I would agree with you about this. Try doing a qualitative
research study by just looking at the transcripts...then listen to the
taped interviews... What different meanings do the words have for you as
you proceed to interpret the discourse.
The confluence of the contextual occurs with sounds and
intonations... I am sure more is lost without video... body language...
At 07:43 PM 3/19/97 -0500, Davidwilk@aol.com wrote:
[..snip by host... Hopefully, snipping the right stuff...]
>For me, email is a challenging method for complex communication. It is
>excellent and extremely useful for simple messages and questions. The
>more complex the issue, the greater the challenge. I am unable to see or
>sense many of the "nonverbals" that are a major part of our oral
>communication. Those nonverbals often allow me to see a context to the
>message. Also, when I don't understand, there is often a long break
>between my questions and the responses. I don't know if I am being
>understood, again I can't see the verbal clues of understanding or am not
>easily able to check for understanding.
Peace,
ET
"We are Learning in turbulent times!"
--eLIZabeth Reed-Torrence <ereedtor@seattleu.edu>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>