Every day, we communicate with others in a variety of ways. We text, talk in person, wave, and so much more. However, does anyone sit and think about how they communicate, or in what forms they do so? In the first chapter of Writer/Designer, communication is discussed in relation to multimodal projects. While reading this chapter, I came across a description of the five modes of communication. I know that several forms of communication exist, but I never sat down to think about them and how they are a part of each day of my life. Whether it is opening a book, saying “hello” to a friend, or hearing a song play on the radio, some form of communication is occurring. The five modes of communication are: linguistic, visual, aural, spatial, and gestural. The linguistic mode deals with language, which includes written and spoken communication. The gestural mode can also go along with the linguistic since many people have a habit of making hand gestures when having a conversation. If anyone talks with their hands, it is definitely me. It can go further than this in that facial expressions, body language, and eye contact (or a lack of) all count as part of the gestural mode. The visual mode can be seen in (see what I did there :P) posters, flyers, advertisements, art, etc. The aural (auditory) mode involves hearing, which is represented through sounds, music, a person’s tone when speaking, and more. The fifth mode, known as the spatial mode, involves the format in which something is designed or arranged. Examples of this mode include how the features of pamphlets/brochures, applications, pictures, posters, and more are arranged. It is true that communication has become multimodal, but if we really think about it, are there more than five modes at this point in time? I would like to argue that there is a sixth mode – digital.
Technology is utilized in place of many forms of “typical” communication. We live in a digital age where we have become so used to communicating over a phone, tablet, laptop, and maybe even holograms one day (80’s sci/fy got many things right). Because of this, how can a “digital” mode not be considered a separate form of communication? I feel that the chapter includes technological or digital examples for communication, but I disagree with how these are only examples to explain some of the five modes. Digital communication is part of more aspects of our lives than it ever has been, so it should count as its own mode of communicating. One thing I am curious about is how many modes of communication does a person know about. In other words, if they were given the chance to name them, how many would they? An interesting experiment that could be done would be to have a group of adults and a group of students complete a survey-like activity. For each age group, the task would include making a list of all of the modes of communication they know of and then choosing which ones they use the most. The consensus or result I would look for is whether or not “technology” would be listed as one of the modes, and if it would be listed as the most common. I do not know the solid answer, but I have a strong belief that technology would be considered, especially by the group of students. If I was asked to participate in an experiment like this prior to reading the chapter, I would most likely mention technology in some form. I honestly thought it was considered a mode since communication is multimodal. However, it may not have been considered so officially just yet.
Overall, communication is broken up into five modes, but a sixth “digital” mode could be considered based on the world we live in today. If you have any questions or thoughts, feel free to leave a comment below! Thank you.
- Arola, Kristen, Cheryl E. Ball, and Jennifer Sheppard. Writer/Designer. 2nd ed. Bedford’s/St. Martin’s, 2014. Chapters 1-2.
Sarah! I really enjoyed your blog post about the seven ways to communicate! I thought it was very engaging and I felt like i re-learned a lot being I read the reading about a week ago. I agree that I don’t know if many people would be able to identify more than one form of communication. I know I had to truly think about it when I was reading. I feel like communication just happens so naturally that we don’t think about all the different ways we can communicate with one another (besides technology of course). I heavily agree with your statement about the study you would want to do. I would even say that adults, even over the age of 75, would list technology as a primary source for communication. It is so wild how much technology has influenced our lives, even in how we communicate with one another. Great post! Ciao!
Hi Sarah,
When I saw your post’s title, I thought at first you were going to bring up olafactory rhetoric, because that is clearly an omission from the list of modes. I have a friend named Lisa Phillips who is an expert in smell rhetorics and her work is fascinating. It relates to social justice rhetoric and witness credibility in communities where residents have complained to authorities about toxic environments related to odors and such. Additionally a good argument should be made for tactile rhetorics, especially for vision impaired people or people with other neurological or physical differences that make tactile communication dominant.
I want to understand how a technological mode is different than the modes that are involved in it (visual, aural, gesture through video, use of space, etc.). As digital communication makes more aspects of the modes available, it changes and becomes more inclusive (although that’s perhaps an assumption on my part). However, I do believe that the study of digital rhetoric requires us to determine how digital tools use these modes DIFFERENTLY and also how they REMEDIATE the modes themselves. People can also choose to ignore certain affordances of digital tools and lean heavily on certain affordances. Let’s say I’m your mom and the only digital tools I will use are Facebook and text messaging and that’s it. Also let’s say I block anyone who disagrees with my political views. So I (as you mom) have created a railroaded situation involving digital communication which is very restrictive by choice. Or it might not be by choice, it might be because it’s all I know how to control. Beyond this rather sad little hypothetical situation, people who are adept with digital tools may choose to foreground some affordances of digital communication while downplaying others for intentional reasons. For example, the Twitch and YouTube content creator CorpseHusband never showed his face on screen, using instead an iconic avatar; he did this for years and his followers included many fans who fantasized about his real appearance, until one day someone revealed his real face, which was perfectly normal but disappointed many fans in its ordinariness. People hide or tweak various aspects of themselves online, which is visual but the intention may be to hide or change appearance. I would not say that is a new modality but it is a rhetorical choice. I guess in general I would identify what you are calling a new mode of communication as a practice of rhetoric.