Scrigroup - Documente si articole

Username / Parola inexistente      

Home Documente Upload Resurse Alte limbi doc  

BulgaraCeha slovacaCroataEnglezaEstonaFinlandezaFranceza




+ Font mai mare | - Font mai mic


Trimite pe Messenger
Movies: Watched With the Eyes or With the Brain?
The Structure of Rasselas
The Relationship between Language, Thought and Reality
Twilight of the Superheroes
DRACULA: between myth and reality


0 Introduction

This chapter of the present paper is aimed at identifying some differences that appear at the level of communication, either verbal, or nonverbal. I start my study with the research questions that are going to be answered in the same time; I continue with the methodology, that including the data collection, the data analyses; and from here I develop all the information by analyzing it from all the points of view that were reached in the theory. The last but not the least part that I identify will be the interpretation of what I could find from the two speeches taken from the film: The Great dictator by Charlie Chaplin. The first speech is said by Hynkel at the beginning of the movie and the second is told by the barber at the end of the movie

Moreover, I try to answer the research question more detailed looking at the base information from the case study.

1. Methodology

The methodology of my study is mostly based on a qualitative approach, trying to explain how and to what degree the communicative goals were or were not achieved in the texts subjected to the analysis process and why the subjects were or were not able to fully grasp the concepts, notions and techniques necessary for successfully communication. Nevertheless, quantitative techniques are almost always present in research, as authors in the field note, see for example:

‘..Sociolinguistic research projects are neither exclusively quantitative nor exclusively qualitative. They are most often both.’, so naturally they are also present in the current investigation. Johnston (2000:36)

More particularly, I made use of the methodology of speech analysis for the present research, as I analyzed the subjects’ from all the points of view.

1.1 Data collection

The data is gathered from the film The Great Dictator directed by Charles Chaplin, with the main character and author Charlie Chaplin. Appeared in October 1940 the film is a perfect transparency of the communist lives in the sense of the power. It represents the first talking movie of Charlie Chaplin.

The film begins during World War I and is being shot for 539 days. Chaplin, as an unnamed Jewish private in the army of the fictional nation of Tomainia, voluntarily attempts to rescue an officer named Schultz , only he loses his memory when the plane, the two had taken off, crashes into a tree. Schultz escapes from the wreckage, and the young private spends the next 20 years in the hospital, thoroughly oblivious to the changes that are taking place in Tomainia: Adenoid Hynkel, now the ruthless dictator of Tomainia, has undertaken to persecute Jews throughout the land, aided by ministers Garbitsch and Herring.

The amnesiac soldier returns to his barbershop in the Jewish ghetto, still unaware of the political situation, and is shocked when storm troopers paint 'Jew' on the windows of his shop. In the ensuing scuffle with the storm troopers, he finds a friend, and ultimately a love interest, in Hannah, a beautiful resident of the ghetto.

Meanwhile, Schultz, who has come up in the ranks in the intervening 20 years, recognizes the barber and, though surprised to find him a Jew, orders the storm troopers to leave him and Hannah alone. Hynkel, in addition, has relaxed his stance on Tomainian Jewry in an attempt to woo a Jewish financier into giving him a loan. Egged on by Garbitsch, Hynkel has become obsessed with the idea of world domination. In a moment of madness he dances with a large, inflatable globe. On Garbitsch's advice, Hynkel has planned to invade the neighbouring country of Osterlich and needs the loan to finance the invasion. Eventually, the financier refuses, and Hynkel reinstates his persecution of the Jews, this time to an even greater extent.

Schultz voices his objection to the pogrom, and Hynkel orders him the placement in a concentration camp. Schultz flees to the ghetto and begins planning to overthrow the Hynkel regime. To decide who will carry out this plot, a coin is placed in one of five puddings, and the person who receives the one with the coin in it is to carry out the mission to blow up the palace, considered a suicide mission. However, Hannah has placed a coin in every dessert, leading to one of Chaplin's most comical scenes. Eventually, both Schultz and his barber friend are captured and condemned to the concentration camp.

Hynkel is initially opposed by Benzino Napaloni (a portmanteau of Benito Mussolini and Napoleon Bonaparte), dictator of Bacteria, in his plans to invade Osterlich. Hynkel invited Napaloni to talk the situation over in Tomainia, however, and attempted to impress Napaloni with a display of military show. The military show turned out to be a disaster. Hynkel's ‘light artillery’ did not arrive. Hynkel's bombers fall from the sky after initially being mistaken for Napaloni's planes. The tanks do arrive, but they totally fail to impress Napaloni, who claims to have tanks that can fly and go under the water. Herring blusters that they are concentrating on ‘flying dreadnoughts’. After some friction and a comedic food fight between the two leaders, a deal is made, which Hynkel immediately breaks and the invasion proceeds successfully. Hannah, who has since emigrated to Osterlich to escape Hynkel, once again finds herself living under Hynkel's regime.

Schultz and the barber escape from the camp wearing Tomainian uniforms. Border guards mistake the barber for Hynkel, to whom he is nearly identical. Conversely, Hynkel, on a duck-hunting trip so that people will not expect an invasion, falls overboard and is mistaken for the barber and is arrested by his own soldiers.

The barber, who has assumed Hynkel's identity, is taken to the Tomainian capital to make a victory speech. Garbitsch, in introducing Hynkel to the throngs, describes free speech and other supposedly traitorous and outdated ideas. In contrast, the barber then makes a rousing speech, reversing Hynkel's anti-Semitic policies and declaring that Tomainia will now be a free nation and a democracy.

Hannah hears the barber's speech on the radio, and is amazed when Hynkel addresses her directly: ‘Hannah, can you hear me? Wherever you are, look up, Hannah. The clouds are lifting. The sun is breaking through. We are coming out of the darkness into the light. We are coming into a new world, a kindlier world, where men will rise above their hate, their greed and brutality. Look up, Hannah. The soul of man has been given wings, and at last he is beginning to fly. He is flying into the rainbow - into the light of hope, into the future, the glorious future that belongs to you, to me, and to all of us. Look up, Hannah. Look up’

The film stars Chaplin as Hynkel and the barber, Paulette Goddard as Hannah, Jack Oakie as Napaloni, Reginald Gardiner as Schultz, Henry Daniell as Garbitsch and Billy Gilbert as Field Marshal Herring, an incompetent adviser to Hynkel. Chaplin stars in a double role as the Jewish barber and the fascist dictator clearly modelled on Adolph Hitler.

The names of the aides of Adenoid Hynkel are parodies of those of Hitler's. Garbitsch (pronounced ‘garbage’), the right hand man of Hynkel, is a parody of Joseph Goebbels, and Field Marshal Herring was modelled after the Luftwaffe chief, Hermann Göring. The ‘Dig-a-ditchy’ of Bacteria, Benzino Napaloni, was modelled after Italy's Il Duce, Benito Mussolini. Benzino is played with arrogant buffoonery by Jack Oakie.

The film was written and directed by Chaplin, and was shot largely at the Chaplin Studios and other locations around Los Angeles (such as Laurel Canyon, where the elaborate World War I scenes were filmed). Chaplin was motivated by the escalating violence and repression of Jews by the Nazis throughout the late 1930s, the magnitude of which was conveyed to him personally by his European Jewish friends and fellow artists. However, Chaplin later stated that he would not have made the film if he had known of the true extent of the Nazis' crimes. Chaplin prepared the story throughout 1938 and 1939, and began filming in September 1939, one week after the beginning of World War II. He finished filming almost six months later. The 2001 BBC documentary on the making of the film, The Tramp and the Dictator, presented newly discovered footage of the film production which showed Chaplin's initial attempts at the film's ending, filmed before the fall of France.

The making of the film coincided with rising tensions throughout the world. Speculation grew that this and other anti-fascist films such as The Mortal Storm and Four Sons would remain unreleased given the United States' neutral relationship with Germany. The project continued largely because Chaplin was financially and artistically independent of other studios; also, failure to release the film would have bankrupted Chaplin, who had invested $1.5 million of his own money in the project. The film eventually opened in New York City in September 1940, to a wider American audience in October and the United Kingdom in December. The film was released in France in April 1945.

1.2 Data analysis

What I looked for, in this film, was to present the communicative differences that appeared in The Great Dictator especially during the 2 speeches interpreted by the same character: Charlie Chaplin but under the name of the barber and that of Adenoid Hynkel analysed, from all the points of view stylistic, paradigmatic, kinesics, verbal. I also searched for misunderstandings and the errors of communication that influenced the situation of communication.

The film contains several of Chaplin's most famous sequences. The rally speech by Hynkel, delivered in German-sounding gibberish, is a caricature of Hitler's oratory style, which Chaplin studied carefully in newsreels. The German words schnitzel, sauerkraut and liverwurst can be made out, as well as ‘Katzenjammer Kids’ and English phrases such as ‘cheese'n'crackers’ and frequently ‘lager beer’, in the fake German Hynkel speaks during the rally and at other points in the film when he is angry. Billy Gilbert as Herring is also required to improvise this fake German at times, and at one point, where he is apologizing for having accidentally knocked Hynkel down the stairs, he comes up with the word ‘banana’. Chaplin is clearly taken by surprise and repeats, ‘Der banana?’ before incorporating the word into his own reply. Chaplin, as Hynkel, has a tendency to remove Herring's medals when he gets angry. In the scene where Hynkel receives news that Napaloni mobilized his troops along the Osterlich border, Hynkel not only removed all of Herring's medals, but removed all of his buttons on his shirt, revealing a striped shirt with suspenders and then slaps Herring.

Chaplin, as the barber, shaves a customer in tune with a radio broadcast of Johannes Brahms's Hungarian Dance No. 5, recorded in one continuous take. The film's most celebrated sequence is the ballet dance between Hynkel and a balloon globe in his palatial office, set to Richard Wagner's Lohengrin Overture, which is also used at the end of the film when the Jewish barber is making the victory speech in Hynkel's place. The globe dance had its origins in the late 1920s, when Chaplin was filmed at a Hollywood party doing an early version of the dance, with a globe and a Prussian military helmet.

The film ends with the barber, having been mistaken for the dictator, delivering an address in front of a large audience and over the radio to the nation, following the Tomainian take-over of Osterlich. The address is widely interpreted as an out-of-character personal played by Chaplin.

Some of the signs in the shop windows of the ghettoized Jewish population in the film are written in Esperanto, a language which Hitler condemned as a Jewish plot to internationalize and destroy German culture.

What is very interesting in both discourses is the way Chaplin adapted his voice, temperament, body positions, gestures, words to each discourses. Practically he creates two different personalities : the barber is kind, calm, modest, wise, passionate, while Hynkel is nervous, bad tempered, ironic, authoritative, stupid, malefic, he uses many gestures (almost any sentence he produce is followed by a kinesics pattern, or facial gesture ).

Hynkel make use of tall voice, gestures, pause for water, pause for crying, a real Catavencu. He knows very well how to impress the audience. In his speech he even goes for some feminine gestures or maternal positions like swinging his arms as if he had a baby. Judging after his big eyes during the speech he seems to be very upset when he speaks about the Jewish people. As much as he wants to give the impression of intelligence he proves exactly the opposite, for example in his relationship with Benzino Napoli, he always wants to be the first, or to be more interesting than him. He does not accept another position than that of winner, even though that supposed a sacrifice: ‘But to remain great we must sacrifice’. Hynkel doesn't have a constant rhythm in his speech. He chooses for harsh responses that come in very quickly mood.

Regarding the barber, Chaplin creates a very simple personality, a common man who finds himself in the front of a Nazism regime that he doesn't like. If it is to describe the barber's temperament it will be exactly the opposite of Hynkel. A kind man, who wants to help the others, a man who has the power to convince the audience not appealing to fake gestures but to good heart, kindness, brave. From the beginning, of his speech, he feels sorry. He fights for unity, for love. However he likes gestures because he uses them a lot in different scenes. He gives the impression that he dances all the time especially when he runs from the army.

1.2.1 Analytical framework

The analytical framework of my research is based on analysing the Charlie Chaplin's speeches and reactions. My investigation is grounded in a corpus of two speeches made by Charlie Chaplin during the movie The Great Dictator, where he interprets two characters: a barber and Adenoid Hynkel. Verbal communications and nonverbal communications are ways of interacting and claim to be understood. This investigation determines the communication system at the level of movies and those of historical speeches.

1.2.2 Verbal communication

Taking in consideration that this talkie movie is the first one from that long series of movies, Chaplin, as an actor, proves to be an excellent talker. Although his speeches are made of non-senses and invented words which just sound in German, he almost generates fear when he pronounces with anger liverwurst. As I said earlier, Chaplin accepted this challenge only after he studied Hitler, particularly his speeches, the way he addressed to the audience.

What influenced people, beyond the ordinary comic, it is not what made Hitler to have so many brained washed people, but the way he talked to them , especially to weak people that needed a leader.

The first discourse, made by Hynkel, is a very simple one. It has short sentences, which respect the following topic: S+VP+NP. This political speech is thought to have an important impact over people. In our case it brings power to Hynkel, so as to influence the whole existence of the human kind. The perfect way of convincing people is to be a good orator. With all this, Hynkel's rhetoric ability generates dangers for citizen’s ethics because he hates Jewish people and he wants them vanished from the face of the world.

Practically the fundament of this speech stands under the pretext of power. Powers that cannot be better highlighted if were not the 'sacrifice'. During his expressed thoughts he prises Tomainia and democracy, he blames liberty: ’Liberty is odious’ and ends with: ‘we must sacrifice’. The register is formal.

From a Pragmatic point of view the form of the verbs in the present, limit the choice of the verb from the next sentence: ‘to remain [] we must sacrifice’. Another thing that deserve to be drawn attention to, is the type of relationship between sentences, which in our case is an adversative one due to the appearance of conjunction :’but’: ‘Tomainia was down but today has risen’/ ‘But to remain great we must sacrifice’. Another element of pragmatics is seen in the last part of the speech where the parallelism is produce under the repetition of the word ‘greatest’: ’the greatest army/ the greatest navy’.

The second speech, when the Jewish barber is making the victory speech in Hynkel's place, is much more complex and long. It has elaborated sentences, and does not respect a certain topic, having different positions of subjects, or verbs. In deed this speech is influencing many people because it is pretty simple, as words, and direct, maybe too direct.

Starting the analysis with the pragmatic elements I must recognise first of all the cohesive devices: the present form of the verbs: present simple: ‘let’ or present perfect simple, generally used in the singular form: ‘has’. The present tense generates a high affinity, of the statements because the producer is certain and committed to the proposition itself.

Taking in consideration the 12 uses of the additive conjunction ’and ‘sentences present a relationship that fill in each utterance, complete it. But there are also many adversatives conjunction that produce a contradiction: ’but ‘appears for 7 times. It is a very complex unity of utterances.

As in the first speech the parallelism can be also mentioned because practically Chaplin starts a new sentence with the repetition of the last word from the anterior sentence , for example: ‘[..] let us fight for a new world, /a world that will give youth a future’; or he also repeats the last word from the anterior sentence but as if he gives a definition of that word: ‘Soldiers don't give yourself to brutes, / men who despise you, enslave you, /regiment your lives, tell you what to think and feel, /who drill you, treat you like cattle and use you as cannon fodder’ or ‘Don't give yourselves to these men, /machine men with machine minds and machine hearts.’ There are also cases when the repetition of certain words like: ’power’, ’fight’, ‘world’ induce the thematic of the speech: freedom, brave.

This speech proves again to be a cohesive one due to the referring expressions, like the pronouns that are used: the barber uses all the persons: the first on singular and plural: ’I’, ‘us’, ‘we’; the second: ‘you’; and the third person on plural pronouns: ‘they’. The most frequently used pronouns are: ‘you’ that appears from 17 times and the first person ‘we’/’us’ that appears from 21 times. Usually the relationship of interpretation is an anaphoric one because each time the barber has to mention the element in the previous sentence:’ [..] brutes have risen. /But they lie! They do not fulfil that promise. They never will!’

The last cohesive device that was used is the repetition: ‘machine men’, ‘machine minds’, ’machine hearts’;’ power to create’,’ power to make’; ’let us fight to free’,’ let us fight for a world’, ’let us unite’. The purpose of these repetitions is to emphasize each thought of the barber. This speech can be named a cohesive text because as it is seen previous the language has formal links that permit interpretation and in the same time the analysis of it.

This speech is an humanitarian one, for all the people in the world, that is why the given information about the human mind and power is relevant to each radio listener of the speech because it is not only producing new information but also strengthens the existing assumptions related to the human rights.

Concerning misunderstanding I can say that the only time when there existed a much cleared one was when Hynkel suggested tightening their belts, and his councillor took it as a true thing. But this case can only be studied in the film.

The relationship between those two speeches is a very completed one, because each speech creates a new personality, a new identity which is opposed to the other one. Judging after the length of the speeches I can say that the first one is a typical speech of a tyran while the second is told from the heart, as if the barber wanted to say those things long time ago and that was his chance.

1.2.3 Non-Verbal communication

The basic role of nonverbal communication in these speeches is to determine the real message that is transmitted through words, fact accomplished by: facial expression and eye contact, body language or posture, gesture and interpersonal distance.

Doing my research I discovered that nonverbal communication in my case study is essential in trying to analyse all its important aspects. So I begin this section by observing the visual parts of the speeches in the movie.

First of all I must mention that differences appear not only at the verbal level but also at the body- voice level. As Chaplin already got us used with his explicit attitude regarding his role in the movie, he also proved that his fear of audio was some how justified, his voice explains in a subjective way what only the image could have suggested, succeeding in transmitting better the emotions. As I said earlier, all the gestures and the eye movements were for Chaplin just a long and detailed study of Hitler's discourses for example the fanatic eyes, the crammed fist, and the stretched forefinger. See figures 1, 2.


Figure 1 The crammed fist Figure 2 The fanatic eyes ( (

In order to apply the theory that I wrote in chapter two, I have to look for certain elements that make those speeches available for the functions of nonverbal communication. So I discovered that the main function of expressing emotion, is very well produced at the level of the second speech where the barber succeeds to impress the whole nations of the world with his simplest but touching words. Another function that was presented is that of self-presentation of one's personality. Both, the barber and Hynkel, talk with words and gestures about themselves: 'I'm sorry but I don't want to be an emperor', 'I like to help everyone' adding his image (see figure 3),'[] we must tighten our belts' See figure 4. Each speaker address the audience in his own way accomplishing the interaction between the speaker and the listener: 'Don't give yourselves to these men, / [..]You are not machines, you are not cattle, you are men! /You have the love of humanity in you. /Soldiers, don't give yourselves to brutes,'-the barber; 'But to remain great we must sacrifice, / We must tighten our belts,'-Hynkel

Figure 3 I'm sorry but I don't want to be a emperor' (The Great dictator)

Figure 4 'we must tighten our belts'(The Great dictator)

If in the first part of the chapter the analyse I made on the second speech is more complex, while in the nonverbal communication part is exactly vice-versa. The first speech that made by Hynkel, is more elaborative due to the small details like: gestures, jumping, eye movements, voice, and tone, practically all which represent elements of nonverbal communication. From the beginning Hynkel is presented like a tyran who 'ruled with the iron fist'. When he starts the speech he does a small jump of the body, having his hands at the back, and continues with specific gestures of the hand bringing them in the front and rising his right hand above his head, than bringing them again in the front of his legs and repeating the gesture, but this time with the crammed fist. With the left hand on his left hip, and with the feelings he has for his country, he gets very anxious.

During these continuous movements he speaks about Tomainia, he even feels the need to drink a glass of water having his throat dry after so many expressed emotions. But after he drinks mouth water, he throws the rest of it in his pants because only the thought of Tomainia gets him very excited. He returns at the microphone having an authoritative position, holding his hands crossed, and from that moment of applauses he stops the crowd with only one hand above his head, more exactly the right one. While he affirms his strong opinion regarding democracy, liberty, or freedom as are being fragrant or odious his hands maintain the same position. See figure5 .Only the thought of Tomainia makes him raise his right hand above his head

Figure 5 Positions of the hand (The Great Dictator)

When he mentions the sacrifice, he adopts a new position with both his hands up in the air, above his head. His last gesture takes place when he speaks about the tightening of their belts and he does the imaginary thing. See figure 4 upper.

As I said before short lines offer many unspoken messages that characterise the persona’s identity more easily than he would present himself. Still in this part of the speech, it is very obvious the eye movement that completes the communication Each time he addresses the nation he has a short look, but very direct that goes from left to right and from right to left.

There are times when he gets angry and his eyes are big, his brows raise and his fury grows. Another element that characterise Hynkel is the voice, the intonation, the rhythm, and the pauses. His voice is high, the intonation is ascendant and descendent, very seldom he is playing with this element passing from one state to another, the rhythm is not at all constant but in contrary very unstable. Concerning the pauses he makes a pause for water, for applauses, and after each important emotion related to Tomainia or liberty.

In comparison with the first discourse the second is not so complex because although it is very long, it lacks the movements. The barber has a long look, blinks rarely, does not make many hand movements, only one , at the end of the speech when he shouts : 'Let us unite'.

Although he starts with a constant tone he ends with a very agitated one. The moment of change in the attitude takes place when the barber addresses to the soldiers, when he encourages them to fight for freedom. In that moment he uses a different intonation, with ups and downs, moves his hands, his body as if he trembles, and nod his head. I can say that this is the grand climax of his speech when he touches his hair and remains astonished looking at the whole nation in front of him. See figure6. When he talks about the power of humanity he is proud of what people can do. As opposed to Hynkel the barber makes just two pauses: one at the beginning when he gathers his thoughts and the second when his speech is addressed directly to the soldiers that fight for their country.

Starting his speech with compassion and humiliation he ends it as a real leader with applauses and greetings. The proof of his desire that of being a simple and modest man, is the tuft of his hair. His face could not express more than he is a barber. Even his tie is not so arranged and perfect as it is that of Hynkel. See figure 6. and figure 7


Figure6 The barber (The Great dictator)  Figure 7 Hynkel (The Great dictator)

1.2.4 Relationship between verbal communication and nonverbal communication

In this section I am speaking about the common points of the elements discussed in the previous two sub chapters, from the point of view of the listener. Moreover the whole part will identify also the relationship between the actants (Hynkel, the barber and the nation) at the cinematic level.

Fist of all I must say that in the collected data we find two different characters, interpreted by the same person. Chaplin succeeds to live each character's life by creating himself a world for his roles. Although these worlds rarely meet, because Chaplin, the director, tries to explain each story at a different level he manages very well the act of communication.

From the theoretical part of the paper, in the nonverbal communication area there existed a relationship between those two types of communication, because the role of nonverbal communication is to determine the message that was initially transmitted to words.

The best relationship can be indicated in the second speech because Hynkel uses not only words but an important system of gestures , eye movements, practically each sentence he produces is followed by a set of non-verbal elements. What is also important is that the message that is transmitted can be deduced partially if we do not know the exactly words. However there are parts in the second speech that do not need any non-verbal element.

To understand better this relationship I reached the conclusion that only the context and the circumstances can influence to a certain level the common knowledge of communication, being it from any type.

What those speeches have as a common base is the love for Tomainia. Each speaker presents his opinions in different ways but the only real subject was the country. So the barber and the tyran got excited when they encouraged soldiers. The climax of each one is touched through the movements of the hands. Both respect the same rules of emotions.

I am tempted to say that there is a relationship of symbiosis, between verbal and nonverbal communication, but the barber proves exactly the opposite because he has one escape during his whole speech, and that at the end of it. He managed very well the verbal language and succeeded to influence people only with the words and not the gestures. As conclusion a relationship exists only at the contextual level depending on different factors.

1.3 Findings and interpretation

In this section I will review the observations I was able to make based on the theory and on the relationship and differences between those two types of communication in the case study, I will then move on to the interpretation of these results, so as to finally be able to furnish the answers to the research questions posed in conclusion.

In theory communication takes place at any level, but with the difference that it can be influenced by many factors as context, miscommunication, silence, gestures paralanguage, and kinesics.

In practice communication can change everything from a person to country. It is enough, a mind, a microphone and courage to change all around you. What is more interesting is that it is not necessary to follow a certain pattern to be listen, if the person talks from the heart it is enough, think at the barber who did not use many paralanguage or kinesics elements .

To a certain degree of complexity, verbal language is as communicative as paralanguage, or kinesics but it depends more on some external factors that can be specific for each individual. Look for example at the barber who did not used many gestures but he communicated very well with the nation.


The purpose of this case study is to offer a clear image on how is communication influencing our actions and what are the main differences that appear in those two types of communication at the level of interpretation, from speeches.

In order to pinpoint the elements that led me to this analyses I used three research questions that coincide with the case study I presented, so as to apply the theory in practice.

The fact that I offered separate interpretations for the findings classified under each speech, and analyzed it as so gives a short look on the differences in communication. But as seen before communication can be made in certain situation by choosing what type of it are we going to use, as the barber made in his speech.

After investigating all the content of the speeches, the audio-visual, and the textual one I can affirm that there are cases when there is no difference between what it is said and what it is transmitted, for example I can guess what Hynkel said, but in the exactly words.

Also as a result of this study, I realized that there is an increased need for communication; fact that can impose only a good understanding of what it is communicated.

Politica de confidentialitate



Vizualizari: 1471
Importanta: rank

Comenteaza documentul:

Te rugam sa te autentifici sau sa iti faci cont pentru a putea comenta

Creaza cont nou

Termeni si conditii de utilizare | Contact
© SCRIGROUP 2022 . All rights reserved

Distribuie URL

Adauga cod HTML in site