Public speaking by the speaker and his audience. Topic: “The speaker and his audience. Public speaking. Establishing contact between the speaker and the audience

The word “orator” (from the Latin orare – “to speak”) is used in two meanings:

1) a person making a speech, speaking in public;

2) a person who knows how to speak well in public, has the gift of eloquence, and has mastery of words.

According to A.F. Merzlyakov, “Orator. tries not only to convince with reason, but especially wants to act on the will. The conviction of reason serves as a means to achieve the goal - the strongest ignition of passions."

Oratory is the art of constructing and delivering a speech in public with the goal of producing a desired impact on an audience. This art means skillful use of words, high degree speaker's skill. Being in the center of attention of the audience itself, the speaker is subject to comprehensive evaluation, ranging from appearance, demeanor and ending with personal charm, i.e., in order to count on the attention and respect of this audience, the speaker must have a certain set of skills and abilities. This must be a highly intelligent, erudite and visually attractive person. He must be free to navigate both in the field of literature and art, and in the field of science and technology.

A special moment in oratory is the audience. The person who is speaking must take into account that at the beginning of a lecture or meeting, the people sitting in front of him are not yet the audience. The speaker must attract the attention of more than a dozen people, so that from individual listeners they form into a socio-psychological community of people with special collective experiences.

The already established audience has some characteristics. For example, one of these signs is the homogeneity (heterogeneity) of the audience, i.e. gender, age, level of education and professional interests of the listeners. The quantitative composition of those present is also important. You should not organize a discussion in a large audience, where it is difficult to use arguments that everyone understands. But a small audience is characterized by a lack of integrity. But it is easier to manage a small audience and discuss controversial issues with it; you can focus on the discursive nature of communication. In this case, the speaker must know the subject and objectives of his speech very well. But reading from pre-prepared notes in this situation is unlikely to work.

A sense of community is another hallmark that differentiates an audience. It manifests itself when the listeners are in a certain emotional mood, when the entire audience in one emotional outburst applauds the speaker or shakes their head disapprovingly. In such an audience, each person lacks a personal “I”; everyone submits to the general and unconscious “we”.

Another motive is the motive for the action of listeners. When attending a lecture, people are guided by certain considerations. Psychologists distinguish three groups of points:

1) intellectual and cognitive (they come because the topic is interesting);

2) moral plan (obliged to be present);

3) emotional-aesthetic (I like the speaker, it’s nice to listen to him). Hence the different mood of listeners when perceiving the performance. The speaker must immediately understand and take into account all of the listed signs. A good speaker is distinguished by the ability to align his goals with the level of preparation of the audience.

Plan

1. The concept of rhetoric, oratory as a spiritual and moral activity. Types of eloquence.

2. Speaker and audience.

3. Public speaking

1. The concept of rhetoric, oratory as a spiritual and moral activity Rhetoric, despite its 25-century existence, began to be taught in modern Russian universities quite recently. Her rehabilitation is not accidental and is due to the need to improve communication skills associated with effective (impacting) communication. However, successful study of the fundamentals of effective speech is impossible without serious theoretical training, which requires familiarity with the nature of speech influence, the conditions for its implementation, and the mechanisms for its implementation. All of the above allows us to formulate the goal of the course, which is to promote the formation of rhetorical competence. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to solve the following tasks :

· provide systemic knowledge in the field of speech influence theory;

· form an idea of the applied component of rhetoric;

· develop a certain minimum of skills that will allow you to use speech and thinking standards that improve the effectiveness of communication

Rhetoric, oratory, is the art of constructing and publicly delivering a speech in order to have the desired impact on the audience.

Constructing and publicly delivering a speech to create the desired impact on the audience.

A similar interpretation of oratory was accepted in ancient times. For example, Aristotle defined rhetoric as “the faculty of finding possible modes of persuasion on any given subject.”

This tradition was continued in Russian rhetorical science. Thus, M.V. Lomonosov in his “Brief Guide to Eloquence” writes:

Eloquence is the art of speaking eloquently about any given matter and thereby inclining others to your opinion about it.

In “Private Rhetoric” by N. Koshansky we read:

Oratory and oratory is the art of using the gift of a living word to influence the mind, passions and will of others .

M. Speransky in “Rules of Higher Eloquence” notes:

Eloquence is the gift of shaking souls, pouring one’s passions into them, and communicating to them the image of one’s concepts. .

The list of such definitions could be continued.

Oratory is also called the historically established science of eloquence and an academic discipline that sets out the fundamentals of oratory.

Traditionally, eloquence was viewed as an art form. It was often compared with poetry and acting (Aristotle, Cicero, M.V. Lomonosov, A.F. Merzlyakov, V.G. Belinsky, A.F. Koni, etc.).

However, as G. Z. Apresyan rightly notes, the understanding of eloquence as a form of art, and often literature, should not mislead anyone. The researcher analyzes what is common and different in poetry, drama, acting, on the one hand, and in oratory, on the other, and concludes that the concept of “art” in relation to eloquence, if not entirely conditional, still requires a number of reservations of fundamental importance.

G. 3. Apresyan emphasizes the close connection between oratory and science. He notes that even ancient philosophers, Plato and Aristotle, considered eloquence in the system of knowledge as a way of knowing and interpreting complex phenomena. Later, F. Bacon, in his work “Essays,” classified rhetoric as the art of “communicating knowledge.” M. Speransky in “The Rules of Higher Eloquence” argued that oratory should be demonstrative, reasonable, and bring knowledge to people.

What, according to G. Z. Apresyan, allows us to consider oratory in connection with science?

Firstly, oratory takes advantage of the discoveries and achievements of all sciences and at the same time widely propagates and popularizes them.

Secondly, many ideas or hypotheses were initially presented orally, in public speeches, lectures, scientific reports, messages, and conversations.

Thirdly, oratory is based on the categorical system of the relevant sciences, which provides a mechanism for argumentation, analysis and judgment, evidence and generalizations.

Thus, in eloquence, art and science constitute a complex fusion of relatively independent ways of influencing people. Oratory is a complex intellectual and emotional creativity of public speech.

Many modern researchers consider oratory as one of the specific types of human activity.

What caused the emergence of oratory? Many of his theorists have tried to answer this question.

The objective basis for the emergence of oratory as a social phenomenon was the urgent need for public discussion and resolution of issues of public importance. In order to substantiate this or that point of view, to prove the correctness of the ideas and positions put forward, to defend one’s position, one had to be proficient in the art of speech, be able to convince listeners and influence their choice.

History shows that the most important condition for the emergence and development of oratory, the free exchange of opinions on vital issues, the driving force of progressive ideas, critical thought are democratic forms of government, the active participation of citizens in the political life of the country. It is no coincidence that the art of oratory is called the “spiritual child of democracy.”

This was discovered back in Ancient Greece. A clear example is the comparison of the two most significant city-states - Sparta and Athens, which had different government systems.

Sparta was a typical oligarchic republic. It was ruled by two kings and a council of elders. The people's assembly was considered the supreme body of power, but in fact it had no significance. Plutarch, telling the biography of Lycurgus, the legendary legislator, tells the order of holding meetings in Sparta. The place where the meetings took place had neither shelters nor any decorations, since, according to the rulers, this does not contribute to sound judgment, on the contrary, it only causes harm, occupies the minds of those gathered with trifles and nonsense, and scatters their attention.

Plutarch notes an interesting detail. When subsequently the people began to change the approved decisions with “various kinds of exceptions and additions,” the kings adopted a resolution: “If the people decide incorrectly, the elders and kings should dissolve,” i.e., the decision should not be considered accepted, but should leave and dissolve the people on the basis that he distorts and distorts what is best and most useful. This order of conducting government affairs gave the aristocrats the opportunity to resolve all issues almost uncontrollably and did not contribute to the broad participation of citizens in government.

Political life developed differently in Athens, which in the middle of the 5th century BC. became the largest economic, political and cultural center of Ancient Greece. A system of slave-owning democracy was established here. Three main institutions were of great importance: the national assembly, the council of five hundred and the court.

The main role belonged to the people's assembly (ecclesia), which legally had full supreme power. Every 10 days, Athenian citizens gathered in the square of their city and discussed important state affairs. Only the People's Assembly could decide to declare war and make peace, to elect senior officials, to issue various decrees, etc. All other state bodies were subordinate to the People's Assembly.

Between meetings of the National Assembly, current affairs were considered by the Council of Five Hundred (bule). Council members were elected by lot from among citizens who were at least 30 years old, 50 people from each of the 10 districts located on the territory of the policy.

Judicial cases, as well as legislative activities, were carried out by the jury (helieya). It was quite numerous. It included 6 thousand jurors, which eliminated the danger of bribing judges. There were no special public prosecutors in Athens. Any citizen could initiate and support charges. There were no defense attorneys at the trial. The defendant had to defend himself.

Naturally, with such a free democratic system in Athens, citizens often had to speak in court or the people's assembly, and take an active part in the affairs of the polis. When discussing issues between parties in the people's assembly, opposing sides often fought fiercely in court. And in order to successfully conduct a case in court or successfully speak in a public assembly, one had to be able to speak well and convincingly, defend one’s position, refute the opinion of an opponent, that is, mastery of oratory and the ability to argue were the first necessity for the Athenians.

According to historians, the Spartan barracks state did not leave anything worthy to its descendants, while Athens, with its democratic disputes in the squares, in court and at public assemblies, quickly put forward the greatest thinkers, scientists, poets, and created immortal works of culture.

As researchers emphasize, the art of oratory develops most actively during critical periods in the life of society. It is widely used when there is a historical need for the participation of the masses in resolving important government issues. Oratory helps to rally people around a common cause, persuading, inspiring and guiding them. Proof of this is the flowering of eloquence during the Renaissance, during periods of social revolutions, when millions of working people were involved in the social movement. A new surge of public interest in oratory is currently observed in connection with the democratic processes taking place in our country.

Throughout the centuries-old history of its development, oratory has been used in various spheres of social life: spiritual, ideological, socio-political. It has always found its widest application in political activity.

Since Ancient Greece, oratory and politics have been inseparable. Thus, all the famous orators of Ancient Greece were major political figures. For example, Pericles, who ruled Athens for 15 years. Legislative measures that led to further democratization of the Athenian state are associated with his name. According to researchers, the highest internal prosperity of Greece coincides with the era of Pericles. They said about Pericles that “the goddess of persuasion rested on his lips,” that “he shot lightning arrows into the souls of his listeners.”

Demosthenes, the most remarkable orator of Ancient Greece, was also a major political figure. The ancient Greek historian Plutarch wrote about him:

Demosthenes first turned to the art of speech in order to improve his own affairs, and subsequently, having achieved skill and strength, he became the first in competitions in the state field and surpassed all his fellow citizens who rose to the oratorical eminence.

Demosthenes was a defender of Athenian slave democracy. For 30 years, with anger and amazing tenacity, he made speeches against the Macedonian king Philip, the main enemy of Athens, calling on citizens to end all discord among themselves and unite against Macedonia. Demosthenes' speeches made a huge impression on his listeners. It is said that when Philip received the delivered speech of Demosthenes, he said that if he had heard the speech himself, he would probably have voted for war against himself.

Demosthenes, who through hard work prepared himself for social activities (from his biography it is known that he suffered from many physical disabilities) and who devoted all his oratory to serving his homeland, was able to correctly determine the social nature of oratory. In the famous speech “On the Crown,” in which he spoke against the representative of the pro-Macedonian party Aeschines, Demosthenes emphasized the connection between oratory and politics:

Oratory was also a major political force in ancient Rome.

The ability to convince an audience was highly valued by people who were preparing for a political career and saw themselves in the future as rulers of the state. It is no coincidence that in the middle of the 2nd century BC. Greek rhetoricians appeared in Rome and opened the first rhetorical schools there, and young people flocked to them. But Greek rhetorician schools were not accessible to everyone: rhetorician lessons were expensive and it was possible to study in them only with a perfect knowledge of the Greek language. In practice, only the children of aristocrats, who were later to become heads of state, could attend Greek schools. Therefore, the government did not interfere with Greek rhetoricians and treated their schools favorably. But when in the 1st century BC. A school teaching rhetoric in Latin opened, and the Senate became agitated. It was impossible to allow representatives of other classes to take up the weapons that their sons were still learning to wield. And in 92, an edict “On the prohibition of Latin rhetorical schools” was issued. It was written there:

We are informed that there are people who have introduced a new type of teaching and to whom young people are going to school; they gave themselves the name of Latin rhetoricians; the young men sit with them all day long. Our ancestors established what to teach their children and what schools they should attend. These innovations, established contrary to the customs and morals of our ancestors, are not pleasing to us and seem wrong.

An oratorical career in ancient Rome was both honorable and lucrative. One of the Roman historians wrote:

Whose art is comparable in glory to oratory?<... >whose names do parents teach their children, whom do the simple ignorant crowd know by name, whom do they point their fingers at? - for speakers, of course.

The famous orators of Ancient Rome, like the ancient Greeks, were famous political figures. Thus, one of the first Roman orators was a statesman of Rome in the 3rd – 2nd centuries BC. Mark Cato the Elder. An irreconcilable enemy of Carthage, Cato ended every speech in the Senate with the phrase that became a catchphrase: “And yet, I believe, Carthage must be destroyed.” This expression is used as a call to persistently fight an enemy or some obstacle.

Outstanding speakers of a later period were famous statesmen and supporters of the agrarian reform- Tiberius and Caius Gracchi. Mark Antony, a Roman politician and commander, also occupied a prominent place among Roman speakers.

But the most important political figure of that time was Marcus Tullius Cicero.

There are two arts, wrote Cicero, that can elevate a person to the highest level of honor: one is the art of a good commander, the other is the art of a good orator.

This saying reveals Cicero's view of the essence of oratory. Oratory is a function of politics.

As history shows, in subsequent periods prominent political figures became major speakers.

It should be borne in mind that oratory has always served and serves the interests of certain social classes, groups, and individuals. It can equally serve both truth and lies, and be used for both moral and immoral purposes.

Who and how does oratory serve - this is the main question that has been resolved throughout the history of oratory, starting with Ancient Greece. And depending on the solution to this issue, the attitude to oratory, to the science of oratory, and to the orator himself was determined.

The moral position of the speaker is perhaps the most important thing in oratory. It is important not only for a politician, but also for any speaker whose word can influence the fate of people and help them make the right decision.

Let us note one more feature of oratory. It has a complex synthetic nature. Philosophy, logic, psychology, pedagogy, linguistics, ethics, aesthetics - these are the sciences on which oratory is based. Specialists of different profiles are interested in various problems of eloquence. For example, linguists develop a theory of the culture of oral speech and give recommendations to speakers on how to use the riches of their native language. Psychologists study the issues of perception and impact of speech messages, deal with problems of attention stability during public speaking, study the psychology of the speaker’s personality, and the psychology of the audience as a socio-psychological community of people. Logic teaches the speaker to consistently and harmoniously express his thoughts, correctly structure his speech, prove the truth of the propositions put forward and refute the false statements of opponents.

Oratory has never been homogeneous. Historically, depending on the scope of application, it was divided into various genera and types. In domestic rhetoric, the following main types of eloquence are distinguished: socio-political, academic, judicial, social, everyday, spiritual (theological-church). Each gender combines certain types of speech, taking into account the function that speech performs from a social point of view, as well as the situation of the speech, its topic and purpose.

Socio-political eloquence includes speeches devoted to issues of state building, economics, law, ethics, culture, produced in parliament, at rallies, public meetings, sessions, etc.;

for academic – educational lecture, scientific report, review, messages;

to the judicial - speeches made by the participants in the trial - the prosecutor, lawyer, accused, etc.;

to social and everyday life - greetings, anniversary, dinner, memorial speeches, etc.;

to theological and ecclesiastical matters - sermons, speeches at the council.

2. The highest manifestation of the skill of public speaking, the most important condition for the effectiveness of oratory speech is contact with listeners. As experienced speakers say, this is the cherished dream of every speaker. Indeed, a speech is pronounced so that it is listened to, correctly perceived, and remembered. If the speaker is not listened to, if the audience is busy with “their own” business during the speech, then the efforts and labors of the speaker are wasted, the effectiveness of such a speech is reduced to zero.

According to psychologists, contact is the common mental state of the speaker and the audience, it is mutual understanding between the speaker and the audience. What is the result of this community? First of all, on the basis of joint mental activity, i.e., the speaker and listeners must solve the same problems, discuss the same issues - the speaker, presenting the topic of his speech, and the listeners, following the development of his thoughts. If the speaker is talking about one thing and the audience is thinking about something else, there is no contact. Scientists call the joint mental activity of the speaker and the audience intellectual empathy.

It is no coincidence that people say: “The word belongs half to the one who speaks, and half to the one who listens.”

For contact to occur, emotional empathy is also important, i.e. the speaker and listeners must experience similar feelings during the speech. The speaker’s attitude to the subject of speech, his interest, and conviction are transmitted to the listeners and cause a response from them.

Thus, contact between speaker and audience occurs when both parties are engaged in the same mental activity and experience similar experiences. Psychologists emphasize that a necessary condition for the establishment of contact between the speaker and the audience is sincere, real respect for the listeners, recognition of them as partners, comrades in communication.

The question arises: how to determine whether contact was established or not?

Externally, contact is manifested in the behavior of the audience, as well as in the behavior of the speaker himself.

Often there is silence in the hall during a speaker's speech. But how different this silence can be!

Some speakers are listened to with bated breath, afraid to miss a single word. This silence is regulated by the speaker himself. The speaker's jokes, his humorous remarks cause movement in the hall, smiles, and laughter from the listeners, but this laughter stops as soon as the speaker begins to express his thoughts again. During the speech, other speakers also sit silently, but not because they hang on his every word, but because they do not want to disturb the speaker. This is the so-called “polite” silence. They sit, without disturbing the order, without talking, but do not listen, do not work together with the speaker, but think about their own things, mentally doing other things. Therefore, silence itself does not indicate the speaker’s contact with the audience.

The main indicators of mutual understanding between speakers and listeners are a positive reaction to the speaker’s words, external expression of attention from listeners(their posture, concentrated gaze, exclamations of approval, nods of head in agreement, smiles, laughter, applause), “working” silence in the hall.

The presence or absence of contact is also indicated by the behavior of the speaker. If the speaker speaks confidently, behaves naturally, often addresses the audience, and keeps the entire audience in his field of vision, then he has found the right approach to the audience. A speaker who does not know how to establish contact with an audience, as a rule, speaks confusedly, inexpressively, he does not see his listeners, and does not react in any way to their behavior.

It should be borne in mind that the speaker sometimes manages to establish contact only with part of the audience, and not with the entire audience. We can say that contact is a variable quantity. It can be complete and incomplete, stable and unstable, and change during the speaker’s speech. Of course, every speaker should strive to establish complete contact with his listeners, stable from the beginning to the end of the speech. And for this it is necessary to take into account a number of factors.

Undoubtedly, the establishment of contact between the speaker and the audience is influenced, first of all, by the relevance of the issue being discussed, the novelty of the coverage of this problem, and the interesting content of the speech.

It is interesting content that largely determines the success of an oratorical speech and is the key to establishing contact between the speaker and the audience.

However, in oratory practice, a whole number of points and requirements should be taken into account, non-compliance with which can negate the interesting content and reduce the effectiveness of the oratorical influence.

Establishing contact with the audience is greatly influenced by the personality of the speaker, his reputation, and the prevailing public opinion about him. If the speaker is known as an erudite, principled person, as a person whose words do not differ from his deeds, a person who does not throw words to the wind, who speaks “not for the sake of a nice word,” then the audience will have confidence in such a speaker.

To establish contact with listeners, it is important to take into account the characteristics of the audience in which you will speak.

Emeritus Professor Nikolai Stepanovich, the hero of Chekhov’s story “A Boring Story,” recalling his lecturing activities, writes:

A good conductor, conveying the composer’s thoughts, does twenty things at once: reads the score, waves his baton, follows the singer, moves towards the drum, then the horn, and so on. It's the same for me when I read. Before me are one and a half hundred faces, not alike one another, and three hundred eyes looking straight into my face. My goal is to defeat this many-headed hydra. If every minute while I read, I have a clear idea of the degree of its attention and the power of understanding, then it is in my power.

Let's consider the main features of the audience of an oratorical speech. First of all, it is important to know whether the audience is homogeneous or heterogeneous.

By what criteria can one judge the homogeneity of the audience? These include such characteristics of listeners as age, gender, nationality, level of education, professional interests, mood, etc. It is clear that the more homogeneous the audience, the more unanimous the listeners’ reaction to the speech, the easier it is to perform. Conversely, a diverse audience tends to react differently to a speaker's words, and he has to make extra efforts to manage his audience.

An essential feature of an audience is the quantitative composition of listeners. If you have ever spoken at a meeting or conference, then you will remember that the techniques used in one and the other audience, the manner of behavior, the form of presenting the material, and addressing a small and large audience were different. Sometimes people wonder which audience is easier to speak in – a small one or a large one. Each audience has its own characteristics. Some speakers are afraid of a large audience, they become very nervous, they are seized, as they say, by “speaking fever”, and they are speechless. A small audience is easier to manage, but in this case the speaker must know the issue being discussed well, since it is hardly convenient to sight-read in front of a small number of listeners.

The audience is also characterized by a sense of community, which manifests itself in the emotional mood of the listeners.

You have probably observed curious phenomena more than once during your performance. For example, a slight noise arose in some part of the hall, and it spreads very quickly throughout the room. Your neighbor nodded his head approvingly to the speaker. This in a certain way influenced your behavior, your attitude towards the words of the speaker. But an ironic remark was made, and the rest of the listeners reacted vividly to it. The influence of listeners on each other is especially pronounced when approving or disapproving of the speaker’s speech.

What's the matter? Why is this happening? Yes, because listeners experience the action of various psychological mechanisms: some listeners unconsciously repeat the actions of those around them, others consciously reproduce the behavior patterns of those sitting next to them, and still others are influenced by the opinions and behavior of the majority of those present. As a result of the action of these mechanisms, a general mood is created in the audience, which significantly affects the establishment of contact between the speaker and the audience. Therefore, the speaker needs to learn to control the mood of the audience and be able to change it, if necessary.

The establishment of contact between the speaker and the audience is also influenced by some features of the psychology of listeners. Listeners make special demands on the speaker: they have given him the main role in the communication process and want him to live up to it. Therefore, it is important that listeners feel confident in the speaker’s behavior, see calm and dignity on his face, and hear firmness and determination in his voice. This is what Oleg Antonovich Yudin, Doctor of Biological Sciences, hero of A. Kron’s novel “Insomnia”, says about his speech at the international congress:

I listened almost attentively to the speaker speaking before me. I would be lying if I said I wasn’t worried at all, but it was the surgeon’s anxiety before an operation; no matter what was going on in his soul, his hands shouldn’t shake. Therefore, when the chairman, with some difficulty, pronounced my whole life, which seemed to me a very simple surname, I stood up and approached the chairman’s table in the same way as I was used to entering the operating room, slowly, with calm confidence in every movement, so that neither the assistants nor the outside observers, God forbid, there was not even a shadow of doubt about success.

It’s an interesting comparison, isn’t it: the speaker goes to the podium with the same confidence with which he is used to entering the operating room. Even the very appearance of the speaker has a psychological impact on the audience - it should set the listeners up for the success of the oratorical speech, no one should have even a shadow of doubt about success. But the speaker is a person like everyone else. Before the performance, he may have troubles, unforeseen complications, and finally, he may suddenly feel unwell. However, the audience does not care about the speaker’s personal experiences. This means that he needs to be able to hide his mood, temporarily disconnect from everything that is not related to the performance in the audience. A. S. Makarenko taught educators:

Your mood can be whatever you want; and your voice must be a real, good, firm voice. Your mood has nothing to do with your voice... You need to make sure that your face, your eyes, your voice are in some cases autonomous.

A special feature of audience psychology is that listeners are also spectators. The speaker just appears on the podium, and the listeners are already evaluating him and exchanging critical remarks with each other. What is it about a speaker that attracts the visual attention of listeners? Of course, first of all, its appearance.

The speaker's clothing must correspond to the nature of the environment in which the speech is given, and be neat and tidy. A.F. Koni advised lecturers:

You should dress simply and decently. There should be nothing pretentious or flashy in the suit (sharp color, unusual style); a dirty, sloppy suit makes an unpleasant impression. This is important to remember because The psychological effect on those gathered begins before the speech, from the moment the lecturer appears in front of the public.

The audience also closely monitors the behavior of the speaker during the speech. Unnecessary, mechanical movements of the speaker distract the attention of the listeners and become the subject of discussion among the audience. Listeners also pay attention to the lecturer’s posture. Some speakers, having reached the podium, lie down on it, sway now to the right, now to the left, shift from foot to foot, and mark time. All this has a negative effect on listeners and does not contribute to establishing contact with the speaker.

Listeners are far from indifferent to where the speaker is looking. You can often observe the following picture: the boss gives a report, speaks at a meeting and from time to time looks out the window, glances at the walls, lowers his eyes to the floor, raises them to the ceiling, examines his hands, i.e. looks anywhere but at the listeners .

It happens even worse: the speaker looks at the audience as if into empty space, looks with an absent gaze. Is it possible in this case to talk about genuine mutual understanding between the speaker and the audience? Of course not! True, making eye contact with the audience does not mean that you need to try to look at everyone all the time. But if you slowly move your gaze from one part of the audience to another while speaking, you can create the impression of good eye contact with the audience.

The form in which the material is presented significantly influences the relationship between the speaker and the audience.

One day, during a lecture on public speaking, one of the authors of this book received a note with the following content:

The question inevitably arises: who should prohibit reading the text of a speech from a sheet?

Let's turn to the methodological literature. None of the authors recommend reading the text as written. Moreover, psychologists warn: when reading a text from a sheet in a half-hour speech, only 17% of its content is perceived.

The tradition of writing and sight-reading oratorical speeches began long before our days. So, from the end of the 5th century BC. Logographers appeared in Athens, that is, writers of speeches for litigants to speak in court. They prepared speeches taking into account the individuality of the “customer”.

The most famous logographer of Ancient Greece was Lysias, who composed speeches for participants in numerous trials in Athens.

In France in the 18th century, it was considered indecent to go to the pulpit without a pre-written speech. The text of the speech must be read. This was the custom.

But Peter I in 1720 issued Decree No. 740, which read:

I point out: gentlemen senators should keep their speech in the presence of the assembly not according to what is written, but only in words, so that everyone’s stupidity is visible to everyone.

In issuing this decree, the great sovereign apparently pursued his own goals, but wittingly or unwittingly the document emphasized the effectiveness of the living spoken word.

An interesting comparison was used by Nobel Prize-winning physicist William Bragg when expressing his views on the art of scientific conversation:

I believe that gathering an audience and then reading written material to them is the same as inviting a friend for a walk, asking if he would mind walking, and then riding next to him in the car.

Let's turn to history. It is known that the greatest Russian historian, Professor V.O. Klyuchevsky, called his lectures simply “reading,” and he, indeed, read them from his notes, read them slowly, quietly, calmly. But these were texts created by him, found by him, thought out by him. A. F. Koni called him “the ruler of the flexible and submissive word.” To take a place in the audience at Klyuchevsky’s lecture, students were forced to sit through two or three previous classes.

Another famous Russian historian, Professor T. N. Granovsky, carefully prepared for his lectures, but never read from notes. He wrote little, and what he wrote, no matter how precious it is, cannot give us a complete idea of his oratory skills. This was an improvisational lecturer.

The named speakers themselves created the texts of their speeches, expressed their thoughts, and expressed their own judgments. So whether they read or spoke their speeches, they were interesting to listen to. Unfortunately, in life you have to deal with speakers who simply voice other people’s texts.

Here's another interesting fact. W. Churchill, a sophisticated politician and seasoned parliamentarian, in those places of his speeches where the weakness of the argument was felt, put two letters in the margins: S. L. (slower, louder - “slower; louder”).

These examples eloquently demonstrate the enormous importance of skillful speech delivery in oratory practice.

Establishing contact and capturing the attention of the audience ensures the success of public speaking and is a necessary condition for transmitting information, providing the desired impact on listeners, and consolidating certain knowledge and beliefs in them.

In conclusion, we emphasize that public speaking practice is so complex, varied, and multifaceted that it is impossible to foresee everything in advance and give advice and recommendations for all occasions.

It is very important that each person takes a creative approach to preparing and delivering an oratorical speech, makes fuller and wider use of his natural gifts and individual capabilities, and skillfully applies acquired rhetorical skills and abilities.

3. There are five main stages in preparing for a speech.

Selecting a topic. It is necessary to determine what is necessary and possible to arouse the interest of listeners. The topic is dictated by the needs of life, the most important tasks of our time. The topic answers the question “What will be discussed in the speech.” For example: “On the loss of national identity”, “On speech incivility”, “On the difficulties of youth”...

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

State educational institution of higher professional education "Magnitogorsk State Technical University named after G.I. Nosov"

Institute of Energy and Automation

Speaker and his audience

Completed by: group AB-10-1

Terentyeva Ekaterina Vyacheslavovna

Checked by: Suedova L.A.

Magnitogorsk 2011

Plan

Introduction

2. Audience and relationship with the speaker

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

The topic of my report: “The speaker and his audience.” We all have to speak in front of the public when we defend our thesis. The most important condition for effectiveness is contact with the audience. According to psychologists, contact is the common mental state of the speaker and the audience, it is mutual understanding between the speaker and the audience.

The report will address two issues:

1. Basic requirements for a speaker

2. The audience and its interaction with the speaker

In the section “Basic Requirements for a Speaker,” I will talk about appearance, demeanor, and tone and timbre of voice.

Then I will move on to the question of psychology and the main characteristics of the audience.

1. Basic requirements for a speaker

General requirements for a speaker

What are the requirements for a speaker? The basic requirements for a speaker are determined by the tasks that face him: communicating knowledge, shaping a worldview, educating the masses. In order to solve these problems, the speaker must first of all have an excellent knowledge of the subject of his speech, be widely erudite in this area and an educated person. No matter how high the level of art of eloquence a lecturer may possess, no matter how captivating his voice may be to his listeners, if he is not competent enough in the issues he is presenting, or is not sufficiently convinced of what he is trying to convince those gathered of, all his efforts are in vain - they will not believe him .

“You can learn speaking techniques,” emphasized A.V. Lunacharsky - but an orator who has nothing to say is, of course, a nonsense... Where there is an excellent transmission apparatus, but nothing to convey, the matter, of course, is rubbish. It is clear"

Each speaker must proceed from the characteristics of his character and temperament and not imitate speakers whose style is not characteristic of them.

To perform successfully, he needs to have special qualities.

What qualities do you think a speaker should have?

Let us also add that the speaker should not lose self-control in the event of unexpected interference or trouble and have qualities such as self-confidence, charm, etc.

Speaker's appearance

Appearance is of great importance. Even before the speech, the audience forms its opinion about the speaker based on his appearance. Here is what the Soviet scientist, Professor Yudin, said about his lecture:

“I took a short break. It was needed not only by me, but also by the listeners. They are also spectators; before they start listening, they like to look at a new person and even exchange critical remarks with their neighbor about his appearance and costume.”

Let's look at another example. Lecturer Sam Sanford once recounted an incident that occurred in the lobby of a small town hotel where he was scheduled to speak. A young saleswoman at the tobacco kiosk where he bought a newspaper joyfully announced to him that she was going to listen to Professor Sanford's lecture that evening. Having learned that Sanford himself was in front of her, the girl looked at him carefully and said: “Well... I’ll go anyway.”

The speaker's clothing must correspond to the nature of the environment in which the speech is given, and be neat and tidy.

Speaker's behavior

During a speech, listeners carefully observe the behavior of the speaker. To establish contact with the audience, it is very important where the speaker is looking. This does not mean that you should try to look at everyone. You can slowly move your gaze from one part of the audience to another. This gives the impression of good eye contact with the audience.

Also important for establishing contact is how the speaker delivers his speech.

The human voice has a very great power of influence on listeners. This is a rich musical instrument, in the work of which our entire body takes part. The voice is individual and very rich in characteristics; by its sound we recognize the invisible interlocutor, the state of the one with whom we are speaking, his mood, his attitude towards us. We are given by nature to control our voice, changing its pitch, strength, tone, and timbre.

Nervous tension leads to muscle stiffness, which at the moment of excitement covers the entire human body, including the respiratory and vocal apparatus. It is muscle stiffness that causes speech defects such as a “choked dull” voice, sudden hoarseness, intermittent breathing, etc.

1. you cannot perform with a sore or cold throat;

2. when making a speech, the posture should be free, not complicating breathing;

3. in a small audience it is better to strive for a “homely”, natural intonation, “preserve silence”, amplifying the voice only in necessary cases; in a large audience, you can speak louder, but also make sure that there is room for increasing the volume range, do not start very loud right away, and generally use this maximum register in the most extreme cases;

4. knowing that, somewhere in our subconscious, it has stuck in our minds that the “speaker” must speak in a special voice, try to get rid of this stereotype, strive to find his own pronunciation style for each situation;

5. knowing about the shortcomings of your voice - increased volume, shrillness or, conversely, its weakness, underdeveloped ranges, you should consciously adjust the volume, train the flexibility of your voice, striving for a possible reduction in the unpleasant effect.

Do not forget also that unnecessary, mechanical gestures of the speaker distract the attention of the listeners. Listeners fix their attention on these annoying little things and do not have time to follow the speech and its content. It is interesting to note that such shortcomings equally interfere with establishing contact with the audience both in the case when the lecturer does not notice them, and in the case when he knows and thinks about it. The latter situation is even worse, since it fetters the lecturer, he is unable to fully concentrate on delivering the text.

Let's turn to Gorky's memories of speakers at the party congress in London to better understand the importance of our behavior when speaking:

“G.V. Plekhanov, in a frock coat buttoned up with all the buttons, looking like a Protestant pastor, opened the congress and spoke like a teacher of the law, confident that his thoughts were indisputable, every word was precious, as was the pause between words. Very skillfully, he hung beautifully rounded phrases in the air above the heads of the congress members, and when on the Bolshevik benches someone moved his tongue, whispering with a comrade, the venerable speaker, after a short pause, pierced him with his gaze like a nail.

One of the buttons on his coat was loved by Plekhanov more than others; he gently and continuously stroked it with his finger, and during a pause he pressed it, like a bell button - one might think that it was this pressure that interrupted the smooth flow of speech...

I don’t remember whether Martov spoke at the first meeting. This amazingly sympathetic man spoke with youthful ardor, and it seemed that he especially deeply felt the drama of the split, the pain of contradictions.

He shuddered all over, swayed, convulsively unbuttoned the collar of his starched shirt, waved his arms; the cuff, jumping out of the sleeve of his jacket, covered his hand; he raised his hand high and shook it to place the cuff in its rightful place. It seemed to me that Martov was not proving, but begging, begging: the split must be eliminated, the party is too weak to split into two, the worker first of all needs “freedoms,” the soul must be supported. Sometimes his first speech sounded almost hysterical, the abundance of words made it incomprehensible, and the speaker himself gave a heavy impression. At the end of the speech and as if out of touch with it, still in a “combat” tone, he still ardently began to shout against the fighting squads and in general the work aimed at preparing an armed uprising...

Rosa Luxemburg spoke beautifully, passionately and sharply, perfectly wielding the weapon of irony. But then Vladimir Ilyich hurriedly ascended the pulpit and said “comrades” in a burly voice. It seemed to me that he spoke poorly, but after a minute I, like everyone else, was “absorbed” by his speech. This was the first time I had heard that the most complex political issues could be discussed so simply. This one did not try to compose beautiful phrases, but presented each word in the palm of his hand, revealing its exact meaning with amazing ease. It is very difficult to convey the unusual impression it evoked.

His hand, stretched forward and slightly raised up, a palm that seemed to weigh every word, weeding out the phrases of opponents, replacing them with weighty provisions, proof of the right and duty of the working class to go its own way, and not behind or even next to the liberal bourgeoisie - - all this was extraordinary and was said by him, Lenin, somehow not on his own, but truly by the will of history. The unity, completeness, directness and power of his speech, all of him in the pulpit, is like a work of classical art: everything is there and nothing superfluous, no decorations, and if there were any, they are not visible, they are as naturally necessary as two eyes on the face, five fingers on the hand.

In terms of time, he spoke less than the speakers who spoke before him, and in terms of impression - much more; I wasn’t the only one who felt this; behind me they whispered enthusiastically:

He speaks thickly...”

So far I have talked about the basic requirements for a speaker. Let's move on to the next paragraph of the report “The audience and its interaction with the speaker”

2. Audihistory and relationship with the speaker

Quantitative and qualitative composition

When a lecturer is just starting to prepare the text of a speech, he first of all analyzes the audience to whom he will speak. The audience can be homogeneous or heterogeneous.

And by what signs can one judge the homogeneity of listeners?

Such signs are: age, gender, education and the approximate level of knowledge of the listeners on the topic being taught, the motives that brought them to the lecture, features of life, work, etc. The more homogeneous the audience, the easier it is to find contact with it.

A very important sign of the audience is its quantitative composition. The larger the hall, the more people it accommodates, the more difficult it is to control this “orchestra”, the more skill the lecturer must show in order to master the audience. Hence the conclusion: at first, a young lecturer should strive for a “closer” audience, for closer contact with listeners. The connection between the speaker and the audience is not one-way - it is a relationship in which the speaker is the most active party, but the “passive” audience, in turn, greatly influences his behavior.

The quantitative composition can determine the form of presentation of the material. For example, in small classrooms it is advised to look at the sheet as little as possible. Moreover, psychologists warn: when reading a text from a sheet, only 17% of the information is perceived in a half-hour speech.

Sometimes the speaker is mainly busy reading the text. This form of public speaking is acceptable and even desirable at scientific conferences or symposia, as well as in formal business relationships. Reading from a public lecture is impermissible, since it violates the main condition for which a monologue is pronounced—an active influence on the audience in the desired direction.

It is very important to occupy such a place in the audience that no part of the audience is placed in the position of “spectator from behind” or “from the blind box”. speaker speech audience

Audience affinity and empathy

One of psychological characteristics audience lies precisely in the sense of community. True, even in this feeling there is a division into groups. There are always people in the hall who come to expand their knowledge. There is a group of listeners who came not out of interest in the topic itself, but in order to use the very fact of being present at the lecture for some purpose. Finally, several people came specifically to “see the lecturer,” as if they were attending a performance by an actor from whom they expect aesthetic pleasure. There is also a considerable percentage of “indifferent” listeners, i.e. those who came “not to be scolded.” They represent the greatest difficulty for the speaker, since their openly disinterested appearance and preoccupation with their own affairs not only create psychological difficulty for the speaker, but also infect others with their attitude.

How can one determine whether it was possible to establish contact with the audience? The main indicators of mutual understanding between speakers and listeners are a positive reaction to the speaker’s words, the external expression of attention from the listeners (their posture, exclamations of encouragement). If contact has already been established and you have become like-minded people, the audience will remain sympathetically silent even if there is some kind of hiccup. But at the same time, the speaker does not have the right to disconnect from the audience. You can apologize, thank you for your patience, or make fun of your bad luck, but don’t get scared and don’t lose the thread of contact.

Conclusion

Establishing contact and capturing the attention of the audience ensures the success of public speaking.

In conclusion, I would like to emphasize that it is impossible to foresee everything in advance and give advice for all occasions. Improving public speaking skills is an endless process and most of all depends on active training: in order to learn how to speak, you need to do this.

Bibliography

1. Vvedenskaya. Russian language and culture of speech

2. Ivanova. Specifics of public speech

3. Gogol. Stories, essays, memoirs

Posted on Allbest.ru

Similar documents

Preparation for a specific speech, work at the pre-communicative stage. Assessment of the situation and composition of the audience. The structure of oratorical speech. Basic norms of public speech. The meaning of logical laws for the speaker. Pronunciation technique and diction of the speaker.

abstract, added 02/15/2013

Consideration of the features of speech pronunciation of people from different social groups. Definition of youth French pronunciation as a stylistic characteristic, its main differences. Description of the phenomenon of youth pronunciation using practical examples.

test, added 01/10/2016

The concept and essence of oratory. Definition of oratory, its history. "Secrets" of public speaking. Features, types and types of oratory. Analysis of functional styles of literary language in a speaker’s speech.

abstract, added 12/20/2009

Consideration of the concept and characteristics conversational style Russian language. Familiarization with statistics on the use of social networks. Positive features of communication on the Internet. Studying the positive and negative linguistic features of virtual communication.

presentation, added 04/24/2015

Oratory as the strongest lever of influence on listeners. Public speech, its impact on feelings and consciousness. The importance of eye contact with the audience. Speech techniques to keep the audience's attention. Posture, facial expressions, gestures as the individual style of the speaker.

abstract, added 11/28/2009

The specifics of the concept of public speaking, which is understood as the communicative interaction of the speaker with the audience of listeners. Features, actions and stages of preparation for public speaking: pre-communicative, communicative, post-communicative.

abstract, added 05/05/2015

Formation, intensive development, methodology of gender linguistics. History of linguistic research into the influence of gender on language. Characteristics of male and female speech characteristics in the Russian language. Stylistic features of male and female speech.

course work, added 12/01/2010

Definition and characterization of the essence of discourse as a linguistic concept. Familiarization with the main functions of political discourse. Exploring the meaning of the use of metaphors in political action. Consideration of the features of the ideologeme.

course work, added 10/20/2017

Compliance with the topic, conditions, audience as a sign of good speech. Using words in accordance with their linguistic meaning. Selecting words from a synonymous series. Lexical diversity of speech. The absence in speech of elements alien to the literary language.

course work, added 04/26/2010

Participle as an attributive form of a verb, which combines the meanings of two parts of speech: verb and adjective. Introducing the main features of an adjective in a participle. general characteristics participial phrase, consideration of features.

The highest manifestation of the skill of public speaking, the most important condition for the effectiveness of oratory speech, is contact with listeners. As experienced speakers say, this is the cherished dream of every speaker. Indeed, a speech is pronounced so that it is listened to, correctly perceived, and remembered. If the speaker is not listened to, if the audience is busy with “their own” business during the speech, then the efforts and labors of the speaker are wasted, the effectiveness of such a speech is reduced to zero.

According to psychologists, contact is the common mental state of the speaker and the audience, it is mutual understanding between the speaker and the audience. What is the result of this community? First of all, on the basis of joint mental activity, that is, the speaker and listeners must solve the same problems, discuss the same issues - the speaker, presenting the topic of his speech, and the listeners, following the development of his thoughts. If the speaker is talking about one thing and the audience is thinking about something else, there is no contact. Scientists call the joint mental activity of the speaker and the audience intellectual empathy.

It is no coincidence that people say: “The word belongs half to the one who speaks, and half to the one who listens.”

For contact to occur, emotional empathy is also important, i.e. The speaker and listeners should experience similar feelings during the speech. The speaker’s attitude to the subject of speech, his interest, and conviction are transmitted to the listeners and cause a response from them.

Thus, contact between speaker and audience occurs when both parties are engaged in the same mental activity and experience similar experiences.

Psychologists emphasize that a necessary condition for the establishment of contact between the speaker and the audience is sincere, real respect for the listeners, recognition of them as Partners, communication comrades. The question arises: how to determine whether contact was established or not? Externally, contact is manifested in the behavior of the audience, as well as in the behavior of the speaker himself.

Often there is silence in the hall during a speaker's speech. But how different this silence can be!

The main indicators of mutual understanding between speakers And by listeners - a positive reaction to the speaker’s words, an external expression of attention at listeners (their posture, concentrated gaze, exclamations of approval, nods of head in agreement, smiles, laughter, applause), “working” silence in the hall.

ABOUT the presence or absence of contact is evidenced by the behavior of the speaker. If the speaker speaks confidently, behaves naturally, often addresses the audience, and keeps the entire audience in his field of vision, then he has found the right approach to the audience. A speaker who does not know how to establish contact with an audience, as a rule, speaks confusedly, inexpressively, he does not see his listeners, and does not react in any way to their behavior.

It is interesting content that largely determines the success of an oratorical speech and is the key to establishing contact between the speaker and the audience.

To establish contact with listeners, it is important to take into account the characteristics of the audience in which you will speak.

Emeritus Professor Nikolai Stepanovich, the hero of Chekhov’s story “A Boring Story,” recalling his lecturing activities, writes:

A good conductor, conveying the composer’s thoughts, does twenty things at once: reads the score, waves his baton, follows the singer, moves towards the drum, then the horn, and so on. It's the same for me when I read. Before me are one and a half hundred faces, not alike one another, and three hundred eyes looking straight into my face. My goal is to defeat this many-headed hydra. If every minute while I read, I have a clear idea of the degree of her attention and the power of her understanding, then she is in my power.

Let's consider the main features of the audience of an oratorical speech. First of all, it is important to know whether the audience is homogeneous or heterogeneous.

An essential feature of an audience is the quantitative composition of listeners. If you have ever spoken at a meeting or conference, then you will remember that the techniques used in one and the other audience, the manner of behavior, the form of presenting the material, and addressing a small and large audience were different. Sometimes people wonder which audience is easier to speak in - a small one or a large one. Each audience has its own characteristics. Some speakers are afraid of a large audience, they become very nervous, they are seized, as they say, by “speaking fever”, and they are speechless. A small audience is easier to manage, but in this case the speaker must know the issue being discussed well, since it is hardly convenient to sight-read in front of a small number of listeners.

The audience is also characterized by a sense of community, which manifests itself in the emotional mood of the listeners.

You can be in any mood, but your voice should be a real, good, firm voice. Your mood has nothing to do with your voice... You need to make sure that your face, your eyes, your voice are in some cases autonomous.

The speaker's clothing must correspond to the nature of the environment in which the speech is given, and be neat and tidy. A.F. Koni advised lecturers:

You should get dressed simple and decent. There should be nothing pretentious or flashy in the suit (sharp color, unusual style); a dirty, sloppy suit makes an unpleasant impression. This is important to remember because The psychological effect on those gathered begins before the speech, from the moment the lecturer appears in front of the public.

The audience also closely monitors the behavior of the speaker during his speech. Unnecessary, mechanical movements of the speaker distract the attention of the listeners and become the subject of discussion among the audience. Listeners also pay attention to the lecturer’s posture. Some speakers, having reached the podium, lie down on it, sway now to the right, now to the left, shift from foot to foot, and mark time. All this has a negative effect on listeners and does not contribute to establishing contact with the speaker.

The form in which the material is presented significantly influences the relationship between the speaker and the audience.

One day, during a lecture on public speaking, one of the authors of this book received a note with the following content:

It is necessary to categorically prohibit everyone from reading the text, except for reports that contain collective thought. We must train speakers to speak to people from the heart, and not from paper. Without this, nothing will help them or, more precisely, will help them little.

The question inevitably arises: who should prohibit reading the text of a speech from a sheet?

The tradition of writing and sight-reading oratorical speeches began long before our days. So, from the end of the 5th century BC. logographers appeared in Athens, i.e. writers of speeches for litigants to speak in court. They prepared speeches taking into account the individuality of the “customer”.

The most famous logographer of Ancient Greece was Lysias, who composed speeches for participants in numerous trials in Athens.

In France in the 18th century, it was considered indecent to go to the pulpit without a pre-written speech. The text of the speech must be read. This was the custom.

But Peter I in 1720 issued Decree No. 740, which read:

I indicate: Messrs. senators should keep their speech in the presence of the assembly not according to what is written, but only in words, so that everyone’s stupidity is visible to everyone.

In issuing this decree, the great sovereign apparently pursued his own goals, but wittingly or unwittingly the document emphasized the effectiveness of the living spoken word.

An interesting comparison was used by Nobel Prize-winning physicist William Bragg when expressing his views on the art of scientific conversation:

I believe that gathering an audience and then reading written material to them is the same as inviting a friend for a walk, asking if he would mind walking, and then riding next to him in the car.

Here's another interesting fact. W. Churchill, a sophisticated politician and seasoned parliamentarian, in those parts of his speeches where the weakness of the argument was felt, put two letters in the margins: S. L. (slower, louder - “slower, louder”).

These examples eloquently demonstrate the enormous importance of skillful speech delivery in oratory practice.

Speaker(from Latin orator, orare - “to speak”) - one who makes a speech, gives a speech, as well as one who has the gift of making speeches, eloquence.

The skillful construction of a speech and its public delivery in order to achieve a certain result and the desired impact on listeners is oratory.

Human society is built on communication. Everyone can speak, but not everyone can speak beautifully, intelligibly, clearly, excitingly and interestingly, or speak confidently in front of an audience.

Skillful use of words, competent presentation of material, and the ability to behave in front of an audience are only part of what a speaker should have. Being in the center of attention, the speaker must be able to attract attention with his appearance, and with your natural abilities, and the way you speak and behave. As a rule, a professional speaker is an erudite, highly intelligent person, fluent in literature and art, as well as in science and technology, as well as in politics and the modern structure of society.

To count on the attention and respect of the listening audience, the speaker must have certain skills and abilities. Let's list some of them:

1) speaking confidently during any communication;

2) the ability to speak on any topic;

3) the ability to accurately express one’s thoughts;

4) use of active vocabulary, ability to use various speech techniques;

5) ability to argue and persuade.

Oratory- this is a dialogical relationship, on one side of which the speaker directly acts, and on the other, the listener, or audience.

Audience represents a community of people that acts as a single socio-psychological group.

The following characteristics are typical for the listening audience:

1) homogeneity (heterogeneity), i.e. differences in gender, age, level of education, interests of listeners;

2) quantitative composition those present;

3) sense of community(a sign that manifests itself in a certain emotional mood of the audience, when the audience applauds or, conversely, expresses dissatisfaction);

4) listener's motive. People attend lectures for various reasons. According to psychologists, three groups of points can be distinguished:

a) intellectual-cognitive plan (when people come because the topic itself is of interest);

b) moral plan (requires human presence);

c) emotional-aesthetic (when people come because they are interested in the speaker, his speeches, his demeanor, etc.).

That is why the listening audience can have a different attitude towards the perception of the speech.