This document analyzes intercultural misunderstandings that occurred during conversations in English between a Spanish researcher and a Pakistani informant. It describes their differing conversational patterns and politeness conventions. Typical miscommunication problems are identified, such as non-understandings due to language ability, code switching, and differing world views. Solutions attempted include repetition, examples, definitions, and explanations. Both positive and negative consequences of miscommunications are discussed. The conclusion emphasizes the importance of addressing cultural clashes, encouraging language use despite problems, and teaching students to negotiate meaning.

1. Intercultural Misunderstandings in the
Conversation in English between a Spanish and
a Pakistani
Elena Merino (UPF)
1. Background
2. Objectives
3. Methodology
4. Results
5. Conclusions

2. 1.Background
1.1. Barcelona Today

3. 1. Background
1.2. Theoretical frame
• Conversation Analysis (Calsamiglia and Tusón 1999,
Cestero 1994, Pomerantz and Ferh 2001, Tusón 1997)
• Intercultural Pragmatics and Interactional
Sociolinguistics (Codó 1999, 2003; Gumperz 1991,
Hernández Sacristán 1999; Hinnenkamp 2001; House 2007; House,
Kasper and Ross 2003)
• Discourse Studies
(Martin Rojo 2003, van Dijk 1985, 2003, 2004, 2007)
• L2 teaching
(Beyrich and Borowski 2000; Corros 2005; Hernandez and Villalba,
2008; Miquel 1995, 1997; Miquel and Sans 2004; Oliveras 2000)

4. 1.2. Concepts
Interpragmatic interferences Miscommunication/
Communicative Mistmatches, Sarangi 1996
Instances of interculture in NS-NNS interaction, cross-cultural
interaction, foreign language interaction , see Codó (1999)
• Non-understanding: misuses of lexicogrammatical rules (House
2007): syntactic, lexical and phonological
• Misunderstanding: it ‘occurs when a communication attempt is
unsucessful because what the speaker intends to express differs
from what the hearer believes to have been expressed’, Humphrey-
Jones (1986).
Intercultural misunderstanding: wrong interpretation of ‘mental
representations’ and those meanings hidden behind elements and
discursive structures of the Other, House (2007).
Ideologies: ‘general systems of basic ideas shared by the members of
a social group — ideas that influence their interpretation of social
events and situations and that control their discourse and other
social practices as group members’, van Dijk (en prensa).

5. 2. Objectives
• To describe the conversational patterns of
both Pakistani and Spanish speakers
• To reveal the types of miscommunication
that emerge between a Pakistani and a
Spanish person during their conversation
in English
• To provide instances of communication
troubles to be used in L2 teaching for
adult immigrants in Spain

6. 3. Methodology
Corpus: 3 audio-taped semi-structured interviews in a
foreign language (English) between the Spanish
female researcher (I) and the Pakistani male
informant (AG).
Setting The informant´s
house
A bar terrace A park
Duration 1 h 24 min 1 h 19 min 1 h 42 min
Date July 2009 July 2009 August 2009
Goal Establish the
rapport, learn
about AG’s daily
life
Learn about
AG’s past life
Learn about
AG’s
communicative
issues in the C2
Interview 1
(AG 001)
Interview 2
(AG 002)
Interview 3
(AG 003)

7. 4. Results I. Non-verbal behavior
Pakistani informant (AG): native
speaker of Punjabi and Urdu
POLITENESS
* Invites I to his house after their first
(informal) encounter.
* At home, without asking I, AG stands up a
few times and brings food and drinks for
I.
* Gives I presents for no reason (a pair of
sunglasses and a necklace) and tries to
pay for coffees when they meet.
GREETING CONVENTIONS
* Shakes his hand when he meets I as a
sign of respect for his wife.
Spanish researcher (I): native
speaker of Spanish
* Never invites AG to her house even if AG
has asked to be invited several times.
* Uses social lies (“I’ll call you to go to the
cinema”, “ I’ll call you this week”, etc.)
* Never gives AG presents although she tries
to pay for coffees when they meet.
* Shakes her hand because of the formality
of encounter (interview).

8. Results II. Conversation Patterns i
Pakistani informant (AG): native
speaker of Punjabi and Urdu
CODE SWITCHING
Introduces words in Spanish during his
discourse in English. He also introduces
some words in Arabic to refer to abstract
concepts.
ANSWERING Q
Very often answers I’s questions with a
negative adverb (no) with emphasis or
rising intonation. This negative particle is
used in different ways: 1) to deny
something, 2) to take the turn (even if the
answer is positive).
Evades I’s questions and makes his answers
long with metaphors and past stories,
sometimes changing topics within the
same story.
Frequently starts answering I’s questions by
saying “ok I tell you”.
Spanish researcher (I): native
speaker of Spanish
Never introduces words in Spanish except for
correction purposes or when I is
rephrasing AG’s words.
Hardly ever answers questions due to the
nature of the conversation (interview).
Repeats questions over and over. For each
new time I repeats a question, she
extends her discourse, exceeding the
appropriate amount of quantity needed to
make herself clear.
I is asked some questions to which she gives
short/long answers depending on the
questions, although she tends to give
long explanations.

9. Results II. Conversation Patterns ii
INTERRUPTIONS/OVERLAPPING
Interrupts I when he does not agree with her
words, sometimes obtaining the turn
some others not.
Overlaps I’s words or interrupts in
appropriate and inappropriate places.
Sometimes finishes up I’s sentences
whenever there is a lengthening of a
previous word or a pause.
TONE/EMPHASIS
AG’s speech is predominantly characterized
by rising intonation and emphatization
not only at the end of whole propositions
but also in single words. AG raises his
voice with certain topics. He doesn’t have
a connected speech.
CONTRIBUTION SIGNS
Only uses contribution signs (hm, ok, yes,
yeah) in very low voice , whenever I is
asking a new question or when I is
answering something he asked.
Interrupts AG when she does not agree with
his words, sometimes obtaining the turn
some others not.
Overlaps AG’s words or interrupts in
appropriate and inappropriate places.
Sometimes finishes up AG’s sentences
whenever there is a lengthening of a
previous word or a pause.
I’s speech is characterized by rising
intonation and high pitch, which she uses
sometimes to emphasize words, to make
herself understood or to obtain the turn.
She doesn’t have a connected speech.
A lot of continuing or contribution signs
(especially hm) whenever AG is
speaking, and normally after AG’s
sentences or words in rising intonation.

10. Results II. Conversation Patterns iii
LAUGHTER
Only laughs while telling a story but few isolated
laughter.
COMPREHENSION CHECKS
Checks comprehension sometimes with questions
such as “ok?”, or expressions such as “perhaps
you understand”, “perhaps I talk to rapidly”
“perhaps you don’t understand my words”
whenever few contribution signs (hm) by I
appear or whenever I has not agreed with him
on some topic.
TOPIC SEQUENCES
Finishes up topics whenever I does not elaborate
much on his words.
Stops talking about a controversial/emotional
topics.
Takes formulaic expressions literally. In the closing
sequence, I offers help (formulaic expression)
and AG brings up new topics.
Very often laughs when AG’s is telling a “funny”
story whether AG laughs or not. I also
laughs while saying/asking something (to
release tension—e.g. when she’s asking
something for the n time).
Checks comprehension very often with
questions such as “do you understand?”,
“right?” “ok?”
Finishes up topics by asking other questions or
by explicitly saying that the conversation is
over.
Talks about anything, no matter the topic.
Closes the conversation by offering help
(formulaic expressions).

11. Results II. Conversation Patterns iv
OFFERING SOMETHING
Uses the imperative form to offer something
(a drink, to see something).
HYPOTHESIS
Has a hard time imagining things or thinking
in abstract terms. AG normally refers to
stories down to earth that either
happened to him or to someone he
knows.
PAUSES/SILENCES
Sometimes, there are pauses/silence after I’s
questions.
Uses modals whenever she offers something
(a class in Spanish, an invitation to go to
somewhere): “we can/could do X”,
however, some of them are social lies.
Works a lot with hypothetical situations,
using conditionals and sentences
beginning with “Imagine that…”
Except for one or two occasions, I never
allows for silence and if she perceives it,
she fills it up with more discourse,
questions, etc.

12. Results III. Typical miscommunication
problems. CausesCauses, solutions and consequences
NON-UNDERSTANDINGS
• L2 competence
(phonetics, syntax, semantics)
• Code switching (English &
Spanish)
• Different degree of cooperation
• Violations of Gricean maxims
(ambiguous info, conversation
thread, veracity, etc.)
IDEOLOY CLASH
• World views
• Assumptions
INTERCULTURAL
MISUNDERSTANDINGS
• Men-women relationship
• Strategic Misunderstanding (on
purpose)
• Greeting conventions
• Management of topics
• Speech acts existent in both L, but
differently used (offering
something, inviting, jokes)
• Background information
• Metaphors
• Laughter, silence
• Social lies
• Assumptions
• Contextualization cues (Gumperz)
• Implicitness, roundabouts,
euphemisms
• Conceptualization of ideas
• Habits

13. Results III. Typical miscommunication problems.
Causes, solutionssolutions and consequences
1st step: one of the interlocutors identifies
the problem with formulations such as: do
you mean…?; I don’t understand, what’s
the meaning of that?; or one speaker
repeats his/her interlocutor’s previous
proposition in rising intonation.
2nd step: one or both interlocutors try to
repair the problem. There are several
means, depending on the type of
miscommunication:

14. PROBLEM SOLUTION
Phonetics, semantics,
code switching
Repetition, context of the word, examples,
spelling, definition, translation
Syntax Unsolved (mismatch btw Q & A, change of
topic) or solved (repetition, explanation)
Ideology One interlocutor surrenders
Strategic Explanation
Metaphors Explanation
Transgression of maxims Explanation
Politeness Unsolved
Assumptions Explanations
Implicitness Unsolved or solved after long explanations
Different
conceptualizations
Explanation

15. 3rd step: once the problem has been
identified and repaired:
a) Speaker 1 checks comprehension: do you
understand?; Ok?
b) Speaker 2 shows s/he finally understood:
ok yeah, oh yes, ah ok, yeah I get it, ok I
didn’t understand, ok, we could consider
that.

16. Results III. Typical miscommunication problems.
Causes, solutions and consequencesconsequences
(-)
• Communication breaks down
(change of topic, mismatch
between Q & A, questions
remain unanswered)
• Stereotyping, negative effect
(social image), face
threatening
• Awkward moments, surprise
• Interruptions in conversation,
long digressions, very long
turns, losing the thread
• Surrendering
• Uncomfortable moments,
impatience
• Hurting the other’s feelings
(+)
• Fun, laughs
• Short interruptions
• Learning about others’
opinions
• Gaining cultural knowledge
• Learning how to present your
arguments / defend your
opinions
• Learning to distinguish
between important and less
important miscommunication
problems
• Using other words to make
yourself understood (L2
competence)
• Learning vocabulary,
phonetics or the right way of
saying things

17. 5. Conclusions. L2 teaching
implications
• The most dangerous misunderstandings have their root in cultural or ideological
issues. Other causes such as prejudices or assumptions may also have a very
negative effect on social relations. As teachers, we need to bring them up in
class, and explain them in order to buffer the clash.
• Teachers also need to be aware of the symbolic power they, willingly or
unwillingly, have due to the institutional context in which they are using their
words.
• The best way to learn the L2 is by experiencing it. Teachers have to encourage
their students to use the L2 even if they know there will be communication
problems sometimes.
• As seen in the results, some of the non-understandings/misunderstandings have
a positive effect: they not only help in the acquisition of the L2 (vocabulary,
pronunciation, syntax, etc.) but they also help to learn about other ways of
thinking and to defend one’s opinions when they are not shared.
• It is also necessary that professionals teach the students to metacommunicate
(Rodrigo Alsina 2000), that is, being able to say what you intend, and that they
provide the students with strategies to negotiate meaning (Lakoff and Johnson
1980-1991).