Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository
Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository
either of the cultures I am addressing in this study. Indeed my connections with both cultures have guided and influenced this study. It is on these personal grounds then that I should begin by highlight the personal elements as far as I myself am concerned (2.1). 2.1 Personal Musings As an'Englishman P2 with limited experience of other cultures, upon first conversing with the Germans, some ten plus years ago now, I experienced a certain degree of 'cultural shock'. On my first participation in what I shall term hereon in German 'sociable episodes, that is, conversation conducted as part of informal gatherings between friends, family and close acquaintances (see chapters 3 and 5), 1 was taken aback upon receiving seemingly unfriendly, patronising, or even aggressive responses to my early tentative steps at 'speaking German'. Verbal contributions to ongoing talk that I thought would allow me to display my openness for interaction, present myself as a'good conversationalist' and share with others something of my self -jokes, 'throwaway' comments, 'quips', amusing little anecdotes (deliberately in their 'not taking issues too seriously' formulation) - seemed to have the opposite effect. Frequently, I felt as if I had 'gone and said the wrong thing', 'put my foot in it', made a 'gaffe, or even said something insulting. I often found myself having to defend what I had just said and not infrequently being 'dragged' into a conversation that I had not really intended nor wanted, and quite frankly, didn't know how to deal with - the closest thing to which that I knew of from my own background being 'pre- fisticufF argumentation. I was unfortunately at a loss to know exactly what it was I was doing wrong. Several cognitive in situ 're-runnings' of such episodes failed to reveal exactly what aspect of my contribution could have brought about the need for such responses and subsequent treatment at the hands of my conversational others. This was at first quite disconcerting, made me feel a little ill at ease - intimidated even, and served to confirm the negative stereotypes that I had brought with me from the entrenched post-war mentality of the UK. My German interlocutors did indeed appear to be aggressively face-threatening, rude, and 4
impolite. However, I soon came to realise (following a number of conversational 'de-briefings' with my wife Elke) that, to'fit Was I was hoping, as an unobtrusive, natural, and essentially functional conversational component, I had to adapt to this new conversational milieu. Quite literally, on top of learning how to speak the language, I also had to learn how to do the conversation in a culturally appropriate manner. This entailed, not only improving my linguistic skills (vocabulary, grammar, sentence construction), but equally as importantly, my conversational skills, which I had assumed until that point were long since mastered. These encounters both informed my understanding of what it meant to 'learn a foreign language' and in turn re-directed my focus on learning, and spawned an interest in English - German differences in conversational interaction that would ultimately lead to the current study some six years later. This study is firmly rooted then in my own personal experience, observations, and set of questions arising first in the form of layman's musings, but later to become formal concerns in the form of research questions. However, my own subjective experience is not the only basis for assuming differences in communicative style. Several texts have highlighted salient differences across a range of discourse types, and it is these that I want now to briefly address. 2.2 German - English Comparative Research' Comparative research of English and German discourse has focused on a range of language usage in everyday settings. Studies have for example have focused on textual materials, such as directives displayed on public signs (Snell-Hornby 1984), magazine articles (Evans 1998), academic text (Clyne 1937), computer software manuals (Luchtenberg 1994; Krenn 1991), letters sent to the editors of magazines (Kienpointer and Kindt 1997), and the structure of television news reports (Pufahl 1992). A second body of work has focused more closely on spoken interaction (e. g. Blum-Kulka and House 1989; Byrnes 1986; Fetzer 1996,1997; Friday 1994; Hellweg, Samovar, and Skow 1994; House 1979,1982a, 1982b, 1982c, 1989; House and Kasper 1981; Kotthoff 1989,1991,1993,1994; Straehle 1997; and Watts 1989). These studies have 47
- Page 5 and 6: Table List of Tables 1.1 Archetypal
- Page 7 and 8: Conversational Excerpts Excerpt Pag
- Page 9 and 10: Acknowledgments Acknowledgements se
- Page 11 and 12: The 'Research Problem' Introduction
- Page 13 and 14: Taking these problematics as a star
- Page 15 and 16: At the time, this proposal seemed e
- Page 17 and 18: the self and its relationship to on
- Page 19 and 20: activity of sociable conversation,
- Page 21 and 22: including the application of the fa
- Page 23 and 24: CHAPTER I FACE AND FACEWORK: CONCEP
- Page 25 and 26: 1.1 Foundational Texts In order to
- Page 27 and 28: communicative action could be seen
- Page 29 and 30: Fig. 1.1 Goffman's Model of Ritual
- Page 31 and 32: distribution of his feelings, and t
- Page 33 and 34: empirically difficult' phenomenon (
- Page 35 and 36: etween self and other). Conversatio
- Page 37 and 38: allowing in effect a speaker to cri
- Page 39 and 40: as an equilibric practice, allowing
- Page 41 and 42: universality, particularly in studi
- Page 43 and 44: Table 1.3 Individualist (LCC) and C
- Page 45 and 46: Morisaki and Gudykunst (1994) emplo
- Page 47 and 48: Mao (1994) addresses this tension b
- Page 49 and 50: Tannen's work (1981 a; 1981 b) perh
- Page 51 and 52: 1.3 Culture, Facework, Equilibrium
- Page 53 and 54: facework operates on an underlying
- Page 55: CHAPTER 2 ANGLO-SAXON CHALK AND TEU
- Page 59 and 60: in potential or actual conflict sit
- Page 61 and 62: salient differences. For example, G
- Page 63 and 64: Watts observed that German conversa
- Page 65 and 66: Finally, although Watts argued that
- Page 67 and 68: elatively little overlap, and a gen
- Page 69 and 70: contributions, with the former set
- Page 71 and 72: fully and substantively, what was r
- Page 73 and 74: oriented to unmitigated disagreemen
- Page 75 and 76: 2.3 Communicative Underpinnings The
- Page 77 and 78: service but by more confrontational
- Page 79 and 80: Finally, additional explanatory dim
- Page 81 and 82: specific communicative practices, a
- Page 83 and 84: Brown and Levinson (1987). Indeed,
- Page 85 and 86: Notes to Chapter 2 11 use the term
- Page 87 and 88: This chapter then can be regarded a
- Page 89 and 90: asic irreducible sociological varia
- Page 91 and 92: Fraser (1990) who, in also attempti
- Page 93 and 94: particularly amenable to such a heu
- Page 95 and 96: identify certain underlying dynamic
- Page 97 and 98: In fact, these two opposing orienta
- Page 99 and 100: at any given point in the flow of c
- Page 101 and 102: orderly and meaningful conversation
- Page 103 and 104: locally managed and constantly in d
- Page 105 and 106: Poles of Alignment Fig. 3.6 Sociabl
impolite. However, I soon came to realise (following a number <strong>of</strong> conversational<br />
'de-briefings' with my wife Elke) that, to'fit Was I was hoping, as an<br />
unobtrusive, natural, and essentially functional conversational component, I had<br />
to adapt to this new conversational milieu. Quite literally, on top <strong>of</strong> learning how<br />
to speak the language, I also had to learn how to do the conversation in a<br />
culturally appropriate manner. This entailed, not only improving my linguistic<br />
skills (vocabulary, grammar, sentence construction), but equally as importantly,<br />
my conversational skills, which I had assumed until that point were long since<br />
mastered. These encounters both informed my understanding <strong>of</strong> what it meant<br />
to 'learn a foreign language' and in turn re-directed my focus on learning, and<br />
spawned an interest in English - German differences in conversational<br />
interaction that would ultimately lead to the current study some six years later.<br />
This study is firmly rooted then in my own personal experience,<br />
observations, and set <strong>of</strong> questions arising first in the form <strong>of</strong> layman's musings,<br />
but later to become formal concerns in the form <strong>of</strong> research questions.<br />
However, my own subjective experience is not the only basis for assuming<br />
differences in communicative style. Several texts have highlighted salient<br />
differences across a range <strong>of</strong> discourse types, and it is these that I want now to<br />
briefly address.<br />
2.2 German - English Comparative Research'<br />
Comparative research <strong>of</strong> English and German discourse has focused on a<br />
range <strong>of</strong> language usage in everyday settings. Studies have for example have<br />
focused on textual materials, such as directives displayed on public signs<br />
(Snell-Hornby 1984), magazine articles (Evans 1998), academic text (Clyne<br />
1937), computer s<strong>of</strong>tware manuals (Luchtenberg 1994; Krenn 1991), letters<br />
sent to the editors <strong>of</strong> magazines (Kienpointer and Kindt 1997), and the structure<br />
<strong>of</strong> television news reports (Pufahl 1992). A second body <strong>of</strong> work has focused<br />
more closely on spoken interaction (e. g. Blum-Kulka and House 1989; Byrnes<br />
1986; Fetzer 1996,1997; Friday 1994; Hellweg, Samovar, and Skow 1994;<br />
House 1979,1982a, 1982b, 1982c, 1989; House and Kasper 1981; Kotth<strong>of</strong>f<br />
1989,1991,1993,1994; Straehle 1997; and Watts 1989). These studies have<br />
47