Category: Speech

On August 19, 1992, the Republican National Convention was held in Houston to nominate the President for re-election. The day was also remembered for the eloquent speech of political activist Mary Fisher, who called on party members and all concerned listeners to support her and stop silencing the spread of HIV. This essay is intended to analyze Fishers speech for verbal constructions that she used to make her address more convincing.

As a daughter of a post-Holocaust Jewish rights advocate, Mary Fisher was prone to political activity. Fisher was married twice, and both times ended in a divorce. In 1991, she was informed that her second husband, Brian Campbell, was HIV-positive and gave her the virus (Fisher, 2012). This news was an occasion to start a future political and public career. After the largest Michigan newspaper published a biographical history of Fisher, she was invited to speak at a conference in front of Republicans in 1992. She will then establish an international fund to help HIV-positive people. In recent years of political life, Fisher has been educating the people of Africa about HIV prevention.

Mary Fishers persuasive speech in front of Republicans allowed the author to gain the trust of his listeners. It is enough to hear this speech once to understand the seriousness and concern of woman intentions. It is possible to analyze her address through specific methods of persuasion that came from the Aristotelian times of Ancient Greece. According to the classification of the famous ancient thinker, any argument can be divided into three groups: pathos, logos, and ethos.

The concept of the logos unites statistical information, the sequence of presentation, and verbal techniques. It is enough to start studying the text of Fishers speech to realize that she is using this belief technique. She talks about millions of cases of infection with the virus and provides a statistical forecast of the number of HIV patients in the next few years (EIUPublicSpeaking, 2015). In this part of her presentation, the activist addresses a more rational part of the audience, to ensure interest in the topic under discussion. Such strategies can often be used to increase the impact on the audience.

Later on, we can see that Fisher focuses not on the rationality of information but on the emotional level. By appealing to the listeners feelings, the woman can influence their opinions and get the support she wants. With the help of pathos, moods and emotions of the opponent are brought to the fore, and a call to fear shows the best result (Pearson, Nelson, Titsworth, & Harter, 2012). Fisher makes the public feel emotionally uncomfortable when he mentions the Holocaust and Nazi permissiveness. In one sentence she stirs up public fear: &If you believe you are safe, you are at risk (EIUPublicSpeaking, 2015). Pathos often makes the audience feel that they are personally interested in the information provided and is, as a rule, a catalyst for action.

Finally, the speakers credibility with hundreds of Republicans is built on a method of persuasion, such as ethos. To encourage the audience to act and stop hiding HIV, Fisher begins by acknowledging that he is HIV-positive. This is not a coincidence, but rather a way for listeners who are far from the topic to see in the speaker a person who is closely connected to the disease. In this case, she can be trusted and listened to.

Methods of persuasion were invented thousands of years ago, but even today, they do not lose their relevance. Using them correctly in your speech, as political activist Mary Fisher did in 1992, people can influence the publics decision to support the idea. It is incorrect to use one particular method instead of seeking integration on the edges of a rhetorical triangle. In such a case, the presentation of the proposed idea will be the most effective and will have the desired result.

References

EIUPublicSpeaking. (2015). Mary Fisher A Whisper of AIDS 1992 [Video file]. Web.

Fisher, M. (2012). My name is Mary: A memoir. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

Pearson, J., Nelson, P., Titsworth, S., & Harter, L. (2012). Human communication. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Humanities.

Introduction

Public speaking skills are essential in the contemporary world since they contribute to a persons academic and career achievements. To improve the ability to deliver speeches in public, people should have a chance to look at themselves through the eyes of their audience. In this way, they can notice the strengths and weaknesses of their performance and try to eliminate the discovered drawbacks in the future. For this reason, I am going to watch the video of my speech delivery and analyze my public speaking skills.

Main body

It seems that the most reliable way of finding out whether the presentation was successful is to check the audiences feedback. After I delivered my speech, the listeners applauded me, so I can assume that they liked my report. Moreover, I heard a surprised sound from the audience when I expressed my recommendation as to the consumption of vitamins. It makes me think that my speech was interesting and useful for the listeners.

I do not think that the presence of the camera contributed to my anxiety. However, I believe that delivering a speech while being recorded is more complicated than speaking in front of people without a camera. When people perform in front of the audience and know that they will later appear on a video, which can be seen by many other people, the number of their listeners is enlarged. Therefore, speakers feel greater responsibility for their performance, which may increase their anxiety.

However, I think that it does not apply to the cases when a person records the speech while he or she is alone. In this case, it is possible to stop recording when anything goes wrong and start delivering the presentation anew.

While delivering the speech, it is essential to let the audience know where the mentioned evidence comes from. It is also important to make sure that the audience can trust the cited sources. To achieve this, the speaker should provide as much information about references as possible, including the authors credentials and dates of publication (Griffin, 2016). For this reason, I cited each of my sources orally, but I think that I could have done it more accurately.

For example, in my report, I cited Raymond Francis, but I did not clarify how old was his research, which I used to support my claims. However, I let my listeners know that Raymond Francis was a doctor and a brilliant and advanced thinker, which proved his trustworthiness. I also mentioned a recent article published in 2019, but I think that my audience could have failed to figure out who had written that article.

Considering the discovered issues, I am determined to do differently several things concerning writing and delivering my speech. First, I will try to provide more information about each of the cited sources. I will tell the listeners the authors names, credentials, and dates of publication. Second, I noticed that I looked at my notes almost all the time. Such behavior usually causes a loss of connection with the audience due to the lack of eye contact (North, n.d.). Therefore, I will try to look at my listeners more often to establish a connection and see their immediate feedback.

Conclusion

To sum up, I consider my speech delivery quite satisfactory. Despite some flaws in citing the sources and little eye contact with the audience, the listeners seemed to like my report because of its relevant topic and useful recommendations. Since I have discovered my weaknesses, it is up to me to deal with them and take them into account while preparing for my next public performance.

References

Griffin, C. L. (2016). Invitation to public speaking  National Geographic edition (6^th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

North, M. (n.d.). 10 tips for improving your public speaking skills. Web.

Outline

The existing different categories used by sociologists to study society include; economic characteristics, class, regional characteristics, and ethnicity. Sociology defines a community as a dimension of shared possessions, knowledge, and behaviors. Linguists however use another dimension of social organization by using speech community to refer to the community. Sociolinguists, therefore, combine the two (Mesthrie, 2000).

Lyons, cited in Wardhaugh (2006), has a different view of a speech community and refers to them as real. The real speech community in this case is all the people who use a given language (or dialect) (Wardhaugh, 2006 p. 120; Hudson, 1996 p. 24). This concept perceives speech communities as those that can overlap in cases where bilingual individuals exist and therefore eliminate the need for cultural or social unity. It is noted that the world of today is characterized by globalization and post-modern cultures and languages. The characteristics of societies, therefore, change with time, and studying such communities requires a definition that includes all aspects.

Introduction

There are so many categories used by sociologists to study society. These categories include; economic characteristics, class, regional characteristics, and ethnicity. According to McMillan & Chavis (1986), Sociology defines a community as a dimension of shared possessions, knowledge, and behaviors. Linguists however use another dimension of social organization by using speech community to refer to the community. Sociolinguists, therefore, combine the two (Mesthrie, 2000).

Sociolinguistic studies consider the community as a speech community. They examine the relationship between language and the social world considering how language creates and respond to structures in society (Nunan & Carter, 2001). Wardhaugh (2006) notes that sociolinguistics is the study of the use of language among or within groups of speakers. However, this definition is not shared by other sociolinguistic scholars who have numerous varied definitions attributed to different concepts and approaches.

All these concepts have led to a finer definition that can be used by sociolinguists for studies and even teaching different communities. This paper outlines a brief literature review of the definitions, concepts, and theories of a speech community. Its use in the current sociolinguistic research is also highlighted.

Literature Review

Speech Communities: Similar and shared concept

Wardhaugh (2006) and other authors such as Hudson (1996) and Maros (2007) have explained so many definitions of speech community according to different theorists who believe differently about what a speech community is. The following definitions are according to different authors who define speech community differently with different concepts:

A speech community is a social group with members having similar/coherent speech characteristics (Wardhaugh, 2006). The concept considers shared knowledge, attitudes, and shared language. Michael Halliday and Dell Hymes, as cited by Hudson (1996), had similar definitions that referred to abstract patterns of variation and shared norms and not shared speech behavior. This kind of definition emphasizes speech community as a group of people who feel they belong together as a community and not as people identified by external characteristics as seen by linguists and outsiders (Hudson, 1996).

Bloomfield, cited in Wardhaugh (2006, p.122), also defined speech community as a group of people who interact using speech. This concept may mean that people can communicate using different languages but still belong to the same community of speech as long as there is a shared language that brings them together (Hudson, 1996). Bloomfields definition recognizes the idea that speech communities are not only identified by what they do but by what they do not do as well (Wardhaugh, 2006).

Wardhaugh (2006) further recognizes that a speech community is not coterminous with a language. He states that so many people in many places across the world speak English, albeit differently among different communities that are completely separated from one another (Wardhaugh, 2006). Examples of such communities are in South Africa, among expatriates in China and New Zealand. Wardhaugh (2006) also notes that one speech community can speak more than one language for example in African states, Canada, Papua New Guinea, Switzerland, and New York.

If speech community is to be defined by linguistic characteristics, then language has to be recognized as a communal possession. Using linguistic characteristics to define speech community however has not been possible due to the difference in the concepts, approaches. It may be concluded that people do not feel directly related to different linguistic characteristics such as accent and tone when it comes to the speech community.

Speech Communities: Differing concepts

Lyons cited in Wardhaugh (2006) has a different view of the people who makes up the speech community, hence referring to the people as real speech community. The real speech community in this case is all the people who use a given language (or dialect) (Wardhaugh, 2006 p. 120; Hudson, 1996 p. 24). It is critical to note that this definition may perceive speech communities as those that can overlap in cases where bilingual individuals exist and therefore eliminate the need for cultural or social unity. Hudson (1996) however notes that it is only possible to consider speech community as people who use a given language or dialect only if it is possible to consider the languages without referring to the community speakers.

The only sure thing in society is that people who speak a certain language use characteristics of the language to obtain group identity with each other and to achieve group differentiation from other speakers. Speakers however do use other characteristics such as culture, political, social, and ethnicity to also identify each other and to differentiate themselves from other speakers.

Wardhaugh (2006) argues that speech community has to be defined using an appropriate criterion and that which does not only consider linguistic characteristics giving the complete definition of a speech community. However, he acknowledges that this definition of a speech community that is dependent on the sociolinguistic purpose, narrowed down to linguistic characteristics is dominant. In this case, a single language can be chosen to define the speech community and the language is also defined for sociolinguistic purposes. Speakers that show certain linguistic norms or share a common feeling about a linguistic behavior belong to the same speech community.

Wardhaugh describes Labovs definition, as cited in Wardhaugh (2006): the speech community is not defined by any marked agreement in the use of language elements, so much as by participation in a set of shared norms (p.121). According to this definition, individuals feel they belong to a community because of the various characteristics including linguistics. This makes the speech community very abstract since specific norms used in those communities may not be related to language and even if they were they vary among small groups (Wardhaugh, 2006).

For example, the Chinese consider themselves one community but different speakers do not consider themselves belonging to that community. Hokkien, cited in Trousdale (2005), for instance, might not express the sense of belonging to a community of Mandarin speakers; hence they would form different speech communities.

Charles Hockett, cited in Husdon (1996), also had a different concept of what speech community is: basing his argument that speech community is characterized by each language. As quoted in Hudson (1996 p. 24), Charles Hockett states, each language defines a speech community: the whole set of people who communicate with each other either directly or via the common language. According to this concept, communication within the community is used as a criterion to define speech community. This means that if two communities speak the same language, yet they have no contact with each other, they would belong to different speech communities (Hudson, 1996).

Gumperzs (1982) concept of a speech community, according to Wardhaugh (2006) and Hudson (1996), gives two definitions of what a speech community is. The first prefers referring to speech community as a linguistic community which defines a community by its relationship with other communities. It considers that community members differ in certain ways from other communities externally and have a social cohesiveness internally; a concept that recognizes Bloomfields definition. It defines the linguistic community as, a social group which may be either monolingual or multilingual (Carlin, 2008). The community is considered one due to communication lines weaknesses from and with surrounding areas and the frequency of social interaction patterns (Hudson, 1996).

The second definition includes another characteristic of speech communities which indicates that speech communities should have specific linguistic differences that separate them among themselves and from the external communities. This disqualifies an earlier definition that stated that speech communities are defined by the languages so that one speech community is defined by one language. It also highlights that a speech community is inherently cohesive through a common language variety. The two definitions also put much emphasis on interaction and communication contrasting the idea that speech communities overlap due to bilingualism as earlier stated (Hudson, 1996).

Another approach of what speech community is advocated by Robert Le Page, cited by Hudson (1996). In this definition, speech community is referred to as societal groups with distinctive social and speech characteristics. These groups according to Hudson (1996) cannot be identified by objective methods used by sociologists, but are those just perceived by the speakers to existing. This definition also indicates that a group may represent certain social types and does not necessarily need to consider the whole population.

The groups in this case overlap but due to multilingualism and not bilingualism as previous definitions stated (Diller, 2008). The individuals group themselves in various multi-dimensions defined by groups found in the society. Each group has linguistic items that make up their language so that other groups can contribute to the linguistic items in their language (Diller, 2008). These personal groupings are considered speech communities by Bolinger Dwight, cited in Hudson (1996). Based on the overlap existing between different groups and how the groups items are classified to form items of another groups language, complexity is created in Bolingers speech community (Hudson, 1996).

Speech community definition has emerged from simple definitions such as, all the people who use a given language (or dialect) and a group of people who interact using speech; to speech community definition that does not only refer to term speech community but also refers to groups as with similar speech and social characteristics (Mendes, 2009). The definition of these groups has led to a more complex definition that considers particular groups in society as speech communities. The groups have specific ways of classifying items of other groups into the linguistic system forming their language identity.

Conclusion

The world of today is characterized by globalization which is characterized by post-modern cultures and languages. The characteristics of societies, therefore, change with time, and studying such communities requires a definition that includes all aspects. Language characteristics also form part of speech community definition.

TESOL teachers need to know the language characteristics of a community for effective delivery of teaching services. Knowledge of how the languages arise in a speech community (Nunan & Carter, 2001) as defined by Bolinger is therefore very important. This definition allows the TESOL teacher to identify the linguistic changes in English as well as other languages to give room for a more specific approach to language teaching, taking into consideration the cultural and language orientation of the learner/s. There are three areas of research that are very important to the TESOL teacher. These are language variation, languages in contact, and linguistic relativity all of which are studied in sociolinguistic research (Nunan & Carter, 2001).

The above paper has described the definition of speech community according to several theorists giving concepts for each definition. These definitions assist sociolinguistics in studying language characteristics about social characteristics of different communities.

Reference List

Carlin, E. B. (2008). Speech community formation: a Sociolinguistic Profile of the Trio of Suriname: Overview of the Trio language. New Indian Guide. Vol. 72 (1&2) pp 4-42.

Diller, A. (2008). Tai-Kadai Languages. London, UK: Routledge.

Gumperz, J. (1982). Language and social identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hudson, R. A. (1996). Sociolinguistics. Ed2. England, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Maros, M. (2007). The Social Functions of Complaints in Malay Speech Community. Abstract for SEALS, 17 (2).

Mendes, B. R. (2009). Speech Communities, Communities of Practice and Sociolinguistic Research in Quilombola Communities. Web.

McMillan, D.W., & Chavis D.M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18, pp. 16-17.

Mesthrie, R. (2000). Introducing sociolinguistics. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.

Nunan, D. & Carter, R. (2001). The Cambridge Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages, 4^th ed. England, UK: Cambridge University Press. Web.

Trousdale, G. (2005). The social context of Kentish raising: Issues in old English social linguistics. International Journal of English Studies. Vol 5 (1) pp 59-76.

Wardhaugh, R. (2006). An introduction to sociolinguistics. 5^th ed. Ontario, Canada: Wiley-Blackwell.

Speech

If in my quest to achieve my goals

I stumble or crumble and lose my soul

Those that knew me would easily co-sign

There was never a life as hard as mine

No father, no money, no chance, and no guide,

I only follow my voice inside

I fit guides me wrong and I do not win

Ill learn from my mistakes and try to achieve again&

(Shakur, T., 1989)

Introduction

The quotation of Tupac Shakur, the famous rapper, actor, poet, and social activist is one of the best ways to demonstrate the importance of ones commitment to follow his or her dreams and do everything one is able to reach ones goals (Lucas, 1995). Needless to say, there is no guarantee for anyone that he or she will definitely reach the goal or make the dream of his/hers come true, but in any case the best one can do in such a situation is put all his or her efforts on making that happen what he or she has been striving for during their whole life (Lucas, 1995; Stephanie, 2009).

At least, even if the pursuit of ones goal results in the complete failure, there is no need to regret as the person has done his/her best and put all his/her essence to the altar of victory (Stephanie, 2009). Tupac Shakur was one of the people to strictly follow this ideal of life, i. e. pursuing ones goals by all the means necessary. The example of this genius who managed to leave the ghetto and coped with the task of becoming a millionaire having been born broke can leave no one doubting if it is possible to achieve ones goals all alone.

Discussion

Of course, you might wonder why I cite Tupac Shakur in front of you and why I talk about the importance of achieving ones goals. The answer to these possible questions is simple  I realize it myself and I need you to realize as well that it is only the fulfilling of our dreams that make us actually happy people. If you do not agree at once, please take your time to sit and think of your own childhood or adulthood dreams that your have never got the chance to make reality (Stephanie, 2009). Think of what could happen if you had been more decisive and courageous while choosing career or facing the alternative of either getting education or taking up sports and becoming a successful basketball player.

I speak today about the importance of striving for ones dreams as far as rather often we kill our dreams ourselves by our being not confident enough to pursue them or being scared by the potential negative consequences predicted by some of our friends or relatives (Lucas, 1995). I have also had an experience of broken dreams in my life. Dreaming of becoming a football player, I had to drop this wish because certain health issues prevented me from developing my dream. For sure, I had the choice of either keeping to the doctors advice and leaving football or taking the whole responsibility to my health myself and continuing my career. I chose the first alternative and regretted it for years.

However, understanding that we are students and we still are young people, I clearly see the solution to the problem of those who are either afraid or do not know how to achieve their goals. To satisfy the need of help such people permanently experience, it is necessary for them to just start taking steps to meet their dreams.

Although it sounds too simple and unprepared, it really works. Remember how many times you have heard about the method of curing an illness by the phenomenon that caused it. If one is, for example, afraid of darkness, what he or she should do is spend enough time in a dark room for the fear to transform into the understanding that there is no reason to be afraid (Stephanie, 2009).

Accordingly, if you do not know how to achieve your goal the first thing you should do is actually believe that you are able to do what you dream of and visualize yourself in the position after achieving the goal. This method works  look at Tupac Shakur who started by writing songs of becoming a millionaire and reached his goal by the age of 25 when his most successful album All Eyes on Me sold over 9 million copies and brought him the worldwide fame.

Try the method I have just told you about and you will see how soon the results will impress you. Anyway, you do not lose anything in the sense that some of the people present here are still only dreaming without actually working on their dreams. In any case, you cannot lose the phenomenon you do not currently have, which makes the way I suggest the win-win variant. On the other hand, the negative consequences of doing nothing can be hard to underestimate. Imagine the life during which you grow older and every day you take your time to regret that you were afraid to do something to achieve your goal when you had such a chance (Lucas, 1995).

For instance, working as a sales assistant in a store in your neighborhood till retirement you might daily go home with the thought that you could have studied better when you had to and develop your career much higher and more successfully. Or as well you might be a successful manager who goes to sleep with the regret of failing to become a painter or movie actor (Stephanie, 2009). To avoid this, you have to believe that now you have the opportunity to move your life in the direction you desire. If you win, you will be proud of your strong will; if you fail, you have nothing to regret as you have done your best.

Conclusion

Thus, we can clearly see that there are people who are either afraid to or do not know how to achieve their goals and make their dreams come true. As far as achieved goals make people happy, it is vitally important to understand how to cope with the task of such an achieving. The best way is to believe in yourself and take steps towards your dream. Let the example of Tupac Shakur become the role model of the successful person who achieved everything in his life exclusively by his strong will and firm confidence in the future success.

What I suggest you do right now is make the first steps to your dreams. Those of you who dream of career in sports should go to the next sports sections and become their members; those who pursue arts in their dreams should attend the nearest school of arts, etc. Just ask yourself what you really dream of and go make your dream come true&and do not be afraid of mistakes:

Ill learn from my mistakes and try to achieve again& (Shakur, T., 1989).

References

Stephanie, B. (2009). Monroes Motivated Sequence: Effectiveness and Use. Web.

Lucas, S.E. (1995). The Art of Public Speaking, 5th. Ed., pp. 353-361.

Shakur, T. (1989). If I Fall. Rose that Grew from the Concrete: Poems by Tupac Shakur.

Usually, hate speech is viewed as a binary decision. Attempting to detect and sanction it requires precise differentiation to justify whether a communication is hate speech. Hate speech is any expression of discrimination that involves hate toward other people. A wide range of expressions is captured under this statement, and hence difficult to identify its lawful restrictions under international human rights law. Therefore, hate speech is used for expressions of hatred, abuse, harassment, discrimination, insults, inciting violence, and intimidation against people that fall into a specific category (Bahador, 2020). All these elements defame the partys reputation on the receiving end.

In some cases, individuals may communicate hate speech that is not defamatory but express their freedom of speech. Such examples of non-defamatory hate speech include matters of truth on government operations, demonstrations against harmful cultural practices, and workplace corruption. However, this may have a wrong impression on either them or the other party despite the statement being true and containing proof. This paper expounds more on non-defamatory hate speech and its negative implications.

According to international human rights law, some severe forms of hate speech supposed to be prohibited include national advocacy, violence, hostility, and religious or racial discrimination. Governments are advised against abusing hate speech legislation that will discourage the participation of citizens in lawful democratic matters involving the countrys general interest (Goguen, 2013). Communication that may seem like hate speech and yet pose no defamatory elements is when a group or an individual has concerns about their government and its operations. This may include issues such as the education system, security in the country, and even support for marginalized communities. One may express his concerns based on these matters in a hate speech manner indicating how ineffective the government works, but its the truth and hence not defamatory in any way. Though not defaming, such communication tends not to follow the suitable protocol in addressing topics before communicating them to the public. The government systems may be ineffective, but one needs to use their freedom of expression to find solutions to such situations and provide recommendations rather than condemnation.

In significant cases, hate speech tends to be a divide between us and them individuals. Different groups in our communities practice different cultural practices. Some practices can be accommodated by the larger society, while others tend to draw a line due to their negative impacts on those involved. In this case, one may communicate hate speech towards the harmful practice of another culture. This may be regarded as not defamatory, for example, female genital mutilation, discrimination, or gender oppression (Waldron, 2012). That does not defame the culture of the other community, but such hate speech is wrong when not followed with the right actions and education to the people practicing the culture on why the culture adopted is harmful.

Lastly, corruption has wasted most working organizations. A hate speech on people involved in crime in an organization and providing evidence of the same is neither classified under defamatory hate speech (Barendt, 2019). There is a need to raise discrimination, harassment, and poor working conditions linked to workplace corruption for a better chance. However, some of these hate speeches provided with goodwill may result in disagreements and violence, resulting in some workers losing their jobs.

In conclusion, only some communications containing hate speech are good. One has freedom of expression, and some may give their complaints in the form of hate speech for actions to be taken and hence not defamatory. However, one must consider the consequences that may result after addressing such issues with other individuals and the possible ways instead of choosing the hate speech method.

References

Babak Bahador, R. (2020). Classifying and identifying the intensity of hate speech. Items. Web.

David Goguen. (2013). Defamation of character or free speech? www.alllaw.com. Web.

Eric- Barendt. (2019). What is the harm of hate speech? SpringerLink. Web.

Waldron, J. (2012). Hate speech and political legitimacy. The Content and Context of Hate Speech, 329-340. Web.

How do we make our speech effective? Why do we sometimes remain misunderstood despite our efforts? What prevents us from being heard? Some people believe that effective communication is something from the arsenal of business psychology, and people who do not need to conduct business negotiations do not need to learn to express their ideas effectively. Others consider effective speech something inherent to great speakers such as Martin Luther King or Mahatma Gandhi. While most people are not born true orators, they can learn to master the ability to speak effectively.

Here are some tips to consider while delivering your speech:

Knowing Your Audience

It is critical to grab your audiences attention. Do you remember how in the Wall Street movie, a young stock broker played by Charlie Sheen received only five minutes to convince the shark of the exchange market (Michael Douglas) to take him on as a member of his team? The success of a speech depends largely on how much you can interest the audience in hearing what you have to say (North, 2016). You need a strategy for increasing the importance of the speech to the audience, conveying its paramount idea, and turning a listener into a follower of your views. We all consider ourselves unique and want to be interesting to others. Being sincerely interested in your audience and knowing their expectations comprise the key to effective speech delivery.

Verbals and Vocals

Voice and speech patterns, speed and volume are important for a speaker because, according to numerous scholarly studies, up to 60 percent of all information is transmitted to the audience through these aspects of speech. Any report should be expressive and include some emotional aspects such as quietness, solemnity, reproachfulness, beseeching, etc. By varying the tonality, speed, and volume of the performance, you can align your speech to the general theme and the overall aim. Verbals and vocals may be determined by the composition of the audience (for example, the average age or their careers) as well as its general mood for receiving the speech. The proper choice of this or that voice or volume in the process of speaking leads to more vivid presentation of the main idea put forward by the speaker in various parts of the performance.

Non-Verbals

The way you speak non-verbally also matters. Behavioral techniques that focus on posture, gestures, mimicry, and eye contact may attract your audience and help listeners to perceive the key idea. For example, psychological research has found that smiling speakers seem to be considered more attractive as people tend to ascribe to them the best human qualities (Bonaccio, OReilly, OSullivan, & Chiocchio, 2016). Smiling shows the audience that communication with the speaker is pleasurable.

Stand straight! During the performance, straighten your back and take your shoulders back as well. A slight smile, a glance at the far wall of the room, and your posture should express confidence and openness. Gesticulation should be synchronous and consonant with what you say. By making movements with your hands, you emphasize the main thoughts and add confidence to your words. Choose one of the listeners and make eye contact as if you were telling your story to him or her and then move to another person. This will increase your concentration and prevent the so-called wandering look.

Visual Aids

Illustrations, tables, charts, and infographics are powerful instruments to supplement your words. Visual aids are useful to help the audience remember information and increase their interest in the topic of the presentation. Simplicity and the size of the visual aids comprise two issues to be kept in mind while preparing and displaying them. Another benefit of using visual aids is that one can use them as speaker notes to be sure that every topic was discussed. They may also help speakers to cope with nervousness before delivering the speech, as a speaker would know that he or she can always refer to the prepared materials. The visual aids should help you to organize the speech in the most effective manner possible.

Coping with Nervous Energy

Nervousness is normal for all people. The adrenaline rush makes you more alert, yet this feeling should be controlled. Coopman and Lull (2015) state that concentrating on your speech anxiety distracts you from what you want to say and makes you more nervous (p. 36). Instead, practice your speech, learn everything about your topic, and be ready for questions. Once a speaker becomes comfortable with the topic selected, he or she becomes less prone to nervousness. It is also useful to record your speech or videotape yourself in order to take a look at your presentation from the audiences point of view.

Practice, Practice, Practice

Communicating with people, especially delivering speeches, is an art. To master it, it is necessary to gain competence in many subtle effects and possess special skills, many of which are seemingly unrelated to communication. However, it is their presence that makes people brilliant speakers and interesting interlocutors. Tell stories and be positive while practicing your speech. Call your friends or family and ask them to listen to your speech and comment on your presentation in general, and also on how well you use the tips listed in this blog in particular. Practice, practice, practice!

References

Bonaccio, S., OReilly, J., OSullivan, S. L., & Chiocchio, F. (2016). Nonverbal behavior and communication in the workplace: A review and an agenda for research. Journal of Management, 42(5), 1044-1074.

Coopman, S. J., & Lull, J. (2015). Public speaking: The evolving art (3rd ed.). Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.

North, M. L. (2016). 10 Tips for improving your public speaking skills. 

Introduction

Micklethwait and Wooldridge state that Ronald Reagan was initially a democrat who admired Franklin Roosevelt but later changed his alliance to adopt conservatism. Consequently, he approved the candidatures of Republicans; Richard Nixon and Dwight Eisenhower while still holding the tag of a democrat. Reagan being an employee of General Electric often gave speeches that had a politically conservative lace and they eventually lost his job after they became too unpopular with the management (Para. 6). His conservative attitudes have been linked to the southern political culture, a region that had the majority of whites who took long to accommodate other races (Cole and Adams 1). He managed to integrate the variant nature of conservatism into one ideology. This essay asserts that Reagan was an anti-democrat, a standpoint that southerners supported.

Southern Elements in Reagans Speech

In his speech, a time for choosing, Reagan opposed the rapid expansion of the government through taxation as vouched by democrats. He stated that citizens would be impoverished because the policy meant a tax burden on them. This view resonates with the classical conservatives who were cautious of the striving foreign policy. The American civil war which was begun by the south over slavery rights left most of the southern politicians unpopular, argue Cole and Adams. This later made it difficult for presidential candidates from the south to seek votes unless they migrated to other places up to the time Jimmy Carter was elected (3). In his speech, Reagan opposed government intentions of going to war to safeguard American security. He argued that it would betray the intentions of forefathers to provide for the freedom of all. He said he thought its time we asked ourselves if we still knew the liberties that were the Founding Fathers intended for us. Probably; Reagan must have been drawing his view from the lessons learned by the Southerners in the civil war.

Southern political culture supported a free market economy. Reagans speech opposed collective ownership of property as the socialist democrats had proposed. He was against constitutional changes that would bring the motive of the welfare of the state to meet peoples requirements in life. This, he said was apt to put everyone under the forceful control of the state which in turn would hinder them in making economic choices. Collectivized farming in the US had become expensive yet unproductive. The federal government was experiencing high costs in maintaining agriculture programs meant for the people and so he suggested privatization of the sector where farmers would pursue their investment capacities. Southern Political culture, through values such as religiosity, capitalism, and patriotism; defended the freedom of individuals to perform economic activities of their desire. Cole and Adams added that the free market economy was supported by southerners because it indicated overall freedom (4). Reagan voted for these sentiments when he said, A government cant control the economy without controlling people.

Southerners were suspicious of the striving foreign policy because they thought it would cause socialism around the world. Reagan was similarly opposed to the reckless spending in the name of foreign aid because some programs of aid ended up in the hands of insensitive leaders of the third world. He said, Were against doling out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world. He talked of aid going to support extra wives of these leaders instead of performing the intended economic purposes.

At that time, the government had spent 146 billion dollars on foreign aid but there was nothing to show of it. Reagan supported aid to allies but he would rather have it go directly to individuals than pass through governments. Southern conservatives also argued that the US would undermine the taxpayer in the name of keeping allies to wage war on communism (Micklethwait and Wooldridge para. 8).

Southern Political conservatives preferred aloofness from the United Nations control. Since the human rights charter was signed in 1948, The US still had issues with racism. Southerners had wanted white supremacy to dominate and had even gone ahead in states like Louisiana and Mississippi to put this supremacy into the justice system until the civil rights movements began. This was despite the UN championing the fight for human rights. Reagans speech stuck to this southern view. He said, &were against subordinating American interests to an organization that has become so structurally unsound& In this case, the American opinion was more important than what the UN wanted.

Ronald Reagan probably preferred well-established institutions. He observed that the program against destitution involved deceptions on how money was given out and required mending or alterations to allow taxpayers to adopt a means of their saving instead of contributing to a program that found its way in corrupt recipients. In this case, he was opposing the democrats for setting up a system seen to be exploitative. He said the program required a sound basis otherwise it would show that we lacked in business sense.  He proposed for People who did not require those payments to determine their choice of getting them. Conservatives, as a matter of principle, believed in well-set institutions to allow better management of national resources and manage the flow of the market economy, and protect the liberty of citizens (Williamson 13).

Anti-southern Elements in Reagans Speech

In this speech, Reagan did not support the southerners. Jones Williamson asserts that most conservatives from the south supported individual liberty without concern about their effects. At one time, people would be free to carry guns ostensibly to protect themselves. This, however, led to disobedience of human rights, where people took justice into their own hands (14). Reagan supported justice for all and respect for human rights. He opposed the frequent confiscation of property from poor farmers in the name of selling them to better users of the land. This he thought would undermine individual rights to ownership of property. Our natural, unalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation of government&so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at the moment. He was referring to democrats confiscation of property for government ownership.

In this speech, Reagan talks about Barry Goldwaters initiation of programs to help employees in his company like the retirement plans and health maintenance system. This is a great departure from classical conservatives who were pessimistic and sensed losses in any new programs. Based on this as a campaign agenda for Goldwater, we can think Reagan was not a pessimist like the southern conservatives. Reagan talks of how previously, campaign managers ran out of patience when Goldwater skipped a campaign to see a dying cancer friend. He liked this quality of risk-taking.

Unlike southern conservatives, Reagan did not hate taxation (Micklethwait and Wooldridge para. 7). His concern was in the way the collected money was spent. He observed that there was a need to have a system that did not devalue the meaning of taxation and individual collection schemes would pay back the person in the future rather than incurring losses due to dollar devaluation. Reagan would want taxation to benefit the taxpayer and not appear as a burden to them. No nation in history has ever survived a tax burden&Today, 37 cents out of every dollar earned in this country is the tax collectors share&we havent balanced our budget, He said.

Reagan supported programs that would reduce juvenile delinquencies such as helping them attain education. He realized that programs that tried to accommodate criminals were more expensive. We find that we are going to spend each year just on room and board for each young person&4,700 dollars a year. We can send them to Harvard for a 2,700 course. Southern conservatives believed in the freedom of the people without consideration to such remedies. Although classical conservatives supported elitism, they had been supporting the criminal accommodation programs.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it can be important to note that Southerners applauded Reagan after this speech because it contained some of the features they supported; a general opposition to the democrats. This speech was based on conservatism to draw his ideology in which he combined several conservative views into one. Reagan departed slightly from southerners in matters like the concept of taxation, justice, and human rights which they had resisted for long. While the conservatives opposed taxation in totality, Reagan wanted the usage of tax to change and benefit the ordinary citizen. Reagan also supported ways of helping the poor, something which conservatives viewed with pessimism.

Works cited

Cole, Rickey L and Kimberley S. Adams. Mississippi: An Emerging Democracy

Creating a culture of Civic Participation among Formerly Oppressed Peoples. Nebula. 4.3(2007): 1-12.

Micklethwait, John and Adrian Wooldridge. Reaganism: the Gippers brand of Conservatism is Unique in to America. The Wall Street Journal (Online). 2009. Web.

Williamson, Jones. Conservatives: was Reagan one of them? Cologne: Zap Books. 1996.

Introduction

Fear is one of the strongest emotions that often defines peoples behavior. Politicians are aware of the power of human fears and tend to exploit them to achieve their goals. The paranoia surrounding communism in the USA in the middle of the 20^th century is an illustration of this case. McCarthy was a devout supporter of the war on communism within the country as well as far beyond its borders. In his speech in Wheeling (West Virginia) in 1950, he outlined some of his ideas on the matter and calling for peoples action and unity. Unfortunately, similar calls are still present in modern society since politicians always find new enemies.

Main body

First, it is necessary to look into the way communism was defined by McCarthy, which will help to understand some of the current trends. McCarthy emphasized that communist nations were hostile to the morals of the Christian world (Senator Joseph McCarthy, speech at Wheeling, 1950). He mentioned that those countries were armed and aggressive, but the only evidence to support this claim was several quotes from some Soviet leaders. At that, one of the quotes was initially uttered in the late 1920s and repeated while the other was rather an ideologic propaganda with reference to the distant future. Nonetheless, McCarthy made it clear that the threat was real and the enemy was already within. The politician fueled peoples fears making them irrational and vulnerable.

A similar situation is apparent in the contemporary USA, but the enemy is different. Islam is the focus of those who want to intimidate people. The 9/11 attack caused a major shift in society and inflicted the fears of the few on the masses. Americans are now afraid of those who practice this religion, and they want these people out of their country. Every Muslim is regarded as a potential enemy just like any person could be accused of being a communist in the 1950s. People are afraid of Islamists as well as anyone who goes to mosques. The massive destruction of New York downtown made them fear and be hostile.

Conclusion

Summing up, Americans are going through another wave of ungrounded fear. They are not afraid of a group of extremists but believe in a threat coming from millions who practice a particular religion. It is valid to draw comparisons between anti-Islam and anti-communist rhetoric since peoples views and behaviors are affected by delusional ideas. It is necessary to analyze the situation and act in rational ways, but masses are often easily affected especially after a horrible catastrophe.

Reference

Senator Joseph McCarthy, speech at Wheeling, West Virginia, 1950. (1950). Web.

Chief Josephs surrender speech named I Will Fight No More Forever was a significant speech that addressed the challenges the Ned Perce tribe had to overcome being chased out of its lands. The main idea of the text was that the hardships Chief Joseph and his people had to experience. His speech conveyed a significant and touching message that will be discussed in detail below.

Surrender Speech Summary and Analysis

Before analyzing the speech Chief Joseph gave in 1877, it is vital to address the events that had led to it. Chief Joseph was one of the Ned Perce tribe, which was forced to surrender after the Battle of the Bear Paw Mountains. The tribe had been chased out of its native territories for several months. General Howard and his soldiers did not provide women, children, and men of the Ned Perce with an opportunity to leave in their lands in the Wallowa Valley. In the end, the tribe had to surrender to General Howard and Colonel Nelson Miles who came to the generals aid. The speech Chief Joseph gave about this event was brief but could be considered touching.

In I Will Fight No More Forever, Chief Joseph wanted to help the occupants understand the struggles the Ned Perce had overcome before the surrender. He talked about his childhood years that he spends in the Wallowa Valley, describing its nature and the memories he had about it. He referred to several generations of people, including his father and other ancestors that had lived and were buried there. Then, he talked about the events that had led to the surrender.

Chief Joseph mentioned that the American government had promised the Ned Perce to protect them and their lands from the white settlement but did not keep its promise. The countrys officials demanded the tribe to leave their territory. Chief Josephs speech was touching, as he described his intention to avoid any violence and conflicts while his people were preparing for leaving their native lands. He seemed to regret the fact that some of the Ned Perce were involved in fights with incoming whites. Such an attitude is notable because it is evident that the American governments position was unfair, as it had promised safety to the tribe. Unfortunately, the conflicts between the Ned Perce and the occupants led to reinforcements from the military, and, as a result, the tribe was chased out of the Wallowa Valley.

Although the Ned Perce had had to surrender, Chief Joseph continued to advocate for their right to return to their lands. Many of the tribe died of epidemic illnesses as the result of the outrages, but the man did not give up. He dared to speak about the unjust attitude of the American government publicly and express his hopes for the future. Chief Josephs speech is notable because it describes the challenges the tribe had to overcome, and the feelings its members had regarding the events they had to experience.

Conclusion

It is possible to say that Chief Josephs speech conveyed a powerful message to the American government, which had betrayed the people of the Ned Perce. It was a significant text that revealed the challenges and struggles Native Americans had to overcome because of the occupants. I Will Fight No More Forever shows that despite the problems the Ned Perce encountered, its members remained strong and were willing to protect their rights.

Reflections on the nature of society, some rules in it, and its influence on an individual are deep-rooted in the sociological science. However, regulation appears to an integral part of any community and organization, and each person has to cope with it. The methods are various, and the results depend on a particular personality and moralities. Barry Schwartz expresses his views on this account and draws attention to the negative effect of incentives. His opinion may also be compared to the giants of sociology who are Georg Simmel and George Herbert Mead. This way, the purpose of this paper is to analyze and describe the speech of Barry Schwartz and outline the connection to Georg Simmel and George Hervert Meads theories in the context of this issue.

A description of the video

A professor from Swarthmore College, Barry Schwartz, presents his opinion on the topic of ethics in modern society in his speech Our Loss of Wisdom. He contrasts the morals and rules and claims that various forms of regulations are not as effective as perceived comprehensively at the moment of hardship and disasters. The professor highlights that the beneficial consequence is only the short term (TED-Ed 2013). The reliance on rules and incentive results in a blasé attitude towards happening and inhibits a person from reacting correctly and wisely to the situation, and occasionally, the regulation does not appear sufficient. Such a system discourages individuals from sticking to moral drives, and Barry Schwartz states that it makes humanity participate in the war on wisdom.

Therefore, the speaker emphasizes the significance of wisdom, especially in present-day developments. In order to support his argument, he mentions Aristotles claim, practical wisdom is the combination of moral will and moral skill (TED-Ed 2013, 3:45). Barry Schwartz compares a wise person to a jazz musician, who is free to adjust, a wise person knows when and how to make the exception to every rule and knows how to improvise (TED-Ed 2013, 3:30). He also draws a specular example for his statements, for instance, observing the list of duties of hospital janitors. It implies such activities as mopping and vacuuming the floor, cleaning toilets, but there is no reference to interaction with human beings. However, janitors participate in supplying patients with high-quality medical care not to a lesser extent.

This way, it is possible to highlight the core ideas of the professor. It is essential to pay more attention to ethics and the moral part of communication between individuals. Incentives and rules are not as beneficial as they are intended, as they result in insufficient reflection on the situation. He supports Barak Obamas opinion that virtue is an integral part of each activity and the most efficient solution for the majority of situations.

Connections to Georg Simmels theories

Georg Simmel is a German scientist, who contributed to the development of sociology significantly. Although his studies were established at the turn of the 19^th and 20^th centuries, the views of Barry Schwartz have specific connections to his theories and are worth being observed through the German sociologists lens. He addresses the topic of individuality and duality in his theories, which can propose a new perspective for the aforementioned issue. According to Georg Simmel, the latter has a significant influence on individuality (Appelrouth and Edles 2016). It can exist and be explained by belonging to a particular group, and maintaining this characteristic depends on the extent of engulfing in it. It should be highlighted that the acceptance of a community result in adjusting to specific rules and incentives. The interaction is impossible without considering this aspect.

In addition, the sociologist claims that there is no self, which can be own. The influence of society is inevitable, and the formation of personality necessarily contains a wide range of aspects, which have been accepted due to social regulation. They may have positive consequences too, for instance, as Georg Simmel mentions, modern societies supply people a possibility to develop their specific talents and interests. However, the researcher highlights the disadvantages too, for instance, the aforementioned fact contributes to declining the human spirit. This way, the nature of belonging to society and rules in it are ambivalent, and that may lead both to the success of an individual or failure.

Connections to George Herbert meads theories

Other theories, which belong to an American sociologist George Herbert Mead, can also be applied to the case of the aforementioned video. The scientist reflects on a wide range of topics, such as self-control, mind, society, and self. The mutual influence of an individual covered by them and society can stimulate listeners of Barry Schwartz to reconsider the issue of regulation. George Herbert Mead states that during the conversation a person tends to accept the attitude of the partner, which he imagines, and respond to his or her potential action (Appelrouth and Edles 2016). The base of communication implies shaping the phrases and actions to the imagined responses.

Another sociologists view of society addresses the individuality and its limitation. He reckons, social control, so far from tending to crush out the human individual or to obliterate his self-conscious individuality, is, on the contrary, actually constitutive of and inextricably associated with that individuality (Appelrouth and Edles 2016, p. 78). This way, it may be concluded that various rules and incentives are intended to determine social interactions in accordance with the potential responses. They are beneficial for protecting personal borders and establishing nonviolent communication between individuals. It is also worth mentioning that there is no evidence in Meads theories whether he might have need totally opposed to Barry Schwartzs statements or not. It is apparent that he supports some forms of regulations, as they result in the mutual development of both individuals and society. They are an obligatory part of the cooperation, and its change may support the progress of humanity.

Conclusion

In summary, all the researchers present persuasive insights into the place of regulation in the life of a person. Although their opinions differ to some extent, the possible solution may exist in the combination of the theories. It is undeniable that rules and incentives guarantee the belonging to the society and the nonviolent behavior of individuals. In addition, they appear to be helpful for achieving specific goals, which may be important to some communities, as they lead to structuring the actions of a huge group of people. However, they relieve the responsibility to elaborate their own correct way to cope with a particular task and stimulate individuals to obey the rules without adjusting to the specialties of situations. Therefore, it is essential both to accept some forms of regulations and reflect on the happening. This way, the level of unconscious obeyance may be minimized.

References

Appelrouth, Scott, and Laura Desfor Edles. 2016. Classical and Contemporary Sociological Theory. Los Angeles, Calif.: SAGE.

TED-Ed. 2013. Our Loss of Wisdom  Barry Schwartz. You-Tube website. Web.