On 27 Jan 98 at 8:19, Simon Buckingham wrote:
> Let me put it this way, you don't hear many people using communist
> terminology like proletariat in Eastern Europe these days! Sometimes the
> only English word that taxi drivers in Poland know is "business". And just
> as the vocabulary changed from communism to capitalism, so too will it
> change from capitalism to technological capitalism- words like employee
> and organization will find little if any use there.
I'm not much for speculating about the future...I find that predictions of
this sort are more often wrong than not. I'm not familiar with Eastern
European languages so I can't really comment.
Retention of this outmoded terminology only delays positive change
and learning. It is true
> to say that even new descriptive terms like "ranker" and "technological
> capitalism" require people to make the effort to have a basic
> understanding of them.
I have trouble understanding these sorts of statements, because I can't
figure out the required part. Who might be requiring this?
I suppose one could argue that inventing words and then REQUIRING (a
somewhat illusory requiring) people to learn them is an effective way to
change people...my take on it is that it is an ineffective way to
communicate. And when we don't communicate, we can't help people change.
...and as an aside...they day I walk into a bar and hear two folks talking
about "technological capitalism" is the day I shall buy you a beverage of
your choice <grin>...or, for that matter bifurcation, essentiality,
rangeness...
One does limit oneself by one's language.
Robert Bacal, Inst.For Cooperative Communication, rbacal@escape.ca
Visit our Resource Centre for articles on mgmt.,training,communication, and defusing hostility
at http://www.escape.ca/~rbacal (204) 888-9290
*Site Last Updated On Jan 24, 1998*
--"Robert Bacal" <rbacal@escape.ca>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>