intercultural communication lecture 6 culture and face systems topic and face
Post on 18-Dec-2015
219 views
TRANSCRIPT
Intercultural Communication
Lecture 6
Culture and Face Systems
Topic and Face
Face Strategies and Systems
Language is ambiguous One way we reduce ambiguity is to make
assumptions about the people we are talking to and our relationship with them
‘Face’ The paradox of face Face strategies Face systems
Politeness and Face
Popular Meanings Face: mian zi, min ji, mentsu, chae myon Concept of honour Politeness: Being ‘nice’, following certain
‘rules’ of social conduct (‘li’_ Popular ideas of politeness and face are
usually governed by expectations about ‘scripts’ and adjacency pairs
Face and Politeness
Linguistic meaning Face the negotiated public image mutually granted
each other by participants in communication Politeness How we signal our relationship with and
feelings towards those we are communicating with in our language use
Is this polite?
‘Ms. Cheung, I wonder if you could please get back to me on this matter at your earliest convenience…’
Is this polite?
Is this polite?
A: Hello. B: Hi Rodney. Can you guess who this
is?
Is this ‘polite’
‘Wow, you look awful today! Is there anything wrong?
To you best friend? To your boss?
My Mother in England
The Paradox of Face
The Paradox of Face
We want people to like us We want people to respect us Respect and intimacy are expressed in
different ways Different groups may have different
ways of expressing intimacy and respect
Two kinds of face Negative face (desire for autonomy,
personal space,freedom from imposition, freedom of action) THE SHIELD
Positive face (desire for self-image to be acknowledged and approved of) THE SPEAR
Each are addressed with specific formsof ‘facework’
Two kinds of face
Negative face (desire for autonomy, personal space,freedom from imposition, freedom of action)
Positive face (desire for self-image to be acknowledged and approved of)
Each are addressed with specific formsof face work
Two Kinds of Face Strategies
Involvement ‘Solidarity’
Showing ‘closeness’ or solidarity using first name, expressing interest,
claiming common point of view, using informal language
Two Kinds of Face Strategy
Independence
Showing ‘respect’ using titles, not making assumptions,
apologizing, using formal language
Independence and Involvement
In any interaction we usually use both independence and involvement strategies
The problem is deciding how and when to use these strategies
Based on who we are talking to why we are talking to them
Face Systems
Face systems are based on three different aspects of the situation
Power (+P power difference, -P no power difference)
Distance (+D distant, -D close) Weight of Imposition (how important topic is
for speakers, +W important, -W not very important)
Values exist on a scale (not absolute)
Deference Face System
-P, +D symmetrical (equal) participants see themselves as at
same social level distant both would use mostly independence
strategies
Solidarity Face System
-P, -D symmetrical close both participants likely to use more
involvement strategies
Hierarchical Face System
+P, +/-D asymmetrical (unequal) asymmetrical face strategies
higher uses more involvement lower uses more independence
Deference
Speaker<-----------------Independence--------------->Speaker
Solidarity
Speaker<--Involvement-->Speaker
HierarchicalSpeaker(involvement)
Speaker (independence)
Communication problems
The calculation of the appropriate face strategies is usually based on a calculation of power
‘When two participants differ in their assessment of face strategies it will tend to be perceived as a difference in power’
Conflicting Strategies/Mixed up systems
Two businessmen meeting for the first time Mr R: (reading Mr. Wong’s business card which
says Wong Hon Fai) Hi, Hon Fai. I’m Bill Richardson. My friends call me Bill.
Mr W: How do you do Mr. Richardson. Mr. Wong thinks: That guy is acting too familiar,
who does he think he is? expects deference system, hears hierarchical system Mr. R. thinks: This guy doesn’t want to be my
friend. He’s not very nice. expects solidarity system, hears deference system
Face and Cluture
Kinship Concept of ‘self’ In-group/Out-group relationships Gemeinshaft and Gesellschaft
Kinship
Hierarchy Collectivistic relationships Love and duty Honesty and harmony
‘Face’ and ‘Self’
differences in assumptions about the ‘self’
Individualism and collectivism
Body-Self-Person
Ingroup-Outgroup Relationships
‘Nei’ and ‘Wai’ How strong are group boundaries How permanent are groups Group identification
Gemeinshaft and Gesellshaft
Community and society Gemeinshaft
Traditional, organic, based on kinship bonds, shared history, common traditions
Gesellshaft Contractual, rational, instrumental, based
on rules and laws
Rhetorical Patterns
Inductive Topic delayed Because…so (yinwei…suoyi)
Deductive Topic first So…because
‘Inscrutable’ Asians?
And ‘Rude’ Americans? Young (1995) Crosstalk and Culture
in Sino-American Communication
Influenced by…
Adjacency, sequence, turn-taking and timing Call-answer-topic Call-answer-facework-topic
Exceptions (eg. Close friends/ service encounters) ‘nei’ and ‘wai’ encounters
Face relationships Differences in cultural structuring of
situations and participant roles
Confucianism and face-relationships
Consciousness of power (‘rank’) differences
Person of higher position has right to introduce topic
Situations
Deductive When it is clear that speakers have the
right to express their opinions in a free and unencumbered way
Inductive When it is not clear the speakers have the
right to express opinions in a free an unencumbered way (eg. When listeners are likely to resist these opinions)
Face Strategies
Inductive Independence
Deductive involvement
Topic and Face Systems
Deference Inductive
Solidarity Deductive
Heirarchial Higher-deductive Lower-inductive
Inferences How do we interpret these rhetorical strategies?
Chinese conceptions of face
Face not seen to belong to self alone, but also to group (family)
Politeness strategies characterized by self-denigration and respect (negative politeness (li)
Heavily encoded in the language
Two kinds of Chinese Face (Mao 1994)
Mianzi (prestige, reputation, either earned or ascribed)
Lian (respect for a person’s underlying moral character)
Morality defined as subordinating one’s own face wants to those of the group
Mianzi vs. Lian Losing mianzi
loss of one’s reputation because of failure or misfortune
Losing lian loss of one’s moral standing in the community
Lian more important than mianzi Mianzi can have negative connotations
(being overly concerned with self-image) to gain mianzi at the expense of lian in the
end will cost one both (Mao 1994)
Mianzi vs. Lian Possible to lose Mianzi
but gain lian Example: J.J. Chan Courageous Disc-Jockey Give AIDS
Campaign a Friendly Spin A 25-year old local disc-jockey suffering
from AIDS is sharing his story to help educate the public about the disease.
J J Chan’s family is proof that AIDS is no hindrance to a happy home life, even after its youngest member got the killer virus four years ago.
"I told my family, thinking that they might throw me out. But on the contrary, my sister and brother encouraged me. They told me I had not committed a crime and it was just a kind of illness."
Isn’t he worried that his television appearance could cause people to stare at him in the streets?
"No. Just let them stare. I want to educate the next generation. Today’s youngsters are very promiscuous," he says, adding that promoting sex education is not enough.
Culture and Written Discourse
Kaplan (1966) linearity vs. circularity Directness vs. indirectness and digression
Kirkpatrick (1991, 1993) Main>Subordinate vs. Subordinate>Main
Ulijn and St Amant (2000) High vs. Low Context > Directness
Chinese Honorifics (Formality, Hierarchy, Modesty)
Task
Look at the two examples of sales letters Pay attention to the order of information and
other strategies of rhetoric that are used What differences can you see? Can you relate any of these differences to
the concepts we have been discussing?
Zhu 2000
Chinese Sales Letters
Greeting Introduction ‘We’ approach Indirect requests
English Sales Letters
Headline P.S. ‘You’ approach Direct requests