Ambiguity in Meaning for Understanding
Who are you? The simplicity of these three words belies the complexity in understanding the sentence’s meaning, that is, the potential within the question and the possibilities for a response. This simple example illustrates the unappreciated relationships between the requester, the respondent, their shared environment, and even their separate histories. Each of these must be identified, interpreted and agreed upon in order to assign meaning, transfer knowledge and gain understanding. Again, consider “Who are you?” What ideas, concerns, or knowledge, could promote such an inquiry? Once the question is put forth, it is subject to interpretation by the respondent, from the literal, “I am Patrick Masson,” to the conceptual, “I am with you.” Beyond this initial exchange lies the potential, or, how the inquisitor, in return, may interpret any of the possible responses. Jonathon Culler, states, “communication depends on the basic convention that participants are cooperating with one another and that, therefore, what one person says to the other is likely to be relevant” (25). A relevant response to “Who are you?” cannot be provided unless one considers the context in which this question is asked. Where am I? What is my relationship to the person requesting the information? What will my response illicit in return? For example, upon entering a room I would not at all be surprised to hear, “Who are you?” from a person standing in front of others, especially if this where the first day of school and I had just entered a classroom. But what if, rather than a classroom, I had entered a bank with a robbery underway? How might I respond differently to that same person standing in front of others if I were a mere citizen, a uniformed police officer, or a psychiatrist? And going further, consider an alternate perspective, how might my response change if the question came from the bank robber, an injured victim or, perhaps a police officer? My interpretation of the question, the response I might give, and my expectations for the future—the meaning I attribute to the words, the knowledge passed and understanding derived—would surely vary in each of these scenarios. As interpersonal and cultural norms are established meaning and even context are assigned, often despite the literal translation of the words or the specific situation those in discussion may find themselves. To my point, consider another common question, “How are you?” Are we always as “fine” as we attest in response, or do we (have we come to) understand this question and its response as simply salutations?
Opening My Masters 