Were the sound, meaning, conversational rules, and contextual rules appropriately met? Why or why not? I felt that the sound and meaning of the conversation grew more emotional as the discussion went on. Both parties were very passionate on how to approach the situation, each making valid points and staying on topic. Although the conversation was primarily between two people, the rest of the congress cheered loudly after certain statements were made, backing their speaker in agreement.
What would you do in a similar situation? How would you handle the situation? Do you think the process of listening and responding was followed properly? Why or why not? If I were involved in this discussion, I would probably back Mr. Adams, as I understand his mindset, as well as his emotions. I think the process of listening and responding was followed properly until the end of the conversation when Mr. Dickinson put his foot down and gave Mr. Adams the ultimatum.
Observe the body language of the people involved in the communication and share your views on the positive and negative aspects of their body languages. Since the majority of the people were sitting except for the speakers, the majority of the body language came in between pauses and from the speakers themselves. The atmosphere of the room was conducted in a very organized manner however; small moments of chaos would ensue in between points. Key people, such as Ben Franklin would be seen shifting back and forth as if part of an intense tennis match. The majority of body language came from exaggerated facial expressions, which often happens during intense conversations.
John Adams [Motion picture]. (2008). HBO Video.