Dear Professor fuck you. If you think the term Dialogical Monologization makes any sense whatsoever, or helps you in any way describe the phenomena you are trying to explain.

Dialogical- referring to dialogue

Monologization- despite not being able to find it in a dictionary I assume it means to turn into a monologue.

He claims that he has invented this term to capture the goal oriented nature of most but not all dialogical processes.

Fuck you, this type of pretentious bullshit should not be in a lower level class. This should be a grad level course, when the TA who is currently getting her PHD says things like "Yea I really don't understand this stuff either" there is a problem.

After further research I have found that this is a psychology term used to describe paying attention to two dimensions of a dialouge. And I suppose he is discussing how out of studying the different dimensions of a Dialouge that one often becomes dominant over another.

This is the most useless shit ever, no wonder I dropped my psyc major.

View Thinker #000000's profile

Whatever the fuck he wants that term to mean, there's surely a way to express it in a less pretentious way. From what I gather, it's the tendency to want to turn a dialog into a monologue? So one person (or both people) trying to entirely dominate a conversation? So you could just substitute the word dominance when you're talking in this context instead of using that monstrous phrase? (By the way, there are six whole results if you search for this phrase in Google)

Log In to Leave Comment