Hayakaw Relationship Between Language In Thought And Action
S.I Hayakawa was an English professor who once held the appellation of president of San Francisco State University. He focused on studying train of thought and the connection between influence and spoken language, and became well known for being a semanticist. The motif of his book, Language in Thought and Action, is dedicated to understanding the impact words have on influencing society (“S.I. Hayakawa”). He claims that “the most interesting and perhaps least understood relationship between words and the world is that between words and future events.”
In addition to Hayakawa’s merited work, it is clear that any type of conversation impacts its audience in some manner. According to Hayakawa, “With words we influence and to an enormous
extent control future events.” Therefore, discussion is destined to leave an impression on those who carry out conversations or are in tune with current events. The very meaning of communication is to exchange opinions, facts, and theories that may or may not be shared by viewers, yet has the capability of changing the way viewers think. Currently, with the easy accessibility to the internet, there are hundreds of ways media can influence the masses through cyberspace. From YouTube videos to statuses on Facebook, the public has boundless intelligence at its fingertips, and media has evolved with advances in technology to attempt to influence viewers. Yet these different methods of persuasion might not work as well with other viewers.
Depending on the type of persuasion and audience the speaker wishes to convey information to, listeners or readers may or may not develop their own thoughts and values from the text, photograph, or other influencing material which might have been seen or heard or read. Transferring thought toward speech carries beliefs from person to person. This means that there are people who can manipulate the way other people may perceive things, using
In conclusion, Hayakawa’s belief that direct dialogue effectively shapes the public eye is true. However, the audience has the choice of deciding whether to make something out of nothing. The people the author or speaker reaches can either be influenced
In addition to Hayakawa’s merited work, it is clear that any type of conversation impacts its audience in some manner. According to Hayakawa, “With words we influence and to an enormous
extent control future events.” Therefore, discussion is destined to leave an impression on those who carry out conversations or are in tune with current events. The very meaning of communication is to exchange opinions, facts, and theories that may or may not be shared by viewers, yet has the capability of changing the way viewers think. Currently, with the easy accessibility to the internet, there are hundreds of ways media can influence the masses through cyberspace. From YouTube videos to statuses on Facebook, the public has boundless intelligence at its fingertips, and media has evolved with advances in technology to attempt to influence viewers. Yet these different methods of persuasion might not work as well with other viewers.
Depending on the type of persuasion and audience the speaker wishes to convey information to, listeners or readers may or may not develop their own thoughts and values from the text, photograph, or other influencing material which might have been seen or heard or read. Transferring thought toward speech carries beliefs from person to person. This means that there are people who can manipulate the way other people may perceive things, using
In conclusion, Hayakawa’s belief that direct dialogue effectively shapes the public eye is true. However, the audience has the choice of deciding whether to make something out of nothing. The people the author or speaker reaches can either be influenced