Language And Culture Final Presentation

3,016 views

Published on

This is a presentation on intercultural communication and conflict that I recently gave in my Language and Culture Class.

0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
3,016
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
11
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
37
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Language And Culture Final Presentation

  1. 1. Face<br />In action in <br />Intercultural Communication and <br />Face-Negotiation Theory<br />
  2. 2. What it means to ‘Save Face’<br />Face: Self-image presented to world<br /> - Identity Respect <br />Self-Construal: independent vs interdependent self<br />Facework: Restoring Face <br />Protect from Judgment <br />
  3. 3. Cultural Characteristics<br />China and Japan: <br />- Collectivist<br /> - High context<br />- Complacent, Indirect, likely to Avoid<br />US and Germany <br />- Individualist<br /> - Low Context<br />- Dominant, Direct, likely to Conflict<br />
  4. 4. Cross-Cultural Conflicts <br />Appropriate Conflict Conduct in Cultural Environment<br />Use of face can result in CONFLICT<br />Incompatibility over substantial issues <br />Miscommunication, Face is not saved<br />Conflict Management Style <br />Leads to Face Negotiation Theory <br />
  5. 5. Face Negotiation Theory<br />Face is mechanism for conflict management<br />Negotiate face in all communication <br />Situated Identities questionable <br />Cultural, Individual, or Situational variables<br />Five Conflict Styles:<br /> - Avoidance - Compromise <br /> - Integration - Oblige <br /> - Domination<br />
  6. 6. Specific Studies <br />US and Germany vs China and Japan<br />Purpose: FACE is the explanation for culture’s influence on conflict behavior<br />Process<br /> - Hypothesis, Questionnaire<br />Results<br />- Cultural features had direct effect <br />- Situational Scenarios low impact<br />
  7. 7. Specific Studies <br /><ul><li>Method: Qualitative Data from structured interviews</li></ul>China vs Japan<br /> Purpose: To test shared face, social debt, and independence<br /><ul><li>Results:</li></ul>Cultural conflict recognized for integration<br />
  8. 8. What does it all mean?<br />Results not conclusive<br />Identity Based Goals<br />- Confirmation/Rejection<br />- Respect/Disrespect<br />- Approval/Disapproval<br />Unresolved Identity Conflicts <br />
  9. 9. Solutions?<br />Face Identity Respect <br />Knowledge of Facework Taxonomies<br />- Face Concerns <br />- Face Movements or Patterns <br />- Facework Interaction Strategies <br />Change in Tendencies <br />- Conflict Communication Styles <br />- Face Content Domains <br />
  10. 10. Implications for Modern World<br />Societies<br />Politics <br />Workforce<br />War and Conflict <br />Economy<br />Identities of Countries in Global Market <br />
  11. 11. Conclusion<br />“God had given you one face, and you make yourself another.”<br />-Hamlet, William Shakespeare <br />
  12. 12. Bibliography<br />Gudykunst, William B. Theorizing about intercultural communication . Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage, 2005. Print.<br />Matsudaira, Tomomi &quot;Cultural Influences on the Use of Social Support by Chinese Immigrants in Japan: &apos;Face&apos; as a Keyword.&quot; Qualitative Health Research 13.3 (2003): 343. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 12 Nov. 2009.<br />Oetzel, John G., and Stella Ting-Toomey &quot;Face Concerns in Interpersonal Conflict: A Cross-Cultural Empirical Test of the Face Negotiation Theory.&quot; Communication Research30.6 (2003): 599-624. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 12 Nov. 2009.<br />
  13. 13. Questions?<br />

×