Title: Cross-Cultural
Pragmatic Failure in Computer-Mediated Communication
Link:
http://www.ub.edu/dpfilsa/4baumervanrensburgcoola5.pdf (-Click this-)
Journal: Australian Studies Centre, Universitat de
Barcelona. Coolabah, Volume No.5, 2011.
Introduction:
This
study is written by Martina Baumer & Henriette van Rensburg. Martina Baumer
is an Academic Skills Development (ASDU) lecturer in the School of Health and
Human Sciences at Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW, Australia while
Henriette van Rensburg is a Lecturer in Pedagogy and Curriculum (Blended
Learning Focus) and Postgraduate Program Coordinator in the Faculty of
Education, University of Southern Queensland, Australia. Basically, the article
is about the occurrence of cross-cultural misunderstandings in
computer-mediated communication (CMC) specifically in the field of pragmatics.
The objective
of this study is to examine the phenomena of written language in asynchronous
communication. The purpose of this
study is to explore the pragmatic failure in the written language in Computer
Mediated Communication such as in the theory of politeness and
miscommunication. Apart
from that, it also aims to explore how social and culture factors influence
language use of native and non-native English speaking national and
international postgraduate Education students.
Statement of the Problem:
Nowadays,
with the advancement of technology, CMC has become a part of many people’s
everyday life. However, the rules of language practice such as politeness and
other characteristics of communication are not really observed by many people
thus create misunderstanding because of cultural diversity and multiple
contexts.
Research Questions:
1. What
is considerate as polite and acceptable and what is rude and intolerable in
CMC?
2. Is
politeness a luxury we no longer can or want to afford?
3. How
is this affecting cross-cultural communication and negotiation in CMC?
Methodology
The
Subjects
The
subjects were USQ postgraduate Education students
Instruments
The
instrument used is a questionnaire which contains two components. The first
component included general demographic questions to establish background data
concerning the participant’s native language, cultural background, and place of
residence, age and gender, foreign language knowledge, and their regular use of
CMC. The second component referred to the DCTs, which comprised of six CMC
scenarios.
Procedure
In
order to conduct this research, postgraduate students from the faculty of
Education at USQ were invited via an email to take part in the study. By
responding to the questionnaire, participants gave permission for the
investigator to use information for research purposes only. Data was collected
using a self-completion questionnaire.
The
questionnaire consists of three parts:
Part
1- Participants’ background including gender, native language, age range,
cultural background and place of residence.
Part
2- Ordinal data about second or other language knowledge and proficiency.
Part
3- The frequency of using either asynchronous and synchronous communication
mediated communication.
Part
4- CMC scenarios; adapted from real life situations.
Data analysis and coding
All
the data in the first part of the questionnaire until the third part were used
to see their connection with the fourth part (CMC scenarios). The scenarios
were classified in accordance with Brown and Levsinson’s (1987) politeness
theory. The responses were annotated, classified, coded sorted applying Leech’s
(1983) taxonomy of illocutionary functions (Table 1).
Results
Participants by gender
In
total, 109 USQ postgraduate Education students participated in this research.
Female participation (72 participants) was higher than male participation (37
participants).
Participants by gender and language
There
are 65 females, or 60%, identified English as their native language while seven
females, or 6 %, indicated they spoke languages other than English. In
comparison, 34 males, (31%), were NE speakers while three, or 3%, speaks other
than English as their native tongue.
CMC participation
Participants
of different gender, age, language, and cultural background equally appreciate
asynchronous but were less enthusiastic to utilise synchronous communication.
Scenarios and coding
The
participants need to read the scenario description and to respond as they would
in reality. The scenarios were coded according to Brown and Levinson’s
politeness theory (1987). The third, fourth and fifth scenarios were considered
positive polite while the first, second and sixth were considered negative
polite.
Discussions
The
data revealed that participants across a wide range of genders, languages,
cultural backgrounds and generations demonstrated a preference for polite
language and a high tolerance for rude and offensive language. Males chose positive
politeness while females used competitive responses, which indicated some
endorsement for impoliteness. In the findings, male responses showed a tendency
for short answers, fewer apologies, and deliberate employment of clichés, and
expressed less doubts about meaning of messages and used humour and irony more
often. Female participants on the other hand, used elaborate expressions in
their answers, responded with more apologies, openly expressed their confusion
about the messages and expressed more gratitude as well as asserted
disapproval. Therefore, it is obvious from the findings that females employ
co-operative strategies such as care, concern and sympathy in communication.
However,
it is also true that using CMC can lead to pragmatic failure which is not only
from errors in syntax, inaccurate pronunciation (not applicable in asynchronous
communication) or literal meaning, but also in part from the misunderstanding
or miscommunication of the implied meaning. In CMC, interlocutors are dependent
on the written text, their language skills and their limited knowledge about
their online community. But, it is true that in CMC, interlocutors generally
strive to save the other person’s face. As a conclusion, The results confirmed
the findings of the literature that participants, regardless of their gender,
language, cultural background or age, predominantly favour politeness.
Conclusion
As
a conclusion, politeness is considered as a mean of respect and kindness to
allow the other interlocutor to save face. The data affirmed the findings of
the literature review, revealing that neither native language, gender, nor
cultural backgrounds are exclusively responsible for cross-cultural pragmatic
failure in CMC. Language and cultural background influenced responses in such a
way that participants predominantly drew on polite tactics. However,
cross-cultural pragmatic failure has the potential to transform into
cross-cultural sensitivity and awareness benefiting the NE and ESL interlocutors
promoting cross-cultural communication and dialogue.
0 comments:
Post a Comment