COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

Module 6 Intercultural Communication

Source: https://nationstraining.com/en/special-english/intercultural-communication/

Introduction

The previous module tackled Edward T. Hall’s concept of high-context and

lowcontext cultures in interpersonal and intergroup communication. The current module
expands the discussion on intercultural communication to frameworks for addressing issues
in intercultural contexts. Knowing how to make communication work in an intercultural
setting is a crucial competence that all of us must develop because all communication is, to
some degree, intercultural. Even among people coming from the same cultural community,
issues in intercultural communication can be observed. The aim of the module is to
introduce you to concepts, cognitive markers, and principles of intercultural

1
communication to help you develop a way of thinking, being, and acting that is responsive
to the complex communicative demands of intercultural interaction.

This module has three lessons: (1) verbal and non-verbal codes; towards
intercultural praxis; and creating a third space. Each lesson has a set of Readings and other
learning materials (e.g., video) to help you better understand the topics. Take note of the
Study Questions to help you digest the readings. After the discussions, you will have 1 to
2 exciting activities (Formative assessment) with corresponding points. Take note of the
Guide Questions and instructions. Finally, at the end of Module 6, you will have one
Summative Activity. So, sit back, relax, read on and learn!

Learning Outcomes

After studying this module, you should be able to:

1. Analyze verbal and nonverbal codes in different intercultural communication situations;

2. Discuss how issues in and barriers to effective intercultural communication can be

addressed through intercultural praxis; and

3. Explain the concept of “third space” and its importance in intercultural communicative
settings.

1.0 Verbal and Nonverbal Codes

Often, intercultural communication results in misunderstandings because

participants in the communicative encounter operate on different sets of meanings both
with regard to the words that they speak and the nonverbal signals or expressions that are
part of how they communicate. This section deals with verbal and nonverbal
communication as aspects of cultural expression. The discussion focuses on how verbal
and nonverbal communication not only distinguish or differentiate cultures but also
connect them to each other.

2
1.1 Verbal Communication

Verbal communication refers to the reception, storage, retrieval, manipulation, and

generation of linguistic symbols. Communicative misunderstanding, which is defined as “a
potential breakdown point in conversation, or at least a kind of communicative turbulence”
by Mauranen (2006, p. 128), is usually perceived as a problem in verbal communication
and more specifically, in the interpretation of what is said by one or the other party.
According to Bremer (1996), a problem in communication arises when “the listener
achieves an interpretation, which makes sense to him or her — but it wasn’t the one the
speaker meant” (Bremer, 1996, p. 40). This mismatch between the speaker’s meaning and
the hearer’s interpretation is attributed by Hua (2014) to two factors: inadequate linguistic
proficiency and pragmatic mismatch which results in pragmatic failure.

The first factor is linguistic in nature. This means that the misunderstanding is due
to a problem in lexical comprehension, mishearing utterances, and the complexity of
syntax or gram-mar experienced by the communicative actors. The second factor has to do
with pragmatics, or how the speaker uses words in a specific context. Pragmatic mismatch
happens when there are significant differences in the locutionary act or what is actually
said and its literal meaning, the illocutionary act or how it is said or delivered (which has
to do with the speaker’s intent), and the perlocutionary act or the effect of what and how
something is said (i.e. the listener's response). All speech acts have these three levels of
meaning, and miscommunication happens when they are misaligned or when there is a
disconnection between what is conveyed and how it is interpreted. For example, someone
would say to you, “It’s warm in here.” and you think that the speaker is referring to the
actual temperature in the room. You respond by opening the windows to let in some cool
air, but the speaker is in fact referring to a feeling of discomfort or tension triggered by a
word you said, and s/he is probably calling you out indirectly.

In a type of pragmatic failure called pragmalinguistic failure, the meaning of an

utterance by a second language speaker does not fit with the meaning that a native speaker has
of it. An-other type of pragmatic failure called sociopragmatic failure happens when the hidden
rules concerning the applicability of ‘pragmatic concepts’ like politeness, face, directness, and
3
sincerity are not observed because of an incomplete understanding of the degree of social
distance, for example. Hua concluded that pragmatic failure occurs when there is a
mismatch in schemas and cultural stereotypes and in the contextualization and framing of
meaning be-tween the communicative actors.

Baldwin and his colleagues (2014) also attributed misunderstandings in

intercultural communication to differences in the systems of meanings governed by
semantics and pragmatics. Semantics is that area of language studies that is concerned with
the meanings of words. Differences in meaning systems, including the rules that govern
speech acts, result in different communication styles (see Box 1).

Box 1. Verbal Communication Style

As discussed in Module 5, in low-context communication meanings are conveyed

Low-context vs. using explicit verbal codes. The speaker expresses her/ himself in direct, detailed,
and clear language without having any preconception about the audience.
highcontext verbal
Highcontext communication uses implicit verbal codes. People talk less and
communication styles
meanings are between the lines or in what is not said. In this context, direct speech
is considered inappropriate and may offend certain cultural sensibilities.

A direct communication style expresses true intentions, ideas, and needs in an

outright manner. This is in contrast with an indirect communication style, which is
characterized by restraint in expressing opposition and use of figurative speech to
get the message across. In indirect communication a series of statements is used to
layer intention. Layering of intentions is a communicative strategy that allows the
Direct vs. indirect communicant to structure an argument in such a way as to soften its effect. An
verbal communication example of a direct communication style is the dugri (meaning “straight”) speech of
styles Israeli Jews, which is a type of talk that goes straight to the point to ensure clarity
and is pragmatic and assertive. An example of an indirect communication style is the
Arab musayra, which is characterized by accommodation or going along with the
person one is conversing with in order to foster a harmonious relationship. This
nonconfrontational, elaborately courteous style stems from ideals of honor,
hospitality, and collectivism.

Self-enhancing vs. The individual with a self-enhancing communication style is assertive and not shy
about stating her/his abilities and accomplishments. In contrast, the person with a
selfeffacing verbal
self-effacing communication style employs verbal restraint and modest talk. S/He
communication styles
speaks with detectable hesitation when asked to talk about personal achievements.

4
Elaborate vs. Elaborate verbal communication is characterized by use of expressive and animated
understated verbal language, while understated verbal communication makes considerable use of
communication styles silence and understatement.

As discussed in Module 5, in low-context communication meanings are conveyed

Low-context vs. using explicit verbal codes. The speaker expresses her/ himself in direct, detailed,
and clear language without having any preconception about the audience.
highcontext verbal
Highcontext communication uses implicit verbal codes. People talk less and
communication styles
meanings are between the lines or in what is not said. In this context, direct speech
is considered inappropriate and may offend certain cultural sensibilities.

A direct communication style expresses true intentions, ideas, and needs in an

Direct vs. indirect outright manner. This is in contrast with an indirect communication style, which is
verbal communication characterized by restraint in expressing opposition and use of figurative speech to
styles get the message across. In indirect communication a series of statements is used to
layer intention. Layering of intentions is a communicative strategy that allows the
communicant to structure an argument in such a way as to soften its effect. An
example of a direct communication style is the dugri (meaning “straight”) speech of
Israeli Jews, which is a type of talk that goes straight to the point to ensure clarity
and is pragmatic and assertive. An example of an indirect communication style is the
Arab musayra, which is characterized by accommodation or going along with the
person one is conversing with in order to foster a harmonious relationship. This
nonconfrontational, elaborately courteous style stems from ideals of honor,
hospitality, and collectivism.

Self-enhancing vs. The individual with a self-enhancing communication style is assertive and not shy
about stating her/his abilities and accomplishments. In contrast, the person with a
selfeffacing verbal
self-effacing communication style employs verbal restraint and modest talk. S/He
communication styles
speaks with detectable hesitation when asked to talk about personal achievements.

Elaborate vs. Elaborate verbal communication is characterized by use of expressive and animated
understated verbal language, while understated verbal communication makes considerable use of
communication styles silence and understatement.

Given these differences in verbal communication styles, it is not surprising that

intercultural communication is often not an easy task. However, acknowledging that the
codes governing speech are culturally distinctive can facilitate intercultural
communication. The differences in speech codes come from the psychological and
sociological uniqueness of cultures. To interpret speech codes, you have to pay attention to

5
and aim for a deeper understanding of the language and communication patterns of native
speakers.
—————————————————————————————————————

Reading 1
Read the following articles as attachments to the module. You may also find these online
through the links provided. These would help enrich your understanding of communication
styles across cultures and their impact on meaning-making:

1. Kapoor, S., Hughs, P.c., Baldwin J.R. & Blue, J.(2003). The Relationship of
individualism–collectivism and self-construals to communication styles in
India and the United States. International Journal of Intercultural
Relations, 27, 683-700.

Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/248437400_The_relationship_of_individu alism-
collectivism_and_self-
construals_to_communication_styles_in_India_and_the_United_States/link/5cdc7faca6fdcc
c9ddb1f659/download

2. Lee, H.E., & Park, H.S. (2011). Why Koreans are more likely to favor
“apology”,while Americans are more likely to favor “thank you”. Human
Communication Research 13(1), 125-146.

Link https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Lee%2C+H.E.%2C+%26+Park%2C+
H.S.+%282011%29.+Why+Koreans+are+more+likely+to+favor+%E2%80%9Capology%E2%80%9D
%2C+while+Americans+are+more+likely+to+favor+%E2%80%9Cthank+you%E2%80%9D.+&btnG
=

Study questions:

Use the following study questions as a guide for reading. You should be able to
answer these questions based on what you understood from the readings.

1. What is individualism and/or collectivism? What is the difference between

individualism and collectivism?

2. What are self-construals? What are examples of self-construals?

3. How does individualism-collectivism impact on behavior?

6
4. What did the authors hypothesize and find out about the relationship between
individualism-collectivism, self-construals, and communication styles?

5. What practical applications might these results have for cultural groups who are not
mentioned in the study?

6. In the second article, what is a speech act?

7. How do specific cultures use “apologies” and “thank yous”?

8. What did the authors hypothesize about the use of apology and thank you between
Americans and Koreans?

9. How did the author observe these differences? What does the result of the study say
about the two cultural groups’ propensity to apologize and express gratitude? What are
the implications of the result?

—————————————————————————————————————

1.2 Nonverbal Communication

Although language is an effective and efficient means of communicating explicit

messages, a full appreciation of the communication process especially in intercultural
interactions requires consideration of nonverbal communication behavior. Nonverbal
behaviors include all actions that take place during communication which do not use
words, such as facial expressions, eye gaze, posture, use of space, and even tone of voice.

Nonverbal communication has at least five basic functions (Samovar et al., 2013;
Matsamuto & Hwang, 2012):

1) To express internal states — i.e. to signal emotions, attitudes, and physiological and
other mental states;

2) To construct identities as physical appearance, comportment, and even clothing often-

times serve as basis for judging people;

3) To regulate interaction — for example, nodding to indicate agreement;

4) To repeat the message — i.e. using gestures to emphasize a point; and

7
5) To substitute for words as when we refer to an object by pointing our lips to a specific
direction or when we fall silent to signify discomfort.

Whether nonverbal communication behaviors are universal or are culturally

conditioned was the subject of debate in the 1960s. Early studies pointed out that various
cultural groups share the same facial expressions of happiness, sadness, anger, and grief.
However, culture plays a significant influence on nonverbal behavior by establishing
expectations and norms that dictate the appropriateness of specific nonverbal displays.
Differences in nonverbal behaviors, also called “cultural displays”, among different groups
of people are facilitated by rules about how to manage and modify emotional expressions
according to the situation that people learn from childhood.

Nonverbal communication can be intentional as well as unintentional. It serves as a

vehicle of expression or impression. The expressive use refers to when we use substitutes
of verbal symbols to deliver information. As a vehicle of impression, nonverbal behaviors
become perceptual, with meanings that they are outside of what is being conveyed directly
but they are nonetheless indicative of the communicative actor’s motivations. Thus,
Edward T. Hall referred to nonverbal behavior as the “hidden dimension” of
communication and he argued that to miss its nuances during interactions takes a
significant amount of the message away from us.

Nonverbal communication is a challenging phenomenon to decode. Firstly,

nonverbal behaviors can be ambiguous, meaning they do not have fixed meanings. A
nonverbal behavior that we may have perceived to mean something may mean another
thing for the actor or the doer of the action. This ambiguity has to do with the contextual
nature of nonverbal actions. Secondly, nonverbal behavior is shaped by multiple factors
that are not limited to cultural background, such as education, gender, age, and personal
preferences and idiosyncrasies. Thirdly, as mentioned, nonverbal communication includes
cultural universals and expressions or actions that are culturally distinctive or unique.

Given these conditions, we are advised to evaluate nonverbal actions carefully before
drawing generalizations about them. Assessing nonverbal behaviors without recognizing that
they are rooted in different cultural frameworks and occur in different cultural spaces leads to
8
negative stereotyping, prejudiced notions, and discrimination. These aversive reactions, which
are caused by using cultural filters that are not situated in the other’s cultural framework, are
issues in intercultural communication. Understanding nonverbal codes can help mitigate this
problem. Nonverbal codes serve as markers of important nonverbal displays that may serve to
highlight similarities and differences, thereby allowing us to adjust our actions in order to
nurture a positive relationship and foster understanding during intercultural encounters. Box 2
includes nine nonverbal codes: appearance, proxemics, chronemics, gestures, haptics,
oculesics, vocalics, olfactics, and silence.

Box 2. Nonverbal Codes

Appearance
Physical appearance is the most externally obvious code of nonverbal
behavior. It may indicate age, gender, nationality, ethnicity, education,
economic status, lifestyle, and attitude. Appearance also carries certain
universal elements. Across cultures, appearance is the basis for judging
beauty, and different cultural groups decorate their body with various
adornments (e.g. tattoos). How we perceive the other’s physical
appearance influences our actions towards them.

Proxemics
This refers to the use of interpersonal space and distance in
communication. Cultures differ in their use of personal space, concept
of territory, and the meanings assigned to proxemic behavior. The
amount of personal space we maintain between ourselves and the
people we interact with shows the depth of our relationship with them.
In sum, how space is used communicates different ways of regarding
others. It could mean familiarity or strangeness, openness or closed-
ness, collaboration or indifference, and submission or aggression,
among many others. That said, proxemics is relational, contextual, and
negotiated.

Chronemics
This refers to the study of meanings, usage, and communication of
time. Different cultures have different concepts of time manifested in
terms of punctuality and pace. There are two ways of looking at time:
monochronic (M-time) and polychronic (P-time). The monochronic
concept of time is linear, sequential, and segmented, such that time is
understood to be scarce and must therefore be spent wisely on
achieving tasks. The polychronic concept of time results in a leisurely
pace.

9
Kinesics
Kinesic behavior, which includes posture, gestures, and facial
expressions, differs from culture to culture. Gestures are hand
movements used to signal speech and to convey verbal meanings.
Gestures differ dramatically in meaning, extensiveness, and intensity.
With regard to facial expressions, there are three types of face that
should be taken into account: our assigned face, our regulated face, and
our reflexive face. Ekman and Friesen (1969) noted six ways in which we
manage our facial expressions: outright expressing, amplifying,
demulsifying (minimizing), masking, combining expressions, and
neutralizing.

Haptics Also called tactile communication, haptics varies in amount, location,

type, and public or private manifestation. Haptics or touch
communicates specific emotions like anger, fear, disgust, love,
gratitude, and sympathy (Matsumoto & Hwang, 2012). A touch can be
accidental, professional, socially polite, friendly, loving, or sexual
depending on context and relationship. In a workplace setting, the
exchange of touches between colleagues is characterized by
professionalism. A handshake proffered during introductions is a sign
of social politeness. Some cultures like the French offer their cheeks for
a peck (la bise) during social introductions. Recoiling from this gesture
of welcome is considered a social faux pas. In the Philippines, the beso
is the equivalent of this. As norms regulate the appropriateness of
specific types of touch, violations of these norms produce aversive and
unpleasant consequences.

Oculesics
Oculesics is the study of messages sent by the eyes, including eye
contact, blinks, eye movements, and pupil dilation (Samovar et al.,
2012). Eye contact and gaze serve a number of functions like
expression of thought, monitoring of feedback, indication of attention,
and regulation of conversation. There are cultures that value direct eye
contact while others practice nominal eye contact. For example,
Americans in general would prefer that the person they are interacting
with look them in the eye. Evasion of eye contact may be perceived
negatively (for example as a sign of dishonesty). On the other hand,
some cultures are offended by direct eye contact because it signifies
aggression. In Arab countries, one is not expected to look people,
especially women, in the eye.

10
 Vocalics or Vocalics or paralanguage refers to the nonverbal elements of the voice,
Paralanguage or the tone of the human voice (Samovar et al., 2013). Paralanguage has
three categories: vocal qualities, vocal characterizers, and vocal
segregates. Vocal qualities include volume, rate, pitch, tempo,
resonance, pronunciation, and tone. Vocal characterizers include
laughing, crying, moaning, whining, and yawning. Vocal segregates
include mono- or poly-syllabic sounds like “uh-huh”, “ssh”, “uh”, “ooh”,
“um”, “mmmh”, and “hmmm”. These segregates, which are
sometimes imitative of verbal sounds or ambient sounds, could signal
disbelief, frustration, amazement, noncommittal agreement, being
lost in thought, and interest, among others. They also vary from
culture to culture.

Olfactics
Olfactics is the study of interpersonal communication via smell.
Olfactics are cultural in two ways: first, certain smells are connected to
diet, bodily rituals, and geography; and second, the ability to smell and
give valence to certain types of smell are also culturally conditioned.
An interesting example is the use of perfumes, which varies among
cultures.

Silence
Often considered as a mere background of speech, silence is a complex
and powerful element of human interaction that is culturally determined
and which communicates certain aspects of a culture (Nakane, 2007).
Although silence acquires significance and meaning only within the
communicative encounter its varying degrees of intensity in the
interaction are as meaningful as language. For example, in developing
relationships, silence communicates awkwardness and can make
people feel uncomfortable. Across cultures, silence plays cognitive,
discursive, social, and affective functions. As a social phenomenon, it
regulates social distance, impression-formation, social control, and role
and power negotiation.

—————————————————————————————————————

Reading 2
To enhance your understanding of the nature and implications of non-verbal
communication across cultures, read the articles listed below. These are attached to the
module. You may also opt to download/ read them on line through the links provided.

11
1. Ekman, P. and Friesen, W.V. (1969) The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories,
origins, usage, and coding, Semiotica, 1, 49–98.

Link:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Ekman%2C+P.+and+Friesen%2C+W.V.+%
281969%29+The+repertoire+of+nonverbal+behavior%3A+Categories%2C+origins%2C+usage%2C+and+coding
%2C+Semiotica%2C+1%2C+49%E2%80%9398.&btnG=

2.Hall, E.T. (1966). The hidden dimension, (113-188). New York, New York: Doubleday
and Company.

Link: https://www.academia.edu/5668023/Edward_T_Hall_The_Hidden_Dimension

Study questions:
Use the following study questions as a guide for reading. You should be able to
answer these questions based on what you understood from the readings.

1. What did Ekman and Friesen say about the usage and origin of nonverbal behavior?
How did they elaborate on the cultural origins of nonverbal behavior?

2. How did they categorize nonverbal behavior?

3. What did Hall say about space? How does space take on different meanings across
cultures?

4. How does space impact on the other categories or forms of nonverbal behaviors? In
Hall’s treatise, it appears that space is the thread that shapes and links the other
nonverbal behaviors. What is your stand on his proposition?

5. Ekman et al. and Hall wrote their treatise on nonverbal behavior and their
communicative implicatures in the 1960s. Society has changed since then. Given the
fact that culture is dynamic, do you think that their conceptualizations of nonverbal
communication is still an adequate framework of analysis in the present time? Why do
you say so? If no, which part needs to be re-examined today?

Learning Activity 1
This activity has two parts. It will help you recognize nonverbal cues and reflect on
the nonverbal messages that you send to others. You will consider whether your
interpretation of nonverbal information is affected by the race/ethnicity or gender of the
person with whom you are interacting.
12
Part A. Nonverbal Code Worksheets

Procedure:

1. You are given three worksheets to answer. Each worksheet corresponds to one
nonverbal code: body language, facial expression, and personal space. (See
attached Worksheets or click on the links below)

Body language worksheet -

http://breakingprejudice.org/assets/AHAA/Activities/Nonverbal%20Communication%20Folder/Bod
y%20Language%20Worksheet.pdf

Facial expression worksheet -

http://breakingprejudice.org/assets/AHAA/Activities/Nonverbal%20Communication%20Folder/Faci
al%20Expressions%20Worksheet.pdf

Personal space worksheet -

http://breakingprejudice.org/assets/AHAA/Activities/Nonverbal%20Communication%20Folder/Prox
emics%20Worksheet.pdf

2. Take your time with the worksheets. Reflect on the questions asked. Write your
answers on the sheets.

1Adopted from Johnson, S.B. (2014). Non-Verbal Communication Activity. Available at http://break-
ingprejudice.org/teaching/group-activities/non-verbal-communication-activity/

Part B. Self Reflection

Procedure/Guide questions:
1. After answering the worksheets, reflect on the following questions.

a. What do you think of nonverbal communication codes as part of communication?

How is it related to culture?
b. What do you think are some challenges in communication with regard to
nonverbal cues?
c. How do you think these challenges may be addressed?
d. What have you discovered about yourself as a communicator, both as a sender
and receiver of nonverbal communication codes.
—————————————————————————————————————
Synthesis

Understanding the verbal and nonverbal communication codes that differentiate

cultures from each other is important in developing intercultural communication
13
competence. They help individuals recognize the diversity among cultures and guide their
actions in order to promote intercultural understanding. However, culture should not be
understood as a monolithic concept. Cultural variations, or co-cultures, exist within nations
and the aforementioned verbal and nonverbal communication behaviors manifest
differently among ethnolinguistic groups within a national boundary. Analysis of
communication across cultures should be sensitive to these inter- and intra-cultural nuances

2.0 Towards Intercultural Praxis

Aside from the clashes of meanings brought about by different cultural

frameworks, there are bigger issues in intercultural communication that stem from a lack of
understanding of other cultures. These include anxiety, ethnocentrism, stereotypes,
prejudice, and discrimination. We consider these to be bigger issues as they do not only
stem from and result in misunderstood meanings; rather they impact negatively on
relationships between cultures and, at their worst, may be the source of intercultural
conflicts with serious socio-political consequences. These issues are discussed briefly
below.

Anxiety. This is a state characterized by light to extreme feelings of worry, fear, and
insecurity about meeting and interacting with individuals from a different cultural background.
It is brought about by the uncertainty in intercultural encounters. Internally, it manifests in light
to excessive mental rehearsals over the quality and the outcome of the interaction. As a
result, the individual is not totally present in the communication transaction; s/he becomes
too conscious about “making it right,” that s/he is unable to listen and respond
appropriately and instead acts in an awkward manner.

Assuming similarity instead of difference. When you assume similarity between

cultures you can be caught unaware of important differences. When you have no
information about a new culture, it might make sense to assume there are no differences
and to behave as you would in your home culture. But each culture is different and unique
to some degree. Assuming that other cultures are similar to ours sometimes drive us to

14
impose our way of thinking and doing things on others. This robs the interaction of its
potential to develop into an interesting relationship.

Ethnocentrism. This refers to negatively judging aspects of another culture by the

standards of one’s own culture. To be ethnocentric is to believe in the superiority of one’s
own culture. In fact, superiority or inferiority is relative. All aspects of a particular culture
would make sense if you understood that culture. For example, resting under a shade at
mid-day makes sense in tropical and subtropical countries. It is not a sign of laziness, as
some people from temperate countries might assume.

Stereotyping. Stereotypes “are widely held beliefs about a group of people” (Jandt,
2017) and are a form of generalization or a way of categorizing and processing information
we receive about others in our daily life. Normally, stereotypes help us to organize and
make sense of new experiences. However, there is tendency to overgeneralize a group of
people as if a culture and its people have uniform attributes. Jandt reminds us not to ignore
nuances in the individualities and identities of people.

Prejudice. Prejudice is a negative attitude toward a cultural group based on little or

no experience of it. It is a prejudgment of sorts. Whereas stereotypes are generalizations
about a group of people, prejudice is a negative feeling about that group arising from these
generalizations.

Discrimination. The behavior that results from stereotyping or prejudice,

specifically overt actions to exclude, avoid, or distance oneself from other groups, is called
discrimination. Discrimination may be based on racism or any of the other “isms” related
to belonging to a cultural group (e.g., sexism, ageism, elitism). One way of thinking about
discrimination is that it is the exercise of power based on prejudice, or simply power plus
prejudice equals “ism.”

Anxiety brought about by the prospect of and actual intercultural encounters can be
addressed relatively easily compared with the other issues in intercultural communication.
For example, Gudykunst (2005) posited, in his Anxiety-Uncertainty Management Theory

15
(AUMT), that intercultural communication is not really characterized by differences but by
the degree of strangeness between the communicative actors and this degree of strangeness
can be navigated by being mindful of the “stranger’s” perspective. Mindfulness includes
openness to the novelty of experiencing a new culture, awareness of the distinctions
between cultures, sensitivity to different contexts, awareness and acceptance of multiple
perspectives, and a sense of grounding in the present.

In the case of ethnocentrism, stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination,

mindfulness takes a more serious cast. Where conflict is at stake we need to re-examine our
positions with regard to the other culture and locate these positions within the constellation
of socio-political factors that has framed our interpretations of reality, such as history,
power, and ideology. Sorrells (2016) unpacked the idea of mindfulness in her concept of
intercultural praxis and traced the roots of our perceptions of cultures to our social
positionings. She describes intercultural praxis as a way of life, a thought process, analysis,
and taking action that allows us to negotiate within and across complex intercultural paths.

2.1 Overcoming the Barriers to Intercultural Communication

Sorrells (2016) put forward six entry points for intercultural praxis, which might
help individuals enhance their intercultural communication competence. These entry points
are inquiry, framing, positioning, dialogue, reflection, and action.

Inquiry includes taking an interest in and making a commitment to learn about

other cultures, which motivate engagement with other people.

Framing is a continuum of perspective-taking options. Our tendency is to consider,

first and foremost, our perspectives and orientations when confronting the world. But
Sorrells suggests that it might be better for us to acknowledge that our perspectives are
constrained by our frames. To remedy this, we need to educate ourselves about the local
and global forces that influence intercultural interactions, like the histories of peoples, for
example.

16
 Positioning – Our geographic positions are closely associated with our social and
political positions. Some of us may be in a geographic location that affords us direct access
to the material and symbolic resources in society. If we acknowledge this centralperiphery
dichotomy of political, social, and economic reality, we may be in a better position to
recognize that people have different levels of access to resources and lack of access
impacts on people’s lived realities. We may be able to acknowledge whose voices are
dominant, whose voices are silent.

Dialogue – In Sorrells’ words, dialogue offers us opportunities “to stretch

ourselves—to reach across—to imagine, experience, and creatively engage with points of
view, ways of thinking and being, and beliefs different from our own while accepting that
we may not fully understand or come to a common agreement or position” (p. 20).

Reflection refers to the capacity for introspection and being able to modify one’s
views and behavior based on that reflection.

Action – Sorrells argues that it is not enough that we modify our thoughts and
feelings in accordance with the ideals of cultural and political inclusiveness. We must also
take action to help promote a socially just, equitable, and peaceful world.

Sorrells (2016) discussed that these entry points require us to exercise critical
thinking, reflective thinking, and acting. These are parts of the intercultural praxis that can
raise our awareness of people’s similarities and differences, pave the way for more critical
analysis to help us determine the locus of power in every situation, and develop responsible
actions that can lead to equity and social justice.

These entry points are useful with the inevitability of intercultural situations. As we
continue to move geographically and use technology, we will encounter people of different
cultures. these entry points will help us transmit, share, co-construct, or contest information
especially if we look at culture as sets of shared or contested meanings. However, Sorrells
(2016) also explained that we can also consider culture as a resource that we can use to
create changes. This requires the reimagination of intercultural communication as a means

17
to generate ideas and solutions, and we can rely on these entry points to make us
productive in achieving our personal and collective goals.

Reading 2

To better understand intercultural praxis, read and answer the following questions:

Sorrells, K. (2016). Opening the conversation. Intercultural communication:

Globalization and social justice (pp. 1-24). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

Study Questions:

1. Sorrells proposes a re-imagination of intercultural communication in the age of

globalization. How is it a re-imagination and why is it necessary to propose it?

2. What did she say about intercultural praxis? What are the important considerations
in intercultural praxis?

3.0 Creating a “third space”

Intercultural communication can be understood in terms of the same variables and

processes that we use in examining other communication phenomena. That is, we can look at
the sender, receiver, message, channel, feedback, effect, and context of the communication in
trying to make sense of our intercultural experiences. What is unique to intercultural
communication, however, is that it “involves interaction between people whose cultural
perceptions and symbol systems differ enough to influence the communication event”
(Samovar et al., 2013, p. 8). Have you experienced interacting with someone from another
region, ethnolinguistic group, or country? Did you have different views and/or beliefs and
practices? How were you able to communicate and settle your differences?

According to Pratt (1992), intercultural encounters can be viewed as “contact zones” or

“social spaces where disparate cultures meet, clash, and grapple with each other, often in highly
asymmetrical relationships of dominance and subordination” (p. 12). Indeed, due to power
differences between groups, intercultural experiences could lead to inclusion or exclusion.
Communicating with someone from another culture is often fraught with tension, oscillating

18
between differences and similarities, strangeness and familiarity, and dominance and
subordination. Thus, Ting-Toomey and Chung (2012) explain, actors in intercultural
interactions find the need to constantly negotiate a common meaning which serves as an
orienting grid upon which to pattern their responses and actions. It is this negotiation of a
common ground for meaning-making between people from different cultures or people who
have different cultural orientations that is the basis for the concept of “third space” or “third
culture” (Casmir, 2016) in intercultural communication.

The term “third space” was coined by Homi Bhabha (1994) to refer to the
“inbetween” space in the clash between cultures where meaning and representation are
negotiated and cultural identity can be re-imagined. Individuals from different cultures who
interact with each other make adjustments to their own sense of cultural identity in order to
explore new ways of building relationships. This calls for individuals to be empathetic and
attentive to other perspectives, to consider the other’s need to understand and be
understood, and to co-create a space where these needs can be fulfilled. The concept of
third space therefore challenges the tendency for “othering” or looking at the world in
terms of “us versus them”, by emphasizing finding commonality and building “ours”.
Simply put, the third space is what happens when people from different cultural
backgrounds negotiate meanings when in the same setting (Kramsch & Uryu, 2012). While
creating third space seems challenging, because it requires time and effort, there are a lot
more opportunities nowadays for people to infuse and incorporate elements of their culture.
When people connect because of a shared purpose, shared identity construction is made
possible.

—————————————————————————————————————

Learning Activity

Read the following essay about intercultural communication and “third space” as a
framework for fostering strong intercultural relationships. Use the guide questions below in
making sense of the ideas discussed in the reading. Write a 500-word paper. Follow the
suggested format below.

19
Kramsch, C., & Uryu, M. (2012). Intercultural contact, hybridity and third space. In J.
Jack-son (Ed.), The handbook of language and intercultural communication (pp. 211-226).
Oxon, OX: Routledge.

Guide questions:
1. What does the concept of “third space” mean?

2. How does the co-creation of a “third space” impact an intercultural encounter between
individuals or between groups? In answering this question, refer to a specific example
of such an encounter that has been featured in the news lately (e.g. a meeting between
leaders or representatives of governments that do not see eye-to-eye, interaction
between mi-grants and locals).

3. What qualities or competencies are needed from actors or participants of an

intercultural interaction to successfully create a “third space”?

—————————————————————————————————————

Summary

To sum up, the way we communicate, whether verbally or nonverbally, is affected

by our culture. When we understand cultural differences in the way we communicate,
we become more open and flexible when interacting with others who are not of the
same culture. When this happens, we are making a contribution towards creating
common ground for meaning-making. Simply put, this becomes our contribution to a
more understanding society, a society where differences are bridged with the help of
communication.

References

Baldwin, J.R., Means Coleman, R.R., Gonzales, A., & Shenoy-Packer, S. (2014).
Intercultural communication in everyday life. West Sussex, UK: Wiley Blackwell.

Bremer, K., Roberts, C. Vasseur, M., Simonot, M. & Broeder, P. (1996). Achieving
Understanding: Discourse in Intercultural Encounters. London: Longman.

Casmir, F.L. (2016). Third-culture building: A paradigm shift for international and
intercultural communication. Annals of the International Communication
Association, 16(1), 402-428.
20
Homi K. Bhabha, “Cultural Diversity and Cultural Differences,” The Post-Colonial
Studies Reader, ed. B. Ashcroft, G. Griffiths, H. Tiffin, Routledge, New York
2006, p. 155–157. Retrieved from http://monumenttotransformation.org/atlas-of
transformation/html/c/cultural-diversity/cultural-diversity-and-cultural differences-
homi-k-bhabha.html

Hua, Z. (2014). Intercultural communication, language in action. Oxon, OX:

Routledge.

Gallavan, N.P. & Ramirez, M.G. “The Lunch Date”: a video for developing cultural self
awareness. Multicultural Perspectives, 7(2), 33–39.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327892mcp0702_6

Gudykunst, W. B. (2005). An Anxiety/Uncertainty Management (AUM) Theory of

Strangers' Intercultural Adjustment. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Theorizing about
intercultural communication (p. 419–457). Sage Publications Ltd.

Jandt, F. E. (2013). An introduction to intercultural communication: Identities in a global

community. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.

Kramsch, C., & Uryu, M. (2012). Intercultural contact, hybridity and third space. In J.
Jackson (Ed.), The handbook of language and intercultural communication (pp. 211-
226).Oxon, OX: Routledge.

Martin, J., & Nakayama, T. (2010). Intercultural communication in context (pp. 212
302). New York, NY: Mc-Graw Hill.

Matsumoto, D., & Hwang, H.S. (2012). Nonverbal communication: The messages of
emotion, action, space, and silence. In J. Jackson (Ed.), The handbook of language
and intercultural communication (pp. 130-147). Oxon, OX: Routledge.

Mauranen, Anna. (2006). Signaling and preventing misunderstanding in English as lingua

franca communication. International Journal of The Sociology of Language. 2006.
123-150. 10.1515/IJSL.2006.008.

Pratt, M.L. (1992). Introduction: Criticisms in the contact zone. Imperial eyes: Travel
writing and transcultural communication. London: Routledge.

Samovar, L.A., Porter, R.E., McDaniel, E.R., & Roy, C.S. (2013). Intercultural
communication: Interaction in a multi-cultural world. Communication between
cultures (8th ed) (pp. 1-26). Boston, MA: Wadsworth.

21
Sorrells, K. (2016). Intercultural communication: Globalization and social justice (pp. 1-
24). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

Ting-Toomey, S., & Chung, L.C. (2012). What is intercultural communication flexibility?
Understanding intercultural communication (2nd ed) (pp.20-35). Cary: North
Carolina: Oxford University Press.

APPENDIX

Name: ________________________ ___Section: _______________ Date: __________

Facial Expressions Worksheet

Instructions: Look over the photos provided and answer the questions that follow. After
the activity is completed, be ready to discuss how you reacted to the facial expressions.

Self-Reflection Questions:

1. What message is sent by each person’s facial expression?

2. Does the actor’s gender influence how her/his facial expression is interpreted?
3. How would you react to each of these facial expressions?
4. Have people ever made judgments about you based on your facial expression? Can you
give specific instances?
5. Is it easy for you to interpret facial expressions correctly? Can you think of instances
where you were unable to correctly identify another persons’ facial expression?
6. When facial expressions are ambiguous, such as in B and D, does racial/ethnic identity
make it more difficult to recognize what the facial expressions indicate?
22
 *Adopted from Johnson, S.B. (2014). Non-Verbal Communication Activity. Available at http://break-
ingprejudice.org/teaching/group-activities/non-verbal-communication-activity/

Name: ________________________ ___Section: _______________ Date: __________

Body Language Worksheet

Instructions: Look over the photos provided and answer the questions that follow. After
completing the activity, be ready to discuss any questions and reactions regarding body
language.

Self-Reflection Questions:

1. What message does each person’s body language send?

2. Does the racial/ethnic identity or gender of the people in the pictures affect the
interpretation of their body language?
1. Does age or social status make a difference in the way their body language is
perceived?
2. How would you react to the body language shown in each of the photographs?
3. What situations have you experienced in which your body language was
misinterpreted?
4. Have you ever made judgments about others based on their body language? Can you
give specific instances?
23
 *Adopted from Johnson, S.B. (2014). Non-Verbal Communication Activity. Available at http://break-
ingprejudice.org/teaching/group-activities/non-verbal-communication-activity/

Name: ________________________ ___Section: _______________ Date: __________

Proxemics (Personal Space)

Worksheet Instructions: Look over the photos provided and answer the questions that
follow. After the activity is completed, be ready to discuss how you reacted to the
photographs.

Self-reflection Questions

1. Which photos clearly show a strong connection between people and which photos
do not? Why do you think that?
2. What are some possible explanations for the personal space shown in each of these
photos?
3. What would your reaction be if one of the people in the photos was of a different
race/ethnicity from the other(s)?
24
4. When you are interacting with people from another culture, religion, race, ethnicity,
etc. what type of proxemics (i.e., personal, social, public) do you use? How does this affect
the way you interact with them?
5. Do you think there are cultural differences in how people interpret the social
distances displayed in these photos? Explain your answer.

*Adopted from Johnson, S.B. (2014). Non-Verbal Communication Activity. Available at http://break-
ingprejudice.org/teaching/group-activities/non-verbal-communication-activity/

25