Appunti Intercultural Communication: English

ADOPT A WIDER CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE

reaching out to one's interlocutors by making the communicative interaction

BUILD RAPPORT: as easy and smooth as possible;

REFER TO LOCAL TERMS AND CONCEPTS: rather than looking for a generic translation in English, but provide an explanation of the meaning of the culturally-bound term.

Communication failures/miscommunication are not always due to language problems but because people have different cultural mindset. – Ex. Malaysian and American teaching in US community college both proficient

M: Can I ask you a question?

A: Yes, of course.

M: Do you know what time it is?

A: Yes, it's two o'clock.

M: Might you have a little soup left in the pot?

A: What? I don't understand.

M (becoming more explicit since the colleague is not getting the point): I will be on campus teaching until nine o'clock tonight, a very long day for any person, let alone a hungry one!

A (finally getting the point): Would you like me to drive you to a

restaurant off campus so you can have lunch?

M: What a very good idea you have! → might you have…?

COMMENT: requests are potentially face-threatening Extra polite and very implicit and with implied meaning (high-context culture) while the American is low-context and – wants to go straight to the point (what?) even when the Malaysian gets more explicit, he beats in the end it’s the around the bush and hints at what he wants without actually making the question - – American that understands and phrases the Malaysian in a way that is understandable to him. at the end the Malaysian doesn’t say “thank you” but “what a good idea you have” as if he doesn’t want to admit that it was his idea in the first place.

Face-threatening acts and politeness strategies Virtually all social acts are potentially face-threatening acts. Brown and Levinson’s politeness theory is based on three main concepts: - face (reputation), - face threatening acts

1. Face Threatening Acts (FTAs) - politeness strategies.

In the course of an interaction, certain acts that threaten a member's face (Face Threatening Acts) can be accomplished. Due to the fact that there is mutual advantage in maintaining each other's face, those acts are often mitigated or expressed by means of strategies that soften their impact.

Face: "the public self-image that every member wants to claim for himself, consisting in two related aspects:

1. negative face: the basic claim to territories, personal preserves, rights to non-distraction - i.e. to freedom of action and freedom from imposition
2. positive face: the positive consistent self-image or 'personality' (crucially including the desire that this self-image be appreciated and approved of) claimed by interactants.

Five strategies for doing FTAs (Brown & Levinson)

In business it is always better to do the FTA, but using politeness

1. not doing the FTA

In business, however, if somebody needs to have something done, it

It is unlikely that he/she just drops the issue because of the FTA involved in it. This is likely to entail problems to the entire organization, as some corporate activities would not be taken care of.

On record more for low-context culture – 4. Off record more for high-context culture being vague and indirect, the other has to try to understand what you mean but the risk is that the other person doesn’t understand. Going off-record with the FTA would run contrary to any company’s goals. For any goal-oriented organization, thus vaguely and ambiguously worded FTAs are likely to require too much time and effort to be conducive to the company’s business in the long run.

Performed 1. Without redressive action, baldly baldly, in a clearly unambiguous way. This kind of act presupposes that the speaker does not fear reproach from the addressee. It involves all those circumstances in which both addresser and addressee agree in considering the face threat connected to the

The communicative act is less important than the achievement of the communicative act itself.

1. With redressive action hedging and cushioning it - The person who employs acts performed with redressive action is conscious of their threatening potential, and tries to mitigate their consequences, often by indicating that such face threat is not intended. The redressive action can take place in the form of positive politeness or negative politeness.¹⁸ - caters to a person's need to be accepted and liked (linked to positive face). It is intended to avoid giving offense by highlighting friendliness. Also called social accelerators. These strategies include:

• juxtaposing criticism with compliments, establishing common ground (ex. I appreciate what you did, but...)
• using jokes, nicknames, honorifics, tag questions, special discourse markers (please) and in-group jargon

noticing aspects of the addressee,

• exaggeration in showing interest or approval of the addressee,

• giving gifts to the addressee in the form of goods, sympathy, understanding, cooperation

• topic embedding (bad information embedded within good information)

• hedges (maybe, sort of, more or less, ...)

• greeting at the beginning, thanking at the end

– caters to a person’s need to act freely. It’s

4. Negative politeness associated with respectful behaviour, as its strategies consist in “assurances that the speaker recognizes and respects the addressee’s negative-face wants and will not (or will only minimally) interfere with the addressee’s freedom of action:

• (e.g. when expressing disagreement) “I'm looking for a pen”. – indirectness, to make sure the other person doesn’t feel threatened

• “it is necessary vs you need…” impersonalizations

• might) “Er, use of modal

auxiliaries (would, could, could you, er, perhaps, close the, um ,window?” –Will questions willingness→ so does would and this can be threatening to thenegative face. Could questions the ability/possibility• ”YouAttend to the hearer: must be hungry, it's a long time since breakfast. How aboutlunch?”some• Avoid disagreement: A: What is she, small? B: Yes, yes, she's small, smallish, um, notreally small but certainly not very big.• ”So when are you coming to see us?”Assume agreement:• ”You really should sort of try harder”.Hedge opinion:• – ”IPessimism make people feel free not to close the window: don't suppose you couldclose the window, could you?”• ”Excuse me, sir, would you mind if I asked you to close the window?”Indicating deference: 19• Apologizing:” but could you close the window?” –I'm terribly sorry to put you out, goodfor

• Countries from high-context culture, but for low-context gives the idea that you made a mistake
• Person responsible: "We forgot to tell you that you needed to buy your plane ticket by "social accelerator" (Brown/ Levinson 1987: 103)
• While positive politeness can be defined, negative politeness techniques are often used as tools of "social distancing" (Brown/ Levinson 1987: 130)
• Exercise → Don't do the FTA
• Walk home → Decide to ask for money
• Do the FTA → Say "Oh no, I'm out of cash, I forgot to go to the bank today"
• Off record → Say "be a pal, and lend me something till tomorrow"
• On record, with redressive action, positive politeness → Say "give me some money!"
• On record, without redressive action, baldly → Say "I'm sorry to trouble you, but could I possibly borrow some money until tomorrow?"
• On record, with redressive action, negative politeness → Say "I'm sorry to trouble you, but could I possibly borrow some money until tomorrow?"

politenessActs threatening H's positive face

• Disapproval, criticism, ridicule, complaints, reprimands, accusations, insults
• Contradictions, disagreements
• Violent expressions of emotion, taboo topics, bad news, non-cooperation, use of 'inappropriate' address forms or conversational style
• Orders, requests, suggestions, advice, reminders, warnings, threats
• Offers, promises
• Compliments
• Expressions of strong emotion (anger, hate, lust)

An English utterance can be grammatically correct but some hidden cultural codes can make communication tricky: 20- In an international context there are multiple possibilities to speak English, each of them depending on the speaker's system of values. Native speaker's English traditionally was recognized as the unique acceptable form ("the- norm"). In the past speaking a good English meant "to copy" native speakers way of speaking.

Example (also for exam) Natasha

To because the power should know who is in charge distance is larger, she just assumes that someone in power will solve the problem. On the other hand, Sharon assumes Natasha doesn't live there cuz for her it's unthinkable. Natasha belongs to a high-context culture so she has a clearer distribution of roles with obligations. She was not too worried cuz she knew someone in charge would take care of the problem.

According to Hofstede, there are 6 fundamental human needs, with which all cultures have to deal and different cultures react differently:

• Power distance - how you relate to power
• Individualism (vs collectivism)
• Masculinity
• Uncertainty/avoidance
• Long term orientation