Summary Of But What Do You Mean By Deborah Tannen

Within the essay, “But What Do You Mean?”, author Deborah Tannen explains several main areas of miscommunication between men and women. She explores each topic contrasting men and women to conclude that while men and women may communicate differently, both are valid forms of communication, merely using language both parties understand will enhance understanding between the two groups. On the other hand, in William Lutz article, “The World of Doublespeak,” he takes a different approach to language discrepancies. Describing double speak as a detriment to communication, thus, should be eliminated to enhance communication. While both authors explore the concept of language use, the authors use different tones, classifications, and come to separate

While both are different perceptions her contrast alignment does not pit the styles against each other. She goes as far as to state that there isn’t a correct way to speak (333). Also, Tannen refrains from overzealous descriptive language, opting for matter-of-fact statements. She contains emotional language within the context of the personal examples she uses. For example, as Tannen discusses ritual fighting, she describes that many women find the art of ritual fighting to be contentious (330). However, she neglects to say it is contentious. Next, she goes as far as to state that there isn’t a correct way to speak (333). Next, within her categorization, Tannen chose to stay within the binary of men and women. More so, Tannen’s primary setting focus is within social or workplace arenas. Her examples include personal experiences from women or men with whom she has conversed. To elaborate, Tannen gives three examples of women in meetings, three between coworkers, and two from a manager to an employee. Decidedly,

From the start, Lutz uses expressive language to set the tone. He uses words such as deceive, mislead, distort, and corrupt to invoke specific emotions from his readers. In doing this, he sets the tone as negative and passionate. Unlike Tannen, he does wish to express a correct and an incorrect way to communicate. Lutz uses engaging negative adjectives to support his assertion and evoke a similar emotion in his readers. Furthermore, Lutz uses a broader array of examples. He provides examples from many different settings. Covering areas such as common usage and business usage, to as far as political usage. To provide more documented examples than solely personal, Lutz offers the US State Department’s policy change to omit using killing in annual reports relating to human rights across the globe. He refers to this type of doublespeak as a form of euphemism. By instead describing such deaths as arbitrary deprivation of life, a euphemism is being employed to mislead the public and distract the people from what in reality is very unpleasant (339). In addition, he cites an airplane crash during 1978 as using another form of doublespeak: jargon. Lutz admits that jargon can be appropriate in the right setting, allowing work to be accomplished quicker by imploring shorthand; however, in the case of the crash of National Airlines 727, National Airlines made a considerable profit,