Cultural Differences: Polychronic vs Monochronic Cultures and Thinking Styles | Schemi e mappe concettuali di Lingua Inglese

Lingua inglese mod. 2

We should not think of this model as “monolithic”: cultures do not rank as “high” or “low” in an absolute sense.we

are talking about TENDENCIES (slides). E.g Texas is more HC oriented than NY, although they’re both part of the US,

wich is usually associated to a LC orientation.

Esempio importante: audioguide italiane, inglesi e americane prof Fina.

Time and its Perception: (guardare video su moodle)

Hall made a distinction between:

1) Polychronic (Hc oriented cultures) -relationships are more important than tasks and schedules; -multi-focus,

they have no problem in doing several things at the same time

2) Monochronic (LC oriented cultures) -tasks and schedules are more important; -mono-focus: interrupting a

meating call to attend another person is cosidered rude.

Another distinction, made by Brake is the one between:

1) Fluid/Polychronic time: -HC oriented cultures, schedules/deadlines may change, “subito”= when I finish what

I’m doing; delays are expected and tolerated; “torno subito”= 5/10/ 30/min etc; FLEXIBILITY

2) Fixed/Monochronic time: -LC oriented cultures; “on time” means “on time”;deadlines are important;

technical time, pause:30 min.) NON FLESSIBILE; MOLTO PRECISO

Cultures are not monolithic, we musn’t speak in absolute terms because this would lead to serious mistakes.

Thinking Orientations

Trompenaars made a distinction between:

1) Deductive thinking: HC oriented cultures; focus on theories, logic and principles. from theory to emphirical

observation.

2) Inductive Thinking: LC oriented cultures, focus on facts and statistics, from emphirical observation to theory.

Oral presentation style (italian VS angloamerican): italians start from the background, they go “around” their main

topic and, finally, they get to the point of their presentation.

Angloamerican instead, begin their speech with the topic of their presentation and then they provide the details step

by step.

Another distinction, also made by Trompenaars , is the one between:

1) Systemic thinking: HC, holistic, focus on the full picture and its backgroung, explainations are in terms of

feelings and similes

2) Linear thinking: LC, focus on details, precision and minute cause and effect.problems are dissected into

logical and precise sequences.

Ricerca: recensioni TripAdvisor italiane ed inglesi. Dettagli importanti: PADLET

Space Orientations

Psychological space VS phisical space.

Psychological space: the degree to wich individuals let others into their lives.

Psychological space can be described as (distinction made by Trompenaars):

1) Diffuse: both public and private space are similar in size. Individuals guard their public space carefully

because entry into public space means entry into private space as well. Guarded approach, but when a

relationship has been formed, entry is aspected to all areas of private space.

2) Specific: individuals have a large public space they share with others and a small private space they guard

closely and share with only close friends.people are often extrovert.work and private life are separated.

Video: cultural proxemics, personal space (Moodle) key points:

- Personal space = compared to a portable air bubble

- It varies depending on the surroundings and the situations

- Robert Sommer defines phisical space as “an area with an invisible boundary surrounding a person’s body,

into wich intruders may not come”

- Edward T.Hall identifies 4 zones of personal space: intimate, personal, social, public.

- In our teenage years the invisible bubbles normally solidify.

- Phisical contact in public spaces = more common in Middle Eastern Countries.

Anteprima parziale del testo

Scarica Cultural Differences: Polychronic vs Monochronic Cultures and Thinking Styles e più Schemi e mappe concettuali in PDF di Lingua Inglese solo su Docsity!

Lingua inglese mod. 2 We should not think of this model as “monolithic”: cultures do not rank as “high” or “low” in an absolute sense.we are talking about TENDENCIES (slides). E.g Texas is more HC oriented than NY, although they’re both part of the US, wich is usually associated to a LC orientation. Esempio importante: audioguide italiane, inglesi e americane prof Fina. Time and its Perception: (guardare video su moodle) Hall made a distinction between:

Polychronic (Hc oriented cultures) -relationships are more important than tasks and schedules; -multi-focus, they have no problem in doing several things at the same time
Monochronic (LC oriented cultures) -tasks and schedules are more important; -mono-focus: interrupting a meating call to attend another person is cosidered rude. Another distinction, made by Brake is the one between:
Fluid/Polychronic time: -HC oriented cultures, schedules/deadlines may change, “subito”= when I finish what I’m doing; delays are expected and tolerated; “torno subito”= 5/10/ 30/min etc; FLEXIBILITY
Fixed/Monochronic time: -LC oriented cultures; “on time” means “on time”;deadlines are important; technical time, pause:30 min.) NON FLESSIBILE; MOLTO PRECISO Cultures are not monolithic, we musn’t speak in absolute terms because this would lead to serious mistakes. Thinking Orientations Trompenaars made a distinction between:
Deductive thinking: HC oriented cultures; focus on theories, logic and principles. from theory to emphirical observation.
Inductive Thinking: LC oriented cultures, focus on facts and statistics, from emphirical observation to theory. Oral presentation style (italian VS angloamerican): italians start from the background, they go “around” their main topic and, finally, they get to the point of their presentation. Angloamerican instead, begin their speech with the topic of their presentation and then they provide the details step by step. Another distinction, also made by Trompenaars , is the one between:
Systemic thinking: HC, holistic, focus on the full picture and its backgroung, explainations are in terms of feelings and similes
Linear thinking : LC, focus on details, precision and minute cause and effect.problems are dissected into logical and precise sequences. Ricerca: recensioni TripAdvisor italiane ed inglesi. Dettagli importanti: PADLET Space Orientations Psychological space VS phisical space. Psychological space: the degree to wich individuals let others into their lives. Psychological space can be described as (distinction made by Trompenaars ):
Diffuse: both public and private space are similar in size. Individuals guard their public space carefully because entry into public space means entry into private space as well. Guarded approach, but when a relationship has been formed, entry is aspected to all areas of private space.
Specific: individuals have a large public space they share with others and a small private space they guard closely and share with only close friends.people are often extrovert.work and private life are separated. Video: cultural proxemics, personal space (Moodle) key points:

Personal space = compared to a portable air bubble
It varies depending on the surroundings and the situations
Robert Sommer defines phisical space as “an area with an invisible boundary surrounding a person’s body, into wich intruders may not come”
Edward T.Hall identifies 4 zones of personal space: intimate, personal, social, public.
In our teenage years the invisible bubbles normally solidify.
Phisical contact in public spaces = more common in Middle Eastern Countries.

Germans tend to keep the door closed while working (because it might lead to intrusion); while the americans tend to do the opposite ( ‘cause they think it could lead to ostracism) Hoefstede’s Research (about Space): Two large surveys conducted in 72 countries (comparison of the answers of 117.000 employees) Hypothesis: all societies face the same problems (e.g how to deal with authority.) but the answers differ depending on culture. Results: average values obtained for each country led to the identification of 4 cultural dimensions (+ 2 added later): Power distance, collectivism VS individualism, uncertainty avoidance (these are the most important) Power distance: the degree to wich the less powerful member of a society accept and expect that power is distributed unequally(…); how a society deals with inequalities amonh people.
Cultures with High Power Distance: accept a hierarcal order where everybody has its own place.
“ “ Low Power Distance: people strive to equalise the distribution of power and demaind justification for inequalities of power. Low Power Distance: inequalities should be minimized; status is accorded depending on proven results; students treat teachers as equals and so the parents do with their children; less powerful prople and more powerful people should be interdependent. High Power Distance: inequalities are expected and tolerated; status is accorded depending on “who” someone is; less powerful prople should be depedent; students treat teachers with respect and so do children with their parents. (Slide 24: esempi) Individualism VS collectivism: a society position on this dimensions is reflected in wheter people’s self-image is defined in terms of “I” or in terms of “we”.
Individualism: preference for loosely-knit social framework in wich individuals are expected to take care of themselved and their immediate families.
Collecivism: preference for a tighty-knit social framework in wich individuals can expect their relatives or members of a particular group to look after them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty. Individualism: children learn to think in terms of “I”, LC operating mode, friendships are voluntary, criteria for marriage patterns are not predetermined, speaking one’s mind is a charateristic of a honest person. Collectivism: childrean learn to think in terms of “we”, HC operating mode prevails,friendships are predetermined, harmony should be mainteined and directs confrontations avoided, brides should be young and bridegrooms should be older. Uncertainty Avoidance: the degree to wich the members of a society feel unconfortable with uncertainty and ambiguity (…) , how a society handles the fact that the future can never be known.
Strong Uncertainty Avoidance: countries exhibiting strong UA maintain rigid codes of belief and are intolerant of behaviours and ideas that deviate from these codes.
Weak Uncertainty Avoidance: weak UA societies maintain a more relaxed attitude toward change and uncertainty. Strong UA: high stress and anxiety, acceptance of familiar risks but fear of ambiguous situations, what is different is dangerous, uncertainty is a threat and must me fought. Weak UA: less stress and low anxiety, comfortable in ambiguous situations and unfamiliar risks, what is different is curious, uncertainty is a feature of life and each day is accepted as is comes. PART 3 – DMIS (developmental model of intercultural sensitivity)
Ethnocentrism: assumes that the worldview of ones’s own culture is central to all realities
Ethnorelativism: suppose that cultures can only be understood relative to one another, and that a particular behaviour can only be understood within a cultural context.
Internal sensitivity: ability to discriminate and to experience relevant cultural differences.
Intercultural competence: abilty to think and act in interculturally appropriate ways. Function of the DMIS: highlights aspects of cultural blindness and distortion; describes how we gain the ability to create an alternative experience that -more or less- matches that of people in another culture; predicts a change of identity: from personal reaction (ethnocentric view) to a global sensitivity (ethnorelative view).

Re-Attribution: strategy to help reduce negative attribution and potential culture shock. The RAG strategy will be effective only if there is a belief in the possibility that it is the context that defines appropriate behaviuour. So, we need to analyse the cultural issue within the context of situation. RAG- 6 STEPS: 1) Bald, negative statements about others noted verbatism (word for word) = you describe your culture shock negative experience. 2) Non-judjemental description of behaviour = you will be asked to describe again the behaviour, but this time you will purify your language from any judgement you used before. (neither negative or positive language) 3) You describe the appropriate behaviour in your own culture (we will name it “culture 1”) 4) Consider the values underlying Culture 1’s right behaviour. We need to provide a list of values and beliefs that underlie the “normal” behaviour in our culture. 5) Possible positive reasons (values) for the strange behaviour in culture 2. We need to slip into the other shoes and consider both the context of situation and the context of culture to check how this behaviour could fit into a wider context for them and therefore be “logical” within that culture. 6) Check emotional pulse: go back to your negative emotion.if the RAG worked,at this point you will be able to see that Culture1 values are fully (or at least in part) satisfied by Culture2 behaviour. You realise that behaviours may be different, but values are more or less the same. People are moved by the same values an beliefs after all. Pratical application of the RAG- slide lezione 01/12/2020 – importante! Politeness: it has to do with communication strategies that we can use to make our communication sound more polite – “cortesia linguistica”. What makes communication polite?

Discourse coventions (e.g compliments)
Body Language (e.g eye contact, smiling)
Rules of etiquette (e.g dress, behaviour)
Taboo topics (e.g sex, money,politics etc.)
Face-saving conventions (e.g “forse ho capito male”)
Language conventions (e.g “I see your point”) you need to show understanding and empathy. Politeness is strictly related to “ Face ” : face is a concept developed by Goffman (a sociologist) and this term is considered sociological. Face is characterized by the positive social image we try to mantain during interaction. Also, it is an image of the self wich depends on both the rules and the values of a particular society and the situation in wich the interaction happens. It also mirrors the way a person want to be perceived. Brown and Levinson’s (2 socio-linguists) extendended the notion of “Face”. According to them, every individual has:

A Positive Face: the desire to be liked, appreciated, approved and to be treated as a member of the group.
A Negative Face : the need to be indipendent, to have freedom of action and not to be imposed by others. The problem arising in everyday communication is that social connections threaten to positive and negative face (and this is inevitable). When we connect with other people, our face might be threatened by others too, because we need to give orders, ask favors, deny favors, give feedback etc. During social interactions, threats should be prevented. They are normal, but they could also lead to misunderstandings. Face Threatening Acts (FTAs): an act that damages the face of the addressee or the speaker by acting in opposition to the wants or the desires of the other. They can affect both negative and positive face. E.g of a threat to positive face: saying “no” or disagree. “ “ “ “ “ negative face: making a request. (when we do it, there is the risk of limiting other’s freedom). Negative face-threatening speech acts: they are threats because they tend to restrict addressee’s freedom of action. Positive face-threatening speech acts: threaten the positive self-image of the addressee by signaling disagreement or undesirable qualities.

Severity of FTAs: not all face-threatening acts has the same levels of severity. What determine that severity?

Power : if the hearer has more power, the request is more face-threatening (e.g asking your boss for assistance instead of asking your co-worker) 2) Distance (not physical,but relational): e.g asking money from your bestfriend is very different from asking money from someone that is not as close to you.) The more is the distance between you and the hearer, the more face-threatening your act will be. 3) Rank of Imposition: while power and distance refer to the people involved in the communication, the Rank of Imposition has to do with the nature of the message. For example, in requests, the larger your request is, the more face-threatening it will be. (E.g: asking to borrow a car is more imposing than asking fo 5£) Politeness Strategies.

- Bald on record : there is no attempt to minimize the threat to the hearer’s face. It provokes shock or embarassment on the hearer. Often used when speaker and hearer has a close relationship. We normally use bald on record when: danger, urgency, when efficiency is necessary (e.g “hear me out”), task oriented, in the interest of the hearer. - Positive Politeness: minimizes threat to the hearer’s poitive face. Used to make the hearers feel good about themselves. Used when speaker and hearer know eachother fairly well. We normally use this when we want to attend the hearer’s interests, needs etc. (you want to show that you care); identity markers are often used (e.g “hey mate!”). Positive politeness involves being optimistic, inclusive, avoiding disagreement etc. - Negative Politeness: minimizes threat to the hearer’s negative face. Emphasizes avoidance/minimization of imposition. Indirectness.e.g: “Hey, I was wondering if you could..”, “Could you…” “Non è che per caso potresti…” “I’m sorry, it is a lot to ask, but…” - Off record: (indirect) only hint, no mention.the request is implicit in the context. E.g: “wow, it’s getting cold here” means “could you please close the window?) it is the opposite of BALD ON RECORD. - No FTA (no face threatening act): you say NOTHING and you hope the other person understand your need. It is the least efficient. The order of these strategies is not random, there are two criteria: efficiency and politeness. The more the strategy is efficient, the less polite it will be (and viceversa). “Bald on record” is the most effective one because it is the most explicit. It is also the least polite (since the message is explicit, there are no politeness linguistic strategies) “No FTAs” means that you renounce to produce a face threatening act. You hope that the other person understand what you want, so it is the most polite strategy but it is also the least efficient. If you want to borrow your neighbour’s vacuum cleaner, this is how you may ask depending on the strategy you want to use:

Off record: “our vacuum cleaner just broke down...”
Negative politeness: “could I please borrow your vacuum cleaner for just an hour?”
Positive politeness: “Susu, dear, I need to borrow your vacuum cleaner”
Bald on record: “get the vacuum cleaner!” – sounds like an order, but it’s just a very direct request. Guardare slides social distance between speaker and hearer. How can we frame politeness in the cross-cultural communication framework, and in particular in HCC vs LCC?
When the request and the politeness are in the text and they are explicit = LCC orientation.
When the request is in the text but the politeness is in the context = HCC orientation. Best approaches for most situations (Slide). Possible exam questions: multiple choice (recognize the type of politeness) ; what is “face”, what are FTAs, examples, list and exemplify politeness strategies.

Cultural Differences: Polychronic vs Monochronic Cultures and Thinking Styles, Schemi e mappe concettuali di Lingua Inglese

Documenti correlati

Anteprima parziale del testo

Scarica Cultural Differences: Polychronic vs Monochronic Cultures and Thinking Styles e più Schemi e mappe concettuali in PDF di Lingua Inglese solo su Docsity!