According to Ong (2002) written text is the residue of oral language which forever locks oral speech into the visual field. This is a perfect way to describe what speechnotes provides with their speech-to-text program. It is a visual residue of the story that was dictated that can be kept for as long as the internet exists, or for as long as a digital or printed copy could be preserved. However, it does not perfectly capture the oral speech. For example, when dictating the speech, I paused several times to gather my thoughts. These pauses are not reflected in the written text because the program simply stopped writing when I stopped talking and then picked up right where it left off when I started again. There is nothing in the text to show these pauses.
There is also nothing in the text to show the reader what the speaker’s tone was when telling the story. For example, at one point in the story the judge asks “can you pay [the ticket]?” The tone of my voice went up at the end of this sentence when telling the story because it is a question. However, since there is no question mark, the reader would probably not add this inflection at the end of the sentence. At least not on first read-through. This is where choosing the right words is vitally important. I said “the judge said can you pay it” but what I should have said was “the judge asked can you pay it”. This way, even without a question mark, the reader would still know a question was coming and would be more likely to read the sentence with a questioning tone.
In speechnotes defence, there are ways to add punctuation to the text while dictating. For example, saying the word(s) period, or question mark at the end of a sentence will add that punctuation. However, since the assignment was simply to speak as if we were telling our friend an anecdote (Horst, 2026), I didn’t stop to say comma, period, or new paragraph. Therefore the story is completely punctuationless making it an imperfect recreation of the oral version.
Scripting the story would have allowed me to add many more details of the story. This dictated version was limited by my memory of the event. If I had scripted a version of this story I would have had time to recall, and add in, many additional details.
One part of the story that I left out was before the officers placed me into the police van, they handcuffed me with my hands in front of my body. Once I was in the back of the van, I tried to step my feet through the handcuffs and get my hands to the back of my body because I had always wondered if it was possible. I was able to successfully do it and just as I did, the van stopped at the courthouse and the officers opened the door to see me sitting with my hands handcuffed behind me. They then joked about how they don’t like it when people are able to get their handcuffed hands from behind them to in front of them, but they have never seen anyone try to go from in front to behind before. I left this part of the story out because I felt it would be much easier for the reader to understand it if I was able to do the gesture while telling it. According to Ong (2002), gesture is a rich form of communication but it falls short of the deep sense of language that articulated sound provides. I agree with Ong (2002) that gesture alone does not have the depth of spoken language, however I would also argue that spoken language alone does not have as much depth as it could if it is not accompanied by gestures. I believe that gestures help the listener get a fuller understanding of the events that they are hearing about. I believe that the activation of another sense (sight) while listening helps to absorb the listener into the story even more.
References
Horst, R. (2026, January 24). [3.4] Task 3: Voice to Text Task (Optional task). ETEC 540 65A 2025 W2. https://canvas.ubc.ca/courses/179955/assignments/2325665?module_item_id=8719783
Ong, W.J. (2002). Chapter 1: The orality of language. In Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word (pp. 5-16). Routledge. (Original work published 1982).
