In the age of globalization, intercultural communication has become a necessity in many areas of life. Considering a worldwide increasing mobility, economists, politicians, scientists, tourists, exchange students, global celebrities, and many others frequently communicate in languages different from their mother tongues. Since English is widely spoken in the Western hemisphere, many native speakers are used to conversing with people who have acquired English as a foreign language. Misunderstandings are very likely to occur, often due to linguistic incompetence. Learners who have acquired basic knowledge of a foreign language in school, frequently struggle with their vocabulary, let alone grammatical correctness. Hence, a sufficient command of a (foreign) language is indispensable in order to communicate efficiently. Equally important is the awareness of cross-cultural differences, which often have a major impact on interactions in business as well as in everyday life. Being able to adequately interact with people from different cultures according to their respective values and unwritten rules of communication is referred to as intercultural competence and includes behavioral, communication and comprehension skills (Lüsebrink 2005:9). Interculturally competent individuals have usually appropriated their skills in a learning process of personal experience in foreign countries and theoretical knowledge about various aspects of one or several culture(s). Intercultural trainers are in demand: Seminars and workshops teaching basics of intercultural communication aim at passing on a general awareness of cross-cultural differences and possible difficulties resulting from them. As Casper-Hehne states, a major challenge in intercultural communication is to capture the link between linguistic phenomena and patterns of thought, emotion, and action, which are culture-specific for our interlocutors (2006: 63).
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Research
2.1. Face and face work
2.2. Contrastive Pragmatics
2.3. Interlanguage Pragmatics
2.4. Methodology and procedures
3. Findings
3.1. Dimensions of cross-cultural difference
3.1.1. Directness vs. indirectness
3.1.2. Self-orientation vs. other-orientation
3.1.3. Content vs. addressees / explicitness vs. implicitness
3.1.4. Ad-Hoc formulation vs. verbal routines
3.2. Discourse rituals
3.2.1. Greetings
3.2.2. Farewells
3.2.3. Compliments
3.2.4. Criticism
3.2.5. Discussions
3.2.5.1. Opposition formats
3.2.5.2. Concessions
3.2.5.3. Intercultural disagreement
3.3. Cross-cultural convergence
4. Conclusion
5. References
Objectives and Key Themes
This paper aims to provide a comprehensive overview of research findings concerning intercultural communication between speakers of German and speakers of English, specifically analyzing how cultural conventions and pragmatic differences lead to misunderstandings.
- Contrastive and interlanguage pragmatic approaches
- The concept of face and face work in communication
- Cross-cultural differences in everyday discourse rituals
- Dimensions of communicative preferences between Germans and Americans
- The phenomenon of cross-cultural convergence
Excerpt from the Book
Directness vs. indirectness
The first dimension, directness vs. indirectness, is similar to Hofstede’s (1980) “reduction of uncertainty” (House 1996: 350): In England, where people tend to be rather indirect, they also feel less threatened by unknown situations and are more relaxed as a result (Hofstede, qtd. Lüsebrink 2005: 23). In Germany, where one leans more towards reduction of uncertainty, it is more acceptable to directly say what one means (Hofstede, qtd. House 1996: 350). Foreigners, not aware of this fact, often believe straightforward Germans to be unfriendly, which clearly constitutes an intercultural misunderstanding (House 1996: 351). As House resumes, indirect speech acts made by speakers of English (in English) are often not responded to as expected, which might be considered very rude by English speakers (1996: 351).
Chapter Summaries
1. Introduction: Introduces the growing necessity of intercultural communication in a globalized world and outlines the core challenges of linguistic and cultural differences.
2. Research: Explores theoretical foundations including face work, contrastive pragmatics, interlanguage pragmatics, and the methodologies used in prior studies.
3. Findings: Examines specific cross-cultural differences through dimensions of communication, discourse rituals like greetings and discussions, and intercultural disagreement.
4. Conclusion: Summarizes the key insights regarding American and German communicative behaviors, highlighting how cultural awareness helps prevent misunderstandings.
Keywords
Intercultural communication, contrastive pragmatics, interlanguage pragmatics, face work, cross-cultural differences, directness, indirectness, discourse rituals, Germans, Americans, misunderstandings
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this work?
The work investigates intercultural communication between German and English speakers, focusing on pragmatic differences and cultural conventions that cause misunderstandings.
What are the central thematic areas covered?
Key areas include face work, contrastive and interlanguage pragmatics, discourse rituals such as greetings and discussions, and cross-cultural convergence.
What is the primary research question or objective?
The objective is to provide an overview of how researchers explain misunderstandings between German and English speakers through differing communicative preferences.
Which scientific methods are utilized?
The paper employs contrastive discourse analysis, interlanguage pragmatics, and reviews empirical studies involving role-plays, questionnaires, and observations.
What topics are discussed in the main body?
The main body covers dimensions of cross-cultural differences, specific discourse rituals like greetings, farewells, compliments, criticism, and discussions, as well as learner difficulties.
Which keywords characterize the publication?
Intercultural communication, pragmatics, face work, discourse rituals, directness, and cross-cultural misunderstandings.
How do Germans and Americans differ regarding directness?
Germans tend to be more direct and explicit to reduce uncertainty, whereas Americans are more indirect, which can lead to mutual misinterpretations of friendliness or rudeness.
What role does face work play in intercultural encounters?
Positive face work is emphasized more in English-speaking countries, while negative face work is more frequent in Germany, affecting how politeness and distance are perceived.
How do discourse rituals differ in discussions?
Germans often enjoy argumentative debates and opposition formats, whereas Americans prefer small talk, consensus, and avoiding controversies.
