Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository

universality, particularly in studies of Asian" cultures (Gu 1990; Matsumoto
1988; Mao 1994; Morisaki and Gudykunst 1994; Scollon and Scollon 1994;
Ting-Toomey; 1988; Ting-Toomey et al. 1991; Cockcroft and Ting-Toomey
1994). These concerns have been based largely on what has been identified as
the inapplicability of the negative aspect of Brown and Levinson's face - i. e. the
need for individual autonomy from others based on the conceptualisation of the
person as an essentially independent entity. For example, Matsumoto (1988)
and Morisaki and Gudykunst (1994) argue that Brown and Levinson's autonomy
face is not applicable to the Japanese culture. Such a concept is based on the
basic unit of society being the individual, and neglects the fact that it is the
acknowledgement and maintenance of the relative position of others, rather
than the preservation of an individual's proper territory which governs social
interaction. It is not the claiming of an autonomous territory with the individual
as its locus, but rather the'fitting in'with the rest of the group, which is a
primary concern to Japanese interactants. Similarly, Mao (1994) sees this
overly individuated conceptualisation of face as being inapplicable to Chinese
culture, where the emphasis is placed not the accommodation of individual
wants or desires, but the harmony of individual conduct with the views and
judgements of the community. These rejections of what are seen as an overly
individualistic aspect to face extend into other Asian cultures sharing a similar
on connectedness with the rest of society.
This apparent fundamental incongruity between East-West
conceptualisations of face has led to the identification of the additional sets of
dimensions which might better account for how face should be conceptualised
and how this might inform cultural variation in facework practices, such as
individual i sm-collectivi sm (Hofstede 1980), and high-context / low-context
cultures (Hall 1976; 1983) (e. g. Ting-Toomey 1985; 1988; 1990; Ting-Toomey
et al. 1991; Cockcroft and Ting-Toomey 1994; Trubisky, Ting-Toomey, and Lin
1991).
The individualism - collectivism paradigm is employed for instance to
generally refer to the cluster of attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours towards
oneself and co-members of society which reflect a common system of
underlying values. The former is usually characterised by, in the first instance, a
31