Date:         Tue, 4 Nov 1997 22:23:50 EST
From: where are my undertinks? <mbarker@MIT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: FILLER: Life with Multilogues

Hello, all...

There have been a couple of questions that I'd like to respond to.
First, someone suggested that family dinners and parties might be
multilogues...

Not really.  The family dinner, parties, or any grouping like that
sometimes "breaks up" into a number of small groups all talking at the
same time.  However, consider just who is listening to a single speaker.
Only the person in the next seat or a small group, not everyone.  And
the responses, no matter how chaotic the process may appear, are
actually limited to one person talking at a time (due to the limitations
of our hearing--human beings really can only listen to one voice talking
and understand it at a time).  Admittedly, several people may try to
talk at the same time, and there are a whole set of phenomena around
interruptions and so forth, but social interactions (eye contact, raised
voice, sometimes posture and so on) allow us to quickly determine which
speaker has "taken the token" and let them talk.

There may be some parallels between multilogues and such collections of
small groups, with each group busily spinning their conversational
thread, and the chaotic interplay of the groups as members shift and
groups dissolve and form.  However, I think the essential process of
each message going to everyone and of the simultaneous writing and
posting of multiple responses (the "pile-on" phenomenon) are
significantly different for the multilogue.

Someone else suggested that the meetings they are in aren't run by
Robert's Rules, EVERYONE just talks at the same time.

Meeting at MIT (and elsewhere I've been) aren't usually run by any
formal rules either.  But there is usually someone who is running the
meeting--often just by looking at the person they expect to talk next.
In fact, I often use occasions when several people try to "grab the
floor" at the same time as a way to check just what the social
relationships are in the group.  If one person "breaks the tie" by
nodding towards someone, by gesturing "you, then you", or similar
method--guess who is the boss.  If the people sort it out themselves,
perhaps by one person just talking over the interruption of the
other--that also tells me something about the relationships.  When
people turn to me to sort it out (something which happens with
distressing frequency any more), it also tells me something about the
relationships--and makes me wonder when I got anointed with "you're in
charge" stuff (or maybe it's tarred with that brush?).

In meetings and similar cases of verbal exchange that I can think of,
the process runs like this:

    One person talks. (A)

    One or more people may have a response, and try to "take the floor."
    This is quickly resolved (through body language, the loudest and the
    most insistent, etc.)

    One person gets the floor, and they talk. (B) (all the other responses
    are at least delayed, and mostly lost at this point.)

    Again, there may be some confusion about giving up the turn (someone
    may try to steal the floor by interrupting, several people may try
    to grab it at the same time, etc.)

    Someone else talks.  (Usually in response to B, NOT one of the
    responses to A)

Compare that to the multilogue, where we see:

    One person posts. (A)

    As many people as want to write and post responses. (B, C, D, E, F...)

    Listserv arbitrarily orders all the responses and sends them out to
    everyone.

    Other people read, post totally independent material, and post
    responses (to A, B, C, D, E, F, in part or all), all at the same time.

    Listserv just keeps making copies of everything and pumping them out
    to everyone.

For the multilogue, it is as if everyone who wanted the floor got it and
made their speech...even though the listeners only get to hear them one
at a time.

(hum...I guess I'll ignore the case of the public speaker with people
whispering to their friends, because that little subgroup interaction is
kind of an aberration--and if enough people ignore the main speaker to
talk to their subgroups, we say the overall speaking event has "broken
down.")

Incidentally, on p. 161 and forward in Genderspeak by Dr. Elgin, there
is a section on "Using the Language Traffic Rules."  This includes the
point that the clearest metaphor for American Mainstream English
Language interactions is that language is traffic. ... One of the Talk
Traffic Rules is "When it's somebody else's turn to talk, slow down,
stop talking, and make it clear that you're ready to yield to that
person."  Let me also quote this section:

(p. 172)  3.  Management of Turns

"This includes getting the turn, keeping the turn, passing the turn to
someone else, accepting the turn from someone else, and refusing the
turn; in other words, changing lanes and getting safely through the
intersections."
    "The basics for this skill can be taken directly from what you know
about traffic on the road.  The only difference that matters is that in
conversation you don't have automatic and unambiguous turn signals.  For
AME the signals that matter most are these:"
    - Making eye contact with the person you plan to give the turn to
(and avoiding eye contact with the speaker if you don't want to talk);
    - Coming to a full and unmistakable _stop_ when you're through with
your turn (and avoiding lengthy pauses at all other times); and
    - Using clear language to clarify matters when necessary, as in
'Bill, did you have something you wanted to say about this?'

    "You need to be able to give these signals, and you need to be able
to observe them and act on them when they come at you from other people.
Getting good at this is like learning to drive well:  You have to pay
attention to what you are doing, and you have to practice."

(There are similar observations of this kind of linguistic convention
in books by Edward T. Hall, etc.  Many "meeting management" courses
also point out and even practice various ways of explicitly or subtly
controlling the speaker's token.)

Hope this helps
tink