Indigenous Theorization of Communication

Published in the Journal of Gramin Adarsha College:

Adhikary, Nirmala Mani. (2012). Indigenous theorization of communication. Rural Aurora, 1, 172-181.

Indigenous Theorization of Communication
Nirmala Mani Adhikary
nma@ku.edu.np
Dept. of Languages and Mass Communication
Kathmandu University, Nepal

Abstract:
The paper presents an account of the sadharanikaran model of communication as an example of indigenous theorization. It also observes the advancement of communication towards multicultural, multidisciplinary, multi-paradigmatic discipline. In addition, it presents brief discussions on the discourse of Asiacentricity and the responsibilities of communication scholars before delineating the fundamentals of the sadharanikaran model.

Key words: Asiacentricity, communication model, communication theory, Hindu perspective, indigenous theorization, sadharanikaran model of communication, sahridayata, Western paradigm.

Sahridayata: The sadharanikaran model of communication

Sahridayata in communication
- Nirmala Mani Adhikary
Kathmandu University, Nepal

In the print version, this article is published as:
Adhikary, N. M. (2010c). Sahridayata in communication. Bodhi: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 4(1), 150-160.

This article describes sahridayata, which has been introduced in the communication discipline and is the core concept in the sadharanikaran model of communication (SMC).
Here, the discussion will be focused primarily on two issues – sahridayata as a ‘concept’ firstly, and as a ‘construct’ secondly.

It is to note that the article is written as a part of the series of works on the SMC. In broader context, it not only continues the Hinducentric study of communication, but also makes contribution to what is sometimes referred as the Asiacentric School of communication theories

Follow the link to read the complete article:
http://adhikary.wordpress.com/2012/01/19/sahridayata-the-sadharanikaran-model-of-communication/

Three responsibilities of communication scholars and the sadharanikaran model of communication

Three responsibilities of communication scholars and the SMC
Nirmala Mani Adhikary
Dept. of Languages and Mass Communication
Kathmandu University, Nepal

In the print version, published as:
Adhikary, N.M. (2012, January 15). Three responsibilities of communication scholars and the SMC. Sanchar Khabar, p. 2.

In my opinion, communication scholars should/need to take the following three responsibilities at this juncture:
First, indigenous communication theories and models are to be explored, constructed and developed. The objectives of such endeavors should be neither 'indigenization', nor mere rejection of the Western theories and models; rather, such studies need to develop a broad and deep appraisal of indigenous intellectual history, philosophy, arts, literature, and religion, including other branches of knowledge, to the study of communication.
My own works regarding the sadharanikaran model of communication – SMC (including: Adhikary, 2003, 2004, 2007a, 2007b, 2009, 2010a, 2010b, 2010c, 2011a, 2011b, 2011c) are examples of indigenous theorization of communication. There are many traditional Hindu/Bharatavarshiya concepts, theories and methods, which can be unearthed to garner their contemporary relevance and significance. The terminologies, approaches, strategies, assumptions, and findings may be different; but there exist vast number of texts, which are relevant to communication studies, even from Western paradigms. These must be consciously explored, appraised and interpreted. And, they are to be rearticulated in such a way that they bear own cultural-intellectual identity.
Second, the study of comparative communication theory should be encouraged and promoted. Comparative study of different concepts of communication is a must for the improved understanding of the process and the advancement of the discipline. Studying the East-West dichotomy, both for their manifest differences and latent commonalities, may be a good point for starting [It is to mention here that the sadharanikaran model of communication has been compared with Aristotle's model (Adhikary, 2008) and Carey's ritual model of communication (Acharya, 2011)]. but the comparative studies should not be focused only on the West versus the rest. It is pertinent to compare one Asian concept/theory of communication with another Asian concept/theory. To be more focused, a comparative study of communication from the perspectives of Kumarila Bhatta and Bhartrihari would be certainly illuminating as well as interesting. Furthermore, multicultural approaches are to be employed for comparative study.
Third, the indigenous theories and models are to be given broad base of application. Here comes the issue of globalizing the indigenous theories. It is only with the proliferation of different theories rooted in different cultures, disciplines and paradigms communication can truly become a multicultural, multidisciplinary and multi-paradigmatic discipline.

Please follow the link below to read the complete article:
http://kukhabar.blogspot.com/2012/01/three-responsibilities-of-communication.html