Intercultural Communication: a Multicultural Perspective
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Intercultural Communication: A Multicultural Perspective D. A. Hall University of Western Sydney 2005 A thesis of 85,000 words submitted as re uirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree I confirm that the work contained herein is my own original work and has not been submitted for examination to any other institution or for any other academic program. Douglas Hall 2005 1 CONTENTS Summary 4 1. Introduction 6 1.1 The Theory-building Orientation of the Thesis , 1.2 The Need for Ongoing .evision of Intercultural Communication Theory 21 1.0 The 1ulticultural Conte2t 28 2. Conceptual 3oundations for a 1ulticultural Perspective 0, 2.1 A 4roader Social Perspective 08 2.1.1 Communication and Conte2t in Theory and .esearch 08 2.1.2. 5ey Concepts in 6iddens and Hanner7 44 2.2 Homogeneity and Heterogeneity in Communication 50 2.2.1 Individual Agency 54 2.2.2 The Importance of Negotiation 5, 2.2.0 The Impact of Social Conte2t on Homogeneity and Heterogeneity 58 2.2.4 Analysing the Homogeneity-Heterogeneity .elationship 65 2.0 The Communication-Culture .elationship 68 2.0.1 The Culture Determines Communication 8iew 68 2.0.2 The Communication Determines Culture 8iew ,6 2.0.0 Intercultural Outcomes. 91 2.4 Conclusion 96 0. 6uidelines for Developing a 1ulticultural Perspective 98 0.1 Introduction 98 0.2 Communication As Process 101 0.0 Developing an Analytical Approach 105 0.4 The Conte2t-Episode Connection 108 4. Elaboration of a 1ulticultural Perspective 124 4.1 Introduction 124 4.2 The Structuring Principles of 1ulticultural Societies 124 4.0 3ocus 1: 1eaning Systems 100 4.0.1 Introduction 100 4.0.2 Ideational 100 4.0.0 Significational 105 4.0.4 Disseminational 109 4.0.5 1eaningful Outcomes 142 4.0.6 Summary 145 4.4 3ocus 2: .elational Systems 146 4.4.1 Introduction 146 4.4.2 Integration and 3ragmentation 146 4.4.0 Symmetry and Asymmetry 158 4.4.4 Similarity and Difference 165 4.4.5 .elational Outcomes 1,1 4.4.6 Summary 1,2 2 4.5 3ocus 0: Identificational Systems 1,0 4.5.1 Introduction 1,0 4.5.2 Identity 3ormation 1,4 4.5.0 Identity Choice 184 4.5.4 Identity Outcomes 201 4.5.5 Summary 200 4.6 3ocus 4: 4ehavioural Systems 204 4.6.1 Introduction 204 4.6.2 4ehavioural Systems and Interaction 204 4.6.0 4ehavioural Outcomes 209 4.6.4 Summary 211 4., 6eneral Summary 211 5. Conclusion 210 5.1 A 1ulticultural 1odel of Intercultural Communication 210 5.2 Applying the 1odel 21, 5.0 3urther Development of Intercultural Communication Theory 22, 5.4 3inal Summary 200 .eference List 201 4ibliography 248 0 Summary Intercultural communication theory and research have largely been based on the ass- umption that dealing with cultural differences is the key element in intercultural encoun- ters. This is applied particularly to encounters between people from different societies, either where a participant is visiting another country, or where that participant has recently migrated. Encounters between people who, though culturally different, live permanently together in the same society however, are not necessarily the same as encounters between people from different societies. In the light of this, intercultural communication theory should be reviewed and developed to better conceptualise the nature of intercultural inter- action as it occurs within the same (multicultural) society. Such a review re uires, as .. Atwood (1984) argued, a framing of intercultural communication episodes within a broad- er social perspective, a more thorough investigation of the relationship of homogeneity and heterogeneity as it affects intercultural interaction and a greater focus how communication processes help to create culture as well as how they are influenced by culture. Work done by Anthony 6iddens and Ulf Hanner7 provides conceptual material that can assist in the development of the proposed multicultural perspective. They recognised first that the characteristics of a society are reproduced in its interactions. Second, they rec- ognised that contemporary societies are characterised by an interplay of homogenising, or @centripetalA forces on the one hand and differentiating, or @centrifugalA, forces on the other. This suggests that a multicultural perspective should be organised around a view of interactions that are characterised by the same interplay of centripetal and centrifugal forces. An organising model for the multicultural perspective is therefore proposed based on three key elements. 3irst it incorporates a system approach that recognises influences on communication, the interactive process and the outcomes of that process. Second, it incor- porates, based on 6iddens, a three-tiered approach that recognises the role played by structural processes in establishing the character of the society, the general patterns of interaction that emerge from these structural processes and the individual application of these processes in communicative episodes. Third, it incorporates, based on 6iddens and Hanner7, a recognition of the interplay of centripetal and centrifugal forces at each of these levels and the range of intercultural possibilities that this raises. The organising model is 4 then used to analyse intercultural interactions across four focuses: meaning, social relations, identity and behaviour. 5 2. Conceptual Foundations for a Multicultural Perspective. The challenge of developing a multicultural perspective on intercultural commun- ication, as indicated in the previous chapter, will be met by first developing an under- standing of both the nature of the social conte2t itself and the connections that e2ist between the social conte2t and the interactions that occur within it. It is the task of this chapter to address how those understandings can be developed. In doing so, the groundwork will be laid for an elaboration of a multicultural perspective in subse uent chapters. It was argued in the previous chapter that the broad character of intercultural comm- unication research was established in the early to mid 1980s through a rush of empirical proBects and theoretical discussions that focussed on the individual participant as the pri- mary subBect of research. This, it was also argued, has continued to be the broad character of the field to the present. It has been difficult, in the light of this, to find meaningful dis- cussions within the field of the possible connections between intercultural interactions and the nature of social conte2t which can hellp give shape to the discussion here. One notable e2ception was an article by Atwood (1984, p.68ff) which argued that not enough work had been done, at a conceptual level, to revise and update assumptions about the nature of cul- ture and communication, the terminology that theory employs (for e2ample, intercultural as opposed to inter-ethnic, inter-racial or international communication) and the types of focus that it adopts (for e2ample, interpersonal concerns as opposed wider social con- cerns). AtwoodDs article thus constitutes an important directive for the discussion under- taken here. 1ore specifically, Atwood proposed three areas where he believed intercultural communication theory was open to revision and development. 3irst, Atwood was of the opinion that because the bulk of intercultural communication research has focussed on interpersonal interactions, it has tended to ignore the possibility of broader generalisable insights (p.,0). Such insights, he suggested, might be gained by considering the wider socio-cultural and communication structures in which people learn to interact (p.84). Second, he observed that research assumes a direct link between homogeneity and hetero- geneity of cultural background and homogeneity and heterogeneity in communication processes. This, he believed, needs to be revised by recognising the presence of @subBective 0, situationalA culture and communication (p.,9-80). This refers to the capacity of people to @communicate culturally at many levelsA (p.80) and to the creative ability of individuals to be uni ue within cultural groups and even families. Atwood thirdly, observed that intercul- tural communication research has been based on the view that culture determines, and so socio-cultural variables are antecedent to, communication. This means therefore that @people of different backgrounds e2perience difficultiesA (p.,6). Atwood suggests that an alternative, @communication determines cultureA view could be taken into consideration. 1ass communication studies, for e2ample, no longer see mass media as Bust a mirror of the world, but as an agent active in creating it. Cultural agencies therefore are determined by the communication system (p.,8). Each of these propositions raises issues that are valuable for e2amining the relation- ship between multicultural society and intercultural communication. Each of them will therefore be considered in turn for their contribution to laying the foundation for the mul- ticultural approach to be developed here. 2.1 A 4roader Social Perspective. It is a primary assumption of this thesis that the multicultural society is a specific kind of communication conte2t that generates intercultural situations which are significantly different to those that arise between people who are members of different societies. 3or this reason, AtwoodDs argument that, rather than maintaining an e2clusive (or at least narrow) emphasis on individuals as the focus of communication studies, intercultural com- munication theory could benefit from considering wider socio-cultural and communication structures, is an important starting point. His argument is