Reconciliation of the East and the West through communication theory
Submitted to:
Nirmala Mani Adhikari
Kathmandu University School of Arts
Submitted by:
Aabhash Shrestha
Roll no.: 24
BMS (2nd
Year, 1st Semester)
Content
1. Abstract……………………………………………….. 1
2. Introduction…………………………………………... 2
3. Discussions……………………………………………. 4
4. Conclusion……………………………………………. 9
5. References……………………………………………. 10
1
Abstract
This term paper studies the differences between the Western perspective and the
Eastern perspective. I was able to do a comparative study by taking Schramm‟s
model with the theory from Western perspective and Sadharanikaran model with
the theory of communication from the Eastern. The Western perspectives explains
its process while the eastern defines its process relating with its religion and
philosophies. Hence, native theorization of communication has paved the way for
reconciliation between different perspectives.
This term paper will further discuss about how Western and Eastern theories of
communication developed and factors that caused the dissimilarities.
2
Introduction
The Western communication theory and model has brought out the Eastern perspective of
communication theories. Due to cultural variations, geographical differences and other
factors of the West and the East, communication process has also differed and has
directly affected the communication theory and the model.
The Western philosophy has dominated the field of communication theory since its
establishment in the educational sectors which began decades ago. In fact, as a discipline
of knowledge or as an academic field of study, communication has been subjected to the
conflict of indigenous versus the external approaches in many non-Western countries.(for
instance: Dissanayake, 1981, 1986, 1988; Kincaid, 1987; Tewari, 1992; Yadava, 1998).
This highlights the inherently problematic position of communication discipline in the
countries like Nepal and India. (Adhikary)
Communication theory is a field of information theory that studies the technical process
of information and the process of human communication.
Additionally communication theory is “any systematic summary about the nature of the
communication process” (Dainton, 2019). It “is a coherent field of metadiscursive
practice, a field of discourse about discourse with implications for the practice of
communication” (Craig, 1999, pg. 120) and seeks to “provide conceptual resources for
reflecting on communication problems” (Wikipedia)
The study of communication and mass media has led to the formulation of many theories
and those information theories and studies of the technical process of information and the
process of human communication is known as communication theory.
3
Models of communication are conceptual models used to explain the human
communication process with the development of Shannon and Weaver‟s communication
model, the advancement in the western region, grew rapidly.
Nevertheless, by understanding their culture and the differences among the western
models and theirs, eastern scholars came up with their own models and theories which
best explained their way of communication. To better understand the differences among
the Eastern and the Western perspective, I have taken Schramm‟s model from the western
perspective and Sadharikaran model from the Eastern.
4
Discussion
Schramm's Model of Communication, postulated by Wilbur Schramm in 1954, suggests
that communication is a two way process where both sender and receiver take turns to
send and receive a message. Communication is usually described along a few major
dimensions: Message, source, form, channel, and receiver. Wilbur Schramm (1954) also
indicated that we should also examine the impact that a message has (both desired and
undesired) on the target of the message. Between parties, communication includes acts
that confer knowledge and experiences, give advice and commands, and ask questions.
These acts may take many forms, in one of the various manners of communication. The
form depends on the abilities of the group communicating. Together, communication
content and form make messages that are sent towards a destination. The target can be
oneself, another person or being, another entity (such as a corporation or group of
beings). The figure below can enhance your understanding of the process that takes place
in this model:
5
Communication here, in this model, is seen as a process of information transmission
governed by three levels of semiotic rules:
1. Syntactic (formal properties of signs and symbols)
2. Pragmatic (concerned with the relations between signs/expressions and their
users)
3. Semantic (study of relationships between signs and symbols and what they
represent)
Therefore, in this model, communication is social interaction where at least two
interacting agents share a common set of signs and a common set of semiotic rules. This
commonly held rule in some sense ignores auto communication, including intrapersonal
communication via diaries or self-talks both secondary phenomena that followed the
primary acquisition of communicative competences within social interactions.
Sadharikaran Model of Communication: The word sadharan is composed by the
combination of saha and dharan where saha means same and dharan means to get or to
amplify. We can say that the word sadharan is ordinary and sadharanikaran is
generalization of feelings ideas and emotions. The word has its root Comparative Study
of Communicative Theory pg. 7 in Bharata Muni‟s natyashastra. Bharata Muni describes
sadharanikaran as that point in the climax of a drama when the audience becomes one
with the actor who lives an experience through his/her acting on stage and starts
simultaneously reliving the same experience. Bhattanayak also has used this word in his
various poetics. The Sadharanikaran model communication, proposed by Nirmala Mani
6
Adhikari is a systematic presentation of the process of attaining mutual understanding
commonness or oneness among communication parties. The concepts drawn on and
mentioned in the model are formal concepts that are firmly established on Sanskrit
poetics as well as Hindu religious-philosophical knowledge system. This model has been
proposed consisting of following elements: - Sahridayas (Sender and Receiver) - Bhava
(Moods or emotions) - Abhivyanjana (Expression or encoding) - Sandesha (Message or
information) - Sarani (Channel) - Rasaswadana (Firstly receiving, decoding and
interpreting the message and finally achieving the rasa) - Doshas (Noises) - Sandarbha
(Context) - Pratrikriya (process of feedback) Sadhranikaran as a communication
process, consists of „sahridayas‟ as the communicating parties. As a technical term, the
word refers to people with a capacity to send and receive messages. The „sahridaya‟- the
sender is the initiator of the process who has „bhavas‟ in the mind. The sahridaya -sender
has to pass the process of „abhivyanjana‟ for expressing those bhavas {there are four
levels of bhavas which are Para (at the unconscious mind), „Pashyanti‟ (to the conscious
mind), „Madhyama‟ (at the level of presentation external mind) and „Vaikahari‟ (the
word spoken out by the sender)} in perceivable form. It is the „sahridaya‟ -reciever with
whom the bhavas are to be shared. He /she have to pass the process of „rasaswadana‟
{rasa are of four levels like bhavas they are shravana, manana, nididhyasana,
Sakshatkara}. During this process there are many obstacles created which are considered
as „doshas‟. The message should be contextual i.e. in which context is given. And there is
the feedback given by the receiver known as „pratikriya‟.
7
8
Sadharanikaran as a concept/theory should not be confused with the sadharanikaran
model. The former, which is one of the significant theories in Sanskrit poetics, has its
root in Natyashastra and is identified with Bhattanayaka. Whereas, latter refers to a
model of communication which draws on the classical concept/theory of sadharanikaran
along with other resources in order to visualize Hindu perspectives on communication.
However, both East and West have realized that communication is a multicultural and
multi-paradigm discipline. There is no one major paradigm that can explain all
communication behavior which is because of the inclination of scholars towards multiple
concepts of communication which may be due to various cultural and philosophical
diversities. This has led towards the adaptation of Western Communication theories in
East due to various local conditions and Eastern Communication Theories is being used
in the West to enhance the Western Communication Theories. Therefore, going back to
ones origin or seeking their own native theories along with the Western will help in
understanding themselves and the world.
9
Conclusion
Both of the theories give us an insight on how communication works in the East and the
West. It shows how these theories are effective due to the cultural influence and
understanding of the people. Communication (both as a field of study or as a discipline)
has been multidisciplinary and multicultural which is forever changing. The theories and
models give us a new perspective on communication from different cultural and
philosophical lenses. This will help in the further development of co-cultural respect and
will give us a better understanding of the world.
Thus, it will create an opportunity for native theorization and comparative study among
various communication theories and models. In this way, understanding of the Eastern
Communication Theories and the Western Communication Theories would guide us
towards reconciliation of the East and the west.
10
References
Schramm, W. (1954). How communication works. In W. Schramm (Ed.), The process
and effects of communication (pp. 3-26). Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press.
Adhikary, N. M. (2007c). Sancharyoga: Verbal communication as a means for attaining
moksha (Unpublished M.Phil. Thesis). Pokhara University, Nepal.
http://sadharanikaran.com/?p=37