Four Sources of Uncertainty in Communication Ontology

The study examines the uncertainties regarding the elements of Communication Ontology from the theoretical universe of communication discipline. There are three primary analytical findings: a) a coherent and rigorous ontology of human communication is missing; b) communication as discipline has no thoroughly explicit ontology; c) the current rudimentary ontology of communication is under the standards of a rigorous and robust ontology. The main identified sources of uncertainty are the following: a) the fact that the attitude and behavior of the communication discipline to take seriously as a discipline was established only in 1990’s; b) the fact that a discipline without a secular past, communication cultivates itself as always being at the beginning; c) the fact that, being always met and treated with courtesy, communication discipline has built hardly "face" among other subjects, leaving a false impression of instability; d) enjoying success without making waste of effort and acting as "being on her own", communication did not, like other disciplines, the effort to define clear, to establish and impose an ontology.

[1]  Robert T. Craig.  3 Constructing theories in communication research , 2013 .

[2]  R P,et al.  A lost generation? , 1990, Science.

[3]  Mădălina Cerban.  Types of References – Achieving Cohesion by Creating Links between Elements , 2009 .

[4]  S. Vladutescu.  DRAINAGE OF SOME AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY IN THE FIELD OF COMMUNICATIVE INSTANCE CONCEPT , 2014 .

[5]  V. Enãchescu.  Managing Decentralization of the Romanian Educational System , 2011 .

[6]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Formal ontology, conceptual analysis and knowledge representation , 1995, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[7]  S. Girboveanu.  COMUNICARE VERBALA SI NONVERBALA , 2004 .

[8]  Moritz Schlick,et al.  Knowing and Being , 1974 .

[9]  What to Say When There Is Nothing to Talk about (Qué decir cuando no hay nada de que hablar) , 2008 .

[10]  Thomas R. Gruber,et al.  A translation approach to portable ontology specifications , 1993, Knowl. Acquis..

[11]  Linda Wetzel,et al.  Types and Tokens: On Abstract Objects , 2009 .

[12]  M. Polanyi,et al.  Knowing and being : essays , 1969 .

[13]  Aurelia Dumitru,et al.  Self-Directed Learning in Economic Education , 2013 .

[14]  Ștefan VlăduÈ›escu.  Message as Fundamental Discursive Commitment of Communication , 2013 .

[15]  Thomas S. Frentz,et al.  Language‐action: A paradigm for communication , 1976 .

[16]  G. Shepherd.  Building a Discipline of Communication , 1993 .

[17]  Stephen W. Littlejohn.  Theories of Human Communication , 1978 .

[18]  John R. Dalphin,et al.  The Research Imagination: An Introduction to Qualitative and Quantitative Methods , 2007 .

[19]  D. Balaban.  DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNICATION SCIENCE IN ROMANIA. CHALLENGES AND PERSPECTIVES , 2013 .

[20]  Rafael Capurro,et al.  Towards an ontological foundation of information ethics , 2006, Ethics and Information Technology.

[21]  T. Sloane,et al.  Encyclopedia of Rhetoric , 2006 .

[22]  I. Stavre.  INTERNET AND DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY – INFLUENCES ON AUDIOVISUAL COMMUNICATION AND ON TEACHING AT MASTER’S DEGREE LEVEL , 2012 .

[23]  Ștefan Vlăduțescu,et al.  Uncertainty Communication Status: Theory or Science , 2014 .

[24]  William B. Gudykunst.  An Anxiety/Uncertainty Management (AUM) Theory of Strangers' Intercultural Adjustment. , 2005 .

[25]  B. Burleson.  Taking communication seriously , 1992 .

[26]  Humberto R. Maturana,et al.  Science and Daily Life: The Ontology of Scientific Explanations , 1990 .

[27]  Nicolae Tandareanu,et al.  The inference mechanism in conditional schemas , 2010 .

[28]  Ștefan Vlăduțescu,et al.  Communicative Message as Nuclear Thinking of an Aspirational Desire , 2013 .

[29]  Gheorghe Vlăduțescu.  Ontology and Metaphysics: Whether They Are One , 2013 .