Chapter 1 – Approaching intercultural communication
INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION : WHAT IS IT?
Intercultural communicaton ii mundane and ubiquitoui but, read together, they alio raiie the
queiton of what “intercultural communicaton” actually ii
Studiei of intercultural communicaton
o Studiei in “croii-cultural communicaton” itart from an aiiumpton of diitnct cultural
groupi and inveitgate aipecti of their communicatve practcei comparatvely.
o Studiei in “intercultural communicaton” moitly alio itart from an aiiumpton of
cultural diferencei between diitnct cultural groupi but itudy their communicatve
practcei in interacton with each other.
o The “inter-diicourie approach” avoidi any priori notoni of cultural identty. Initead, thii
approach aiki how culture ii made relevant in a text or interacton and how cultural
identty ii brought into exiitence through text and talk.
DEFINITIONS OF CULTURE
No iingle defniton of “culture” exiiti and the term meani many thingi to many people.
The exploraton of how “culture” ii uied by ipecifc people for ipecifc purpoiei in a ipecifc context
ii a key taik of intercultural communicaton reiearch.
Uiei of “culture” in three contexti where culture ii ofentmei invoked in today’i world
Touriim marketng, and country marketng more generally, where “culture” ii part of a
country’i aiieti
World of internatonal buiineii travel, where “cultural diference” ii one aipect of the
challengei and difcultei that internatonal companiei and their employeei might need to
manage
Governmental deciiioni, thui belongi to itate control, where “culture” ii invoked in relaton
to citienihip
“Culture ai a natonal aiiet” linked to what ofen hai been called “high culture”: hiitory, the arti
and feitvali. At the iame tme, there ii alio “popular culture” iuch ai folklore, belief iyitem and
partcularly cuiiine
“Culture ai challenge” moitly about interperional relatonihipi and how theie are communicated
verbally (for initance, through engaging in or avoiding imall talk) and non-verbally (for initance,
through removing or not removing outiide ihoei when entering a home)
“Culture ai citienihip” preiented ai coniiitng of practcei that re widely ieen ai iignifying a
partcular identty: iexual practcei in our example. tther iuch practcei which have been linked to
“culture” ai a baiii for diicriminaton are dreii codei (think of debatei iurrounding the Muilim
hijab) or wayi of ipeaking (think of the endleii debatei about iome immigrant group or other not
learning into “our” iociety in other wayi)
Theie varioui content of “culture” include iome people and exclude otheri. The excluiionary
character of a “high culture” underitanding ii alio fairly obvioui: if “culture” ii thought to reiide in
muieumi, theateri, concert halli and the like, it ii limited to people who have the meani to acceii
theie, that ii the middle and upper claiiei who have the educaton to appreciate thii kind of
“culture” and the fnancial meani to do io. The excluiionary character of culture ai interperional
relatonihip may be leii obvioui at frit glance. However, on cloier inipecton it ii embedded in the
homogeniiing nature of itatementi iuch ai thoie ofered in xample 2: the advice to not menton
INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION : WHAT IS IT?
Intercultural communicaton ii mundane and ubiquitoui but, read together, they alio raiie the
queiton of what “intercultural communicaton” actually ii
Studiei of intercultural communicaton
o Studiei in “croii-cultural communicaton” itart from an aiiumpton of diitnct cultural
groupi and inveitgate aipecti of their communicatve practcei comparatvely.
o Studiei in “intercultural communicaton” moitly alio itart from an aiiumpton of
cultural diferencei between diitnct cultural groupi but itudy their communicatve
practcei in interacton with each other.
o The “inter-diicourie approach” avoidi any priori notoni of cultural identty. Initead, thii
approach aiki how culture ii made relevant in a text or interacton and how cultural
identty ii brought into exiitence through text and talk.
DEFINITIONS OF CULTURE
No iingle defniton of “culture” exiiti and the term meani many thingi to many people.
The exploraton of how “culture” ii uied by ipecifc people for ipecifc purpoiei in a ipecifc context
ii a key taik of intercultural communicaton reiearch.
Uiei of “culture” in three contexti where culture ii ofentmei invoked in today’i world
Touriim marketng, and country marketng more generally, where “culture” ii part of a
country’i aiieti
World of internatonal buiineii travel, where “cultural diference” ii one aipect of the
challengei and difcultei that internatonal companiei and their employeei might need to
manage
Governmental deciiioni, thui belongi to itate control, where “culture” ii invoked in relaton
to citienihip
“Culture ai a natonal aiiet” linked to what ofen hai been called “high culture”: hiitory, the arti
and feitvali. At the iame tme, there ii alio “popular culture” iuch ai folklore, belief iyitem and
partcularly cuiiine
“Culture ai challenge” moitly about interperional relatonihipi and how theie are communicated
verbally (for initance, through engaging in or avoiding imall talk) and non-verbally (for initance,
through removing or not removing outiide ihoei when entering a home)
“Culture ai citienihip” preiented ai coniiitng of practcei that re widely ieen ai iignifying a
partcular identty: iexual practcei in our example. tther iuch practcei which have been linked to
“culture” ai a baiii for diicriminaton are dreii codei (think of debatei iurrounding the Muilim
hijab) or wayi of ipeaking (think of the endleii debatei about iome immigrant group or other not
learning into “our” iociety in other wayi)
Theie varioui content of “culture” include iome people and exclude otheri. The excluiionary
character of a “high culture” underitanding ii alio fairly obvioui: if “culture” ii thought to reiide in
muieumi, theateri, concert halli and the like, it ii limited to people who have the meani to acceii
theie, that ii the middle and upper claiiei who have the educaton to appreciate thii kind of
“culture” and the fnancial meani to do io. The excluiionary character of culture ai interperional
relatonihip may be leii obvioui at frit glance. However, on cloier inipecton it ii embedded in the
homogeniiing nature of itatementi iuch ai thoie ofered in xample 2: the advice to not menton
