maxim of quantity, the maxim of quality, the maxim of relation and the maxim of manner. The maxim of quantity is concern with giving an appropriate amount of information to others, not too ambiguous and not insufficient. The maxim of quality is about saying the truth without altering information while the maxim of relation is to be relevant and suits one’s discussion. However, the maxim of manner is when one tries to be clear, precise and less ambiguity.

What Islam has to say about Grice’s four maxims?

               The maxim of quantity is very supported by Islam as in Islam, we are asked to speak when needed and remain silent when there is no purpose of talking. Thus, appropriate amount of knowledge is righteous to spread to others while ambiguous and insufficient information should be avoided. Insufficient and ambiguous information might give disadvantages to the listener and it might lead one to the wrong path especially when it is pertaining Islamic jurisprudence, Fiqh, the Quran and Hadith. A Hadith saying:-

The Prophet (SAW) said: “A man might speak a word without thinking about its implications, but because of it, he will plunge into the Hellfire further than the distance between the east and west.” [ Sahîh al-Bukhârî and Sahîh Muslim ]

Therefore, this above Hadith tells us that we are supposed to guard our tongue and speak purposely that gives out benefits to the people and not corruption to oneself.

         From this cartoon strip, we can see how the mother abuses the maxim of quality by not answering or somehow gives a vague answer to her child. Hence, abusing the maxim of quality should be avoided in conversation as it may also kill one’s thinking process.

           The maxim of quality is somehow in line with the Islamic teachings which teach us to tell the truth. In other words, do not lie. Honesty is the key to Heaven and innate characteristic of a true believer. Hence, lying is not one of the characteristics of a true believer.

         'Abdullah b. Mas'ud reported Allah's Messenger (SAW) as saying: Telling of truth is a virtue and virtue leads to Paradise and the servant who endeavours to tell the truth is recorded as truthful, and lie is obscenity and obscenity leads to Hell-Fire, and the servant who endeavours to tell a lie is recorded as a liar. Ibn Abu Shaiba reported this from Allah's Apostle (SAW).  

           Telling the truth is a righteous act and to tell a lie is the worst act. Thus, it comes to conversation with people, be sincere and even in written language whether in writing our assignment, article and et cetera; the best way to write is to produce pearls of utterances. For example, Kahaled Hosseini is a well-known author; who uses splendid sentences to write about neither the consequences nor a metaphor about lying:-

According to Khaled Hosseini (2007), “When you kill a man, you steal a life. You steal his wife’s right to a husband; rob his children of a father. When you tell a lie, you steal someone’s right to the truth. When you cheat, you steal the right to fairness. There is no act more wretched than stealing.” p. 115

           The third maxim is maxim of relation which asks us to be relevant. We have to relevant, be it according to Islam or not. If we utter irrational saying, it shows how our mind operated and a wise man always up-to-date with current issues, religious studies and even knowledge pertaining social sciences. Therefore, relevancy is very important in a conversation to transmit right information to people and to be acceptable in a society. For instance:-

Mother: “Yasmin, where is my praying dress and Quran? I want to pray.”

Yasmin: “I think the kiblah is this way.”

              From the above extract, we can see that Yasmin is abusing the maxim of relation as she is not answering her mother’s question and she even changes the topic to a totally different issue. Hence, maxim of relation is very important in conversations to avoid misunderstanding.

           Maxim of manner requires precision rather than obscurity and ambiguity. Precision is very important in Islam as without precision; the unity of brotherhood and faith issues will be affected. The easiest example we can take is from our compulsory ibadah i.e salah and sawm. Salah must be performed five times in a day when the specific and precise time comes. For instance, Fajr is around 5.47am; one cannot pray Fajr until it is 5.47am. This same goes to sawm where all Muslims can break their fasting when the call of Maghrib is being heard. Thus, if one breaks his fasting even a minute before the call of Maghrib; it is considered invalid. Precision appears in many forms such as actions, saying and et cetera. The reason Grice came up with this maxim of manner is to make people aware of being precise is very important in a conversation to get a mutual understanding.

            Dear our beloved readers, pragmatics also discussed the issue of politeness. Yule defined politeness as “the means employed to show awareness of another person’s face” (1996: 60). In Islam, it is irrefutable that we must show our respect to others and approach them politely in speech as well as in manner. In Quran, Allah has mentioned many times that we need to use kindness, gentle and wisdom in order to preach to others. In Surah Ibrahim, verse 14, Allah said that, “I did not send any messenger except that he spoke the language of his people to explain to them”. Here, we can see that the message of Islam is always through the words of truth and applied the politeness principles in many ways. Our prophet Muhammad PBUH is the best example of a man with polite words and manners. He used different approaches when he spoke to the Quraish leaders according to their face wants (the expectations concerning their public self-image).

            In pragmatics, speech act refers to us performing our action via utterances. However, there are certain conditions for us to say something. Under Felicity conditions there are general condition, content condition, prepatory condition and essential condition. When our parents said study hard and we understand what they said is a general condition. Our reply as In shaa Allah or okay is the agreement that the act of study hard will happen in future (content condition). Our reply also denote that the act of study hard getting good result will not happen by themselves but we, as the promise will initiate the act of study hard and making the goal of getting good result will happen in future, sincerely and not for the sake of other things likely present or additional on our monthly allowance (preapatory condition).

In the first verse of Surah Al Maidah, Allah said “O you who believe, fulfill your promises!” Keeping promises is one of characteristics of true believer. In Islam, Allah called upon His believers not only in the chapter stated above but also in another chapters like Al Isra’ (17:34) and Maryam (19:54).

            Beyond our realization, everything that we said is a promise. When our parents said, “study hard son” and we gonna reply, “In shaa Allah”, or simply replied “okay” is a promise. Therefore, this is an example of speech act which illustrates the promise.

According to Yule (1996), in order to make our speeches become meaningful, speeches should be uttered according to situations or circumstances. The situation in which speech act occur is what we called as speech event. In performing our act through utterances, we should first produce a meaningful linguistic expression or utterances (locutionary act). This is followed by the purpose of the utterances.

            On the other hand, speech acts are very much related to the methods of dakwah (spread the message of Islam). Alquran and prophetic history always emphasize on spreading the message of Islam by wisdom. Hence, one of the ways of wisdom in dakwah is by using speech act. Speech act is very applicable in performing da’wah. As for certain situation, it is inappropriate to directly say something to someone. 
                For example, when we want to encourage our friend to wear hijab, we must say it in a proper way and using right word such as by saying “Subhanallah, you look georgeous with hijab!” therefore she will feel encouraged to wear hijab. Here, we can see the three dimension of speech act by saying such thing indirectly in a way of imperative yet very meaningful in order to praise that friend as the nature of the sentence suggest but at the same time we want to encourage her to continuously wear hijab in future. Why such praise is chosen? Firstly is because human being loves beauty. Secondly, not all people can receive direct comment like “eh, you are sinful because you do not wear hijab”. Our duty is not to judge others but to show and share the right way of Islam. 
          In Surah Al Nahl, verse 125, Allah mentioned the best method to preach: “Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best. Indeed, your Lord is most knowing of who has strayed from His way, and He is most knowing of who is [rightly] guided ...”. Hence, in order to preach, we should observe the situation we are in (speech events) and performing speech acts with its three dimensions in order for the message to be successfully delivered.

              Another important thing discussed in Pragmatics is the preference and conversational structure (Yule, 1996). According to Yule, the preference and conversational structure mainly consist of the elements used in the conversation processes such as turn-taking, pauses, overlaps, and backchannels. In Islam, these are called manners in dialogues. It is indisputable that Muslims must observe manners while converse with other people. The process of turn-taking (an attempt to control the right to speak) is very important is Islam because it will give the speaker an opportunity to explain what in his minds and it also gives the respondent a chance to ask or refute. In Surah Al-Baqarah verse 258, Allah said:

“Hast thou not Turned thy vision to one who disputed with Abraham About his Lord, because Allah had granted him power? Abraham said: "My Lord is He Who Giveth life and death." He said: "I give life and death". Said Abraham: "But it is Allah that causeth the sun to rise from the east: Do thou then cause him to rise from the West." Thus was he confounded who (in arrogance) rejected faith. Nor doth Allah Give guidance to a people unjust.” (2:258)

        In this verse, we can clearly see one example from thousands of example in the Al-Quran that contains dialogue. Here, these dialogues are between Prophet Ibrahim and his people when his people have a dispute with him about the Lord. From this verse, prophet Ibrahim observes the principle of turn taking and argues with them with patience and even replies to their words with simple and wisdom. He does not dominate the ‘floor’ of conversations but gives them their right to speak. We can see the Transition Relevance Place (TRP) between prophet Ibrahim and his people.

            Dr.Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi (2008) explained that the examples of dialogues and arguments in Al-Quran are wide and cover many issues. There are dialogues of Allah and the prophets, the angels, the devils and dialogues of various people.

           In Pragmatics, sometimes people use pauses in their conversation. As defined by Yule (1996), pauses are the transitions with a long silence between turns. This happens probably because of unfamiliarity, or the absence of information about certain knowledge. In Islam, pauses are allowed in conversation but it is more recommended to reply with an answer if the respondent does know about the question. There is an example in Surah An-Naml : 20-23, when prophet Sulaiman asked a group of birds about the absence of Hud-Hud. They remained silent until Hud-Hud bird came and explained to Prophet Sulaiman about what it saw in Saba’.

      In Islam, some of the principles of conversation as discussed by Dr.Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi (2008):

1)  Based on the truth and avoid from false misconceptions.

2)  Stick on the issue of discussions (avoid personal opinions and interests)

3)  Clear and logical arguments, without emotional influence.

4)  Have a clear aim to solve the issues with justice and truth.

5)  Humbleness, not arrogant, and observing politeness.

6) Give a full chance to all speakers to give their own opinion without aggressive refutation or humiliating their personal being.

7)  Respect opinions from more experienced scholars.

8)  Do not rush in defining Shariah (rules and regulations), and do not astray from the truth.

9) The contents of the dialogues must be beneficial to various people intellectually. 

   Last but not least, as long as the pragmatics is concerned, it is related with the linguistic forms and the users of the forms. It concerns how people interact with each other and the significant meanings behind each interaction. Hence, Muslims should utilize various ways of speaking to their aesthetic functions that are very much related with Islam because Islam always emphasizes on good relations with other people through actions and utterances.

As a conclusion, Allah says in Al-Quran Surah Ibrahim verse 24-25:

Have you not considered how Allah presents an example, [making] a good word like a good tree, whose root is firmly fixed and its branches [high] in the sky?  

It produces its fruit all the time, by permission of its Lord. And Allah presents examples for the people that perhaps they will be reminded. (14: 24-25)

References

Afzal Iqbal. (1992). Diplomatic Practices of Rasulullah S.A.W. Pustaka Salam Sdn Bhd: Kuala Lumpur.

Dr. Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi. (2008). The Religious Aspects of Dialogues in Islam. Translation Institute of Malaysia: Kuala Lumpur.

Khaled Hosseini. (2008). The Kite Runner.Riverhead Books: New York:

Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford University Press: NY

Crystal, D. (2012). Pragmatics and Speech Acts. Retrieved from http://www.teachit.co.uk/armoore/lang/pragmatics.htm  on 2nd Dec 2012

http://islamicbooks.info/H-7-Ethics/7--Ethics-4.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawah

http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/dravling/grice.html 

http://en.islamtoday.net/artshow-427-3256.htm 

http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?

book=032&translator=2&start=129&number=6308 

http://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/ 

 Lastly, let us recite this du'a, hopefully our deeds will be accepted by Allah..amiin.

REFLECTION 6: Computer Mediated Communication (CMC)

Date    : 19th March 2013
Day     : Tuesday
Topic   : Computer Mediated Communication

Assalamualaikum  Wbt.

       Dear our beloved reader, today is a very wonderful day, Alhamdulillah.. Allah still blessed us with strength so we can learn a new topic for today's class. It is CMC (Computer Mediated Communication). This term is very new to us, but, in a real world, we have been using this CMC since our primary school! ^^, 

        E-mail, Yahoo!Messenger, MSN, Facebook, Twitter, Bulletin Board, Forum, and many more applications that mainly used in the internet to converse with other people including social networking sites are the examples of CMC. Very familiar to us right? ;)

       Well, there are actually two forms of CMC:
   1) Synchronus - real time, instantaneous communication (just like Yahoo!Messenger or MSN or    Skype)
   2) Asynchronus - non-real time communication (like E-mail, Blog, or Bulletin Board)

       It is indisputable that there are many differences in language styles between these two forms of CMC because one is rapid process (just like talking face to face! *but still have time to pause) and the other is delayed process (like when we write an e-mail, we can edit several times!). Many research had been done to investigate the features of language use in both forms of CMC.

       Yes, we can chat, e-mail, use social networking sites but we must always beware of the negative consequences if the use of this technology is not properly utilized in the ethical manner. Islam always emphasized on the importance of being ethical in all aspects of our lives so we can avoid from the backsides that occur from the use of the Internet.

Lastly, let us share a word of wisdom for today's post:

CMC QUESTIONS & ANSWER

   

Assalamualaikum Wbt..

Dear our readers, we have been given several questions regarding CMC (Computer Mediated Communication). From our discussion and brainstorming, alhamdulillah we have come with these answers:

      1)      How has CMC transform the dynamics of interactions?

CMC transforms the mode of interactions by making it more flexible in which people from various places inside the country or outside any country can be connected via various Computer Mediated Communication’s applications such as Facebook, Twitter, E-mail, Yahoo!Messenger, Instant Messaging ,and  Online Forums anytime and anywhere as long as they are connected to the Internet. Communications and interactions become very fast, easy, flexible, and effective because everything is at the end of fingertips. If compare to world before the emergence of CMC, people who live far away from certain country can interact through letters via post and that takes a very long time to achieve the letter and to have the reply. Fortunately, with CMC, everything becomes very fast and effective. However, in some ways, CMC has change the dynamics of interactions in which people have less face to face interactions and thus the interpersonal speaking skills are less enhanced.

   

      2)      How has this transformation shape society?

This transformation helps build a better society that is advanced in using ICT. People are more aware with the current issues as they are fast widespread through many applications such as Facebook and Twitter in which they can share the news and tag others to know about the current news and issues. In addition, the discussions that available in online forums make people more open minded as they can discuss many issues and gain many sources. Therefore, it makes various terms of socialization accessible to society.

Besides, through certain CMC applications, people can interact with the country leaders in which it is less possible in real face to face interactions. For example, many Malaysian leaders own facebook , twitter and email in which ordinary people can contact them through these applications.

Apart from that, this transformation allows many possibilities in education. Teacher and students can utilize various applications of CMC in teaching and learning process. For example, Google Group allows teacher to virtually interact with students via online forums. There is also Whassap Application which can be used as a tool for group discussion. E-Learning allows instructors to post learning materials, give assignments, announcements, and also forum discussion. Thus, CMC makes society becomes more enlightened in the field of education.

      3)      Is this mode of communication in sync with Islam?

Islam allows muslims to interact using various methods including CMC but they must observe four crucial aspects:

a)      Intention

-Firstly, the most important thing that can guide muslims whether they are in the right path or not is the intention. They should use any CMC applications with the right intentions for example to strengthen family bonding or relationship among friends, to be united in Islamic brotherhood, and to help spreading the Islamic messages.

b)      Akhlaq (attitudes)

People must aware that by using asynchronous or synchronous CMC, they are actually ‘protected’ by the computer screen. Even they are not interacting in reality, but they must follow the attitudes outlined by Islam in socialization. For example, they should not freely expose themselves by uploading inappropriate personal pictures and for different gender; there are certain limitations in socialization such as discussing only important issues.

c)       Adab in speech (manner in speech)

Islam emphasizes on the good relationship among fellow human being. Therefore, in communication through computer, people should consider their manner is speech. For example, do not hurt others feeling by using inappropriate words and avoid humiliating each other.

d)      Observing time

Time is crucial in our life. Islam always reminds the followers to observe time in any aspects. As for communication via computer, sometimes the users busy chatting or using Facebook therefore they failed to manage the time properly. Therefore, it is important to utilize the applications in a good way and observe time properly.

  

By that, we end our post today with a food for thought:

Thank You!

GRADED ASSIGNMENT 2 (Part 1); Summary of the Article

Title: Cross-Cultural Pragmatic Failure in Computer-Mediated Communication

Link: http://www.ub.edu/dpfilsa/4baumervanrensburgcoola5.pdf  (-Click this-)

Journal:  Australian Studies Centre, Universitat de Barcelona. Coolabah, Volume No.5, 2011.

Introduction:

This study is written by Martina Baumer & Henriette van Rensburg. Martina Baumer is an Academic Skills Development (ASDU) lecturer in the School of Health and Human Sciences at Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW, Australia while Henriette van Rensburg is a Lecturer in Pedagogy and Curriculum (Blended Learning Focus) and Postgraduate Program Coordinator in the Faculty of Education, University of Southern Queensland, Australia. Basically, the article is about the occurrence of cross-cultural misunderstandings in computer-mediated communication (CMC) specifically in the field of pragmatics.

The objective of this study is to examine the phenomena of written language in asynchronous communication. The purpose of this study is to explore the pragmatic failure in the written language in Computer Mediated Communication such as in the theory of politeness and miscommunication. Apart from that, it also aims to explore how social and culture factors influence language use of native and non-native English speaking national and international postgraduate Education students.

Statement of the Problem:

Nowadays, with the advancement of technology, CMC has become a part of many people’s everyday life. However, the rules of language practice such as politeness and other characteristics of communication are not really observed by many people thus create misunderstanding because of cultural diversity and multiple contexts.

Research Questions:

1.      What is considerate as polite and acceptable and what is rude and intolerable in CMC?

2.      Is politeness a luxury we no longer can or want to afford?

3.      How is this affecting cross-cultural communication and negotiation in CMC?

Methodology

The Subjects

The subjects were USQ postgraduate Education students

Instruments

The instrument used is a questionnaire which contains two components. The first component included general demographic questions to establish background data concerning the participant’s native language, cultural background, and place of residence, age and gender, foreign language knowledge, and their regular use of CMC. The second component referred to the DCTs, which comprised of six CMC scenarios.

Procedure

In order to conduct this research, postgraduate students from the faculty of Education at USQ were invited via an email to take part in the study. By responding to the questionnaire, participants gave permission for the investigator to use information for research purposes only. Data was collected using a self-completion questionnaire.

The questionnaire consists of three parts:

Part 1- Participants’ background including gender, native language, age range, cultural background and place of residence.

Part 2- Ordinal data about second or other language knowledge and proficiency.

Part 3- The frequency of using either asynchronous and synchronous communication mediated communication.

Part 4- CMC scenarios; adapted from real life situations.

Data analysis and coding

All the data in the first part of the questionnaire until the third part were used to see their connection with the fourth part (CMC scenarios). The scenarios were classified in accordance with Brown and Levsinson’s (1987) politeness theory. The responses were annotated, classified, coded sorted applying Leech’s (1983) taxonomy of illocutionary functions (Table 1).

Results

Participants by gender

In total, 109 USQ postgraduate Education students participated in this research. Female participation (72 participants) was higher than male participation (37 participants).

Participants by gender and language

There are 65 females, or 60%, identified English as their native language while seven females, or 6 %, indicated they spoke languages other than English. In comparison, 34 males, (31%), were NE speakers while three, or 3%, speaks other than English as their native tongue.

CMC participation

Participants of different gender, age, language, and cultural background equally appreciate asynchronous but were less enthusiastic to utilise synchronous communication.

Scenarios and coding

The participants need to read the scenario description and to respond as they would in reality. The scenarios were coded according to Brown and Levinson’s politeness theory (1987). The third, fourth and fifth scenarios were considered positive polite while the first, second and sixth were considered negative polite.

Discussions

The data revealed that participants across a wide range of genders, languages, cultural backgrounds and generations demonstrated a preference for polite language and a high tolerance for rude and offensive language. Males chose positive politeness while females used competitive responses, which indicated some endorsement for impoliteness. In the findings, male responses showed a tendency for short answers, fewer apologies, and deliberate employment of clichés, and expressed less doubts about meaning of messages and used humour and irony more often. Female participants on the other hand, used elaborate expressions in their answers, responded with more apologies, openly expressed their confusion about the messages and expressed more gratitude as well as asserted disapproval. Therefore, it is obvious from the findings that females employ co-operative strategies such as care, concern and sympathy in communication.

However, it is also true that using CMC can lead to pragmatic failure which is not only from errors in syntax, inaccurate pronunciation (not applicable in asynchronous communication) or literal meaning, but also in part from the misunderstanding or miscommunication of the implied meaning. In CMC, interlocutors are dependent on the written text, their language skills and their limited knowledge about their online community. But, it is true that in CMC, interlocutors generally strive to save the other person’s face. As a conclusion, The results confirmed the findings of the literature that participants, regardless of their gender, language, cultural background or age, predominantly favour politeness.

Conclusion

As a conclusion, politeness is considered as a mean of respect and kindness to allow the other interlocutor to save face. The data affirmed the findings of the literature review, revealing that neither native language, gender, nor cultural backgrounds are exclusively responsible for cross-cultural pragmatic failure in CMC. Language and cultural background influenced responses in such a way that participants predominantly drew on polite tactics. However, cross-cultural pragmatic failure has the potential to transform into cross-cultural sensitivity and awareness benefiting the NE and ESL interlocutors promoting cross-cultural communication and dialogue.