These attributes of written tradition are possible because the pace of writing is controlled by both the writer and the reader. Written documents can be rewritten at great length.
The reader can also take in more information because the text is visible as opposed to oral tradition. Speeches can be more precise to listeners than reading. Although precision in oral communication comes only with a great deal of preparation and compression, it is more receptive to listeners because once words are spoken, they cannot be retracted.
One can even read from a written text and achieve the same degree of verbal precision as written tradition. But word-for-word reading from a text is not speech-making, and in most circumstances audiences find those speeches boring and retain very little of the information. Oral tradition can also be stronger because you can put emphasize on words that you cannot in writing.
Oral Tradition and written tradition are both complex and simple. Both of them can be stronger than one another. It all depends on how strong of a case you present. I'm Edwin! Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one? Skip to content Oral Tradition vs. Previous Previous post: Multiple Sclerosis Essay. A traditional written history, by contrast, uses a variety of sources, which may include oral interviews, government reports, newspaper articles, letters, diaries and personal papers.
It is generally written from the third person, adopting a scholarly voice and an analytical approach. Historians writing traditional history cite their sources, which establishes both authority and credibility.
Although not meant to appeal to a general audience, some traditional histories, particularly biographies of important political figures like George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, are widely read. Simply put, oral history is a method: a way of gathering information from people who come into contact with history, who have lived through events or periods and are willing to reflect on not only what happened but also how they experienced what happened.
In the Arkansas Delta Oral History Project, which the Brown Chair in English Literacy Initiative has conducted for the past three years, university students will work with Delta high school students to capture the legend and lore of Delta communities using oral history. In the Augusta Community Literacy Advocacy Project, citizens of that small Woodruff County town have used oral history to write a book of stories about military veterans, and members of several churches are using oral history to honor the contributions of long-time members, the pillars of the church.
For these Arkansans, oral history brings reading and writing to life. Mary Parler, founder of the University of Arkansas Folklore Research Project, and her assistants interviewed hundreds of Arkansans in the s and early s, collecting ballads, tales and other cultural information.
They recorded reels of audiotape, all fully transcribed, an invaluable resource for historians and linguists. Andy Albertson senior director of communications , aalbert uark.
Matt McGowan assistant director of research communications , dmcgowa uark. Hardin Young assistant director of research communications , hyoung uark. What is the difference between oral history and traditional written history?
0コメント