Question

eview the section on using words ethically in Communication in the Real World, Chapter 3.3; then, identify a situation where you believe language could be used unethically in academic, professional, or personal contexts. Next, suggest three (3) ways your example relates to civility, polarizing language, swearing, or accountability.Over the past years, I have noticed the unethical language being used, especially with children. I have done so much traveling, due to modeling, I have been in many places and it seems the same everywhere I go. In a personal context, I see where parents talk to their children as if they didn’t even know them. They don’t only do this at home but anywhere and vice versa. An example would be where a family is out shopping, the child may want something really bad and parent says no. The child in turns misbehaves and the parents swears at them as if that is someone they do not even know. The other difference would be the child swearing at the parent.

Answer 1

Language is a means of excluding and including people. Ethical problems related to language and linguistic practices have very few general solutions. First, accuracy and clarity in communication can help to avoid ethical problems related to accidental misunderstandings. Second, intentionally bad acts, linguistic as well as non-linguistic, can be avoided only by a change of intention.

Any linguistic practice can be relevantly considered from a moral point of view and that any communication is potentially morally reproachable, for example, if it is misheard, misread, or misunderstood. In the latter cases, moral doubt or reproach arises accidentally (mainly for syntactic reasons) at the receiver’s end of communication. Another group of morally reprehensible uses of language are those that the sender of a communication intends to be wrong or insulting.

If we have to take Contexts in Academics: In the context where students in same college basically beloning to different religions speaking different launages are provoked for the clashes due political reasons within the group keeping the language as a mode of creating differences is unethical, It's all about misintepretation and miscommunication on the launage.

If we have to take Contexts in Profession: when a MNC company operating at different countries could have a launage barrier. Eventhough Englisgh is the golbally used for professional communication, the group speaking about a team or work or any professional related matters in local langiage in Official meet would be treated as unethical keeping in view of the audiance and members and may lead to professsional team failures.

Civility: Any professinal commiuncation may be misunderstood/misinterpreted based on the tone of speaking/commumication, based on the words that are used, attitide and skill of the person. Ex: If a communication on completing job can be expresssed as " You should complete it by" seems to be harder when it can politely communicated as " Let's enusre that it's done by".

Polarizing language: Polarising launage needs to be avoided to stop hiding behind platitudes when prejudice is peddled about! sine everyone ahs social and professional responsibilites. A civilian mentioning all politicians are corrupt would be a wrong way of expressing his bad experience enoountered with a politician.

Swearing: gives an emotional relief on it's use in personal life, however it's not professionally worth/correct to use as a part of professional communication.

Accountability: The verbal communication whic could become judgemental and interfernces based on thoughts or assunmprions but may not be fact or an validated comminication. Ex; When am employee passed a comment that his manager is biased and do not recognise the my efforts would be judgemental statement on the Managers evaluation without is presented may as a fact which is not validated.