The Lingual Theory A Hybrid of Semiotics and Stand Point Theories of Analyzing Films

The Lingual Theory A Hybrid of Semiotics and Stand Point Theories of Analyzing Films The media is an avenue through which occurrences taking place in a society are communicated to the audience. Such communication is usually guided by specific frameworks meant to deliver information in a certain manner. Colombo (2004) points out that film and other forms of mass communication ascribe to particular theoretical frameworks to deliver their message to the target audience.Advertising We will write a custom research paper sample on The Lingual Theory: A Hybrid of Semiotics and Stand Point Theories of Analyzing Films specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More However, some of the theories used in this field have been overtaken by events, rendering them irrelevant in contemporary society. As such, it is incumbent upon the stakeholders to come up with new theoretical frameworks that respond to the evolving needs in these changing times. In the current paper, the author seeks to develop a new theory of communication with regards to film. Colombo (2004) points out that generation of new theories is made possible by building upon existing models. To this end, the author of this paper relies on the semiotics and standpoint theories to come up with a new structure of communication. The utilization of these two theories in the field of film generation and distribution is critically examined in this essay. Such assessment helps the author to come up with a hybrid theory whose concepts build on the weaknesses of the other two. The applicability of the new theoretical model, dubbed the lingual theory, will be tested against a real life scenario in contemporary media. The Semiotics Theory of Communication The theoretical structure is developed from the study of signs and their related processes and applications in communication. According to Friedman and Thellefsen (2011), the theory is closely related to the linguistic model of analyzing the structure of a particular language. The model helps to determine the meaning of the various languages used in communication. Friedman and Thellefsen (2011) add that the theory of semiotics builds on linguistic studies. To this effect, it makes use of sign systems that are not themselves linguistic in nature. In a bid to illustrate the components of the semiotics model of communication, Friedman and Thellefsen (2011) point out that signs form the backbone of the theory. Friedman and Thellefsen argue that the theoretical framework is applied in a wide array of platforms in the communication and media arena. For example, Friedman and Thellefsen (2011) are of the opinion that the theory is used in the fashion and the science fiction movie industries. The developers of this framework suggest that human beings are naturally animals. Friedman and Thellefsen (2011) add that, due to their animalistic nature, humans have the ability to develop and interpret signs. It is this development and interpretation of symbols that forms the basis of the semiotics theory.Advertising Looking for research paper on communications media? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More In analyzing this theory, Li (2011) posits that there are three main branches that give it its meanings. The first is the branch that focuses on the semantics of the language. Here, the meaning of the signs used in communication is deciphered. In addition, the theory looks at the structural relations between the given signs. It is these relations that Li (2011) refers to as the semantics. Finally, the model has a pragmatic component to it. The element helps to determine the relationship between the sign using agents and the signs developed. In other words, it identifies the language in relation to the user. The theory is widely used in communication given that language and linguistics are major components of this phenomenon. In such cases, the signs are developed to form some kind of code. Such codes represent a particular element of the society (Alsina Jimenez, 2010). An example of its application is found in the imagery used to depict a specific phenomenon in the society through the media. Alsina and Jimenez (2010) hold that advertisements and films make use of sexual allure to pass across their message to the target audience. In this case, the symbol of a woman is mostly used. The need to develop this theory stems from the two of the assumptions that are made. Friedman and Thellefsen (2011) point out that the model assumes that cultures are formed through language. Consequently, the use of a language that appears to be private creates an atmosphere of unfairness. Another supposition is made with regards to speech in the society. The theory presupposes that all individuals have the ability to communicate in more than one ‘speech community’ (Colombo, 2004, p. 44). The two assumptions are evidently in conflict with each other. As a result, a need arises to generate a blend between the two (Friedman Thellefsen, 2011). The model insists that everybody can participate in the various speech communities. As a result, the theory implies that all cultures have a similar signage in their languages (Friedman Thellefsen, 2011).Advertising We will write a custom research paper sample on The Lingual Theory: A Hybrid of Semiotics and Stand Point Theories of Analyzing Films specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Such an assumption is not entirely true. An example of the erroneous nature of such a supposition can be seen in the generational gap between people. For instance, there was a time when certain depictions that are not in use today were accepted in the media. Alsina and Jimenez (2010) make a case for feminism and how its acceptance varies depending on one’s age group. The generation that lived in the fifties accepted the image of a submissive woman in the media. The same is unacceptable in today’s society (Friedman Thellef sen, 2011). To the female watching a 50s film today, an image of a woman working out in the kitchen appears like a foreign language. Such are the reasons why the theory needs to be changed since imagery is viewed as a private language to people of different speech communities. Standpoint Theory of Communication In modern society, there exist various forms of communication which are inter-subjective in nature. The standpoint theory is a framework developed to analyze discourses of this form (Anderson Baym, 2004, p. 589). The theoretical model is of the view that people’s opinions are formed by their knowledge. As a result, the opinions vary depending on the levels of knowledge among different individuals. The perspectives of the audience in relation to a particular subject matter are based or informed by their past experiences. Anderson and Baym (2004) provide a working definition of the standpoint concept to illustrate this model. Anderson and Baym (2004) conceptualize the c oncept as a specific location from where an individual looks at their society. The standpoint model of communication focuses on a number of issues. The elements addressed include gender, race, and social class (Anderson Baym, 2004). An example of the use of this theory is evident in the way one perceives a person from the African American community. The media depictions of the said racial group’s association with crime support the biased nature of such individual perceptions. A similar situation is seen among the Hispanic community. However, a change in their social class may lead to variations in the perceptions accorded the individuals. The theory is synonymous with feminism in mass communication (Anderson Baym, 2004). Like any other social science model, the standpoint theory makes a number of assumptions. In their research, Buzzanell (2003) affirms that the standpoint model of communication is feminist in nature. The same stems from the assumption that social relations are understood on the basis of societal classes (Buzzanell, 2003). In addition, the theory postulates that the elite members of a society lord their opinions on their inferiors. The upper classes suppress the opinions and welfare of persons in the lower echelons of the social ladder. The view further assumes that the ‘standpoints’ of the social elite rank higher than those of persons from the lower cadres.Advertising Looking for research paper on communications media? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The assumptions made by the standpoint theory fuel the sentiments of those opposed to it. The critics argue that it focuses on the marginalized groups in the society, leaving out the others. According to Intemann (2010), the conceptual framework is applied in instances where there is a need to illustrate marginalization in the community. The most common example of the application of this theory is in the analysis of the issue of slavery. At the time of the slave trade, the Africans sold to slavery were believed to be from an inferior school of thought. Consequently, films created in this field tend to depict persons of African origins as inferior to the Caucasians (Intemann, 2010). In the modern times, feminism appears to be the most common channel through which the standpoint theory conveys information to the general public (Buzzanell, 2003). An example of this application is made apparent in the African context where radio is used by women to highlight their sufferings in the soci ety. Such is a biased perspective given the fact that it is discriminatory to use the radio to address the issues related to women along. Buzzanell (2003) points out that mass media exhibit feminism by depicting women as inferior to men. Intemann (2010) points out that the internet age has made information accessible to many people. As a result, the class and gender biases associated with this theory are increasingly becoming irrelevant, necessitating a new framework. The standpoint model attempts to build on previous theories by insisting that experience is not necessary in formulating perceptions about a group of people. However, by creating class and gender biases, the theory appears to erect hurdles with regards to information access. As a result, it is important to develop a better framework to reduce this bias. The Need for a New Theory of Communication Anderson and Boym (2004) posit that communication should be beneficial to the audience targeted. The said benefit can be real ized through elimination of biases. Effective communication makes use of coded language in a bid to discriminate against or pour contempt on another group of people. The two theories discussed above fail to meet the high threshold of fairness. Based on this, the need to develop an effective communication framework requires the advancement of a new theory. The shortcomings of the two theories above are grounds enough for the formulation of a new theoretical framework. The author of this essay responds to this need by developing a hybrid theoretical concept. According to Anderson and Boym (2004), communication philosophy should evolve with time. Hybridization of existing theories is a way through which this evolution is realized. The New Lingual Theory of Communication Termed the lingual theory, the new framework borrows various concepts from the two theories discussed above. According to Mejias (2001), communication is a dynamic social behavior. It follows that the frameworks through which information is communicated to the masses must respond to these dynamics. In line with this, the lingual theory attempts to introduce dynamism to the semiotics and standpoint theories. In essence, the new model brings together the two ‘antique’ frameworks and builds on their weaknesses. The underlying principle of this new framework is the language factor. Wright (2001) argues that communication should develop in tandem with the changes taking place in the language sector. The changes are usually in the semantics and the demographic perceptions associated with particular languages. In such cases, the semiotics theory addresses the issue through the signage concept. On its part, the standpoint theory donates its concepts on knowledge. By fusing the two dimensions, the lingual theory seeks to reduce the biases and prejudices attributed to the earlier conceptualizations of communication. Theories are usually formulated by making several assumptions (Wright, 2001). T he lingual theory presupposes that communication is a phenomenon characteristic to all living organisms. For the purposes of this discourse, the phenomenon is assumed to be present in all human beings. The second conjecture of this theory is that people from all walks of life are free to access information. Consequently, communication will phase out signs and analogies that lock out some groups in the society. Mejias (2001) illustrates that in today’s cyber age, access to information is not restricted. On the basis of this reality, the lingual theory makes the assumption that information should be made available to all people. The theory proposes the elimination of coded language that creates some form of secrecy. The objective is to ensure that information is communicated without a tinge of prejudice whatsoever. The propositions made in the lingual theory are aimed at reducing the identified biases. The model promotes innovativeness in communication. According to Anderson an d Boym (2004), the dynamic nature of language implies that certain semantics do not make sense to some clusters of people in the society. The theory homes in on such circumstances and proposes innovativeness in the semantics and symbols used in language. For instance, instead of using sexual allure as a symbol for advertising female related products, media outlets should introduce some form of euphemism. In this sense, innovativeness is likely to increase the number of target audience The theory provides that communication should not discriminate against some groups in the society. Lack of discrimination will increase access to information. The suggestion rides on the assumption that information should be open to everyone in the society. Anderson and Boym (2004) make a similar suggestion by arguing that communication is expected to be a universally uniting form of art. To this end, the element should reduce racial, gender, and class discrimination, which characterize most forms of v isual art. Mejias (2001) affirms that theoretical frameworks are developed from various paradigms. The paradigms are schools of thought that tend to explain the perceptions of the various elements in the community. The lingual theory relies on a positivist paradigm given its focus on reality as defined by a person’s senses. The need to eliminate biases and prejudices informs the use of this paradigm. The theory seeks to be objective and realistic. The selected paradigm makes it possible to communicate by expressing concrete aspects of a society, including events and situations. The theory borrows heavily from the Shannon and Weaver traditions of communication models. Mejias (2001) points out that the model comprises of a sender, a medium, and a receiver. The lingual theory is based on the fact that modern communication relies on different media for transmission, upholding this tradition in the long term. The tradition adopted also stems from the fact that the new model addres ses the issue of parties involved in communication. Application of the Lingual Theory The theory can be used in different situations in a societal setting. As already indicated, it seeks to eliminate biases and prejudices in communication. It can be utilized to address complaints touching on feminism. According to Cuklanz and Sujata (2006), the depiction of women in the media is a major concern to many people. There are groups of people who feel offended by the feminist approach in highlighting women in films and other communication platforms. The lingual theory comes as a relief to women and other anti-feminist groups. Feminism can be used to understand the injustices meted out on women due to their gender (Cuklanz Sujata, 2006). Some media personalities find it important to use women to pass across information. However, such depictions are associated with various prejudices and biases. An assumption is made to the effect that women belong to a certain category. Such depictions of women as housewives were prominent in the 1950s. However, with changing times, women are increasingly embracing new professions. As a result, a portrayal of women as inferior beings goes against the ethics of communication. The most common element of feminism in communication is evident in the illustration of women as sexual objects. Cuklanz and Sujata (2006) argue that most films and advertisement campaigns seek to attract the attention of their clients by creating sexual images of women. In most cases such forms of communication are targeted at the male audience. In a way, the sexual highlight is prejudicial since women can be much more than objects of primal satisfaction. Communication of such nature is driven by the two theories discussed earlier. The lingual theory seeks to respond to anti-feminism, especially in mass media. An example is made of a fashion advertisement targeting women who are in the working class category. Bearing in mind that the lingual theory focuses on th e content, the creator, and the recipient of messages, innovativeness is expected to minimize bias. In line with this, the theory comes up with signs and semantics that sit well with the professional woman of modern times. For instance, rather than advertise a dress that has sexual connotations, the emitter can go for a comfortable, yet appealing, professional look. Figures 1 and 2 below illustrate this: Figure 1: Sexy dress Source: Women sexy dress lady party mini dresses backless clubwear evening (2013) Figure 2: Professional look Source: Ladies’ sweater ol fashion large size knitted coat women’s modern outer wholse, ladies’ autumn outerwear fall clothing (2014) Figure 1 creates an evident sexual appeal illustrated through the dress worn by the model. Such an impression is common in advertisements. However, the model in figure 2 helps to bring in some sense of self-worth to suggest that a woman can be comfortable and happy without the need to appeal to the s exual emotions. Symbols and signs inform most communication processes (Alsina Jimenez, 2010). However, according to the lingual theory, the symbol used in figure 2 lacks bias and prejudice. Semantics are key components of communication processes (Anderson Baym, 2004). By borrowing from the semiotics theory, the lingual framework incorporates semantics in the new equation. The textual language used to pass information should be non-prejudicial. In such instances, the emitter of a given piece of information is expected to make use of euphemism. An example can be made in the film industry. An example can be given of a film featuring women. Intemann (2010) argues that derogatory language may be used to refer to female characters. Such language is offensive to the women folk. The lingual theory restricts individuals from making use of such offensive language in a bid to accommodate everyone. Conclusion The author of this paper argues that the standpoint and semiotics theory limit the e ffectiveness of communication. Anderson and Boym (2004) hold the opinion that effective communication should not discriminate against some parties in the society. The shortcomings of the two theories necessitate the creation of an alternative model. However, it is important to note that the new lingual theory has its own shortcomings. By assuming that information is universally accessible, the theory goes against the need for privacy under sensitive circumstances. Nonetheless, the lingual theory provides an alternative framework of communication. References Alsina, R., Jimenez, L. (2010). Communication theory and research in Spain: A paradigmatic case of a socio-humanistic discipline. European Journal of Communication, 35(3), 273-286. Anderson, A., Baym, G. (2004). Philosophies and philosophic issues in communication. Journal of Communication, 54(4), 589-615. Buzzanell, P. (2003). A feminist standpoint analysis of maternity and maternity leave for women with disabilities.  Women and Language,  26(2), 53-65. Colombo, M. (2004). Theoretical perspectives in media-communication research: From linear to discursive models. Forum: Qualitative Social Research,  5(2), 26-28. Cuklanz, M., Sujata, M. (2006). Televisions â€Å"new† feminism: Prime-time representations of women and victimization. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 23(4), 302-321. Friedman, A., Thellefsen, M. (2011). Concept theory and semiotics in knowledge organization. Journal of Documentation, 67(4), 644-674. Intemann, K. (2010). 25 years of feminist empiricism and standpoint theory: Where are we now?. Hypatia, 25(4), 228-796. Ladies’ sweater ol fashion large size knitted coat women’s modern outer wholse, ladies’ autumn outerwear fall clothing [Image]. (2014). Web. Li, Y. (2011). Nonwestern semiotics and its possible impact on the composition of semiotics theory in the future. Semiotica, 2011(187), 229-237. Mejias, U. (2001). Sustainable communicational realit ies in the age of virtuality. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 18, 211-228. Women sexy dress lady party mini dresses backless clubwear evening [Image]. (2013). Web. Wright, M. (2001). Gestalt psychological theory’s value in rhetorical criticism. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 87, 208-215.