intercultural communication in contexts 6th ed

#Intercultural communication in contexts 6th ed code

For this reason it is absolutely logical that recent studies on intergenerational discourse have had their methodological standards set by researchers who also work on the macroculturally defined level of ICC (e.g.

#Intercultural communication in contexts 6th ed code

That is, if the concept of culture is viewed narrowly as being based on sub-cultures, then one could definitely designate, as ICC, the communication between the younger and the older generations in a society characterised by differences in the communicative code and in the underlying norms and values. To this extent, intercultural communication does not differ in principle from intracultural communication.

the assessment of the social relationship - (Bateson 1972) are a frequent consequence.ĭifferences in the knowledge on which the communication is based and the linguistic forms of symbolic behaviour related to this do not just exist between groups defined by a nation or a country (which could be called 'macro-cultures'), but also between groups within macro-cultures (i.e. Misunderstandings on the level of the message, the propositional meaning based on the content, and still more on the level of the metamessage, the implied social meaning which is usually only indirectly expressed - i.e. Therefore, the assumption that the other person possesses both the knowledge of the linguistic forms of communicative action as well as the body of knowledge to which they refer may be false. However, participants in ICC have only limited, if any, communicative experience in common. This is a consensus in which one cannot and need not define ad infinitum the meanings of the forms of communicative behaviour, but rather that one can presuppose these meanings to be self-evident, given and shared by the communication partner due to a common communicative experience. These problems mainly originate from the fact that in ICC the pragmatic consensus on which everyday social interactions are based has proven to be particularly fragile. It is the occurrence of these kinds of differences in contact situations that creates the problems typical of ICC.

'Intercultural communication,' abbreviated in this article as 'ICC', can hence be defined as the interpersonal interaction between members of different groups, which differ from each other in respect of the knowledge shared by their members and in respect of their linguistic forms of symbolic behaviour. one which includes verbal, para-verbal and non-verbal elements a system that can be realised either directly (face-to-face) or via other media (written, aural, visual). 'Communication' is to be understood here as interpersonal interaction by means of a linguistic symbol system in the widest sense, i.e. 'Culture' will be understood here in the sense of cognitive cultural anthropology as a body of knowledge shared by members of a society as to standards of perceiving, believing, evaluating and acting (Goodenough 1971), a knowledge which is itself manifested in the public performance of symbolic behaviour (Geertz 1973) and which is taken for granted when dealing with one another (ABS 1973). Towards a definition of 'Intercultural Communication'īecause the adjective 'intercultural' is nowadays used in a very inflationary way in the most varied contexts and because 'culture' and 'communication' occur frequently as 'passe-partout' concepts, it would seem appropriate here first to explicate the concept 'intercultural communication' which forms the basis of this eponymous section of EESE, and then to outline the subject area to which this concept refers. Intercultural Communication in Erfurt Electronic Studies in Englishġ.