Connotation is the meaning of a word beyond its definition. Different words referring to a single concept may communicate unique implications respectively thereof, usually with emotionally positive or negative correlation. Some connotations are related to the etymological origins of a word, but most are the result of usage patterns, and are a symptom of a language’s evolution over time. Regular users of a language will become intuitively familiar with their tongue’s communicative subtleties, but often remain unconscious of the specifics thereof. Conversely, those approaching the language afresh from the background of another language may struggle to implement this nuance of usage in their speech. There are thus some risks to connotation when employed in unequal settings, necessitating rectification to ensure communication is successful.
The difficulty lies in subjectivity; since connotation is not directly part of definition, its understanding can vary between persons. Successful communication relies on a shared understanding, which itself is accomplished by adherence to an objective standard thereof. But connotation often relies on subjective association, which may need to be clarified to avoid confusion. When an unshared connotation goes by unnoticed, it does not receive clarification and may result in a breakdown in communication. To prevent this, the participants must be aware of the success or failure of their communication at any given point. This is the responsibility of communication, and while it is shared equally between all involved, it is up to each individual to uphold their own part. Let us therefore consider the major aspects of this responsibility, of which there are two.
Most obviously, it is the responsibility of the deliverer of information to be considerate of his words. As he knows what it is he intends to communicate, he must try to ensure that his phrasing is well suited to it. This is the greater responsibility, for its justification is more than mere practicality; it is also the ordinance of God, to be clear and intention with our words. This is illustrated in Matthew 5:37 (which itself is in reference to Deuteronomy 23:23); while more literally concerning vows, these passages showcase the concern of God toward honesty and encourage being careful with our words in avoidance of deception.
The secondary responsibility of communication is that of the recipient; to be aware of their own comprehension in receiving. Herein lies the dichotomy; while one must do what they can to be understood, such does not excuse the other from their duty to understand. When communication is traded, all parties involved trade off their roles of listener and speaker respectively by each individual. If the former finds their understanding to be insufficient, they must consider themselves obliged to request clarification, just as the latter must be ready to offer it.
Be clear. TTT