Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository

Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository

usir.salford.ac.uk
from usir.salford.ac.uk More from this publisher
23.03.2013 Views

For example, the diverse conceptual i sati ons of face used in Western and Asian culture are seen as being based essentially on different conceptual isations of the self (Mao, 1994). Brown and Levinson's conceptual isation of the self is seen as being an overly individualistic conceptual isati on, one that is in the last analysis, a self-image (Mao 1994). As Mao describes it, the self is in this sense '... the principal constituent that informs and contextualizes the content of face; it acts like an 'epicenter' towards which others... converge, and against which they are measured. The self is 'public' only to the extent that it depends on other's face being maintained... it is 'negotiated' with others via discourse activity. The self 'appropriates' the public only to preserve its own interest... it only concerns the individual's 'wants' and 'desires' (ibid. 459). Converse to this, Mao posits Asian conceptual i sations of the self and face as 'intimately linked to the views o-I the community and to the community's judgement and perception of the individual's character and behaviour ... to quote Goffman... it is "on loan ... from society",.. it belongs to the individual or to the self only to the extent that the individual acts in full compliance with that face' (Mao 1994,460). Rather than 'self-image' then, face as it operates in Asian cultures is equated more to a Goffmanian notion of 'image of self' in the eyes of others. Further highlighting the fundamental relationship between cultural readings of the self and conceptual isati ons of face is the work which has conceptualised cultural selfhood as variously overlapping with the self boundaries of other selves. For example, Scollon and Scollon (1995) show how Asian notions of selfhood extend beyond the boundaries of the individual to include others in the wider community. (see fig. 1.6). Key Fig. 1.6 The Individualistic and Collectivist Self 6 Wider mat,, i. 1 culture 5 Intimate society and culture ------------ 4 Eapressible conscious 3 Inexpressible conscious 2 Pre-conscious ("Freudian") I Interior unconscious S6 Key 6 Wider m2terial culture 5 Intimate society and culture 4 Expr-ible consaous 3 Inexpressible conscrous, 2 Pre-conscious ("Freudim") I Interior unconscious Adapted from Scollon and Scollon (1995,132-133) 6 34

Morisaki and Gudykunst (1994) employ the term 'self-construals' to encapsulate these cultural variations, with western cultures being characterised by independent self-construals (essentially autonomy of the self from others), and Asian ones by interdependent self-construals (essentially 'connectedness of the self to others'). Thus, a culture, or individual, may sit somewhere on the independent-interdependent dimension (see fig. 1.7). Fig. 1.7 Predominance of Independent and Interdependent Self- Construal Types Independent -4 Interdependent mo- us JAPAN Derived from Morisaki and Gudykunst (1994) Face is seen as being located in these construal, and facework as reflecting the concerns associated with each construal of self. In short, in predominantly12 independent cultures, persons engaged in interaction will base facework primarily on concern for both self- and other- independent face, whilst in interdependent cultures, persons will work to mutually support interdependent face. A summary of characteristics of each is given in table 1.4 These readings of cultures as being characterised in their beliefs, attitude, and communicative behaviours as individualist or collectivist, and of the related conceptual isations of self as a basis for ho face is perceived seem to provide for an understanding of East - West differences in face and facework practices. However, rather than employing these readings to account for and amplify cultural dichotomy in face and facework, some scholars have suggested a more fluid and dynamic application. 35

For example, the diverse conceptual i sati ons <strong>of</strong> face used in Western and<br />

Asian culture are seen as being based essentially on different<br />

conceptual isations <strong>of</strong> the self (Mao, 1994). Brown and Levinson's<br />

conceptual isation <strong>of</strong> the self is seen as being an overly individualistic<br />

conceptual isati on, one that is in the last analysis, a self-image (Mao 1994). As<br />

Mao describes it, the self is in this sense '... the principal constituent that informs<br />

and contextualizes the content <strong>of</strong> face; it acts like an 'epicenter' towards which<br />

others... converge, and against which they are measured. The self is 'public'<br />

only to the extent that it depends on other's face being maintained... it is<br />

'negotiated' with others via discourse activity. The self 'appropriates' the public<br />

only to preserve its own interest... it only concerns the individual's 'wants' and<br />

'desires' (ibid. 459). Converse to this, Mao posits Asian conceptual i sations <strong>of</strong><br />

the self and face as 'intimately linked to the views o-I the community and to the<br />

community's judgement and perception <strong>of</strong> the individual's character and<br />

behaviour ... to quote G<strong>of</strong>fman... it is "on loan ... from society",.. it belongs to the<br />

individual or to the self only to the extent that the individual acts in full<br />

compliance with that face' (Mao 1994,460). Rather than 'self-image' then, face<br />

as it operates in Asian cultures is equated more to a G<strong>of</strong>fmanian notion <strong>of</strong><br />

'image <strong>of</strong> self' in the eyes <strong>of</strong> others.<br />

Further highlighting the fundamental relationship between cultural<br />

readings <strong>of</strong> the self and conceptual isati ons <strong>of</strong> face is the work which has<br />

conceptualised cultural selfhood as variously overlapping with the self<br />

boundaries <strong>of</strong> other selves. For example, Scollon and Scollon (1995) show how<br />

Asian notions <strong>of</strong> selfhood extend beyond the boundaries <strong>of</strong> the individual to<br />

include others in the wider community. (see fig. 1.6).<br />

Key<br />

Fig. 1.6 The Individualistic and Collectivist Self<br />

6 Wider mat,, i. 1 culture<br />

5 Intimate society and culture<br />

------------<br />

4 Eapressible<br />

conscious<br />

3 Inexpressible conscious<br />

2 Pre-conscious ("Freudian")<br />

I Interior unconscious<br />

S6<br />

Key<br />

6 Wider m2terial culture<br />

5 Intimate society and culture<br />

4 Expr-ible consaous<br />

3 Inexpressible conscrous,<br />

2 Pre-conscious ("Freudim")<br />

I Interior unconscious<br />

Adapted from Scollon and Scollon (1995,132-133)<br />

6<br />

34

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!