modality = 'kind'

[Jonathan Lighter]

Victor, that was the full quote. AFAICT, there was no additional hint of
what "modalities" might mean. The speaker was quickly enumerating his
qualifications in a way that might impress a prospective employer. (Several
times a week CNN allows the long-term unemployed to "pitch" themselves to
viewers in a 30-second rundown.) This gentleman's previous career was as a
"life coach."

Perhaps he was using educational jargon in a clumsy way. But whatever he may
have intended or been thinking, the most natural interpretation of
"modalities" in this context is indeed "sorts" or "backgrounds," with
narrower connotations as I suggested.  (Surely he wasn't thinking of
attributes like hat size or favorite childhood diversions.)

Larry, you make a powerful case nonetheless.

JL

On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Victor Steinbok <aardvark66 at gmail.com>wrote:

> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       Victor Steinbok <aardvark66 at GMAIL.COM>
> Subject:      Re: modality = 'kind'
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I'm quite used to reference to "modalities" by chiropractors and
> physical therapists, who use the term to describe different procedures
> on [different organs of the] patients (and, thus, different billing
> codes). But in 20 or so years in ed research I have never encountered
> this terminology. Perhaps we had been exposed to different parts of the
> field.
>
> But Wiki does mention "modalities" under Education:
>
> > It is currently fashionable to divide education into different
> > learning "modes". The learning modalities are probably the most common:
> > * Visual: learning based on observation and seeing what is being learned.
> > * Auditory: learning based on listening to instructions/information.
> > * Kinesthetic: learning based on hands-on work and engaging in
> activities.
>
> This just looks as some sort of variation on various "multiple
> intelligence" theories, personality types (MBTI), etc.--all of which are
> mentioned in the paragraph immediately preceding the one quoted. But
> this makes much more sense than the statement on CNN, as given. I'd need
> to see the full quote to verify if he meant some sort of two-dimensional
> analysis (social groups vs. modalities), but it certainly does not
> appear to be the case.
>
>     VS-)
>
> On 1/27/2011 3:00 PM, Laurence Horn wrote:
> > At 12:28 PM -0500 1/27/11, Jonathan Lighter wrote:
> >> '...especially social class, gender orientation, or ethnicity.'
> >>
> >> A well-educated guest on CNN was explaining that, in his his last job,
> he
> >> had "prepared educational curricula for people of all modalities."
> > You don't think he was referring to possible people, likely and
> > unlikely people, necessary people, and the like?
> >
> > LH
> >
> >> Before we ridicule this usage, consider that he (and presumably others)
> may
> >> assume that even naming such "modalities" might be considered
> >> "controversial" by some.
> >>
> >> The speaker was hoping that his appearance on CNN might lead to a good
> new
> >> job.
> >>
> >> OK, now we can ridicule.
> >>
> >> JL
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>



--
"If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the truth."

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org