In addition to fights at particular front-lines, war conflicts influence the otherwise quite calm life in the hinterland areas as well. This manifests itself not only in material poverty of the people living in the hinterland areas, but also by infringements of close and wider family relationship. The young men, who must go fighting, leave at home not only their parents, grand-parents, brothers and sisters and other relatives, but very often also their girl-friends, fiancées, wives as well as children. No one of them knows whether they will meet again. This is a big intrusion into existing and possible future family relations, of course.
On a particular example, the text follows two young people separated by the call-up order during World War I (in spring 1915), their fates, better said how their fates were passed on in family memories within the space of almost one century, namely from the World War I up to the outset of the 21st century. The reflexion of this family story passed down from generation to generation in its basic outlines, showed itself in a quite different light after almost one hundred years, than it was passed on through family gatherings and repeated narrations over a long period.
Komunikace v rodině je jedním z hlavních pilířů fungování rodiny. Narušení komunikace má zásadní vliv na funkčnost rodiny jako systému i na její členy. Mezi taková narušení patří tabu, která jsou přítomna v určité míře v každé rodině. Úroveň i povaha komunikace se v jednotlivých rodinách liší a také se mění uvnitř rodiny v průběhu vývojového cyklu. Jednou takovou vývojovou změnou je období adolescence jednoho z potomků. Adolescent se chce stát dospělým, rodič je nucen na to reagovat. Předmětem našeho výzkumu je rodinná komunikace právě z pohledu adolescenta. Využíváme námi sestavenou škálu rodinné komunikace a škálu FACES II. Účastníci výzkumu – respondenti – vnímají komunikaci v rodině jako vcelku dobrou. Největší výhrady mají v oblastech soukromí a respektu jejich osoby ze strany rodičů. Naopak u rodičů oceňují podporu a důvěřují jim. Největší tabu nacházíme v oblasti komunikace citů, a to jak slovní, tak dotekem. Komunikace s matkou je hodnocena lépe než komunikace s otcem, nejvíce se liší ve vyjadřování citů. Pro dívky je vyjadřování citů důležitější než pro chlapce. Dimenze nově vzniknuvší metody souvisejí s dimenzemi škály FACES II, a tak dobře obrážejí rodinnou komunikaci, potažmo fungování rodiny. and Family communication is an important supposal for the family functioning. One of its disturbing factors is taboo. It affects both, the family system and its members. The niveau of communication varies from family to family, and also according to the phase of the family life-span. One of the important phases is the time when a child is stepping into the adult-life, adolescence. Parents are due to react to the child’s new life position and preferences. In our research, we have answered the questions concerned with the family communication in the eyes of an adolescent. For that, we used FACES II and our own method – Scale of Family Communication. The families of our respondents have been assumed to be rather good-working (both methods have implied that). The adolescents were unsatisfied with their parents’ behaviour concerned with the adolescents’ privacy and respect. They appreciated parents being supportive, and they trusted them. The biggest taboo has emerged in the area of emotion communication. In this area, we also have found the main differences between mother and father when communicating with an adolescent, and between boys and girls. The latter rank the emotion communicating higher. The dimensions of our own method – Scale of Family Communication – correlates with the FACES-dimensions, and therefore, we assume the scale as wellreflecting the family communication, actually the family functioning in whole.
This paper discusses the phenomenon of linguistic taboo. It contrasts that phenomenon with the truth-conditional and non-truth-conditional dimensions of meaning, paying particular attention to slurs and coarseness. It then highlights the peculiarities of taboo and its meta-semantic repercussions: taboo is a meaning-related feature that is nevertheless directly associated with the tokening process. In the conclusion, it gestures to the role of taboo within a theory of linguistic action and the standard framework for conversational exchanges. On these results, I am going to end by looking at some of the harms that epistemic injustice inflicts upon its victims.