Communication Theory & Practice: Language as a Shared Symbolic System

Communication Theory & Practice
Student Name
Instructor Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Number and Name
Due Date
Communication Theory & Practice
Mead’s Emphasis on Language
While symbols represent a significant aspect of language, I believe that the depiction of language as a shared symbolic system is reductionist. Essential elements of language are lost in the paradigm. The human tongue is considered more developed than other species in the animal kingdom because it facilitates comprehensive communication.
Communication facilitates the expression of affections. As emotional beings, human beings utilize language to express deep-seated desires. A person cannot effectively articulate this emotion if language is the linkage of signs and symbols. The reading posits that human behavior is only partly influenced by personal choice and social construction (“The Relationship,” n.d.). Humans are additionally motivated by survival instincts and biological and philosophical needs (“The Relationship,” n.d.). While the symbolic system is readily discernable, some human affectionate behavior remains beyond ordinary consciousness. If the symbolic design were valid, affections could be exclusively communicated through nonverbal messages such as touch, smile, and vocals. Unfortunately, this does not depict the current reality.
In addition to the nonverbal messages, humans utilize language. This paradigm does not embody the personal or the socially defined sign and symbol relationship. For instance, one will voluntarily tell their spouse that they love them as an expression of affection (Kramsch, 2014). People may argue that the individuals in a relationship or seeking to be in one are socially conditioned to identify the status with the love phrases. The proposition is defeated by the hypothesis that one may be affectionate toward a potential partner but fail to express the feelings because of the fear o...