Morrus,
here's an introduction to Baby Got Back that's geared toward Englishmen.
If I can use you as an example, however, I think you demonstrate something I said earlier in the thread: communication must consider both the speaker (writer, singer, etc.) AND the listener (reader, audience, etc.). You're probably not Sir Mix-a-lot's intended audience, any more than you're
Korpiklaani's intended audience. The fact that you have trouble understanding their lyrics is neither your fault nor their fault: it's just a side effect of the fact that they weren't trying to communicate with you, but with a different audience who
would understand.
Another example: I used to give presentations all the time to children about taking care of animals and about what a humane society does. One time, due to a teacher's request, I brought along the director of our animal control department to co-teach the lesson with me.
Now, David was an awesome director of animal control: he was professional, motivated, calm, intelligent, precise, pretty much everything you'd want in an officer. But my lord, that was a painful lesson! He'd tell the six-year-olds something that was completely correct, e.g., "County ordinance forbids residents from permitting their pets from leaving their property unless the animal is properly constrained, and a violation of this ordinance can result in a hundred dollar citation." The kids would gape at him.
When I could do so without being rude, I'd step in: "That's exactly right. You have to keep your dog in your yard or in your house. If you take your dog for a walk, it has to be on a leash. Who can tell me what a leash is? ... Exactly right. If your dog ever runs out of your yard and it isn't on a leash, your parents will have to pay a one-hundred-dollar ticket! So you always want to keep your dog in your yard, in your house, or on a leash."
Was my description technically accurate? Absolutely not. For one thing, I didn't mention cats, emus, horses, or any of the other animals covered by the ordinance; for another thing, I left out the transportation of animals. I'm sure my description was inaccurate in half a dozen other ways as well.
But, despite being flawed in these respects, it considered its audience carefully. It would have been lousy communication to someone who was facing a citation, but it was good communication for six-year-olds who were just beginning to learn about responsible citizenship.
Always consider the audience--even when you ARE the audience. If a particular communication irritates you, consider whether the speaker intends for you to be the audience in the first place.
Daniel
