0% found this document useful (0 votes)

333 views331 pages

10 1017@9781108780360 002-Merged

Uploaded by

Man Bidam

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

333 views331 pages

10 1017@9781108780360 002-Merged

Uploaded by

Man Bidam

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 331

chapter 1

Key Concepts in Intercultural Communication

Chapter Overview
The scholarship on intercultural communication is grounded in interdis-
ciplinary research in anthropology, communication studies, education,
linguistics, and, more recently, applied linguistics. Given this interdisci-
plinarity, it is useful to establish a shared understanding of how key
concepts such as culture and communication are used in this book.
Additionally, this chapter highlights the nature of culture as layered and
of communication as dynamically co-constructed by participants and the
social context in which their interaction takes place. Finally, the discussion
turns to prominent models of intercultural communication from a social-
scientiﬁc perspective, which offer fruitful points of analysis in language
pedagogy as well.

Culture: An Elusive Deﬁnition

Deﬁning the term ‘culture’ is a challenging endeavor, and since this book
explores it in depth, here I only offer a brief review of seminal works that
attempted to capture the meaning of ‘culture.’
Saville-Troike (2003) described it as a “set of codes and rules … for
contextually appropriate behavior in a community or group; in other
words, culture was conceived to be what the individual needs to know to
be a functional member of the community” (p. 6). Others note the
importance of shared beliefs, values, thought patterns, and rules of
making and interpreting meaning (Byram, 1997; Haslett, 2017;
Nostrand, 1989). Schiffman (1993) echoes this view and describes culture
as “the set of behaviors, beliefs, attitudes, and historical circumstances
associated with a particular language” (p. 120). Similarly, Ting-Toomey
and Takai (2006) highlight the collective frame of reference that culture
provides:

Layers of Culture
While cultural cohesion is grounded in shared experiences, culture is not
monolithic. Instead, cultures are layered constructs, and each individual
reflects affiliation with and is influenced by broader and narrower social
forces that shape our communicative practices. Broader cultural forces
might include supranational (beyond the nation) communities, such as
Doctors without Borders or Harry Potter fans around the globe. Nations –
the most common association with the term ‘culture’ – that determine
laws, as well as language and other social policies, also have a significant
impact on cultural practices. For example, it is usually the state that
determines procedures or traditions for electing, appointing or inheriting
leadership (e.g., democracies versus a monarchy), including verbal and
nonverbal communication that such procedures entail. Within each poli-
tically defined nation, there are mid-level cultural groups – e.g., based on
ethnic identity, social class, or geographic region – whose values and
practices may align more or less with dominant trends in the nation-state
(Bonvillain, 2020; Haslett, 2017; Myers-Scotton, 2006; Neuliep, 2018).
Religious groups that share linguistic rituals or an indigenous community
revitalizing its heritage language represent two examples of such mid-level
groups. Representing the next layer, smaller cultural groups influence

broad cultural
context

organizations
& institutions

interpersonal
relationships

the individual

Figure 1.1 Layers of culture and impact (adapted from Oetzel, 2009).

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:37:07, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.002
12 Part I Theoretical and Methodological Foundations
common history and verbal and nonverbal symbol systems” (p. 21). Within
broad cultural contexts exist microcultural contexts, the way smaller social
groups (e.g., ethnic groups) view and understand the world. The next layer
is the environmental context, referring to the ways in which the physical
location and immediate surroundings affect communication (e.g., whis-
pering during a religious ceremony but yelling at sports games). The most
immediate influence on interactions is each individual’s perceptual context,
“the individual characteristics of each interactant, including cognitions,
attitudes, dispositions, and motivations” (p. 22). Moreover, interactions
take place within sociorelational contexts, or “the relationship between the
interactants,” both familial and professional, such as friends, parents and
children, mentor and pupil (p. 22). It is within this context that inter-
actants use verbal and nonverbal communication to create and interpret
messages.
Oetzel’s layers and Neuliep’s contexts reflect multiple cultural and
individual factors that influence specific communicative events. These
factors impact our interactions in different ways at different times. What
is salient – relevant, impactful – varies across situations. For example,
whether an individual is shy or has a particular way of speaking, whether
the interlocutors are familiar with each other or not, and what each
person wants to achieve with the interaction plays an important role in
determining how an interaction progresses, and what its outcomes
might be.
Figure 1.2 illustrates how broader societal forces and highly individual,
local factors may converge: an American athlete, the captain of the U.S.
women’s soccer team1, will likely interact differently during training or at
an international press conference than she might with her friends at home;
she might also interact differently if she is stressed or has a disagreement on
a consequential issue, as opposed to discussing what movie to watch
Saturday night. In any of her interactions with others, a different aspect
of her identity might be most salient: her being on the American as
opposed to the German team may influence her attitude towards winning;
her being the captain of the team versus another player determines who
represents the team to the media; her being with friends rather than
strangers affects her language choices, her verbal and nonverbal behaviors.
When analyzing interactions, it is important to understand how various
contextual and cultural forces interplay to shape an interaction, and how
participants consequently enact their social personae, or identities, through

1
www.ussoccer.com/womens-national-team#tab-1

Coarse-Grained Factors

Americans Germans

American women American men

American women American women

athletes non-athletes

The American
Other American
women’s soccer
women athletes
team

The other players of

The captain of the
the American
American women’s
women’s soccer
soccer team
team

The captain during The captain during a The captain at home

training game with friends

The captain having a The captain having a

good time with disagreement with a
friends friend

The captain when

The captain during a
discussing an issue
first-time
of ongoing
disagreement
disagreement

The captain having a The captain having a

disagreement while disagreement while
tired well rested

Fine-Grained Factors

Figure 1.2 Cultural inﬂuences on interaction

Communication and Socialization

Communication is a basic human need that is equal parts pure joy and
endless opportunity for mishap or even conflict. We use language to accom-
plish a wide range of social purposes, from expressing friendship or thanks,
giving advice or solace, teasing or flirting, debating issues of policy, establish-
ing social identity or creating, maintaining or deconstructing power and
authority (Monaghan & Goodman, 2007). As infants, our instinctive cries
are soon recognized as a cue to get fed or soothed, and we notice that
babbling makes others interact with us (Clark, 2016). Soon, toddlers drasti-
cally increase their vocabulary and use it to demand, cajole, express affection,
and comment verbally on their expanding world, using short utterances.
They learn how to ask and answer questions, and often how to play different
roles (parents, children, favorite characters in books or movies, etc.) by
adopting distinct voices, expressions, or speech patterns. Byram (1997) and
Risager (2007) refer to these types of processes as primary socialization. They
are followed by secondary socialization, when children enter the educational
system, although many kids around the world lack access to a formal
education. During our teenage years and throughout our lives, we encounter
new cultural groups and continue to grow our communicative skills, learn-
ing to participate in increasingly more diverse communicative events effec-
tively, such as celebrating graduation, giving a talk, participating in a friend’s
wedding, or giving a eulogy at a funeral (Duff & Hornberger, 2010; Ochs &
Schieffelin, 2008; Saville-Troike, 2003).
Socialization teaches in-group members how these events might be
celebrated, how they are organized, who may speak, and when or what is
appropriate to say. Expectations are rarely articulated and instead reflect
implicit rules for the “ways in which information, ideas, and attitudes pass
among individuals, groups, nations, and generations” (Barnouw, 1989,
p. 25). Constituted in infinite ways – a family, siblings, a sports team, a
village, a nation, or a group of people sharing the same gender, political
view, or religious affiliation – the communities to which we belong impact
how we view ourselves and others who belong to the same community –
i.e., members of the in-group – and, conversely, how we view and com-
municate with ‘outsiders,’ who are members of the out-group. As Baumann
(2007) notes,

The Genesis of Cross-Cultural and Intercultural Communication

The field of intercultural communication emerged out of the work of
Edward T. Hall, a cultural anthropologist who linked anthropology,
linguistics, ethology (the study of human/animal behavior and social
organization), and psychology to study communication. Much research
in the social sciences, including Hall’s work, has been cross-cultural: two or
more cultures are studied in terms of behaviors, beliefs, values, or practices,
identifying differences and similarities between them, so that members of
each group can interact more effectively with members of the other group
(Oetzel, 2009). This approach was used to help train diplomats and other
Foreign Service employees, based on interviews and observations of cul-
tural groups, whose behavior was interpreted in terms of societal patterns
that the trainees were likely to encounter.
More recent research reflects an intercultural approach, which explores
communication that occurs between members of different cultural groups
(Neuliep, 2018). This approach embraces the idea that, through commu-
nication, learners become more aware of the realities and perceptions
regarding their own culture and those of another culture, creating a “sphere
of interculturality” that encourages learners to put another “culture in
relation with one’s own” (Kramsch, 2003, p. 205). An intercultural per-
spective acknowledges the demands of navigating a new culture, maintain-
ing some of our own beliefs and practices, while giving up others (Byram,
1997; Byram & Masuhara, 2013). Intercultural communication requires
“intercultural competence [which] is the ability to interact effectively with
people from cultures that we recognise as being different from our own”
(Guilherme, 2000, p. 297). Intercultural competence, as we discuss in
detail in Chapter 2, entails linguistic and cultural knowledge regarding
more than one social group, the willingness to explore similarities and
differences between them through self-and other-reflection, cognitive and
psychological engagement, as well as a commitment to ongoing learning.

Communication Basics: Participants and Modalities

As Neuliep (2018) states, communication is an “ongoing, ever changing,
and continuous … interactive” process that is culturally bound (p. 11),
mostly intentional, although sometimes we communicate information
unwittingly. In interactions, information is exchanged between two or
more participants, also called interlocutors or interactants. Interactions
may be between two or more participants: a dyadic interaction can be
between a tutor and his student, whereas multiparty interactions have
more participants, such as a talk given at a public lecture or a group of
friends debating politics. Most of us are aware of our interlocutors and
share an expectation of information exchange, even if the speaker might
not know every person in the audience (e.g., a TV anchor). Expected
participants are ratified or legitimate. The roles of the speaker, who relates
the information, and the addressee(s), who listen(s), typically shift in
dynamic ways among participants. There may also be legitimate third-
party participants (e.g., the TV audience).
In some communication, however, there are unratified participants –
inadvertent (or intentional) hearers and listeners – in addition to the
ratified participants. They are not explicitly a part of the conversation or
may not be legitimate interlocutors. They might overhear a conversation by
accident, such as standing in line at the grocery store when somebody is
talking on the phone, or intentionally, without the knowledge of the
ratified participants, such as in the case of wiretapping2 during the course
of a criminal investigation. Figure 1.3 presents a diagram of the types of
participant roles I describe here.
Participant roles are not static; instead, participants create, shape, man-
age, and enact their identities in conjunction with their interlocutors
within social contexts during communication (Kern & Liddicoat, 2008).
At the same time, participants also enact culturally defined social roles,
such as an author writing in her diary, friends chatting or a therapist

2
www.npr.org/news/specials/nsawiretap/legality.html

PARTICIPANTS

RATIFIED PARTICIPANTS UNRATIFIED

(interlocutors/interactants) PARTICIPANTS

Speakers Hearers/Listeners

Addressees Third parties Overhearers

Bystanders Eavesdroppers

Figure 1.3 Potential participants in interactions (based on Dynel, 2010)

interacting with her patient. These roles are often limited in the language
classroom but are at the heart of meaning-making in real-world commu-
nication. Therefore, L2/Lx learning must shift to provide opportunities for
creative and diverse language use as a living expression of the self
(Shohamy, 2007).

Components of Intercultural Communication

We communicate meaning and our identities verbally and nonverbally,
through written and spoken language, using a combination of multiple
channels of communication simultaneously. In this volume, we will exam-
ine six subcategories to analyze culturally situated meaning that provide a
thorough overview of verbal and nonverbal communication: vocabulary,
grammar, pragmatics, paralinguistic features, nonverbal communication,
and context (Figure 1.4). Although, for the sake of clarity, individual
chapters are dedicated to each component (Chapters 4–9), in social prac-
tice they are integrated to interpret and create meaning, whereby “linguis-
tic structures provide elements for a communication system that, in turn,
becomes the resource through which social practices are created and
accomplished” (Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013, p. 17).
Vocabulary/Lexicon refers to words used in a language, including their
surface form and most frequent meaning, such as mosey for walking slowly,

Nonverbal
Communication
Pragmatics
Paralinguistic Features

Figure 1.4 Facets of intercultural communication

their collocations (frequently co-occurring words), such as mosey along,

their social connotations (e.g., in casual conversation), and referential
knowledge (e.g., that this term was used in the nineteenth-century Old
West in the United States).
Grammar is the morphology and syntax of a language (Myers-Scotton,
2006). Morphology explains how components of words work together to
express meaning; morphemes indicate, for example, whether an item is
singular, dual (two), or plural (three or more) in Inuktitut, a language
spoken in northern Canada (from Bonvillain, 2020, p. 21):
/iglu/ a house
/igluk/ two houses
/iglut/ three or more houses
Syntax describes how words fit together to form sentences and create
meaning. Syntactic rules determine word order or required elements in a
phrase, knowing, for example, that in French Je mange la baguette (‘I eat the
baguette’) is the correct word order (*La baguette je mange is not), and that
*Je mange baguette is insufficient, because either a definite or indefinite
article is required before the noun.
Pragmatics explores how we understand and use language beyond the
surface-level meaning, such as knowing to use thank you to express grati-
tude in English or convey sarcasm. Two sub-components comprise prag-
matics: pragmalinguistics focuses on the relationship between linguistic
form and meaning (e.g., the conditional may soften requests in the
German phrase könnten Sie mir bitte helfen [‘could you please help me’]),
while sociopragmatics refers to the social information required for inter-
preting and producing meaning (e.g., knowing with whom to use sensei
[‘teacher’] in Japanese).
Paralinguistic features pertain to sound quality, such as pitch, volume,
intonation, rate of speech, the use of silence, or hedges (e.g., ehm in British

Theoretical Models of Intercultural Communication

Over the past sixty years, scholarship has sought to understand cultural
beliefs, values, and behaviors systematically. While not without limita-
tions, these models are useful for organizing intercultural communication
in the L2/Lx learning context as well. There is insufﬁcient space to give a
complete overview of all available models (see Spitzberg & Changnon,
2009 for a detailed review), therefore just a few of the most inﬂuential
examples are addressed below.

Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s Values Orientation Theory

One of the earliest models of intercultural communication was the Values
Orientation Theory (Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck, 1961), developed originally
by Clyde Kluckhohn then expanded upon by Florence Kluckhohn and
Fred Strodtbeck, anthropologists who worked with ﬁve cultural groups in
the Southwest of the United States: members of the Navajo and Zuni
tribes, Mexican Americans, rural Texans, and members of Mormon vil-
lages. Their analyses generated ﬁve dimensions, with three value orienta-
tions possible for each, as shown in Table 1.1.

Dimensions Value Orientations

1. Human nature Basically good Mixture of good Basically bad

(socially oriented) and bad (selﬁsh)
2. Relationship Mastery Harmony between Submissive
between humans (humans dominate) the two (nature dominates)
and nature
3. Relationship Individual Hierarchical Collateral
between humans (independent (deference to (consensus building,
decision-making) authority, state seen group members
as responsible) are seen as equals)
4. Preferred Doing/action Being-in-becoming Being (emphasis on
personality (achievement, both (spiritual growth) expressive/
(motivations) personally and emotional self-
externally set) presentation)
5. Orientation Past-orientation Present-orientation Future
towards time (preserving (here-and-now, (planning ahead,
traditions) accommodate seeking new ways
changes in beliefs to replace the old)
and traditions)

Adapted from Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck, 1961, and Ting-Toomey, 2018.

A culture’s guiding documents (e.g., legal documents, an oral

narrative) provide useful insights as to its orientation towards these
five values. Regarding the first question, a culture that believes that
people are fundamentally good would focus on rehabilitation in
prison (e.g., Norway) and prioritize improving human goodness
(e.g., Buddhism). In a culture that views humans as basically bad –
like Christian notions of sin – the legal emphasis would be on
punishment, while the human emphasis would be on repentance. A
more mixed view blends these two perspectives and considers some
human action to be redeemable and others unforgivable (e.g., a family
unit decides what is acceptable and what results in shunning). In
Kluckhohn’s model, each category has a mutable and immutable ver-
sion: an individual can start out bad but improve (mutable) or be
born bad and remain that way (immutable) (Hills, 2002).
The second value focuses on humans’ relationship to nature, which they
may dominate, be subjugated to, or live in harmony with. In the United
States, government policies typically reflect a dominant stance towards

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:37:07, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.002
1 Key Concepts in Intercultural Communication 21
nature: rivers are rerouted and the Arctic is opened up for oil drilling3. The
human-over-nature paradigm reflects most Western countries since the
onset of the Enlightenment (Vining, Merrick, & Price, 2008). A nature-
over-human (biocentric) orientation, on the other hand, would accept
unlimited births (Martin & Nakayama, 2018), prefer organic food, or
engage in environmental activism. Cultures in which nature and people
are viewed as being in harmony with one another – neither dominant over
the other (e.g., adapting to nature by building homes on stilts) – include
many Native American societies and most Japanese people (Martin &
Nakayama, 2018).
Human relationships are also guided by value systems. Individualistic
societies (like many communities in the United States and Western
Europe) prefer individuals to take full responsibility for their actions
(e.g., financial situation), while hierarchical societies might be more likely
to see the state (or a patriarch or matriarch) as being responsible for the
well-being of its citizens (family or community members) (Hills, 2002). In
a collaterally oriented culture, members would make decisions with equal
weight and reach consensus, stressing “role obligations and in-group
interdependence, kinship bonds, and extended family bonds” (Ting-
Toomey, 2018, p. 194).
Doing, being-in-becoming, and being are the three possible responses to
motivations. The United States, by and large, is doing-oriented: it is not
enough to make it to the Olympic Games, it is crucial to earn a medal, lest
the country’s performance be called ‘lousy’ (Paine, 2018). A being-in-
becoming orientation may be difficult to measure in surveys, since personal
growth can mean myriads of possible paths that are important to a unique
human being. According to Martin and Nakayama (2018), “This orienta-
tion seems to be less prevalent than the other two, perhaps practiced only in
Zen Buddhism” (p. 101). Arguably, however, artists who wish to hone their
skills to meet their own aspirations towards a goal they had set for
themselves would also reflect this orientation. The third orientation –
being (expressive/emotional self-presentation) – emphasizes social struc-
tures and relationships (e.g., Chinese, Japanese, or Arab cultures, with the
obvious caveat that there is variation in each of these broad cultural labels).
In such cultures, an individual’s birth, family connections, or age would
outweigh their personal actions: “what [a person] is” carries greater sig-
nificance than “what he does” (Okabe, 1983, p. 24).

3
www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/04/trump-administration-takes-ﬁrst-steps-toward-drilling-alaska-
s-arctic-refuge

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:37:07, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.002
22 Part I Theoretical and Methodological Foundations
Future, present, and past orientations form the basis of the final question
in Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s analytic model. Cultures that focus on the
future are likely to set out goals they want to meet in five or ten years, set up
appointments months or years in advance, and focus on saving up vacation
days or money for future adventures (e.g., the Boy Scout motto “Always be
prepared,” Canada and the United States at the national level). A present
orientation focuses on taking advantage of and enjoying the here and now
(e.g., Spain or Greece). As Kluckhohn (1953) herself observed, present-
oriented cultures “pay little attention to what has happened in the past, and
regard the future as a vague and most unpredictable period” (p. 348).
Cultures with past orientation, in contrast, emphasize tradition, a connec-
tion to the past, and the experience that older members of society can
contribute. Many European, Central and South American, and Asian
countries reflect this value orientation.
According to Hills (2002), Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck proposed a sixth
value orientation, space, which they did not know how to investigate at the
time of their original research. Hills himself suggested expanding the
original model with four further dimensions (quotes from p. 10):
1. Space: “Should space belong to individuals, to groups (especially the
family) or to everybody?”
2. The nature of work: “What should be the basic motivation for work?
To make a contribution to society, to have a sense of personal achieve-
ment, or to attain financial security?”
3. The relationship between genders: “How should society distribute
roles, power and responsibility between the genders?” (power and
responsibility to men, women, or equally to both)
4. The relationship between individuals and the state: “Should precedent
right and responsibility be accorded the nation or the individual?”
(individuals take full responsibility for themselves, with no support
from the state; the state provides full support to all members; the
individual and the state share rights and responsibilities in reasonable
proportions).
Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck were surprised by the relative similarities
among cultures around the world (five dimensions, fifteen value orienta-
tions), while at the same time, there was much diversity among cultures as
well (the permutations of five dimensions and fifteen orientations yield 243
possible variants). It is important to note that Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck
did not elevate any orientations above the others; differences were seen as
differences, not ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ ways of understanding the world,

Hofstede’s Value Orientations Model

Geert Hofstede, a social psychologist, worked for IBM, a multinational
computer company, in the 1960s. He collected data from over 100,000
employees in seventy countries and regions to identify patterns of beliefs
and values across cultures. Between the 1980s and 2000s Hofstede devel-
oped a model of cultural analysis along four dimensions:

1. Individualism – Collectivism
In individualistic societies (e.g., the United States, Australia), the priority is given to the
needs of an individual, with little emphasis on group cohesion or the interests of a larger
social unit. In contrast, in collectivistic cultures (e.g., Ecuador, Taiwan), there is less
emphasis on individual achievement and wants and more on relationships and loyalty
(i.e., accomplishment is less important than membership in particular social groups).
Communication is more direct in individualistic cultures, while it may be mediated by
third parties in collectivist cultures.
2. High power distance – Low power distance
Although all cultures experience some degree of inequality, in high power distance
cultures, there is significant inequality between more and less powerful members. These
cultures tend to be very hierarchical, both at the family level and in society at large (e.g.,
Malaysia, Panama). Conversely, cultures with low power distance are comparatively
egalitarian, with little inequality between members of society. At work, supervisors are
more likely to accept questions and suggestions; at home, children are involved in
decision-making (e.g., New Zealand, Denmark).
3. Masculinity – Femininity
This dimension does not label countries masculine or feminine, rather it describes the
extent to which gender roles are distinguished from each other. More masculine
cultures (e.g., Japan, Austria) tend to have more rigidly assigned gender roles (e.g.,
women stay at home, men work; women perform low-level tasks, men are in positions
of power). Commensurately, traditional masculine attributes of assertiveness,
competitiveness, and material success are highly valued in such cultures. In contrast,
more feminine cultures (e.g., Sweden, Costa Rica) have fewer gender-specific roles and
reflect flexible ideas about work that men and women can undertake. These cultures
value characteristics that were traditionally associated with women: interpersonal
relationships, taking care of those in need, nurturing, or moderated ambition.

4. High uncertainty avoidance – Low uncertainty avoidance

Cultures with a preference for high uncertainty avoidance dislike ambiguous,
unpredictable, or risky situations (e.g., Greece, Uruguay). To mitigate uncertainty, such
cultures set up detailed rules, discourage dissent, and strive for consensus in decision-
making. Low uncertainty avoidance, in contrast, means cultures in which there is less
concern about unpredictability (e.g., Jamaica, Denmark). Consequently, there are
fewer rules that conﬁne life, dissent is welcomed and encouraged, and risk is not seen in
a negative light.

These studies were conducted in the domain of the workplace, and

probably skewed towards younger, technologically more savvy respon-
dents than the general population.
Later scholarship contributed two further dimensions to Hofstede’s
(1991) model, adding a non-Western perspective to cultural analysis –
long-term versus short-term orientation – grounded in Confucianism
and a modern concern regarding indulgence and self-restraint (Hofstede,
Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010).

5. Long-term orientation – Short-term orientation

Cultures with long-term orientation (e.g., China, Japan) emphasize virtues such as
thrift, perseverance, and effort (persistent work towards a goal), the willingness to
subordinate oneself to a larger purpose or cause, and flexible concepts of good
and evil (what is good or evil depends on circumstances). Conversely, cultures
with short-term orientation (e.g., Nigeria, the Philippines) prefer quick results,
adherence to social pressure (e.g., spending money even beyond one’s means,
to keep up with external social expectations), reliance on luck (e.g., gambling),
pride in one’s country, universal notions of good and evil (circumstances are
irrelevant).
6. Indulgence – Self-restraint
Cultures that score high on the indulgence scale (e.g., Venezuela, Sweden) accept
“relatively free gratification of basic and natural human desires related to enjoying
life and having fun” (Hofstede, 2011, p. 15). Individuals might have a strong sense
of control over their lives, value leisure, emphasize friendships, participate in
sports, and indulge in pleasurable activities (eating, partying, sexual liberty). At
the same time, a culture with stronger self-restraint “controls gratification of needs
and regulates it by means of strict social norms” (Hofstede, 2011, p. 15). Such
cultures (e.g., Pakistan, Latvia) limit freedom of speech, where individuals enjoy
less leisure time, de-emphasize friendships, and experience a more acute sense of
helplessness (what happens to me is beyond my control); consequently, fewer
people report feelings of happiness.

Hall’s Dimensions of Cultural Difference

The final model to be addressed was developed by Hall (1976), who,
unlike the previous scholars, focused on behaviors rather than the
beliefs and values that motivate people’s actions. Specifically, he
studied time, communicative context, and the use of space. The first
two categories are continua, with most cultures falling somewhere
between the two endpoints, while the third one divides behaviors
across four types.

1. Monochromatic time – Polychromatic time

M-time describes practices where an individual focuses on one thing at a time; there is an
emphasis on being punctual, having a clear schedule of activities, and completing tasks
in a linear fashion. In contrast, P-time reﬂects multitasking, involvement with people,
and prioritizing them as opposed to completing tasks according to a preset schedule.

2. Low-context communication – High-context communication

Low-context communication prefers explicit verbal messages to express meaning, and
very little information that pertains to an interaction has to be inferred from the
context. High-context communication, on the other hand, relies heavily on contextual
information pertaining to social roles and positions, customs, shared knowledge and
experience, and nonverbal communication (e.g., silence, intonation, pauses, gestures,
body posture).
3. Use of personal space
Hall distinguished four contexts for analyzing personal space: intimate distance,
personal distance, social distance, public distance. Each type of interactional context
permits for very different types of closeness and touching, and cultures have different
notions of how many inches or centimeters each of these distances should be (Crouch,
2012; Watson & Graves, 1966), although the sense of what is appropriate is typically
subconscious for most people.
Intimate distance is reserved for making love, comforting a loved one (partners, close
family, children), whispering secrets, and touching among close friends.
Personal distance is used with friends and acquaintances during casual conversations;
this distance is what we prefer to keep around ourselves, commonly labeled as ‘personal
space’ (about one arm’s length for men in the United States, Crouch, 2012).
Social distance refers to space that we consider appropriate in formal interactions (e.g.,
a business meeting, a company reception).
Public distance typically requires the largest space between a speaker and his or her
audience; a public speech, performance, or ceremony usually fall into this category.

Knowledge of Hall’s and the preceding models might not eliminate

miscommunication or conﬂict entirely; instead, they provide frameworks
for guiding reﬂection, analysis, and understanding in intercultural com-
munication, a worthy and necessary goal in today’s interconnected world.
His dimensions also lend themselves particularly well to materials design
for lower-level language classes.

Recent Conceptualizations of Intercultural Knowledge

and Competence
Over the last decade, faculty from several U.S. universities collabo-
rated on designing a rubric to evaluate individuals’ intercultural
competence from early to more advanced stages of development.
This rubric is grounded in a framework based on knowledge, atti-
tudes, and skills and entails the following subcomponents, and ideal
competences:

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:37:07, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.002
1 Key Concepts in Intercultural Communication 27
1. Knowledge:
a. Cultural self-awareness: The ability to recognize the complexity of
one’s own cultural practices and biases and how one’s experiences
shape these rules.
b. Knowledge of cultural worldview frameworks: The ability to
understand the complexity of another culture, such as its history,
values, communication styles, and so on.
2. Skills
a. Empathy: The ability to interpret intercultural experiences from
multiple perspectives, including one’s own cultural framework, as
well as that of another cultural group.
b. Verbal and nonverbal communication: The ability to interpret
and participate in interaction successfully, using culturally appro-
priate verbal and nonverbal communication (e.g., preferred phy-
sical contact, directness, or indirectness).
3. Attitudes
a. Curiosity: The ability and willingness to ask complex questions
about other cultures, recognizing that answers to these questions
vary, reﬂecting multiple perspectives.
b. Openness: The ability and willingness to interact with people
from diverse cultural backgrounds, suspending judgment limited
by one’s own cultural beliefs and practices.
This framework recognizes the importance of intercultural commu-
nicative competence in a globally interconnected world. It also puts
culture at the center of transformative learning. Thus, the rubric
offers “a systematic way to measure our capacity to identify our
own cultural patterns, compare and contrast them with others, and
adapt empathically and ﬂexibly to unfamiliar ways of being”
(www.aacu.org/value/rubrics/intercultural-knowledge). While the
faculty experts acknowledge that intercultural communicative
competence is more complex than the components of the rubric,
this matrix is a valuable way to conceptualize and understand the
knowledge, attitudes, and skills required for becoming an intercultu-
rally competent individual.

Summary
Since the study of intercultural communication ﬁrst began in the 1950s, it
has been dominated by the social sciences, such as anthropology,

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS AND ACTIVITIES

1. What culture(s) do you belong to? How did you learn about the
practices, behaviors, and values of that/those culture(s)? Which practices
do you participate in, and which values do you share? Which practices do
you choose not to participate in, and which values do you not
share? Why?
2. How might your cultural affiliations change in different situations?
What factors influence your sense of cultural belonging?
3. Who determines what is ‘appropriate’ – in terms of beliefs and
practices – in a cultural group? What are some top-down and
bottom-up effects that may effect change in this group (see
discussions regarding Oetzel and Neuliep)?
4. Keep a journal for a day and note the different social personae you
inhabit in various interactions. What cultural affiliations are salient in
these interactions? How do you know? How does your communication
change to reflect various social identities?
5. Select a model of intercultural communication and analyze one of the
cultural groups you belong to (e.g., nation, hobby, family). Afterwards,
reflect on what practices, beliefs, and values were easy or difficult to
identify and why.

6. Using the same model, analyze a cultural group that you are at least
somewhat familiar with but do not belong to. Afterwards, consider what
dimensions of the model were easy or difﬁcult to identify. What kinds of
knowledge would you need to develop to be able to analyze this cultural
group more thoroughly, effectively, and accurately?

Pedagogical Foundations of Teaching Intercultural

Communication for L2/Lx Use

Chapter Overview
Our understanding of language learning and teaching, and what role we
believe the broader social context plays in the L2/Lx learning process, have
changed drastically over the past 100 years. This chapter offers a brief
review of key developments in language pedagogy, from the grammar
translation method to the communicative approach and beyond. This
review lays the groundwork for teaching languages with an intercultural
communication orientation, which is discussed in the second half of this
chapter and explored in depth in the pedagogical chapters in this volume.

The Evolution of Language Pedagogy: L2 Pedagogy until

the 1970s
Until the nineteenth century, Latin and Ancient Greek were the most com-
monly taught foreign languages in Europe. Teaching focused on grammar
(taught by rote memorization), translation of literary and historical texts, and
rhetoric. Due to the central role of grammar instruction, this teaching style was
later labeled the Grammar Translation Method (Richards & Rodgers, 2014).
Societal changes in the nineteenth century, however, reshaped the perception of
language learning, as more people either had to or chose to travel during the
Industrial Revolution and colonial expansion, and as public education gained
momentum (Lawson & Silver, 2013). This was also a period of rapid growth in
scholarship by Danish, English, French, and German linguists (Koerner, 1994),
whose work shifted the focus to spoken and living languages and changed
considerations regarding how languages were learned and used in society.
Consequently, by the turn of the twentieth century, practically oriented
European linguists reconceptualized language instruction, giving rise to the
Direct Method (also known as the Berlitz method), whose main tenets were
that:

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:55:43, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.003
2 Pedagogical Foundations of Teaching ICC for L2/Lx Use 31
• spoken language was the primary mode of communication,
• the process of L2 learning was similar to L1 acquisition,
• correct pronunciation was essential,
• L2 learning should reﬂect real-world language use,
• grammar should be taught implicitly, and
• the target language should be taught without relying on learners’ L1
(Richards & Rodgers, 2014).
This method required native or near-native levels of language knowl-
edge of instructors and the ability to teach without a textbook or coherent
syllabus. The learning process was also lengthy (children take years to
develop good language skills in their L1) and did not utilize cognitive
advantages that adult speakers could bring to the table, such as the ability
to analyze texts, to draw on linguistic and cultural background knowledge
or a well-formed L1.
The next major shift in L2 teaching occurred in the middle of the
twentieth century, when World War II and the Cold War increased the
need for communication across languages and cultures. Much of this
change was driven by the demand for translators and interpreters, code-
breakers and other specialized linguistic personnel in the military.
Inﬂuenced by contemporary psychological theory (behaviorism), language
learning was seen as habit formation: practice reinforced knowledge in
ways that “minimized the chances of producing mistakes” (Richards &
Rodgers, 2014, p. 26). Behaviorism informed the Audiolingual Method,
which used dialogic pattern drills focusing on structural components of
language (e.g., phonemes, morphemes). While this pedagogy aimed to
foster primarily spoken communication, successful L2 learning required
exceptional motivation and availability (lessons and practice could last
10–12 hours a day), and the ability to extrapolate from memorized chunks
of language to communicative contexts beyond the textbook dialogs
(Shrum & Glisan, 2015).

Cognitive Theory and L2 Pedagogy

One of the most important conceptual developments in L2 pedagogy
occurred in the 1960s and 1970s. Arising in part as a critique of behaviorism,
the work of Noam Chomsky posited that the previously believed pattern of
stimulus and response could not account for all the innovative language
phenomena in child language acquisition. Instead, he argued, language
learning is generative: with relatively limited input, children can produce

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:55:43, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.003
32 Part I Theoretical and Methodological Foundations
endless variations of language due to the brain’s innate ability to organize
information – form rules – via abstract mental processing (Gass, Behney, &
Plonsky, 2013). In addition to reconceptualizing the way humans learn
language, Chomsky (1965) also proposed the notion of language competence,
the knowledge that native speakers are capable of applying to the comprehen-
sion and production of language. This construct was based on the abilities of
an ideal speaker-listener in a completely homogeneous speech community,
who knows his language perfectly and is unaffected by such grammatically
irrelevant conditions as memory limitation, distractions, shifts of attention
and interest, and errors (random or characteristic) in applying his knowl-
edge of the language in actual performance. (p. 3)
Chomsky contrasted competence with performance, the actual produc-
tion of language, during which humans are prone to making mistakes, such
as hesitations, false starts, and grammatical or other mishaps. As
a theoretical linguist, Chomsky did not intend to influence second lan-
guage learning, but his work had a long-lasting impact on the way we
understand second language acquisition (SLA).
Consequently, cognitively oriented scholarship in SLA research has
sought to understand the nature of knowledge that learners acquire, how
it responds to environmental stimulation (e.g., input types or instructional
intervention), and what they need to know to complete language tasks
(Doughty, 2003; Gass et al., 2013; Tóth & Davin, 2016). Learners’ perfor-
mance is typically compared to that of idealized or highly educated native
speakers, mostly on lexico-grammatical features of language (cf. Gass et al.,
2013). The resultant language pedagogy presents and practices the L2 via
activities that break down information into manageable chunks. Input-
presentation draws learners’ attention to target features, while negotiation
of meaning during interaction and error correction facilitates the mental
restructuring and solidification of knowledge. Learning is measured in
terms of linguistic output, with a primary focus on form and quantifiable
effects of pedagogical intervention (Atkinson, 2013; Ellis, 2001a, b; van
Patten & Williams, 2015). Missing from cognitively oriented pedagogy is
the role that the social context plays in learning.

The Sociocultural Theory of Second Language

Acquisition and L2 Pedagogy
Sociocultural theory was originally conceptualized by Lev Vygostky,
a Soviet psychologist, to describe a theory of mind that explained the

The Sociocognitive Theory of Second Language

Acquisition and L2 Pedagogy
Sociocognitive theory advances the idea that L2 learning is “a meeting of
minds within social worlds” (Tóth & Davin, 2016, p. 149). The ecological
perspective that underscores this theory considers cognition, social rela-
tionships, and the broader social context to be integrated, where learning is
seen as a dynamic, adaptive process (Atkinson, 2011, 2013). That is, learning
is both cognitive and social in nature (Kasper, 2006; Tóth & Davin, 2016;
Young, 2009).
As a result, in sociocognitively oriented L2 pedagogy, practice focuses on
context-sensitive uses of “lexical and grammatical resources to do some-
thing with language that matters” (Tóth & Davin, 2016, p. 153). Language

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:55:43, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.003
34 Part I Theoretical and Methodological Foundations
is presented in social contexts, and learners’ ability to use language inde-
pendently comes from related language experiences. Instructors can model
language use and provide guided practice, which steps should enable
learners to use the L2 in new and innovative ways (van Lier, 2004, 2008).
Explicit instruction is possible, as long as it directs learners’ attention to
specific grammatical, lexical, and content knowledge that they need for
accomplishing particular communicative goals. Communication with
others can be an effective source of social interaction, as can any artifact
(e.g., maps, movies) “that promotes interactive engagement with/in L2
environments” (Atkinson, 2013, p. 8).
Moreover, activities must engender a genuine exchange of information
among learners or between a source and the learner, engaging learners both
cognitively and socially (Atkinson, 2011, 2013). According to Tóth and
Davin (2016) three principles guide sociocognitively oriented language
teaching:
• Exercises should lead learners from more controlled language use
(modeling and guided practice) to independent and interactive self-
expression, using the L2 purposefully.
• Learning activities should reflect the symbolic complexity of real-world
language, both to interpret sources of input and to produce the L2 for
self-expression.
• Learners should gain “meaningful experience with knowledgeable
others” (p. 163), in order to develop the interdependent cognitive and
social processes necessary for successful L2 use.
Thus, according to sociocognitive theory, language is a social tool used
in situated activity to achieve social goals. Such a view would seem to be in
natural alignment with the notion of communicative competence,
a concept that has purportedly been behind L2 pedagogy in the past five
decades, although not always successfully. However, just as views of
language teaching have shifted over time, so have conceptualizations of
the competences learners need to develop in order to participate in inter-
cultural interactions.

Communicative Competence
In addition to new developments in cognitive psychology, the 1970s
witnessed the emergence of innovative theories in the social sciences as
well. While these new, socially oriented theories focused on L1 language use
and socialization, they were also very inﬂuential for L2 pedagogy, especially

Communicative Competence in L2 Pedagogy

Hymes’ model of competence was highly impactful in L2 pedagogy,
pushing educators to emphasize the communicative potential of language
instead of focusing only on the linguistic code. This orientation was the
foundation of communicative language teaching (CLT), whose main
objective was to help learners develop communicative competence in read-
ing, writing, listening, and speaking. In CLT, language learning is
grounded in the primacy of interaction, whereby language is “a vehicle
for the realization for interpersonal relations and for the performance of
social transactions between individuals. Language is seen as a tool for the
creation and maintenance of social relations” (Richards & Rodgers, 2014,
p. 24). Thus the most important practice is to use the L2 in real-world
conversations with others who speak it as well, including both native
speakers and other L2 learners, although, until quite recently, an idealized
native speaker was still the gold standard towards which L2 learners were
expected to aspire. Consequently, there was great interest in identifying
what native speakers of a language need to know in order to communicate
in their L1, which would guide the learning objectives for L2 learners as
well.
One of the earliest models of communicative competence in the L2
context was developed in 1980 by Canale and Swain, who identiﬁed four
subcomponents of language knowledge:

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:55:43, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.003
36 Part I Theoretical and Methodological Foundations
1. Grammatical competence: knowledge of the linguistic system, such
as grammar or the lexicon, including knowing how to use cases and
genders, conjugate verbs or put words in the right order.
• Example: I went to the store describes an event that happened in the
past, and bought apples describes multiple items.
2. Sociolinguistic competence: knowledge of social rules that guide
language use, including when to say what to whom, and what is
appropriate or not appropriate language in particular situations.
• Example: cul8er is appropriate for sending a text message (‘see you
later’) and Good morning, Professor for greeting an instructor during
office hours.
3. Discourse competence: knowledge of the way language fits together to
form entire texts, influenced by the cultural context and bound by
cultural practice.
• Example: Once upon a time . . . denotes the beginning of a fairy tale;
therefore indicates the consequence of an event or action.
4. Strategic competence: knowledge of skills that speakers use to initiate,
maintain, redirect, close, or repair interactions.
• Example: using a synonym for a forgotten word; asking for help;
using filler words (um . . .) to keep control of the conversation while
the speaker collects her thoughts.
Expanding on the work of Canale and Swain, Savignon (1997) suggested
that each of the four components of communicative competence are
emphasized differently at various levels of L2 proficiency. Specifically,
learners are initially likely to rely more on communication strategies to
fill in gaps of linguistic knowledge, such as using gestures or asking for
help. They may also draw from their understanding of the world, in terms
of sociocultural knowledge. However, at this stage, they have less control
over linguistic or discourse knowledge. Conversely, more proficient speak-
ers can draw on increasingly refined grammatical and sociolinguistic
sophistication to participate in broader varieties of discourses and use
communication strategies to complement their utterances rather than in
lieu of them.
In 1990 Bachman developed a more detailed model of communicative
competence, which was both similar to and different from Canale
and Swain’s original design. He separated language competence into
two main branches: organizational and pragmatic competence.
Organizational competence is comprised of grammatical and textual
competence (see Figure 2.1).

• vocabulary
grammatical • morphology
competence • syntax
• phonology/graphology
organizational
competence
• cohesion
textual • rhetorical &
competence conversational
organization

Figure 2.1 Model of organizational competence (adapted from Bachman 1990)

• ideational functions
illocutionary • manipulative functions
competence • heuristic functions
• imaginative functions
pragmatic
competence
• sensitivity to dialects and
sociolinguistic language varieties
competence • sensitivity to registers
• sensitivity to natural and
idiomatic expressions
• cultural references and
figures of speech

Figure 2.2 Model of pragmatic competence (adapted from Bachman 1990)

Canale and Swain’s and Bachman’s concepts of grammatical com-

petence are similar, as are their concepts of textual competence and
discourse knowledge. However, Bachman separates pragmatic compe-
tence (related to Canale & Swain’s sociolinguistic competence) into
two subconstructs: illocutionary and sociolinguistic competence (see
Figure 2.2).
The ﬁrst subconstruct, illocutionary competence, includes the ability to
express opinions or exchange ideas (ideational functions), persuade some-
one or make small talk (manipulative functions), solve problems like we do
in teaching and learning (heuristic functions), and express an imaginary
and/or humorous world through jokes, literature, and other creative
endeavors (imaginative functions).
The second subconstruct, sociolinguistic competence, pertains to the “sen-
sitivity to, or control of the conventions of language use that are determined
by the features of the speciﬁc language use context” (Bachman, 1990, p. 94).

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:55:43, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.003
38 Part I Theoretical and Methodological Foundations
That is, knowing “when to speak, when not, and . . . what to talk about
with whom, when, where, in what manner” (Hymes, 1972, p. 277).
Sociolinguistic competence includes four subskills. The first one pertains
to learners’ ability to distinguish and use different varieties of a language,
such as regional or social dialects, in contextually appropriate ways.
The second skill requires learners to identify and use the spoken or
written, formal or informal register appropriate for a particular interac-
tional context, knowing how to “formulate or interpret an utterance
which is not only linguistically accurate, but which is also phrased
in . . . a nativelike way . . . by speakers . . . who are native to the culture
of that dialect or variety” (Bachman, 1990, p. 97). The third subskill
requires learners to develop a sensitivity to natural and idiomatic expres-
sions. For example, they have to learn when and how to use phrases such
as three strikes, you’re out (a reference to baseball and a third missed strike
at a ball) in American English or Njia ya mwongo ni fupi1 (‘The route of
a liar is short ~ do not lie’) in KiSwahili. Interpretation of figures of
speech, such as the hyperbolic expression that weighs a ton for something
heavy also falls into this category. Finally, a large number of references
require knowledge of historical, political, or literary events to understand,
such as the meaning of I am Charlie Hebdo which was a rallying cry after
the January 7, 2015, shooting at the offices of the French satirical weekly
newspaper Charlie Hebdo2 in Paris. Notably absent from Bachman’s
model is strategic competence – how to fill gaps of knowledge, such as
missing vocabulary or background information – an essential skill for
navigating real-time interactions.
Since the late twentieth century, the definition of communicative com-
petence in applied linguistics has evolved and expanded as new under-
standings of language, language learning, and communication have
emerged, but it has remained a prominent driving force behind L2 peda-
gogy. Richards and Rodgers (2014: 89–90) summarize the main tenets of
communicative competence as follows:
1. Language is a system for the expression of meaning.
2. The primary function of language is to allow interaction and
communication.
3. The structure of language reflects its functional and communicative
uses.

1
www.kiswahili.net/3-reference-works/proverbs-and-riddles/proverbs-and-riddles-east-african.html
2
www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30708237

Communicative
competence

sociocultural strategic
competence competence

referential textual
gestural
proxemic
pragmatic
discursive
socio-
linguistic rhetorical

linguistic
syntactic - morphological - semantic
phonological

semiotic competence

© 2019 Guy Spielmann

Figure 2.3 Spielmann’s integrated model of communicative competence

3
http://opsis.georgetown.domains/LaPageDeGuy/docs/FLE/images/CommCompetence.jpg

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:55:43, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.003
40 Part I Theoretical and Methodological Foundations
In Spielman’s model, semiotic competence interacts with sociocultural
competence, and they both overlap with strategic competence. Many
textbooks in the United States focus on the lower circle, semiotic compe-
tence, primarily represented as linguistic competence: knowing vocabu-
lary, grammatical conventions, word order. However, Spielmann rightly
adds other semiotic systems, including images and symbolism, to the
repertoire of knowledge that individuals need to know, such as the
Statue of Liberty signaling freedom for immigrants in the United States.
Thus, sociocultural competence is integrally connected to semiotic
competence. It includes both sociolinguistic and referential competence,
such as cultural connotations and conventions for politeness or impolite-
ness. Originally developed by van Ek (1986), sociocultural competence is
broader than sociolinguistic competence and includes background knowl-
edge about a culture. It entails, for example, knowing famous people,
history, and important facts about a culture, but also everyday practices
and perspectives held by its members. Van Ek also included social compe-
tence as a separate tenet: the ability to handle social interaction with others,
their motivation and attitude towards participating in another culture, self-
confidence, and empathy.
The next component in Spielmann’s model, strategic competence, over-
laps with semiotic and sociocultural competence. Writing a research paper,
whether in the L1 or the L2, for example, relies on knowledge of rhetorical
organization, both in terms of what to include and how to structure the
paper. Knowing when and how to initiate, maintain, and terminate inter-
actions also requires the knowledge of both linguistic and sociocultural
practices, as does when and how to ask for help when the speaker’s (socio)
linguistic competence is inadequate in a communicative situation.
In the center of Spielmann’s Venn diagram, the three main constructs
converge, as several communicative devices require semiotic, sociocultural,
and strategic knowledge: gestures (e.g., a shrug indicating I don’t know),
proxemics (e.g., how close to stand to another person), pragmatics (e.g.,
how to apologize), and discourse competence (e.g., using cohesion devices,
such as first, or consequently).
Celce-Murcia (2007) considers two more components to the models of
communicative competence presented above: formulaic and interactional
competence. The former entails unanalyzed chunks of language – such as
idiomatic expressions and common lexical collocations – that native speak-
ers rely on for fluent language production. The latter refers to the practical
implementation of sociocultural/sociolinguistic competence and includes

Byram’s Model of Intercultural Communicative Competence

In 1997 Michael Byram published his seminal book entitled Teaching and
Assessing Intercultural Communicative Competence, which inspired decades
of research in this area (e.g., Byram & Feng, 2005; Chun 2011; Furstenberg
et al., 2001; Hua, 2014; Liddicoat & Scarino, 2010, 2013; Moeller &
Nugent, 2014; Müller-Hartmann & Schocker, 2013; Ware & Kramsch,
2005). A foundational concept in Byram’s model is cultural belonging: “a
social group is the shared world which its members accept, and they in turn
are accepted as members because they subscribe to the beliefs, behaviors
and meanings of that shared world” (Byram, 1997, p. 17). The process of
socializing an individual into informal (e.g., a family or friendship) or
formal (e.g., institutions) groups is lengthy (Ochs & Schieffelin, 2008) and
does not guarantee mastery of all types of knowledge required for all kinds
of interactions. Native speakers have to learn new skills continually, such as
how to participate in a job interview or express sympathy to a grieving
friend. While cultural participation can be challenging for members of the
in-group, out-group members often struggle with linguistic mismatches in
addition to lacking cultural understanding.
Given that native speakers acquire their L1 over time within various
sociocultural contexts, whereas L2 learners typically have little or no time
being socialized into L2 speech communities, Byram emphasizes that what
native speakers of a language know about its culturally contextualized use
cannot be the objective for L2 learning. He ﬁnds it unreasonable to expect
nonnative speakers to abandon “one language in order to blend into
another linguistic environment, becoming accepted as a native speaker
by other native speakers” (p. 11). Moreover, learning new languages may
entail adopting new and complex social identities, which cannot happen at
the expense of leaving behind ones developed from infancy. Language
learners might not wish to become like native speakers either, even though

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:55:43, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.003
42 Part I Theoretical and Methodological Foundations
they participate in L2 speech communities successfully. A better outcome,
Byram (1997) argues,
is a learner with the ability to see and manage the relationships between
themselves and their own cultural beliefs, behaviours and meanings, as
expressed in a foreign language, and those of their interlocutors, expressed
in the same language – or even a combination of languages – which may be
interlocutors’ native language, or not. (p. 12)
Learning to navigate inter-group memberships – adapting to new cul-
tures and participating in our own – takes explicit learning and depends on
individual needs and experiences. Byram identified two roles in cultural
encounters. A tourist briefly leaves her home to visit another place but
returns home without changing in any significant way nor having had
much of an impact on the location she visited. In contrast, being a sojourner
involves adaptation by individuals, whether the contact with the new
culture is sought (e.g., study abroad) or is forced by circumstance (e.g.,
refugee status, natural disasters). Sojourners identify practices, beliefs, and
behaviors that are similar to and different from what they experienced at
home, and ideally develop the “capacity to critique and improve their own
and others’ conditions” (p. 2). Byram’s notion of intercultural communi-
cative competence pertains to sojourners, who need to establish and main-
tain relationships with people whose cultural affiliations they do not share.
With sojourners’ needs in mind, L2 pedagogy should help learners
develop into intercultural speakers (Kramsch, 1993; Risager, 2007), who
operate across multiple languages, language varieties, and cultural contexts.
Thus, intercultural speakers need to develop both linguistic and cultural
skills. According to Byram and Zarate (1997), linguistic skills entail (1)
linguistic competence, the ability to apply the rules of a standard variety of
the L2 and produce and interpret it in speech and writing, (2) sociolinguistic
competence, the ability to interpret the L2, produced by native and non-
native speakers, in line with the speaker’s intention or in negotiation with
him or her, and (3) discourse competence, the ability to produce and inter-
pret different genres of spoken or written texts in line with L2 conventions.
These linguistic competences must be complemented by cultural and
intercultural communicative competence reflected in five pedagogical
objectives (Byram, 1997; Byram & Wagner, 2018; Wagner & Bryam, 2017).
The first objective is the development of attitudes that enable individuals
to be curious about and open to other cultures, suspending what they
believe about those cultures and about their own. Second, learners need to
gain knowledge about other social groups, including their products and

Table 2.1 Components of intercultural communicative competence

(based on Byram, 1997)

Attitudes
• Engage with members of various social groups to learn about daily lives, beyond exotic
or touristic presentations.
• Discover diverse perspectives and interpretations of cultural phenomena.
• Actively question your own cultural beliefs, practices and habits.
• Be open to adapting to and interacting with other cultures.
• Learn conventions of verbal and nonverbal communication and rules for interaction.
Knowledge
• Understand current and historical relationships between the countries of the
interlocutors.
• Learn about opportunities for traveling to other countries and staying in touch with
members of that community.
• Learn about communication practices that may cause misunderstandings between
interlocutors.
• Know about the collective national memory of your own and the other country (e.g., myths,
historical sites, cultural products) from the perspective of both the in- and out-groups.
• Understand deﬁnitions of geographical space in your own and the other country and
how members of the in- and out-groups perceive them (e.g., regional dialects).
• Learn about how members of a social group are socialized formally and informally.
• Understand ways in which social identities, such as class, ethnicity, gender, profession,
or religion, are marked both in verbal and nonverbal communication.
• Learn about institutions that shape daily life in both countries, and how these institutions
are perceived (e.g., who determines the role of government in managing healthcare).
• Understand how social interaction is structured in both countries, in terms of formality
and informality, politeness, taboos, beliefs, etc.
Skills of interpreting and relating
• Understand ethnocentric perspectives and their origins when reading a text or obser-
ving an event; be able to explain the underlying issues.

• “Identify areas of misunderstanding and dysfunction in an interaction and explain

them in terms of each of the cultural systems present” (p. 61).
• Use your knowledge of possible sources of misunderstanding to overcome instances of
miscommunication with your interlocutor.
Skills of discovery and interaction
• Learn about concepts and connotations of texts and events; build and test hypotheses
about cause and effect, logical or conditional relationships.
• Understand important cultural references, their connotations both within your own
and your interlocutor’s country.
• Recognize similarities and differences in interactional practices in your own and your
interlocutor’s culture, including verbal and nonverbal communication.
• Be able to identify the closeness or distance between your own and your interlocutor’s
culture, and apply the appropriate attitude, skills, and knowledge.
• Be aware of relationships between your own and your interlocutor’s cultures, present
and past.
• Engage with other cultures with the help of public and private organizations.
• Recognize the cause of misunderstandings and dysfunction during communication,
and repair it by using relevant knowledge, skills, and attitudes.
Critical cultural awareness/political education
• Analyze documents or events from your own and your interlocutor’s cultures for
implicit and explicit values reflected.
• Be aware of your own cultural perspectives and values that influence the way you
evaluate documents and events (e.g., political/religious affiliation).
• Recognize potential sources of conflict between your own and your interlocutor’s
ideologies, negotiate differences, and reach acceptance when possible, using relevant
knowledge, skills, and attitudes.

It is important to acknowledge that developing all of the skills and knowl-

edge described in Byram’s model is not really feasible. If one is learning
English, should they know everything about the United States? The United
Kingdom? Australia? India? If someone is learning multiple languages, they
cannot learn everything about every cultural context in which that L2 is
spoken. Nor will instructors have all relevant information at their fingertips
(as we explore in later chapters). Our own understanding of the world is
already ‘limited’ and ‘influenced’ by our own cultural perspectives (for
example, a sixty-year-old Japanese-American woman will have a different
view of the United States, than a twenty-five-year-old Native American male
or a ten-year-old Latinx child). Instead, the objective is to provide as many
tools as possible over the course of a one-to-four-year curriculum and imbue
learners with a passion for continuing the life-long process of becoming
intercultural individuals across multiple cultural contexts.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:55:43, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.003
2 Pedagogical Foundations of Teaching ICC for L2/Lx Use 45
Byram (1997) also recognizes that most curricula cannot address all of
these skills and subskills and suggests instead that instructors set realistic
goals for their pedagogical contexts (e.g., age of learners, length and purpose
of the course). Whether the L2 learning takes place in a second or foreign
language setting may also identify suitable goals, since the L2 classroom,
fieldwork, and independent learning will likely foster the development of
distinct types and levels of intercultural communication abilities (Byram,
1997; Byram & Wagner, 2018; Wagner & Bryam, 2017). In the classroom,
for example, students can read about the different perceptions of their own
culture and of the societies whose language they are learning. In fieldwork,
instructors can organize excursions, watch videos, or complete introspective
analyses of the culture; this arrangement can offer learners sufficient inde-
pendence to engage with the other culture on their own alongside a common
space for analyzing and reflecting on their experiences. Finally, independent
learning is part of “life-long learning” (Byram, 1997, p. 69), where learners
engage with the other culture without the safety-net of a classroom. Ideally,
learners have an opportunity to develop the attitude, knowledge, and skills
required for successful intercultural communicative competence in a guided
setting prior to having to navigate such encounters on their own.
To summarize, Bryam’s approach rests on “three fundamental features”
(p. 70): (1) the ideal is an intercultural speaker, in contrast to a monolingual
native speaker, (2) L2 pedagogy should foster the development of intercultural
communication, and (3) learning should take place in and beyond the L2
classroom. Byram’s ideas have influenced the profession in significant ways and
lay the foundation for recent research on intercultural communication as well.

Recent Developments in Intercultural Communication

and L2 Pedagogy
Advancing Byram’s (1997) proposal, recent scholarship (cf. Hua, 2014;
Kramsch, 2009; Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013) has offered complementary
and expanded understandings of Byram’s work. A shared principle under-
lying these discussions is the belief that L2/Lx instruction must move
beyond a focus on teaching language as linguistic code and emphasize its
socially contextualized meaning.

The Multilingual Subject

In The Multilingual Subject, Kramsch (2009) reconceptualizes the notion
of her earlier (Kramsch 1993) concept of third culture – the cognitive and

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:55:43, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.003
46 Part I Theoretical and Methodological Foundations
affective ‘place’ multilingual speakers create as they navigate two or more
languages and cultures – as symbolic competence, a dynamic concept that
reflects the cognitive and affective strengths and tensions that arise from
belonging to multiple speech communities. Multilingual persons’ sym-
bolic competence entails the use of multiple semiotic systems to interpret
and create meaning and experience events from different perspectives.
Symbolic competence also allows multilingual speakers to traverse bound-
aries of both languages and break with conventions in novel, creative ways;
they can also enact different social personae in their various languages and
cultures.
In order to foster the development of symbolic competence, Kramsch
(2009) suggests viewing language learning “as a semiotic, historically and
culturally grounded, personal experience” (p. 2) grounded in specific social
contexts. To reflect the diversity of social contexts in which language is
used, L2 pedagogy should (1) focus on social interaction that reflects
variation across specific communicative contexts, (2) examine how multi-
ple modes of communication – different semiotic systems – are used to
convey meaning, and (3) encourage learners to shed conventional social
identities (e.g., nationality, gender, age) and adopt different subject posi-
tions across languages and social contexts.
The social context – and by extension navigating different identities –
includes tensions between conventional and subjective uses of language
and cultural practices. The former refers to the way that society has
traditionally used certain words, symbols, or meanings, while the latter
reflects a person’s idiosyncratic use of language. Learners have to navigate
these tensions by exploring and even moving beyond conventional uses of
language (i.e., creating meaning or subverting social expectations), while
remaining comprehensible by members of the community:
the multilingual subject is not defined by its boundless freedom and agency,
but, on the contrary, by the linguistic and discursive boundaries it abides by
in order to, now and then, transgress them. The ability to decide how to attach
oneself to the world does not come from a lack of boundaries, but from the choice
of which boundary to transgress. (Kramsch, 2009, p. 185; emphasis mine)
Several pedagogical guidelines for facilitating the development of sym-
bolic competence can be gleaned from Kramsch’s discussion. First, she
argues that classroom activities should address “cultural, political and
ideological issues of language, power, and identity,” perhaps by comparing
representations of the same event from multiple cultural perspectives
(p. 192). Second, activities should foster “sustained thinking or personal

Moving between Linguistic and Cultural Systems

Similar to Kramsch, Liddicoat and Scarino (2013) recognize multilingual-
ism as movement between languages and cultures. Thus, the basic premise
of learning intercultural communication, they argue, is that learners
already enact cultural practices as members of various cultural groups,
“‘moving between’ linguistic and cultural systems” (Liddicoat and
Scarino 2013, p. 33). For this reason, learning new languages provides an
excellent opportunity for reflecting on one’s own cultural assumptions
about how meaning is created and interpreted in day-to-day interactions,
and how such assumptions might impact the way learners make sense of
practices in the new culture, since “the linguistic and cultural repertoires of
each individual exist in complex interrelationships” (p. 2). This perspective
can serve as an organizing principle for pedagogical practice, prompting
the selection of materials that consistently encourage meaning-making and
interpretation across languages and cultures.
Authentic resources that reflect linguistic and cultural diversity in com-
municative practice beyond the reality of dominant cultural and social
groups (e.g., literary canons) can help foster intercultural communicative
skills. These resources should reflect cultural activities that social groups
use to “express, create, and interpret meanings and to establish and main-
tain social and interpersonal relationships” (Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013,
p. 15). At the same time, teaching materials should engage learners as
coparticipants in a communicative system, whereby the new culture serves
as a lens “through which people mutually create and interpret meanings”
(p. 20).
Learning to interpret and create meaning with this new lens requires
new linguistic skills, cultural knowledge, and meta-awareness about how

Intercultural Communication as Language Socialization

Hua (2014) deﬁnes intercultural communication “as the study of how
people from different cultural backgrounds communicate with each
other,” with the understanding “that cultural groupings are not given or
pre-deﬁned. They can be of different levels or sizes; overlap with or be
subsumed within another; come into existence, rejuvenate, retract, or
disassemble through interaction” (p. 198). During intercultural interac-
tions, cultural differences may become salient, but do not become auto-
matically problematic. The L2/Lx classroom is an ideal location for
discussing cultural patterns – differences and similarities – since learners
are drawn to language learning for a variety of reasons, most of which
include an interest in other cultures. While ‘culture’ is often understood as
high culture (e.g., the arts, music, literature, history), common patterns of
interaction, such as rules for politeness, humor, or how to do ‘small talk’
are just as important to address in intercultural analyses. Intercultural
pedagogy, as Hua presents, should focus on integrating language and
culture – teach culture through language, actually, to help the learner

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:55:43, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.003
2 Pedagogical Foundations of Teaching ICC for L2/Lx Use 49
“become an ‘intercultural speaker’ who can mediate between different
cultures and different viewpoints” (p. 7).
Intercultural learning that fosters the development of diverse view-
points can occur in both the classroom and the real world. Classroom
activities can encourage ethnographic observations and the develop-
ment of declarative knowledge (explicit understandings of how culture
works), while real-world interactions offer opportunities for develop-
ing procedural knowledge, knowing how to participate in commu-
nities of practice (Hua, 2014). Both types of learning are important:
real-world interactions help newcomers become fully legitimate parti-
cipants in cultural practice, both in their own eyes and those of the
host community (Scollon, Scollon, & Jones, 2012), whereas explicit
instruction can help make sense of the new culture, whose practices
often seem indecipherable (Hua, 2014). This duality highlights the
“social nature of the process of socialisation, which is very often
overlooked. It also reminds us of the ‘unﬁnished’ and ongoing nature
of learning and socialisation” (Hua, 2014, p. 168).
In outlining a pedagogy that fosters the development of intercultural
communicative competence, Hua makes several key observations, high-
lighting that developing intercultural communicative competence is
a long-term process that requires both awareness about language and
culture (i.e., declarative knowledge) and real-world opportunities for put-
ting theory to practice (i.e., procedural knowledge). Moreover, Hua
argues, language pedagogy should support learners at their stage of devel-
opment, while also pushing them to try new experiences, using the class-
room to help “the learner make sense of their intercultural learning
experience” (p. 159). Like Kramsch (2009), Hua also emphasizes that
pedagogical tasks focusing on intercultural communication should guide
learners to analyze and understand contexts of communication (e.g., the
setting of the interaction, the participants, their goals for the interaction)
and culture-speciﬁc ways of communication (e.g., directness/indirectness).
Finally, she underscores the importance of language play as well, because it
can help learners explore in what ways and to what extent they wish to
adopt the practices of the host culture(s).

Suggestions for an Intercultural Communication Oriented

L2/Lx Pedagogy
In this chapter we examined the evolution of L2 pedagogy, from teaching
grammar to communicative competence and intercultural communicative

Knowledge & Skills

1. Reflect on their own cultural practices and use their existing knowledge as a resource
for learning about new cultures (without that knowledge impeding exploration).
2. Discover trends in the practices, beliefs, and behaviors of new cultures, while also
attending to intracultural variation.
3. Gain knowledge about social groups in other cultures, including critical awareness of
cultural, political, and ideological issues of language, power, and identity.
4. Develop skills of interpreting and relating different perspectives on events and
documents, as well as gaining new cultural knowledge and applying it during real-time
interaction (e.g., explore the motivations of different characters in stories).
5. Foster learners’ engagement with authentic materials, increasing their self-
determination and intrinsic motivation, by allowing them to try on different identities,
including race, class, gender, sexuality, or ability.
6. Develop attitudes of openness and curiosity, accepting that there is no one right way to
do things and valuing one’s own culture and other cultures.
7. Evaluate the L2/Lx within its social contexts, while also reflecting critically on
the L1.
Linguistic Repertoire
1. Move from more controlled language use to independent, interactive and purposeful
L2 use.
2. Learn to interact effectively with people from cultures different from their own, using
varieties of languages (e.g., regional and stylistic variation).
3. Pedagogical tasks need to analyze and understand contexts of communication (e.g., the
setting of the interaction, the participants, their goals for the interaction) and culture-
specific ways of communication (e.g., high- and low-context cultures).
4. Engage in intercultural interaction with the help of interesting L2/Lx materials and
develop the interdependent cognitive and social processes necessary for successful L2
use; authentic linguistic resources that reflect the symbolic complexity of real-world
language and can facilitate skills of interpretation and production of the L2 for self-
expression.
5. Develop linguistic, cultural, and meta-skills to discuss a range of language forms,
cultural expression (e.g., art, politics), and learners’ own experience with the learning
process.

6. Learn to understand communication in speciﬁc interactional situations; what is

‘correct’ and ‘appropriate’ depends on variables such as the participants, their goals for,
and the setting of the interaction, their communication styles that are both culturally
bound and idiosyncratic.
7. Use language creatively and playfully, to (a) give learners some control over their L2
learning and whether, how, or to what extent they wish to participate in L2 speech
communities, (b) help learners discover and enjoy the L2 and test its boundaries, and
(c) give learners the opportunity to explore their personal intercultural styles and
identities.
8. Learn to analyze multimodal sources, to examine how complementary modes of
communication create meaning through multiple semiotic systems (including
comparisons between ﬁlmic and textual versions of the same story).
Curricular considerations
1. Develop intercultural communicative competence through both formal education and
real-world interactions, and thereby offer a balance between supporting and
challenging growth.
2. Incorporate both classroom-based learning of intercultural communication, which can
help improve learners’ awareness about it (i.e., declarative knowledge), and real-world
interactions, which may foster procedural knowledge, the lived experience of
improving interaction with others in real time (i.e., putting theory to practice).
3. Accept that developing intercultural competence takes time, both in the short term
(tasks should allow in-depth investigations of intercultural communication and foster
sustained thinking) and the long term (expectations for progress need to be reasonable,
given that it takes years to become interculturally competent).
4. As multilingual subjects themselves, instructors should reﬂect on what they like
or dislike about the L2/Lx, and how their emotions may shape their pedagogical
practices.

Summary
While most scholarship focuses on SLA as a predominantly psycho-
linguistic process, some recent theories acknowledge the social context
in which language is used. Living in a multilingual and multicultural
world requires such a social orientation and entails developing com-
municative competence. Since this construct was developed for study-
ing language use among native speakers, it has been expanded to
intercultural communicative competence in the L2/Lx learning con-
text, to reﬂect the existing linguistic, cultural, and referential knowl-
edge that (especially) adult learners have upon embarking on their
language learning journey (Byram, 1997; Hua, 2014; Kramsch, 2009;
Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013). Proposals for a pedagogy oriented towards

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS AND ACTIVITIES

1. Reflect on a day’s interactions and identify the communicative
competences you need in order to be able to participate in them.
What are areas of strength for you? In what areas do you still need
to develop?
2. Think of an interaction you participated in yesterday and consider
how it might have gone differently if you changed one of the
participants or the reason for the interaction? Would these changes
have impacted the way you talked and behaved? How so? Can you
make these changes both in your L1 and your L2/Lx? If not, what
knowledge do you need to gain to be able to adapt your language use to
specific contexts?
3. Think of an authentic resource you use every day (e.g., menu,
newspaper, TV show). How might you describe this resource to
a friend? Reflect on your description and consider how it might change,
if you had to describe it to a language learner of the L2/Lx you will be
teaching, who has limited language proficiency.
4. Consider a historical event or a political issue and examine it from the
perspectives of at least two cultural groups. What are the similarities and
differences between how these groups see that event or issue? What past
and current cultural forces have helped to shape these differing
perspectives? Consider how you would structure teaching activities –
within one lesson and over the course of several weeks – that would help
learners acquire the necessary skills to analyze this event or issue
thoroughly and critically.
5. Using the pedagogical activities you developed for question #3, consider
how you would help learners adopt – and maintain – attitudes of
curiosity and openness. While the former might be easy in an academic
setting, the latter may be more challenging; debating abstract issues of
democracy versus other forms of government may or may not bring
about heated exchanges, but discussing human rights violations or
prison reform might.

6. Reﬂect on how you developed your intercultural communication skills

through both formal education and real-world interactions. How could
you foster a similar development for your learners, perhaps with the help
of real-world practice, authentic materials, and realistic interactions
followed by tasks that prompt reﬂective discussions about the
interaction?

The Learner as Analyst: Methods and Sources

of Data Analysis

Chapter Overview
In order to become more effective communicators, we – and our students –
need to understand how participants, their cultural and intercultural
selves, values, motivations, language knowledge and language use, among
other factors, shape interactions. We can improve our understanding by
analyzing interactions systematically: What are different ways in which we
communicate in our L1? And in our L2/Lx? How is communication in the
L2/Lx similar to or different from the way we communicate in our L1 in
speciﬁc interactions? What are some challenges we face when communi-
cating with people from different linguistic and cultural backgrounds?
What can facilitate smooth and effective communication? How do the
different layers of culture – the supranational, national, regional, cultural
group-based, local, and individual factors – contribute to the interaction
(Bonvillain, 2020; Oetzel, 2009; Saville-Troike, 2003)? Which aspects of
culture are most salient – relevant and impactful – in a particular situation?
Reﬂecting upon such questions helps learners recognize patterns both in
their L1 and L2/Lx and become more effective intercultural communicators.
To further this goal, in light of Byram and Masuhara’s (2013) recommenda-
tion, this chapter presents three models for analyzing communication as a
culturally situated process: the ethnography of communication, interac-
tional sociolinguistics, and multimodal analysis. Instructors can implement
these analytic approaches in the classroom, using various sources of authen-
tic data, to help students learn to understand communication in culturally
and situationally appropriate ways.

The L2/Lx Learner as Intercultural Communication Analyst

Learning how to analyze intercultural communication requires explicit
instruction, but the objective is not for our learners to become fully trained

Modiﬁed Ethnographic Analysis

Ethnography of communication emerged out of linguistic anthropology
and investigates the relationship between cultural practices and language
codes (Hymes, 1972; Saville-Troike, 2003). Comprised of the Greek
ethnos (‘people’) and graphia (‘writing’), ethnography is the act of writing
about “how and why people do what they do,” including “the cultural
and contextual meaning of human interactions” (Monaghan &
Goodman, 2007, p. 2). Ethnographic analyses emphasize the dynamic,
“creative, emergent, and performance-based aspects of language use”
(Monaghan & Goodman, 2007, p. 4) and offer a holistic view of
communication.
The underlying premise of ethnography of communication is that the
language we use –both verbal and nonverbal communication – represent
culturally specific ways of speaking. According to Saville-Troike (2003),
these cultural patterns occur at three levels: (1) society (e.g., speech func-
tions, categories of talk), (2) group (e.g., gender, age, social status, geo-
graphic region), or (3) individual (e.g., emotional state, the purpose of
interaction), layers that echo models proposed by Bonvillain (2020) and
Oetzel (2009) as discussed in Chapter 1. In other words, communication
reflects a community’s patterns of interaction, performed by specific
individuals (Hymes, 1972; Rampton, 2017). In order to study such socially
situated language, Hymes developed an analytic model (with the acronym
SPEAKING) that recognizes eight components of communicative events:
1. Setting and scene: the location and context in which the event takes
place; what the occasion is.
2. Participants: characteristics of the interactants (e.g., age, gender,
profession, hobbies), as well as pertinent relationships between them,
such as friendship.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:56:33, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.004
56 Part I Theoretical and Methodological Foundations
3. Ends: shared expectations, what the participants want to accomplish
during the interaction.
4. Act sequence: the content of the communicative event, referential
information exchanged by interactants; the steps they take during
the interaction (e.g., turn-taking, overlapping speech).
5. Key: the tone of the event, for example, whether it is humorous or
serious.
6. Instrumentalities: the form of communication, including verbal and
nonverbal channels.
7. Norms of interpretation: shared knowledge for understanding the
structure of interaction.
8. Genre: the type of communicative event, such as greetings or narration.
In contexts where the L2/Lx is widely spoken, a range of ethnographic
data can be collected and analyzed by learners. Reports from participant
observations may include quick impressionistic notes, detailed fieldnotes
of interactions that the observer is an active participant in or ones that he or
she observes from the outside, as well as transcripts of interviews and
interactions (Monaghan, 2007). Quick handwritten notes serve the pur-
pose of reminding the observer of important aspects of a communicative
event. In contrast, fieldnotes are more analytic and present thorough
accounts of cultural activity; they utilize detailed descriptions of
the participants, the purpose of the interaction, the setting, the mood of
the exchange, as well as any questions that arise regarding the commu-
nicative event. Transcriptions are precise written records of an interaction
(preferably recorded). Whether analyzing real-world or text-based interac-
tions, students can begin by filling out Hymes’ SPEAKING grid (see
Appendix A for a sample analysis) and examining how communication is
cocreated by participants within specific social situations.
The salient aspects – what is actually important for and relevant to
understanding the interaction – must be included in the analyses, includ-
ing exact words, overlapping speech, and/or pauses, if they help make sense
of the exchange. These data are written up in an ethnographic report,
presenting a rich analysis of what you experienced and observed. A rich
analysis – thick descriptions (Geertz, 2007) – requires a thorough exam-
ination of the data, including the social context in which the interaction
took place, as the following example of two boys winking illustrates:
Consider … two boys rapidly contracting the eyelids of their right eyes. In
one, this is an involuntary twitch; in the other, a conspiratorial signal to a
friend. The two movements are, as movements, identical; from an I-am-a-

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:56:33, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.004
3 The Learner as Analyst: Methods and Sources of Data Analysis 57
camera, “phenomenalistic” observation of them alone, one could not tell
which was twitch and which was wink, or indeed whether both or either was
twitch or wink. Yet the difference, however unphotographable, between a
twitch and a wink is vast; as anyone unfortunate enough to have had the first
taken for the second knows. The winker is communicating, and indeed
communicating in a quite precise and special way: (1) deliberately, (2) to
someone in particular, (3) to impart a particular message, (4) according to a
socially established code, and (5) without cognizance of the rest of the
company. As Ryle1 points out, the winker has done two things, contracted
his eyelids and winked, while the twitcher has done only one, contracted his
eyelids. Contracting your eyelids on purpose when there exists a public code
in which so doing counts as a conspiratorial signal is winking. That’s all
there is to it: a speck of behavior, a fleck of culture, and – voilà! – a gesture.
(Geertz, 2007, p. 28)
This vignette demonstrates the difference between merely noticing
communicative activities and analyzing them. Analysis seeks to understand
how particular communicative devices are used in social interaction and
why. Consider, for example, what happens when a friend visits you at
home:
• How would you greet this person?
• What social purpose do you hope to achieve with this greeting?
• How do the verbal and nonverbal aspects of your greeting work
together?
• Under what circumstances is this specific greeting appropriate (e.g.,
with whom, when)?
• When would it be unusual?
• What values and issues of identity or power inform your interpretation
of when this greeting is appropriate and when it is not?
• How do you learn and know which communicative acts are appropriate
in which communicative contexts?
In order to answer questions like this, as communicators, Ls/Lx learners –
and we, as instructors – need to learn to analyze various types of data.
Transcripts of an interaction teach learners about how participants jointly
construct communication within specific social contexts. Such data can be
complemented by metapragmatic information, if learners ask or interview
members of a culture whose practices learners seek to understand
(Monaghan & Goodman, 2007). However, it is important to recognize

1
This question of intentionality was originally posed by the philosopher G. Ryle (1968) ‘The Thinking
of Thoughts. What Is Le Penseur Doing?’, reprinted in Ryle (2009).

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:56:33, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.004
58 Part I Theoretical and Methodological Foundations
that not all members of a culture can accurately analyze and describe their
own practices, which are mostly guided by procedural knowledge, knowing
how to do something without thinking about it. Consequently, it can be
difficult even for members of the in-group to provide declarative knowledge,
to explain why people use language in a certain way or what cultural values
and beliefs might affect their communication (Myers-Scotton, 2006). In
our daily interactions, we constantly make split-second judgments about
how we communicate both verbally and nonverbally, but we rarely have to
articulate the underlying rules that guide our sociocultural mental foot-
work. Yet, if we are serious about improving our ability to communicate
interculturally, we need to understand why we communicate how we do
and increase our declarative knowledge both about our L1 and our L2/Lxs.
Rampton (2007) notes that ethnographic analyses can be challenging,
since it entails “trying to get familiar with the strange” and “trying to get
analytic distance on what’s close at hand,” interrogating what we take for
granted in communication (pp. 590–591; emphasis original). He empha-
sizes that ethnography requires reflective, detailed, and sustained analysis
that looks at language use, starting with the details (i.e., bottom-up),
leading to interpretations of how language is used in and by social actors.
Implications from the language data regarding broader cultural practices
need to be drawn with caution. The people and language we analyze should
not be treated solely as members of a group, since individuals are not
simply categories. Instead, they reflect unique combinations of broader
and smaller cultural influences, as we saw in Chapter 1.
While it is not Rampton’s intention to make a link to intercultural
communicative competence, his description of ethnography actually
makes a good case for incorporating such analyses in the L2/Lx classroom.
Prior to engaging in analyses of other cultural groups, learners should
reflect on their own practices as this process “encourages sensitivity to
the risks of stereotyping: if you are researching people and institutions in
the area where you are based, the kind of people you are studying may well
turn up in your classes and/or read-and-reply to what you’ve written, and
this provides quite strong incentives to hedge your claims and clearly specify
their limits” (Rampton, 2007, p. 591; emphasis mine).
In other words, engaging in a process of identifying what the rules might
be and what their limits are (who observes them, in what specific situations,
when do they not apply, etc.) can guide learners to observe other cultures
with nuance beyond the taken-for-granted ‘nation = culture’ model.
Insights should be gleaned from multiple sources, to ensure that our
interpretation of communicative events and their cultural contexts is

Interactional Sociolinguistics
While learners at earlier levels of L2 development might not be able to
reproduce the language they see, hear, or read in L2/Lx authentic materials,
they can learn to recognize cultural practices reflected in language.
Interactional sociolinguistics (IS), which was developed by the linguistic
anthropologist John Gumperz (1982), can shed light on how people create
meaning through interaction and how language interacts with its social
context. By examining discourse closely – usually transcribed audio- or
video-materials of natural or naturalistic language – IS helps reveal how we
decode and encode meaning during interaction, processes that are typically
subconscious but always culturally situated; that is, always in a specific
cultural context. Close analyses of interaction can help avoid overgener-
alization and identify what aspect of the context (e.g., social roles) might be
most salient in particular interactions. For example, when you are “being
interviewed for a job, sitting in class, having a meal, hanging around with
friends, talking about recent events, work, food, music and so forth – you
soon realize that local, institutional, activity- and discourse-specific iden-
tities may be a lot more compelling for the participants than, for example,
their Anglo, Pakistani or African Caribbean family backgrounds, and that
when ethnicity does become an issue, this happens in all sorts of different
ways – deconstructive, respectful, racist, some quite spectacular and others
hardly noticed” (Rampton, 2017, p. 4).
To understand communication in context, IS examines verbal and
nonverbal interaction turn by turn (complemented by conversation ana-
lysis), cross-checking it against broader cultural practices that help indivi-
duals “reconcile the material that they encounter in any given situation
with their prior [culturally informed] understanding” (Rampton, 2017,
p. 3). In interactions, individuals use language they deem appropriate to

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:56:33, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.004
60 Part I Theoretical and Methodological Foundations
convey the substance of their message, but also additional social informa-
tion, such as using backchanneling devices (e.g., aha or nodding) to show
that they are paying attention to their interlocutor or adjusting their level
of formality to match the situation (e.g., shifting to a more prestigious
accent, standing up straighter). This process is typically effortless and
subconscious for competent L1 users, as they continually evaluate the
interaction to ensure that their communication meets shared expected
patterns or to understand what variation from expectations might mean:
Does the higher volume means that my interlocutor is annoyed or only
that the ambient noise is louder too? Is the misuse of a word a joke or has
the message of my interactional partner shifted? The speciﬁc context –
understanding who the participants are, what the goals of their interaction
are, how the physical environment may affect their communication – is an
essential, intrinsic aspect of communication (Erickson, 2011).
The following excerpt illustrates how IS can be used to analyze interac-
tion. This excerpt depicts the beginning of an exchange between a clerk
and an American guest (who is accompanied by his wife and two teenage
sons) at the registration desk of a hotel that rents out apartments in Venice,
Italy. The clerk’s tasks entail welcoming the guest, obtaining documenta-
tion and payment, providing directions, handing over the keys to the
guests, and describing the rules for using the apartment. The guest’s
objectives are complementary: he needs to register, pay the tourist taxes,
pick up the key, and get directions to the apartment. The interaction lasted
about twelve minutes, and the ﬁrst few minutes are transcribed here (for
classroom use, instructors should provide transcripts of focal segments of
interactions until learners are able to transcribe them themselves, probably
at the intermediate-high, advanced levels, depending on the type of inter-
action, such as the number of participants, rate of speech).

Excerpt (1)

(1) Clerk: Good morning, Sir, how may I HELP you?

(2) Guest 1: [yeah, good afternoon, we have reservations for
this apartment
(3) Guest 1: and would like to check in? The GARNERS?
(4) Clerk: [Ah, yes, the apartment is READY for you. I
will show you
(5) where it is on this map, but ﬁrst, may I have your passports?
(6) Guest 1: [umm … yes, here they are …

(7) Clerk: Thank you. I will make a photocopy of each of them,

OKAY? There are four of you, staying at the
(8) Apartment in the CALESELE, is that correct?
(9) Guest 1: Yes, that is correct, and the printout should have the
conﬁrmation number.
(10) Clerk: [Oh, I don’t NEED that, you are
(11) all set up. You have already paid for the cost of the
apartment … here are the passports for you.
(12) Guest 1: Oh, thank you. Can we check in already?
(13) Clerk: [mhm … Yes, of course. But umm.. you also
have to
(14) pay the city taxes, which are 3.00 Euro for each person per
night. I am afraid that that must be
(15) paid cash. If you don’t have the money, you can go to the
bank in the building next door?
(16) Guest 1: Oh, no, we have it. Do you have the cash?
(17) Guest 2: [Yeah, right here. Check to make sure it’s
enough.
(18) Clerk: Thank you.

The interaction begins when the hotel clerk greets the four guests,
primarily addressing Guest 1, using a formulaic expression, which includes
a question that determines the content of the text turn. She greets the
guests in English, possibly because English is a lingua franca of tourism or
the appearance of the guests prompted her to address them in English.
Alternately, she could have referred to a list of check-ins for the day and
expected the American family. The guest’s response (beginning in line 2)
overlaps slightly with the clerk’s question, since he is familiar with the
greeting-query style of communication commonly used when checking in
at a hotel. The rising intonation of his questions (line 3) implies an indirect
conﬁrmation check whether this is the right place to be checking in.
Similarly, the clerk’s rising intonation in her statement about making
copies of the passports is an indirect request for permission; the guests
know that this has to be done, and the question can be interpreted as a pro-
forma expression of courtesy. Her next question (lines 7–8) seeks to
conﬁrm the number of guests and the location of the apartment. There
are several overlapping backchanneling devices (umm … or yeah) and
turns, for example in lines 2, 4, 6, and 10. They reveal two facts about
the interaction. First, the participants signal that they are paying attention
to their interlocutors. Second, they also signal that they can anticipate each

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:56:33, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.004
62 Part I Theoretical and Methodological Foundations
other’s comment, given the routinized format and content of this interac-
tion, relying on a shared knowledge of the registration process. The two
hesitation markers in line 13 (mhm … Yes, of course. But umm..) seem to
indicate something different: the clerk has to ask for money to cover city
taxes, and she may feel uncomfortable with this request, and these devices
help soften that request. In line 16, Guest 1 asks his wife for cash, and
although she responds to him, suggesting that he confirm the amount (line
17), it was the clerk who reached out to accept the money.
While the participants’ prior referential knowledge was helpful in ensur-
ing smooth communication, there were some features of the interaction
that were specific to the immediate context. The clerk spoke fluent English
and was clearly able to converse comfortably with native speakers of the
language. The guest had also traveled in Italy before and knew about the
tax that had to be paid in cash; this knowledge prevented the need for
lengthy explanations about an additional (for some, unexpected) cash
expense. The coequal turn-taking between the clerk and Guest 1 demon-
strated complementary and cooperative social roles in this particular
interaction. Finally, although the clerk’s emphatic comment in line 11 –
oh, I don’t NEED that – might have come across as somewhat direct in
other contexts, she was smiling during the exchange, and both participants
wanted to achieve a shared objective, therefore took accommodating
stances (attitudes) towards each other.
As we can see, the participants co-constructed the interaction in a
specific, unique way, situated in the local context (i.e., the specific people,
their specific linguistic and pragmatic choices, attitudes, etc.). The notion
that interaction is locally situated describes an analytic approach that
examines how broader cultural practices and beliefs contribute to interac-
tion, while accepting that it is the individual participants who enact culture
and their social identity as they communicate (Mills, 2009).
For L2/Lx learners, participating in interaction can be challenging,
especially at lower levels of proficiency, when referential knowledge (see
Chapter 9) is not available to fall back on and linguistic skills are not
sufficiently developed yet. The challenges include the lack of sufficient
access to interactional modelling between users of the L2/Lx, whether
native or effective nonnative language users. In addition to difficulties
with interpreting or employing varieties of language (e.g., lexicon, pro-
nunciation, grammar, sociolinguistic rules) that allow them to adapt to
different social meanings, inexperienced language users often also lack the
frameworks for interpreting the relevance of social roles, situation-specific
discourse, the physical setting of the interaction, or cultural references.

Multimodal Analysis
Real-world communication typically occurs across multiple integrated
channels of meaning-making (Abrams, 2016a; Helm & Dooly, 2017;
Herring, 2007, 2015; Jewitt, 2014; Jewitt, Bezemer & O’Halloran, 2016;
Kress & van Leeuwen, 2001; Norris & Maier, 2014), combining various
communicative resources, a community’s means for creating meaning:
• visual: including printed texts, fonts, colors, symbols, images, avatars,
graphics, clothing;
• sound: including speech, exclamations (e.g., ha!), noise, music; and
• actions: including proxemics (e.g., preferences for personal space),
posture or gestures.
Any of these modes or semiotic resources may be the focus of multimodal
analysis, depending on what the learner/analyst wishes to understand or
the epistemological stances of the researcher. Jewitt and her colleagues
(2016) identify three approaches to multimodal analysis: systemic-func-
tional multimodal discourse analysis, social semiotics, and conversation
analysis. The ﬁrst and last approaches are quite technical and do not lend

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:56:33, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.004
64 Part I Theoretical and Methodological Foundations
themselves well to classroom adaptation. In contrast, social semiotics
(Kress & van Leeuwen, 2001) seems well suited for the purposes of this
volume, since it is more easily accessible to language instructors and their
students, helping them develop the skills necessary for systematic observa-
tion of intercultural communication. Moreover, this approach is repre-
sented predominantly in studies on second language learning, analyzing a
range of ‘texts,’ including printed materials, still images, popular media,
sociopolitical commentary, or computer-mediated communication
(Abrams, 2016a; Hampel, 2010; Hampel & Hauck, 2006; Hampel &
Pleines, 2013; Hauck, 2010). Although originally focusing on textual arte-
facts, this approach has been expanded to analyze dynamic interactions as
well, especially when used in conjunction with interactional sociolinguis-
tics and ethnography (Jewitt et al., 2016; Norris, 2004). Next, I outline the
basic tenets of this approach to multimodal analysis, followed by two
sample analyses, one of the interaction presented in Excerpt (1) above
and one of a poster.
Social semiotics, like all multimodal analyses, views language (i.e., speech
and writing) as only one of the many channels through which people convey
information to their interlocutors (Jewitt et al., 2016). Embodied modes
(e.g., body language, eye-gaze) and disembodied modes (e.g., the physical
location, clothing, artefacts) contribute to meaning-making (Norris, 2004).
The various modes (e.g., the verbal message and gestures) may reinforce
(nodding while saying yes) or contradict (sarcastic tone of voice when saying
Oh, I’m just fine) one another; alternately, they may fulfil complementary
roles, for example, when we ask would you like this bouquet of flowers or that
one? while pointing (Kress & van Leeuwen, 2001).
Importantly, understanding the specific context in which communica-
tion takes place is crucial for analyzing social action, interaction, and
identity, including the social relationships among participants, power,
and agency. Consequently, interpreting communication requires the abil-
ity to understand the totality of meaning-making, which can be provided
by rich ethnographic data (Flewitt, 2011): Who are the participants? What
and why are they communicating? How do their communicative choices
reflect their identities? How does history and culture influence the way
they communicate? How is multimodal communication encoded and
decoded in specific cultural settings? Understanding the totality of com-
munication, however, does not mean that every single facet of the text or
interaction has to be investigated equally at all times. Any analysis may
focus on one or more specific modes or aspects of communication, such as
how silence, laughter, clothing, bodily adornment, or eye-gaze is used by

Sample Multimodal Interactional Analysis

For Norris (2004) the unit of multimodal analysis is the action. Larger
higher-level actions, which are bracketed by an opening at the beginning
and a closing sequence at the end, usually serve as the focus of analysis.
Higher-level actions are made up of chains of smaller lower-level actions.
Referring back to the hotel-registration example in Excerpt (1), the opening
would be the clerk’s acknowledgment of the guests, and the closure would
entail a multi-step leave-taking ritual, culminating in the guests’ departure.
Excerpt (1) presented the verbal exchange, but communication actually
emerged as smaller actions along multiple channels, including verbal
exchanges, several types of nonverbal communication, realia (e.g., docu-
ments or other physical items), and even the physical set-up of where the
interaction takes place (e.g., noise or the availability of space). The salience
of each channel shifts during the encounter, sometimes emphasizing verbal
communication, at other times various realia. The interwoven, multimodal
nature of these channels is reﬂected in Excerpt (2), a more complex but also
more complete transcript.

Excerpt (2)

(1) Clerk: Good morning, Sir, how may I HELP you?

(smiles and turns head and body towards the door as the
guests enter, stands up behind the desk)
(2) Guest 1: [yeah, good afternoon, we have reservations
for this apartment
(returns smile, establishes eye-contact with
the clerk, shows her the printout of the
reservation conﬁrmation)
(3) Guest 1: and would like to check in? The GARNERS?
(4) Guest 2: (also returns smile, stands next to Guest 1)
(5) Guests 3, 4: (stand by the entrance)
(6) Clerk: [Ah, yes, the apartment is ready. I will
show you where it is

(7) on this map, but ﬁrst, may I have your passports?

(Continues to smile, places a map of Venice on the
counter; reaches out right hand, palm facing up, to take
passports)
(8) Guest 1: [umm … yes, here they are …
(gets passports from backpack, leans forward, hand over
passports to the clerk)
(9) Clerk: Thank you. I will make a photocopy of each of them,
OKAY? There are four of you, staying at the
(10) Apartment in the CALESELE, is that correct?
(turns back, makes photocopies)
(10) Guest 1: Yes, that is correct, and the printout should have the
conﬁrmation number.
(leans against counter, looks at his family)
(11) Clerk: [Oh, I don’t NEED that, you
(12) are all set up. You have already paid for the cost of the
apartment … here are the passports for you.
(ﬁnishes the photocopies, turns back to the
counter and hands back the passports)
(13) Guest 1: Oh, thank you. Can we already check in already?
(turns back to the clerk)
(14) Clerk: [mhm … Yes, of course. But umm.. you
also have to
(eye-gaze looking down at photocopies)
(15) pay the city taxes, which are 3.00 Euro for each person
per night. I am afraid that that must be
(16) paid cash. If you don’t have the money, you can go to the
bank in the building next door?
(head tilted to the side, angled down, looks up at Guest 1)
(18) Guest 1: Oh, no, we have it. Do you have the cash?
(turns to Guest 2, reaches out hand)
(19) Guest 2: [Yeah, right here. Check to make sure it’s enough.
(hands the money toward Guest 1)
(20) Clerk: Thank you.
(the space is small enough that the clerk reaches for and
takes the bills)

This transcript allows the reader/observer to examine how the partici-

pants co-constructed the exchange through multiple channels simulta-
neously, integrating verbal and nonverbal communication, while also
referencing external documents and utilizing the physical set-up of the

Sample Social Semiotic Analysis

According to Kress and van Leeuwen (2001), layers of communication
convey three types of meaning: ideational, interpersonal, and textual
meaning. Figure 3.1 – a poster prepared by the College Nine and College
Ten CoCurricular Programs Ofﬁce at the University of California Santa
Cruz, the university’s ‘international’ college – exempliﬁes these layers. The
poster is organized into three horizontal planes: at the top is information
regarding the main message of the poster, inviting students to a weekly get-
together. The center plane provides visual support for the message, reiter-
ating the key objectives, while the bottom plane includes details about the
dates, times, and location of events. All three planes include ideational
meaning, which is the main proposition or idea being conveyed. The
ideational meaning in the header, Drop by Activities on identity, social
justice, self-care and artistic expression, is reiterated in the center of the
poster, with Engage in social justice, Explore identity, and Practice self-care.
The ideational meaning in the bottom pane includes factual information:
every Thursday, 1:30–3:30 and in front of the C9/C10 dining hall, as well as the
contact email for the host.
In addition to the surface-level ideational meaning, these statements also
convey interpersonal meaning, which refers to the relationship between the
speaker and recipients/readers. The interpersonal meaning conveys social

Figure 3.1 Flyer by College Nine and College Ten Cocurricular Programs Unit, UCSC
(poster created by Daphne Mark, reprinted with permission)

messages, such as friendship or identities. This poster implies closeness,

with the imperative form of the verbs signaling direct suggestions (e.g.,
come join us or practice self-care). Although not present in this ﬂyer,
pronouns (e.g., inclusive we or attention-grabbing you) can also signal

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:56:33, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.004
3 The Learner as Analyst: Methods and Sources of Data Analysis 69
solidarity or distance between the text’s author(s) and its intended audi-
ence. The fact that neither the Cocurricular programs office or the location
for the events is included with a map indicates that the author and audience
are familiar with the physical context of the advertised events.
Beyond the first two layers, the poster communicates an underlying
textual meaning as well, indicating how the ideational and interperso-
nal messages interact to form a unified message. In this ad, the
colorful and thematically coherent images focus on fun and creative
expression, and are intended to elicit a sense of excitement in the
viewers regarding the event so that they want to participate and thus
help strengthen a sense of community among the students belonging
to these colleges. At the same time, the messages also connect the
event with values important to the university: social justice, celebrat-
ing students’ identities and self-care, which are useful life-skills that
students need as they transition to university. The design features
reiterate the focus on students: the sans serif font is youthful, evoking
a close and forward-looking relationship among the author and view-
ers, compared to more old-fashioned fonts.
As this poster partly illustrated, visual images, sounds, and actions
convey socially situated meaning (Jewitt, 2014); some are limited to parti-
cular social communities, others are shared across cultures. For example,
the rings of the Olympic Games are globally recognized symbols for an
international athletic competition. The winners’ podium conveys meaning
as well: the highest step signals the gold-medalist, the middle step is
reserved for the silver- and the lowest step for the bronze-medal awardees.
Music adds another communicative layer: the national anthems that
celebrate the winners might not be familiar internationally but have
symbolic and emotional significance for many members of the athlete’s
country. These elements jointly create cognitive and affective meaning to
the audiences of the Olympic Games.
Engaging with multimodal communication is crucial for L2/Lx learning
as well. Websites designed for authentic audiences contain verbal, non-
verbal, audio, and visual information that reflect how communication is
created for and by real-world users of the language (Kress & van Leeuwen,
2001). With the advent of the Internet and the rise in popularity of social
media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter, and
others, people rarely use just one modality to communicate their ideas to
and with their interactants. L2/Lx learners also often use their technologi-
cal devices to stay informed about the world, interact with other L2/Lx
users, engage with and experience entertainment, and receive and process

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:56:33, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.004
70 Part I Theoretical and Methodological Foundations
course materials (González-Lloret & Ortega, 2014). At this point, it is
useful to note that computer and Internet access is a privilege, and not all
L2/Lx learners have the same opportunities for unlimited, immediate
access to authentic language sources across the globe; also, not all languages
enjoy the same breadth of representation on the Internet as English, for
example.
In spite of its wealth of meaning-making resources, multimodal com-
munication might be overwhelming for L2/Lx learners, particularly at early
stages of language learning. Therefore, such materials need careful
consideration. Hampel and Hauck (2006) acknowledge the significant
challenge that multimodal L2/Lx pedagogy represents by shifting from
the single spoken modality of traditional classrooms to communicating in
multiple modes:
Learners in general and language learners in particular have always been
required to shift semiotic material outside their modal ‘comfort zone’ and to
transpose information from oral input, written text and visual clues.
However, the varying degrees of embeddedness of modes in the new
media and the resulting modal complexity turn language acquisition in
virtual environments into a new challenge. (p. 11)
Furthermore, transcribing multimodal communication is challenging
(Helm & Dooly, 2017). It is selective and incomplete. It is impossible to
transcribe an entire day’s or movie’s worth of interactions, therefore, we
predetermine what segment of communication we end up analyzing.
Similarly, we cannot capture every gaze, gesture, and body movement,
just as it is unlikely that we can transcribe every nuance of spoken language.
To reduce the challenges, there are several steps that instructors and
students can take to make use of multimodal analyses for the benefit of
L2/Lx learning:
• identify what it is that you are trying to understand from the multi-
modal analysis (if body language, then focus only on those aspects of
communication),
• understand the context of use of the multimodal discourse (e.g., reflect
on the ethnographic situation: Who are the interlocutors? What is their
objective?),
• analyze different modes separately (depending on the analytic focus,
start with one mode, then add the other modes of communication),
• work in pairs or groups, asking different observers to capture various
layers of the multimodal message or interaction,

Possible Data Sources: Authentic Materials

Although the primary focus of this chapter is on data analysis, potential
sources of data warrant explicit discussion, especially in foreign-language
learning situations, which offer fewer opportunities for extensive observa-
tions of culturally bound communicative patterns than second-language
settings. To fill this gap in readily available observable data, authentic
materials – including movies, documentaries, advertisements, or novels –
can be an invaluable resource for developing intercultural communicative
competence.
Authentic materials represent genuine communication among members of
a linguistic or cultural community (Abrams, 2016; Kilickaya, 2004; Peacock,
1997; Zyzik & Polio, 2017). Therefore, authentic communication is carried
out by members of a cultural group – including nonnative speakers of
languages – in specific social contexts, where the focus is on “content rather
than the form” (Berardo, 2006, p. 62) and “to fulfil some social purpose in
the language community” (Little, Devitt & Singleton, 1989, p. 25). In
contrast to authentic materials, pedagogically prepared materials are
usually “very unlike anything that the learner will encounter in the real
world and very often they do not reflect how the language is really used”

Selecting Authentic Materials

Authentic materials should include a wide array of media that foster
culturally situated processes of interpreting and creating meaning, such as
• texts: children’s stories, poetry, novels, newspaper articles, interviews
transcripts;
• audio-visual materials: podcasts, song lyrics, photos, color (and their
meaning), font, graffiti, television or newspaper ads, computer
games; and
• realia: cultural artefacts, clothing, jewelry, food, or sculptures.
When selecting authentic materials, several issues need to be considered:
1. Developing intercultural communicative competence is a long-term
goal, taught across multiple courses and instructional units, each of
which contributes to the overarching objective. Consequently, each
authentic source will serve as only one prism for introducing specific
aspects of the other culture.
2. Authentic materials should be interesting, motivating, and relevant,
reflecting learners’ age, life, and academic needs (e.g., traveling, study-
ing, or working abroad), and the availability of pedagogical materials
(e.g., Internet access), among other variables (Gilmore, 2007;
Kilickaya, 2004).
3. Sources should represent diverse perspectives and topics, to provide a
more complete understanding of the culture(s) whose language(s) lear-
ners are studying. Articles should present political information from
different parties or arguments for and against social issues. Variation
should also reflect social diversity and power structures, to avoid limit-
ing L2/Lx learning just to the language of those who wield power.
4. Thematically coherent resources (e.g., watching several episodes of a
TV-series or a novel read over a semester) that match learning objec-
tives (e.g., an academic writing course ideally provides examples of
successful student papers) allow in-depth learning, both of the L2/Lx
and the cultural content the source conveys.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:56:33, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.004
3 The Learner as Analyst: Methods and Sources of Data Analysis 73
5. Working with authentic materials requires learners and instructors to
become comfortable with not understanding everything; becoming
comfortable with an incomplete understanding of the L2/Lx can help
learners be more successful intercultural communicators as well
(Hofstede, Hofstede & Minkov, 2010).
6. Over time, students develop a sense of accomplishment as they learn to
“comprehend a real and authentic source from the target language”
(Gilmore, 2007, p. 107), but beforehand, their confidence can be fostered
by selecting material and tasks that are not so difficult as to frustrate the
learners, but not so easy as to suppress their interest in the learning
process.
7. Authentic materials need to match learners’ proficiency level in the
L2/Lx.
a. Beginning learners: In general, shorter, everyday topics presented
with audio-visual support may be useful at earlier stages of L2/Lx
development, because multimodality can help make input more
comprehensible and reduce learner frustration (Kilickaya, 2004).
Less complex storylines, adherence to ‘standard’ varieties of the
language and sources that do not rely heavily on abstract concepts
or cultural symbolism might be more suitable for this population.
Also at early stages of L2/Lx learning, some modification of
authentic texts may be warranted, such as selecting a smaller
segment of a longer text or highlighting key points (Gilmore,
2007), although making sources more accessible should not
come at the expense of losing the cultural benefits they provide.
Realistic videos are also better at this stage: people speaking will be
more comprehensible than cartoons, and nonverbal communica-
tion can help learners understand linguistic and cultural informa-
tion better.
b. Intermediate learners: This population can conduct increasingly
more sophisticated analyses of the connection between language
form and its socially contextualized meaning. For example, lear-
ners can use newspapers to compare the elements of news reports
and opinion pieces: What are the key arguments in each type of
writing and how are they structured? What evidence, if any, do the
authors use to support their points? Are there differences in how
the authors present their points in terms of language, modality, or
stylistic preferences? Selecting content that is familiar to and of
interest to learners can facilitate comprehension, because learners
can tap into available background knowledge, but intermediate-

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:56:33, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.004
74 Part I Theoretical and Methodological Foundations
level learners still require significant scaffolding for understanding
and interacting with authentic materials.
c. Advanced-level learners: With increasing proficiency, learners
should engage with more complex and abstract language and
ideas, learning about cultural beliefs and practices in progressively
more nuanced ways. Authentic sources and tasks should also
promote critical analyses of power and social dominance.
Learners could explore, for example, how different social groups
describe political events in which they participated (e.g., the
references, lexicon, or metaphors they use). Texts on sensitive
topics should allow for a thorough discussion of the underlying
issues and for learners’ questions to be answered adequately.
Instructors should not shy away from interesting or provocative
topics, but it can be difficult to discuss them in an L2/Lx when the
relevant linguistic and cultural knowledge is not yet readily acces-
sible for participants.
8. Interpreting authentic materials requires significant levels of L2/Lx
linguistic and cultural knowledge by the instructor, thus, educa-
tors need to commit to learning about the culture(s) they teach,
and from multiple perspectives (i.e., intracultural variation). The
authentic resources they select can also improve instructors’ own
knowledge of the L2/Lx cultures and demonstrate to learners that
developing intercultural communicative competence is a lifelong
process. Additionally, learners often contribute insights that the
instructor does not know or has not considered, perhaps some-
thing students learned in another course or experienced first-hand;
this is a positive aspect of a learning community. Student ques-
tions can also guide the class session in a positive and purposeful
direction.
9. It can be difficult – or unsustainably time consuming – to find
authentic sources that model particular language forms or cultural
concepts sufficiently. If the curriculum permits it, convert this chal-
lenge into a strength and focus onwhat is presented, namely, actual,
authentic language use. If, however, curricular constraints prevent
such flexibility, authentic materials should be combined with pedago-
gically prepared ones to help learners ease into their contact with the
L2/Lx. Glossaries or pretasks can provide lexical and content support
for authentic sources, simultaneously reducing the need for text mod-
ification and increasing learner autonomy.

Film as Data Source

In contexts where the L2/Lx is not spoken in the broader social commu-
nity, authentic filmic materials merit particular consideration as a source of
observable culturally contextualized linguistic behavior (Abrams, 2016b;
Fernández-Guerra, 2008; Kaiser & Shibahara, 2014; Kambara, 2011; Rose,
2001; Tognozzi, 2010; Washburn, 2001). Before delving into their peda-
gogical potential, a few words of caution are warranted. First, films should
not be equated with reality, since they represent only a fictional view of
events and society, filtered through the interpretations of authors, screen-
play writers, directors, editors, actors, technical staff, and technological
limitations (compare black-and-white silent films of the 1920s and com-
puter-generated images today) (Monaco, 2009). Second, movies do not
present completely realistic models of language. Scripts often lack such
aspects of discourse as hesitations, pauses, slips of the tongue, hedges,
incomplete sentences, or unexpected topic shifts, which are common in
everyday communication. Nonetheless, filmic materials can offer a wealth
of L2/Lx input.
To begin with, filmic materials have the potential to engage learners
affectively in socially and culturally relevant issues. Artists, their work and
the audience exist in historical and political contexts, which influence (or
even determine) what topics might be tackled and how the resultant art is
used socially: “The political determinant defines the relationship between
the work of art and the society that nurtures it” (Monaco, 2009, p. 36).
At the same time, movies and television can model extended, richly
contextualized L2/Lx and varied discourse in a wide array of authentic
interactional settings (Abrams, 2016b; Grant & Starks, 2001). Moreover, in
spite of the filtered nature of the medium, the language of film and
television mostly relies on culturally patterned communication, since
otherwise viewers would not be able to understand them (Abrams,
2016b; Grant & Starks, 2001; Kaiser & Shibahara, 2014; Monaco, 2009;
Saville-Troike, 2003). In fact, “good” films allow “native speakers [to]
suspend disbelief and accept the language as real” (Kaiser, 2009; cited in

Summary
In this chapter, three analytic approaches were presented – the ethno-
graphy of communication, interactional sociolinguistics, and multi-
modal analysis – that lend themselves well to implementation in L2/
Lx pedagogy. Using these analyses allows students to examine inter-
actions closely and to learn how to participate in intercultural com-
munication themselves. The type of data needed and the appropriate
analytic approach depend on what aspect of communication learners
are seeking to understand. For questions regarding the relationship
between language and broader social practices, ethnography of com-
munication is a good ﬁt; for a closer analysis of how language is used
for speciﬁc communicative purposes, interactional sociolinguistics is
perhaps better suited; for understanding posters or music videos,
multimodal analysis can be prioritized. However, these approaches
are often used in combination, such as in Excerpt (2), where interac-
tional sociolinguistics is combined with multimodal analysis.
Crucially, learners need not become fully trained ethnographers,

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS AND ACTIVITIES

1. What are some speech events in which you frequently participate? Who
are the main participants? What are usual objectives for the interaction?
Are there typical patterns of language that characterize your interactions?
2. Are there speech communities that you are aware of, either in your L1 or
L2/Lx communities, whose communication you are unfamiliar with?
How would you go about learning the necessary information to
participate in these communities? What resources would you use? How?
3. As a native speaker of your L1 and learner/speaker of your L2/Lx, you do
not know everything about communication (language and culture) in
these languages. How could you include your students in activities that
would help you and them become co-learners? How would you feel
about having your learners know something that you do not?
4. Based on a familiar speech event in which you participate, conduct a
modified ethnographic analysis using Hymes’ SPEAKING model. In what
ways do your findings reflect common practices in your community? What
are the parameters of these practices (e.g., under what circumstances are
these rules followed, by whom, in what ways)?
5. Select a multimedia source (image, song, advertisement, etc.) you are
familiar with and conduct a multimodal analysis on it with a small group
in your class. Use the following questions to guide your analysis: What
semiotic systems are used to create meaning? What ideational,
interpersonal, and textual meanings are conveyed by this image,
song, or clip?
6. Record (or use a video clip) and transcribe a brief, five- to eight-minute
exchange between two or three multilingual participants (use either

interactional sociolinguistics or interactional sociolinguistics with

embodied multimodal analysis). Take note of the process: How long
did the transcription take? What challenges did you face? How did you
resolve them? Were there things you could not resolve? Based on your
experience with this task, would you use such an assignment in your
own language teaching? If yes, how? If not, why not?

Appendix: Sample Analysis Using Hymes’ SPEAKING Grid

Analysis of an interview conducted by Jon Stewart (a former late-night
comedy show host in the United States) with Malala Yousafzai (June 18,
2015). www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjGL6YY6oMs The transcript is
available on the companion website.

Detailed response (provide evidence from the text to support your

Description responses)

Setting TV set, with an audience, cameras, the host and the guest sit on two
sides of a desk (this makes the interview a bit more formal, and
limits body language); audience in armchairs in the hall.
Scene Comedy, light-hearted entertainment
Participants • Speaker/listener: Jon Stewart (the host)
• Listener/speaker: Malala Yousafzai (a 16-year old girl, originally
from Pakistan, youngest Nobel Prize winner, author, activist
for girls’ education; survivor of a shooting by the Taliban)
• The audience on the set; the TV audience at home/in front of
computers
• Participants are ratified and legitimate, speaker/listener, audience
Ends • To entertain: first and foremost, a late-night comedy show is
meant to entertain the audience and engage in light-hearted
banter with the guest (e.g., his reference to New Jersey, self-
deprecating humor)
• To inform the audience about Malala’s story, her book, and
girls’ education in Pakistan
• To get people to support her cause (e.g., by buying her book or
donating to her foundation)
Act sequence • Introduction: JS introduces MY to the audience(s)
• JS asks questions, MY answers throughout the interview – all
questions are open-ended, sufficient time provided for
responses
• Audience laughs throughout, applauses between turns

Detailed response (provide evidence from the text to support your

Description responses)

• Closure: JS wraps up the interview and thanks MY (multi-turn

closure)
Key • Jocular (e.g., where JS asks if he could adopt her), but some-
what subdued and serious occasionally (long stretches of MY’s
responses)
Instrumentalities • Casual register, but not as low register as some of JS’s other
guests because of her cultural background
• Verbal exchange primarily, with laughter from the audience,
laughter shared by two speakers
• English was the L1 for the host (and, likely, most of the
audience); the interview language was an L2 for the guest
[this is evident from the video clip and knowing her
background]
Norms of interaction • As host, JS determines what the questions are, he is the one
asking them, courteously – he facilitates the dialog
• The guest, the respondent, is given broad leeway in how and
how long she responds, what details she emphasizes or
brings up
• The dialog is created collaboratively, questions following from
what the respondent said
• The audience cannot interrupt with speech or come up onto
the stage; they are, however, encouraged to participate in the
interaction through laughter and applause
• Overall: there are strict participant roles (host/guest; ques-
tioner/respondent)
Genre • Interview (between two primary participants, an interviewer
and a respondent)

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:56:33, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.004
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:56:33, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.004
chapter 4

Intercultural Communication: Teaching Vocabulary

Chapter Overview
One of the most important contributors to the comprehension and pro-
duction of the L2/Lx is the lexicon, the focus of the first pedagogical
chapter. After briefly reviewing relevant research regarding the develop-
ment of the L2/Lx lexicon, the discussion turns to issues in language
variation and communication strategies that L2/Lx users might draw on,
when they lack the necessary vocabulary to convey their intended meaning.
Since research into L2/Lx lexical acquisition is vast, a full review is impos-
sible in this space; therefore, this chapter focuses specifically on findings
that are most relevant for promoting intercultural communicative compe-
tence. The chapter concludes with a proposal of connecting L2/Lx research
on the lexicon to concepts in intercultural communicative competence,
including two sets of language teaching activities.

Key Concepts in L2/Lx Lexical Acquisition

Vocabulary is essential for expressing and comprehending ideas. It drives
sentence production, and only after lexical information is processed does
the mind deal with grammatical information (Levelt, 1989). Perhaps
accordingly, grammatical errors may be easier to understand than ones
stemming from lexical mismatches (Gass et al., 2013). This is unfortunate,
because grammar (a more ﬁnite system) is usually easier to learn than the
L2/Lx lexicon, beyond minimal levels of lexical knowledge.
The range of vocabulary we need to control depends on why we are
learning another language. For tourism and basic survival needs, for
example, around 120 words and expressions might sufﬁce (Nation &
Crabbe, 1991). In contrast, educated native speakers of English are likely
to know about 20,000 word families. Communication is manageable with
fewer words, though, since a relatively small group of the most frequently

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 05:10:45, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.005
84 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
used words carry a significant amount of the communicative load in an L2/
Lx. The most frequent 100 words in English, for example, account for as
much as 50 percent of texts, while the 1000 most frequent words cover 70–
90 percent of most reading texts (Nation, 2013). Nation (2016) and Schmitt
(2014) suggest focusing on the highest-frequency words (ca 3000 words and
word families) in the first years of L2 instruction, while subsequent years
should push the development of a mid-frequent band of 6000 words.1
Notably, such frequency information is not available for all languages, in
which case the target vocabulary can be identified by determining students’
current needs in the L2/Lx context, such as traveling, interpersonal rela-
tionships, specific work requirements, or academic disciplines.
Once the target vocabulary has been identified, decoding and encoding
vocabulary requires three types of knowledge: form, meaning, and use
(Nation, 2001, 2013). Form refers to the sound and pronunciation of a
word, its spelling and components (e.g., stem, suffixes). Meaning includes
the concepts words signify (e.g., ‘What is a ghost?’), how additional
components change their meaning (e.g., haunt → haunted indicating the
past tense) and other lexical and cultural associations (e.g., Halloween).
Finally, use addresses the grammatical functions of lexical items (i.e., is it a
noun or an adverb?), frequent collocations (cooccurring word combina-
tions, such as haunted house), as well as the linguistic and sociolinguistic
constraints surrounding them (e.g., register, appropriate contexts).
Using Nation’s framework, Table 4.1 presents a sample analysis of the
word destructive used in an article on the political situation in Syria,
published in the American newspaper The Washington Post2.
Learners’ lexical knowledge can be described by its breadth (i.e., how
many different words a learner knows) and its depth (i.e., detailed knowl-
edge of the meaning, form, and use of words, and the networks they create
with other words). Both the breadth and depth of lexical knowledge play
important roles in language comprehension and production, although
depth of knowledge seems to facilitate both receptive and productive skills,
because it enhances effective strategy use and successful lexical inferencing
(Gass et al., 2013; Hu & Nassaji, 2014). In addition to breadth and depth of
knowledge, a distinction needs to be made between receptive and

1
This subset may or may not overlap with general high-frequency words from everyday language use.
Also, word-frequency lists are often based on written corpora (compilations of texts) and that some of
the distinctions between moderately and very low-frequency words can be arbitrary.
2
www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/after-syria-attack-us-and-russia-tensions-rise-bu
t-military-confrontation-fears-ease/2018/04/14/d7a48d32-3fdb-11e8-a7d1-e4efec6389f0_story.html?u
tm_term=.f40396b0e071

Pronunciation /dəˈstrəktiv/ [Mainstream U.S. English]

Spelling ‘destructive’
Components This lexical item consists of three morphemes: de- [negative prefix]
+ struct [base morpheme] + -ive [adjectival suffix]
Meaning The Merriam-Webster online dictionary lists two meanings for
this word:
1: causing destruction
2: designed or tending to hurt or destroy
Concept Some connotations of this adjective include ‘negative,’ ‘force,’
‘power,’ ‘damaging’
Related words devastating, ruinous, disastrous, catastrophic, calamitous,
cataclysmic
Patterns of occurrence ‘Destructive’ is an adjective, preceding the noun it modifies
Sample collocations Typical cooccurring words are ‘storm’ (literal meaning) and
‘criticism’ or ‘behavior’ (figurative meaning)
Use in context “Russian President Vladimir Putin said the strikes would have ‘a
destructive effect on the entire system of international relations’
and called for an emergency meeting of the U.N. Security
Council . . .” (emphasis mine). This is a low-frequency word
(#5024) in the Corpus of Contemporary American English3.

productive knowledge. Receptive knowledge includes the ability to recog-

nize words, what they mean in general terms and in the specific context in
which they are being used, what components they are comprised of (e.g.,
prefixes, stems, suffixes), and their connotations (Nation, 2013). Productive
knowledge, in contrast, refers to learners’ ability to access, produce, and use
words correctly in various contexts, including their grammatical and socio-
linguistic constraints (Gass et al., 2013). Learners’ receptive vocabulary
generally exceeds their productive vocabulary, although differences tend
to diminish as L2 proficiency increases (Nation, 2001).
Lexical knowledge can also be described in terms of organization. In
native speakers and advanced L2 learners, the psycholinguistic representa-
tion of words is typically organized in two kinds of networks: (1) paradig-
matic links include semantic groupings, concepts that we associate with the
word, such as water → river, sea, ocean, lake, and stream, while (2) syntag-
matic links include syntactic or grammatical associations, and common

3
www.wordfrequency.info/free.asp

Research on Teaching the L2/Lx Lexicon

When preparing to teach the L2/Lx lexicon, instructors should keep two
basic principles in mind. First, vocabulary learning requires multiple – as
many as sixteen – exposures to each lexical item, depending on the
frequency and complexity of the word or whether it has a useful L1 cognate
that learners can draw on (e.g., Brown, 2013; Nation, 2013; Vidal, 2011).
Second, while both planned pedagogical activity and incidental learning
during extensive reading or listening offer opportunities for much needed
repetition, receptive exposure by itself will foster only receptive skills,
whereas productive lexical development requires productive practice
(Paribakht & Wesche, 1997; Rott, 1999).
With these principles in mind, lexical development can be fostered in the
L2/Lx classroom in several ways. Multimedia presentations, for example, have
been shown to be particularly effective sources of lexical development,
because they allow more in-depth processing of vocabulary (Chun & Plass,
1996; Moeller, Ketsman, & Masmaliyeva, 2009). Additionally, teaching
preﬁxes and sufﬁxes (e.g., dis- or -ly) explicitly helps increase learners’ voca-
bulary size, emphasizing patterns of word families (Nation, 2016). Moreover,
effective pedagogy focuses learners’ attention to both form and meaning in a
counterbalanced approach (Lyster, 2007; Moeller et al., 2009). Shifting

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 05:10:45, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.005
4 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Vocabulary 87
between attending to a word’s meaning or its form (e.g., singular/plural,
tense, aspect) helps learners become aware of the form–meaning connection,
which is required for the accurate interpretation of lexical information. This
approach leads to deeper lexical processing and better retention.
A particularly effective approach to teaching vocabulary is in word
groups, collocations, phrasal verbs, and idiomatic expressions (e.g., let me
think about it or You’re kidding) (Boers, Eyckmans, & Stengers, 2007;
Chun & Payne, 2004; Gass et al., 2013; Moeller et al., 2009). Using “fixed
expressions and formulas has an important economizing role in speech
production,” because processing words in groups instead of as individual
words reduces the learning burden (Kecskés, 2019, p. 50). Consequently,
they facilitate both comprehension and production. Hinkel (2017) also
highlights the importance of teaching idiomatic expressions and conven-
tionalized phrases, which are closely linked to specific languages and
cultures. Idiomatic expressions and conventionalized phrases can be diffi-
cult to operationalize – they range from single-word to multi-word expres-
sions (e.g., what?!?! or burning the midnight oil) and can be rigid or
somewhat flexible – they are ubiquitous in both spoken and written
language, in both formal and informal contexts, and can take diverse
forms:
1. frequently recurring and culture-specific expressions with opaque
meanings (e.g., cost an arm and a leg; better late than never)
2. collocations, that is, words that often occur together but with flexible
and variable components (e.g., take place/part/a test/a break; ready to
go/start/close [verb]; give advice/suggestion(s))
3. fixed phrases with specific and well-defined meanings, as well as
phrasal verbs (e.g., break in/out/down/up/into; out of place)
4. figurative expressions (such as metaphors) (e.g., The world is my oyster;
couch potato; heart of gold; heart of stone; melting pot)
5. conversational routines and pre-patterned speech (e.g., Excuse me,
could you tell me where xxx is?; I am sorry I am late; No problem/No
worries)
6. set and rigidly ordered phrases (in which components are fixed in a
certain order) (e.g., here we go; ahead of time; what in the world)
7. proverbs (e.g., two wrongs don’t make a right; no man is an island)
8. culturally bound sayings (e.g., a fish out of water; right as rain; count
your chickens before they hatch)
(Hinkel, 2017, pp. 49–50; reduced examples; emphases mine)

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 05:10:45, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.005
88 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
These formulaic expressions can have literal and figurative meanings – she’s
with me either implies that someone is physically by my side or that she
shares my opinion – with figurative meaning often being a stumbling block
for L2/Lx learners. Since such expressions number in the thousands (Shin
& Nation, 2008), it is best to focus on the most frequently used phrases
during regular L2/Lx instruction (Arnon & Snider, 2010), with repeated
exposures in all language skills (Hinkel, 2017).
An investment in teaching vocabulary has great positive impact, since
lexical development is exponential: known words serve as springboards for
linking to and networking with increasingly wider ranges of new, related,
and associated words. This includes learners’ existing multilingual lexical
repertoires, since the L1 and L2/Lx lexicons are in communication with
each other (Gass et al., 2013; Jiang, 2004). Thus, exploring cross-linguistic
word associations can support vocabulary development. Cognates – words
with similar historical roots across languages, e.g., Schwester in German and
sister in English – can help activate phonological, orthographic, semantic,
and syntactic aspects of both languages, potentially promoting L2/Lx
lexical acquisition. Explicit connections to other languages that learners
know can be especially helpful at advanced levels of L2/Lx proficiency,
since the academic lexicon, which is similar to specialized lexicons of
professions (e.g., medicine, law, mathematics), draws heavily on words
with Greek and Latin roots, which can serve as built-in scaffolding for
reading and viewing activities that emphasize “meaning-focused input,
language-focused learning, meaning-focused output, and fluency develop-
ment” (Nation, 2001, p. 196).
At the same time, L1–L2/Lx connections can also be problematic. For
example, false cognates, which are words that have divergent meanings in
different languages (e.g., Gift, means ‘poison’ in German but ‘present’ in
English) are misleading. Similarly, semantically overlapping but still distinct
words across languages, such as friendship, which describes a different range
of relationships in French than in English, may cause confusion
(Furstenberg, Levet, English, & Maillet, 2001). Even when lexical items
are shared across languages, they often connote different objects; for many
Americans, the core meaning of bread refers to a sliced white bread, while in
Iran, the word naan (‘bread’) depicts a flat bread. There may be missing
concepts across languages as well. The Japanese word kawaii in general terms
means ‘cute,’ ‘adorable,’ or ‘delicate’ but has no direct English equivalent,
and no English counterpart carries the same affective connotations
(Burdelski & Mitsuhashi, 2010). Collocations also do not readily transfer
from the L1 into the L2/Lx; for example, while you brush your teeth in

Reconsidering Teaching L2/Lx Vocabulary with an Intercultural

Communication Orientation
Lexical knowledge is a prerequisite for intercultural communication, as it is
the main meaning-making component of language (Byram & Zarate, 1997;
Oetzel, 2009). Communicating meaning effectively fosters curiosity and
openness towards members of other cultures and can reduce frustrations
stemming from cultural and communicative differences. Consequently,
without the lexicon, the skills and savoirs Byram (1997) outlined are not
achievable. Focusing on the vocabulary, especially from authentic sources,
helps learners build and test hypotheses, using their multilingual and
multicultural experiences (e.g., recognizing similarities and differences in
communicative practices). Learning about intracultural variation builds
knowledge about regional differences (both in terms of space and social
identities) as well as skills of interpreting and relating. Finally, lexical
knowledge is necessary for critical cultural awareness as well, as learners

Language Variation
The way people use language reflects geographic, situational, and indivi-
dual variation that telegraphs a speaker’s region of origin, profession, and
other social affiliations. The first indicator, regional variation, is based on
phonological, morphological, syntactic, and lexical differences between
dialects and languages (Myers-Scotton, 2006). Sometimes the distinction
between language and dialect is arbitrary and greatly influenced by socio-
political factors. Dutch and German are oft-quoted examples where regio-
nal varieties (e.g., Bavarian, spoken in southern Germany and Plattdeutsch
spoken in northern Germany) might be more different phonologically and
morphologically, and less mutually comprehensible, than Dutch and
certain German dialects (Fagan, 2009).
Due to historical sociopolitical factors, one or two language varieties
might emerge as privileged. These standard varieties typically represent
the language to outsiders (e.g., used in dictionaries), reflect the speech of
people with education, power, and prestige, and are used by national
media. In comparison, other varieties of the language are viewed as ‘non-
standard,’ because they diverge from the ‘standard’ phonologically, lexi-
cally, morphologically, and/or syntactically. Standard varieties of
languages coexist with regional dialects in diglossic situations, in which
each variety is deployed in different contexts of use (e.g., the standard
variety might be used at work and the dialect at home). Although, from a
linguistic standpoint, all languages are equally valid and valuable, non-
standard varieties sometimes enjoy less symbolic capital (i.e., value placed
on them by society) than ‘standard’ languages; these differences often
maintain existing social and power structures (Bourdieu, 1993; Lippi-
Green, 2012).
Languages can also have multiple standard varieties. These languages
are called pluricentric and include Arabic, Chinese, English, French,
German, Portuguese, and Spanish (Fagan, 2009; Myers-Scotton,
2006). Given the stature of English as a world language, spoken by the
most speakers around the globe as a native or additional language, it has
received significant attention for its variation. Kachru (2008) coined the
term World Englishes to describe its spread and distribution, grouped in
three concentric circles:

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 05:10:45, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.005
4 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Vocabulary 91
1. The inner circle represents countries in which English is spoken as a
native language, including Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand,
the United Kingdom, and the United States. The standard varieties
spoken in these countries are traditionally seen as socially and eco-
nomically more powerful and prestigious (~380 million users of
English).
2. The outer circle includes countries with a colonial past, where English
is spoken by broad segments of society as a first, second, or additional
language learned from childhood, such as some countries in the
Caribbean, India, Kenya, or the Philippines (~350–450 million
people).
3. In the outermost expanding circle, we find countries without a colonial
past, where English is spoken as an L2/Lx. Given the important
economic, political, and social role that English plays around the
globe, this circle includes all remaining countries (~750 million
individuals).
The varieties spoken in the three circles have enjoyed different levels of
prestige over time and still reflect current and historical relationships
among countries, cultural groups, and individuals. Raising learners’ aware-
ness of the value society places on different language varieties pertains to
Byram’s (1997) notion of knowledge and should be included in an inter-
culturally oriented L2/Lx pedagogy.
There is an additional reason for addressing pluricentricity: the surface-
level similarity between these language varieties may (mis)lead speakers
into a false sense of security, even though smooth communication is not
guaranteed. Lexical mismatches (e.g., flat v. apartment between British and
U.S. American English) or divergent pronunciation (e.g., the Arabic
expression for ‘good morning’ is pronounced as SabaaH iklheer in Cairo
but as SbaH klher in Fez; Brustad, Al-Batal, & Al-Tonsi, 2014) may trip up
interactants. Awareness of these distinctions not only facilitates commu-
nication among speakers of different languages, but also of different
varieties of the same language.
In addition to regional differences, variation reflects gender, education,
ethnicity, and spheres of activity (e.g., hobbies). We adopt these social
dialects intentionally or inadvertently and signal social group membership
to our interlocutors (Myers-Scotton, 2006); we may use more or less
formal language, specific vocabulary (e.g., pertaining to a profession), or
phonological features. For example, while giving a speech at a conference,
we use sophisticated and technical vocabulary (e.g., examine the dataset)

new word coinage:

emojis images or icons used in electronic communication and social
media to express emotions and attitudes or convey information
playfully without words.
semantic change:
mouse originally referring to a small rodent, the primary meaning most
people now associate with this word is the computer mouse,
due to the omnipresence of technology.

Some of these newly coined terms subsequently migrate from written to

spoken language, since we now incorporate tweet and Twitter into regular
conversations, adding suffixes or other components (e.g., he tweeted or
Twitter storm). Technology is one of the main driving forces behind lexical
innovation, but not the only one. The word of the year in 2016, for
example, was dumpster fire. American linguists selected this two-word
expression and the combined emoji of the fireball and a basket because

Language Variation in an L2/Lx

For psycholinguistic or sociopsychological reasons, most individuals do
not develop native-like pronunciation in an L2/Lx, unless they learn it
from early childhood. Psycholinguistic reasons include our diminishing
ability to distinguish and produce sounds that are not part of our L1 as early
as six to eight years of age, perhaps due to a reduction in motor skill
flexibility or less brain plasticity (Moyer, 1999; Myers-Scotton, 2006).
Other scholars (cf. Birdsong, 2013) contend, however, that even adults
can develop native or near-native pronunciation, and that factors other
than age determine pronunciation attainment, such as the ability to decode
and encode sounds (phonemes), working memory, or language aptitude.
Psycholinguistic causes of nonnative pronunciation patterns can also be
attributed to L1 transfer. For example, in Arabic, the word-initial bilabial
voiceless stop /p/ in plastic is replaced with its voiced equivalent (/b/, with
an epenthetic vowel /i/) to pronounce the word as ‘bilastic,’ because the
voiceless consonant is phonologically dispreferred in Arabic (Farwaneh,
2009; Khattab & Al-Tamimi, 2014). Some variation in learning outcomes
is sociopsychological in origin.
L2/Lx variation depends on conscious or subconscious sociopsycholo-
gical/psychosocial factors (Myers-Scotton, 2006). For example, ch /t∫/
carries a somewhat negative stigma in Greek, therefore Greek learners of
English might use alternate sounds to avoid sounding less educated,
reflecting a transfer of sociolinguistic preferences from the L1 (Beebe,
1980). Learners may also make conscious decisions to signal their L1
affiliation. If the host culture finds a particular accent charming – such as

4
www.wired.com/2017/01/word-of-year-dumpster-ﬁre/

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 05:10:45, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.005
94 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
French or Italian in the United States – or if a language user wants to
convey a certain personality, like Henry Kissinger maintaining his accent
to emphasize his image as a German professor and thus be taken more
seriously, there might be little impetus to adapt to L2/Lx pronunciation
(Myers-Scotton, 2006). Moreover, speaking an L2/Lx too well can lead to
difficulties. As Piller (2016) relates, in 2009, a boat carrying Sri Lankan
asylum seekers to Australia was intercepted; their leader, who had trained
at a U.S. call-center spoke English with an American accent and used the
anglicized name ‘Alex.’ The Sri Lankan High Commissioner questioned
the group’s refugee status, due to Alex’s excellent English skills, putting
their asylum claim in jeopardy.
In contrast, in some bilingual communities, learners do not ever develop
sufficient proficiency in the L2/Lx and retain significant nonnative-like
accents and language skills. This is the situation for many ethnic
Hungarians in the Hungarian-majority part of Romania (Transylvania),
where students only study Romanian at school, in very limited contexts of
use, and often fail to learn it well enough to pass graduation requirements
(Piller, 2016). Their lack of fluency subsequently limits students’ access to
higher education or employment.
The situation in multilingual speech communities is not always dire,
and members of these communities easily shift between languages,
although not randomly. One of the determiners of language choice is the
domain of interaction, which Fishman (1972) divided into five categories:
(1) home, (2) work, (3) neighborhood, (4) church/religion, and (5) public
affairs. For example, someone may speak English in educational settings
but Haitian Creole with her family and friends, although participants at
home may also code switch – use two languages in the same conversation – a
phenomenon frequently observed in bilingual communication (Myers-
Scotton, 2006). Multilingual people also tend to have strengths in one
language for some of these domains and use their other language(s) for the
other domains.
These are some of the issues that multilingual speakers negotiate as they
traverse diverse linguistic and cultural realms. When their lexical knowl-
edge is insufficient for a particular interaction, they may have to resort to
communication strategies to make themselves understood.

Communication Strategies: Mind the Gap

As I mentioned at the beginning of the chapter, vocabulary is one of the
most signiﬁcant contributors to meaning-making and, at the same time,

Learner-to-Learner Lexical Development

Research on L2/Lx lexical development in intercultural communication is
limited, as a review of current scholarship reveals. However, a handful of
studies offer possible lines of further inquiry in this area. In a study
analyzing children’s intentional and incidental lexical development in a
text-based online chat, Coyle, Reverte Prieto, and Martínez Rico (2017)
found that, although participants did not always acquire the target voca-
bulary, their lexical knowledge improved signiﬁcantly over the ﬁve-week
project, especially on nontarget lexical items and formulaic expressions that
were important for task completion, as a result of in-depth negotiation of
meaning. The children recognized gaps in their lexicon, which prompted
them to seek information outside of class. In addition to paying attention
to their own lexical output and their peers’ feedback, they also developed
multimodal communication skills. Their activities engaged them

Strategy type Subcategory Process Speciﬁc strategy Example

Appeal for assistance Asking for help (how do you say . . .), comprehension check
Mime Acting out swimming
Gesture Using thumbs-up to signal ‘good’ or pointing to an icon on a map,

Interactive
if the speaker does not know the word for ‘castle’
Message abandonment Speaker does not know how to say three o’clock so they respond
with I don’t know when asked the time
Topic avoidance Speaker lacks the technical vocabulary required for explaining

Reduction
what is wrong with the car
Approximation Saying blue and green instead of teal
Semantic contiguity
Analogy It is like the color of the sea
Antonymy Not good for discouraging

speakers)
used by L2/Lx
Metonymy Using one word to represent a different idea, such as crown for the
Royal Family in the U.K.

Holistic (more often

Synonymy Windy for stormy
Superordinate Saying leg instead of foot, substituting the entire for the speciﬁc
part
Circumlocution (e.g., size, The thing you boil water in for tea for kettle

Conceptual
color, shape – high-

terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.005

frequency words replace
low-frequency ones)

Achievement / Compensatory
Repetition Repeating a word, perhaps with a rising intonation to signal
uncertainty

Lx competence)
Exempliﬁcation Providing one or more examples, such as car, bus, or subway to
explain transportation

or at higher levels of L2/

Analytic (often used in L1

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 05:10:45, subject to the Cambridge Core
Borrowing Using a word from the L1, retaining the L1 pronunciation, within
the surrounding L2/Lx message
Foreignizing Using the L1 word for an item with L2/Lx phonology, hoping that
it is transferable (e.g., theater → *teater in Greek, which is close
enough to the actual Greek word θέατρο, hopefully
recognizable for the listener

Code
Literal translation Literal translation of an L1 word into the L2, expecting a one-to-
one transfer, such as confiture de circulation (i.e., ‘traffic
marmalade’ in French) when trying to express traffic jam
Word coinage Creation of *hétután (‘next week’) in Hungarian, following the

Transfer & Morpho-creation

pattern of holnapután (‘the day after tomorrow’)

terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.005

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 05:10:45, subject to the Cambridge Core
98 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
cognitively and affectively, pushing them to form and test hypotheses and
reflect on their language use, activities that help solidify lexical knowledge
(Williams, 2012).
Multimodal lexical use and development is also the focus of Jiang’s
(2019) analysis of memes developed on a Chinese meme-sharing website,
斗图终结者 (‘the terminator of picture fight’). The multilingual nature of
these images helps users “express views about current social, political issues
. . . [and] get past censorship.” Involving polysemy and homonymy and
external references to social and political events, these high-level word
games foster deep bilingual lexical processing, as nuances in meaning
form the basis of participants’ collaboratively created humor.
Collaboration has shown to promote lexical development in other
projects as well. Lee and Markey (2014) observed that U.S. American and
Spanish university students participating in a telecollaborative exchange
taught each other about their personal musical preferences and cultural
practices, linguistic variation between Iberian and Latin American varieties
of Spanish (in terms of lexicon and phonology), and colloquial expressions
(e.g., wicked used for very in the northeastern part of the United States),
which can be difficult for L2/Lx learners to acquire otherwise. Through the
exchanges, Lee and Markey’s participants also had opportunities to con-
nect the lexicon to real people using a real language: “The ability to
establish a personal rapport can be seen to have greatly enhanced the
working of these intercultural exchanges” (p. 289). Personal rapport can
push positive attitudes towards other cultures and languages, a fundamen-
tal pillar of intercultural communicative competence.

Summary
As this chapter has demonstrated, lexical knowledge is essential for com-
municating with members of other cultures. By emphasizing vocabulary in
their teaching, L2/Lx instructors contribute signiﬁcantly to learners’ ability
to communicate with members of other cultures and speakers of other
languages. However, there are additional ways in which lexical knowledge
can be mapped onto intercultural communication, in terms of the guide-
lines presented in Chapter 2 (Byram, 1997; Hua, 2014; Kramsch, 2009;
Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013) and the concepts discussed in Chapter 1 (e.g.,
Hall, 1976; Hofstede, et al., 2010; Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck, 1961). The
following synthesis models possible interrelationships among these threads
of research, illustrating what an intercultural communication-oriented
pedagogy might entail:

Knowledge & skills

1. Include opportunities for students to explore lexical items they find personally
interesting, engaging with them cognitively (research their meaning and test
hypotheses) and affectively (skills of discovery).
2. Acknowledge psycholinguistic and psychosocial factors (e.g., age of acquisition or
affiliation with an L1 speech community) that may affect L2/Lx language use
(attitude).
3. Include authentic materials that reflect regional and stylistic variation reflected in
lexical choice and pronunciation, and explore how language use relates to social
identities (knowledge; skills of relating, interpreting, and interacting; critical cultural
awareness).
4. Teach communication strategies – including meta-awareness – to enhance a speaker’s
message or compensate for gaps in lexical knowledge (skill of interaction).
Linguistic repertoire
1. Prioritize lexical development (over grammar), especially at lower levels of L2/Lx
proficiency; in the first two years, focus on the 3000 high-frequency words that carry
most of the meaning; from year 3, expand to academic or specialized vocabularies.
2. Address meaning (e.g., denotation, synonyms, antonyms) and use (e.g., when, how, by
whom), in addition to form (e.g., sounds, spelling, components).
3. Emphasize chunked expressions (meaning, usage, and linguistic flexibility), explicitly
connected to the cultural context in which they occur (i.e., likely speakers, contexts).
4. Teach two-word idioms and conventional expressions first (they are easier for
beginning learners to remember), then expand to longer and less transparent
expressions (i.e., with less obvious meaning) starting in the second year.
Curricular considerations
1. Help L2/Lx learners set reasonable learning objectives regarding pronunciation; users
who learn the language past early childhood in foreign language learning contexts
often cannot learn it with a native-like pronunciation; that goal is unreasonable and
perhaps undesirable for learners and instructors.
2. Over time (e.g., one year, two years, four years), examine how the lexicon reflects
societal values, including (but not limited to) high- versus low-power distance
relationships, individualism versus collectivism, or long- versus short-term
orientation; include reflections by learners about their possible reaction to differences
from their own experiences vis-à-vis other cultural preference (e.g., punctuality,
collectivism).

In the next section, two teaching activities are presented that reflect
some of the pedagogical goals. They also promote deeper levels of analysis
and reflection at increased levels of proficiency.

ACTIVITY SET 1

L2/Lx: Greek
Learner group: Novice/A1 learners
Source: Advertisement from a Greek supermarket chain called
Bazaar
Duration: 1–2 lessons

Learning Objectives
By the end of this activity, students will be able to:
1. read and identify
• the labels for individual items (e.g., milk, ham),
• their superordinate category (e.g., dairy, vegetables),
• the culturally appropriate way to measure items (e.g., kilogram,
bunch),
• the cost of various items and actual prices (e.g., the ad lists the price
of a kilogram of meat, but individual packages vary in weight),
include the currency used in Greece;
2. negotiate and create a grocery list they would purchase for a speciﬁc
occasion (e.g., birthday party), using the correct vocabulary, within an
anticipated budget;
3. reﬂect on different items that may be purchased at a grocery store (versus
pharmacy or open-air market) in Greece compared to students’ home
culture.

Analytic Approach
Multimodal analysis. Students learn to interpret the complementary
semiotic systems of images, words (including multilingual labels, which
can tap into learners’ world knowledge and multilingual skills to
identify objects), numbers, colors, and their meanings (e.g., bottle caps
often indicate sparkling or plain water), as well as how information is
organized.
Steps in the Task
Pre-Reading
1. Looking at images, students identify the authentic source material (i.e.,
ﬂyer/advertisement for a supermarket).
2. Students search for and ﬁnd cognates, using their knowledge of Greek
orthography and referential knowledge (e.g., recognizing images of
fruit).

Reading
Working in pairs or small groups, students sort the groceries into
superordinate categories, what they like/dislike or what they have/need. As a
team, they use skills of interpreting and discovery as they clarify the
meaning of new lexical items in a culturally contextualized environment,
overcome mismatches in expected and actual content, and explore costs
associated with food in Greece.

Post-Reading
1. Students create a list of items they need for their event and ensure that
their purchases ﬁt their budget – if available, budgets for several socio-
economic groups could be shared with learners to understand better the
sociocultural context (e.g., how much a teacher or a street vendor earns
each month).
• Provide learners with formulaic phrases they need for the task
We (don’t) need . . .
We still have plenty of . . .
I (don’t) like . . .
Do you like . . . / Don’t you like . . .
2. In small groups, students can act out shopping in short skits, including:
• asking for help from a salesperson: can you show me where [item x] is?
or where can I ﬁnd [item x]? using chunked phrases;
• learning and exchanging information about whether they
need a shopping cart or a basket,
need a plastic bag or say thanks, we have one, and
be paying by bankcard or in cash;
• identifying useful communication strategies: pointing to items
whose name they do not know, guessing from context, gesturing, etc.
[Other students should take notes on each group’s skit, what they
need and how they plan to pay, to foster listening
comprehension.]

Analysis
These pre- during- and post-reading tasks provide sufﬁcient repetition
of targeted words, focusing on meaning in a rich cultural context. The
multimodal presentation and practice foster deeper cognitive processing
and generate a fuller semantic domain of shopping (i.e., paradigmatic
organization), connecting it to real-world products. Additionally, the
multimodal environment – images of food and advertising tools,
multilingual text, numbers, cultural information, etc. – engages
students both cognitively and affectively, increasing their L2/Lx lexical
knowledge and improving their attitude (curiosity) towards the new

culture. Moving from interpreting culturally and sociolinguistically

contextualized input to producing it themselves helps learners develop
receptive and productive skills for an essential, everyday task in a guided
environment prior to having to perform it on their own in the host
culture.

ACTIVITY SET 2

L2/Lx: English as a second/foreign language

Learner group: Intermediate-mid to -high/B1-B2 learners
Source: The New Zealand television series 800 Words (www
.imdb.com/title/tt4380324/) 2015–2018, forty episodes
(approximately 45 minutes each)
Duration: Variable; 1–6 lessons (if longer than one lesson, the
activity can be done intensively in one week or spread
out over time, watching one episode every week)

Learning Objectives
By the end of this activity, students will be able to do the following:
1. Recognize several features of the regional varieties of English used by the
actors, for now focusing on the lexicon: phonology, form, and meaning,
including features that overlap with other varieties learners know and
those that are local. Because three of the main characters are Australian,
while the others are from New Zealand, the material lends itself well to
detailed comparisons of language varieties used by multilingual
speakers.
2. Identify styles of language used in the movie: casual and formal,
including contexts-of-use, and social dialects (e.g., young people,
members of the local population).
3. Identify language and terminology – and the underlying cultural
implications – used to deﬁne kinship, friendships, acquaintances, and
professional relationships, as well as topics that are discussed in these
communities.
4. Identify language used to describe and celebrate life events (e.g., gra-
duation from school, getting a job, a cricket match) or to grieve (e.g.,
loss of friendship, death).
5. Describe several societal dimensions (e.g., power distance
relationships, masculine/feminine), orientation towards time, high-
versus low-context communication, or personal space; the number of
features to be analyzed depends on how many
episodes can be watched.

Analytic Approaches
Ethnography of communication and interactional sociolinguistics.

Steps in the Task

Pre-Viewing
1. In class, watch a short segment (ca 10 minutes) of Series 1, Episode 1 and
identify the different settings and participants who are introduced (these
lists will be expanded later, during viewing), noting details provided
about each person.
2. Students note words and expressions (form, meaning, and use) that
make an impression on them, as interesting or new, perhaps
because they are not yet known to the learner or they are used
differently than what the learners had encountered before in other
varieties of English.

Viewing
1. Watch one or more episodes in segments of 15–20 minutes (pausing at a
natural break in the story line, such as a shift of events), expanding the
list of participants and settings introduced:
• check back with the class after each segment, to ensure compre-
hension (it serves as a foundation for analysis).
2. Divide the class into four groups, each taking notes on one of the
following details in Episode 1 and subsequent episodes, using evidence
from the film:
• ends: shared interactional expectations, rules for interaction, the
objectives participants want to accomplish;
• act sequence: the content of the communicative event (i.e., referential
information exchanged) and how participants interact (e.g., turn-
taking, collaborative or competitive overlap);
• key: the tone of the event, whether it is humorous or serious
• instrumentalities: message form, the type of communication used
(for this task, the group should focus on specific lexical areas, such as
idioms, metaphors or puns).
3. Half-way through the episode, each group presents its finding to the rest
of the class, so that the second half is viewed with the information
serving as an interpretive lens for studying the lexicon.

Post-Viewing
1. Groups might want to re-watch selected scenes and discuss the norms of
interpretation focusing speciﬁcally on the lexicon (e.g., Were there
difﬁculties between the participants in terms of vocabulary?) and the
genre (e.g., What are the characteristics of communication in this
television series? What types of language – regional varieties, styles,

registers – are used and for what purposes? How does the language of
young people vary from that of older characters? What other social
dialects were you able to identify?)
2. Learners, working in small groups, write short scenes, which can be
presented orally or in writing, and identify:
• the setting,
• the participants,
• the purpose of the interaction,
• the act sequence,
• the key,
• the instrumentalities (re-creating the appropriate style, form, con-
tent, and use of language we would expect these characters to speak),
• applying norms of interpretation, and
• framing their scene according to the TV series’ genre.

Analysis
Extended texts, such as films, not only offer repeated exposure to the same
vocabulary, deepening learners’ lexical knowledge, but also detailed
information about contexts of use for that vocabulary. The visual support
available in films, as well as adapting the content into different modalities or
formats (e.g., creating a skit) further stabilizes that knowledge. Additionally,
integrating vocabulary practice with expanding culturally relevant world
knowledge – such as the organization of families or friendships in different
cultures – supports the development of intercultural communicative
competence.
It is good to keep in mind that no one activity set will result in intercultural
communicative competence as regards the lexicon. Rather, this process requires
numerous iterations in the curriculum over time. Furthermore, these tasks can
supplement existing curricula and need not become the entire curriculum; they
are flexible in their adoption.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS AND ACTIVITIES

1. Examine a language textbook for its vocabulary presentation. Does the

presentation reflect the research discussed in the first half of this chapter?
Does it already reflect an intercultural communication orientation? If
not, how could you supplement the textbook activities with an inter-
cultural communication dimension?
2. If learners’ affect plays a role in lexical acquisition, and one pillar of
Byram’s model is attitude towards the L2/Lx, how can you increase

learners’ interest in and enthusiasm for vocabulary? Reﬂect on your own

L2/Lx learning: What role has affect played in this process? Has enjoy-
ment been important for your lexical acquisition?
3. Is the language you teach pluricentric? If yes, what are the different
standard varieties? Do they all enjoy the same level of prestige globally
and locally? What variation are you aware of in your own linguistic and
cultural context(s)?
4. Select a task you complete every day (e.g., texting a friend or reading the
news) and identify key vocabulary that you need to know for complet-
ing this task. Examine a set of 5–6 words and describe them using
Nation’s (2001, 2013) tripartite model of form, meaning, and use (see
Table 4.1). Discuss with your peers how you would help your students
learn these layers of knowledge, and at what level this particular content
or task might be appropriate to teach.
5. Observe three interactions among different social actors and note
features of their vocabulary: lexical choices, pronunciation, style, etc.
What relationships between linguistic code and social-group member-
ships can you recognize? What are the limitations of your analyses? How
might you guide your own students to conduct such analyses success-
fully in an L2/Lx-speaking context?
6. Based on an authentic resource, design a task to teach vocabulary using
multimodal analysis. Identify your student population (e.g., age, pro-
ﬁciency level, learning context), the focal vocabulary, the variety of
language to be taught (e.g., regional, stylistic variation), and two
learning objectives. Which aspects of intercultural communicative
competence does this task foster?

Intercultural Communication: Teaching Vocabulary

Key Concepts in L2/Lx Lexical Acquisition

Pronunciation /dəˈstrəktiv/ [Mainstream U.S. English]

productive knowledge. Receptive knowledge includes the ability to recog-

3
www.wordfrequency.info/free.asp

Research on Teaching the L2/Lx Lexicon

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 05:10:45, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.005
4 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Vocabulary 87
between attending to a word’s meaning or its form (e.g., singular/plural,
tense, aspect) helps learners become aware of the form–meaning connection,
which is required for the accurate interpretation of lexical information. This
approach leads to deeper lexical processing and better retention.
A particularly effective approach to teaching vocabulary is in word
groups, collocations, phrasal verbs, and idiomatic expressions (e.g., let me
think about it or You’re kidding) (Boers, Eyckmans, & Stengers, 2007;
Chun & Payne, 2004; Gass et al., 2013; Moeller et al., 2009). Using “fixed
expressions and formulas has an important economizing role in speech
production,” because processing words in groups instead of as individual
words reduces the learning burden (Kecskés, 2019, p. 50). Consequently,
they facilitate both comprehension and production. Hinkel (2017) also
highlights the importance of teaching idiomatic expressions and conven-
tionalized phrases, which are closely linked to specific languages and
cultures. Idiomatic expressions and conventionalized phrases can be diffi-
cult to operationalize – they range from single-word to multi-word expres-
sions (e.g., what?!?! or burning the midnight oil) and can be rigid or
somewhat flexible – they are ubiquitous in both spoken and written
language, in both formal and informal contexts, and can take diverse
forms:
1. frequently recurring and culture-specific expressions with opaque
meanings (e.g., cost an arm and a leg; better late than never)
2. collocations, that is, words that often occur together but with flexible
and variable components (e.g., take place/part/a test/a break; ready to
go/start/close [verb]; give advice/suggestion(s))
3. fixed phrases with specific and well-defined meanings, as well as
phrasal verbs (e.g., break in/out/down/up/into; out of place)
4. figurative expressions (such as metaphors) (e.g., The world is my oyster;
couch potato; heart of gold; heart of stone; melting pot)
5. conversational routines and pre-patterned speech (e.g., Excuse me,
could you tell me where xxx is?; I am sorry I am late; No problem/No
worries)
6. set and rigidly ordered phrases (in which components are fixed in a
certain order) (e.g., here we go; ahead of time; what in the world)
7. proverbs (e.g., two wrongs don’t make a right; no man is an island)
8. culturally bound sayings (e.g., a fish out of water; right as rain; count
your chickens before they hatch)
(Hinkel, 2017, pp. 49–50; reduced examples; emphases mine)

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 05:10:45, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.005
88 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
These formulaic expressions can have literal and figurative meanings – she’s
with me either implies that someone is physically by my side or that she
shares my opinion – with figurative meaning often being a stumbling block
for L2/Lx learners. Since such expressions number in the thousands (Shin
& Nation, 2008), it is best to focus on the most frequently used phrases
during regular L2/Lx instruction (Arnon & Snider, 2010), with repeated
exposures in all language skills (Hinkel, 2017).
An investment in teaching vocabulary has great positive impact, since
lexical development is exponential: known words serve as springboards for
linking to and networking with increasingly wider ranges of new, related,
and associated words. This includes learners’ existing multilingual lexical
repertoires, since the L1 and L2/Lx lexicons are in communication with
each other (Gass et al., 2013; Jiang, 2004). Thus, exploring cross-linguistic
word associations can support vocabulary development. Cognates – words
with similar historical roots across languages, e.g., Schwester in German and
sister in English – can help activate phonological, orthographic, semantic,
and syntactic aspects of both languages, potentially promoting L2/Lx
lexical acquisition. Explicit connections to other languages that learners
know can be especially helpful at advanced levels of L2/Lx proficiency,
since the academic lexicon, which is similar to specialized lexicons of
professions (e.g., medicine, law, mathematics), draws heavily on words
with Greek and Latin roots, which can serve as built-in scaffolding for
reading and viewing activities that emphasize “meaning-focused input,
language-focused learning, meaning-focused output, and fluency develop-
ment” (Nation, 2001, p. 196).
At the same time, L1–L2/Lx connections can also be problematic. For
example, false cognates, which are words that have divergent meanings in
different languages (e.g., Gift, means ‘poison’ in German but ‘present’ in
English) are misleading. Similarly, semantically overlapping but still distinct
words across languages, such as friendship, which describes a different range
of relationships in French than in English, may cause confusion
(Furstenberg, Levet, English, & Maillet, 2001). Even when lexical items
are shared across languages, they often connote different objects; for many
Americans, the core meaning of bread refers to a sliced white bread, while in
Iran, the word naan (‘bread’) depicts a flat bread. There may be missing
concepts across languages as well. The Japanese word kawaii in general terms
means ‘cute,’ ‘adorable,’ or ‘delicate’ but has no direct English equivalent,
and no English counterpart carries the same affective connotations
(Burdelski & Mitsuhashi, 2010). Collocations also do not readily transfer
from the L1 into the L2/Lx; for example, while you brush your teeth in

Reconsidering Teaching L2/Lx Vocabulary with an Intercultural

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 05:10:45, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.005
4 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Vocabulary 91
1. The inner circle represents countries in which English is spoken as a
native language, including Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand,
the United Kingdom, and the United States. The standard varieties
spoken in these countries are traditionally seen as socially and eco-
nomically more powerful and prestigious (~380 million users of
English).
2. The outer circle includes countries with a colonial past, where English
is spoken by broad segments of society as a first, second, or additional
language learned from childhood, such as some countries in the
Caribbean, India, Kenya, or the Philippines (~350–450 million
people).
3. In the outermost expanding circle, we find countries without a colonial
past, where English is spoken as an L2/Lx. Given the important
economic, political, and social role that English plays around the
globe, this circle includes all remaining countries (~750 million
individuals).
The varieties spoken in the three circles have enjoyed different levels of
prestige over time and still reflect current and historical relationships
among countries, cultural groups, and individuals. Raising learners’ aware-
ness of the value society places on different language varieties pertains to
Byram’s (1997) notion of knowledge and should be included in an inter-
culturally oriented L2/Lx pedagogy.
There is an additional reason for addressing pluricentricity: the surface-
level similarity between these language varieties may (mis)lead speakers
into a false sense of security, even though smooth communication is not
guaranteed. Lexical mismatches (e.g., flat v. apartment between British and
U.S. American English) or divergent pronunciation (e.g., the Arabic
expression for ‘good morning’ is pronounced as SabaaH iklheer in Cairo
but as SbaH klher in Fez; Brustad, Al-Batal, & Al-Tonsi, 2014) may trip up
interactants. Awareness of these distinctions not only facilitates commu-
nication among speakers of different languages, but also of different
varieties of the same language.
In addition to regional differences, variation reflects gender, education,
ethnicity, and spheres of activity (e.g., hobbies). We adopt these social
dialects intentionally or inadvertently and signal social group membership
to our interlocutors (Myers-Scotton, 2006); we may use more or less
formal language, specific vocabulary (e.g., pertaining to a profession), or
phonological features. For example, while giving a speech at a conference,
we use sophisticated and technical vocabulary (e.g., examine the dataset)

new word coinage:

Some of these newly coined terms subsequently migrate from written to

Language Variation in an L2/Lx

4
www.wired.com/2017/01/word-of-year-dumpster-ﬁre/

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 05:10:45, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.005
94 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
French or Italian in the United States – or if a language user wants to
convey a certain personality, like Henry Kissinger maintaining his accent
to emphasize his image as a German professor and thus be taken more
seriously, there might be little impetus to adapt to L2/Lx pronunciation
(Myers-Scotton, 2006). Moreover, speaking an L2/Lx too well can lead to
difficulties. As Piller (2016) relates, in 2009, a boat carrying Sri Lankan
asylum seekers to Australia was intercepted; their leader, who had trained
at a U.S. call-center spoke English with an American accent and used the
anglicized name ‘Alex.’ The Sri Lankan High Commissioner questioned
the group’s refugee status, due to Alex’s excellent English skills, putting
their asylum claim in jeopardy.
In contrast, in some bilingual communities, learners do not ever develop
sufficient proficiency in the L2/Lx and retain significant nonnative-like
accents and language skills. This is the situation for many ethnic
Hungarians in the Hungarian-majority part of Romania (Transylvania),
where students only study Romanian at school, in very limited contexts of
use, and often fail to learn it well enough to pass graduation requirements
(Piller, 2016). Their lack of fluency subsequently limits students’ access to
higher education or employment.
The situation in multilingual speech communities is not always dire,
and members of these communities easily shift between languages,
although not randomly. One of the determiners of language choice is the
domain of interaction, which Fishman (1972) divided into five categories:
(1) home, (2) work, (3) neighborhood, (4) church/religion, and (5) public
affairs. For example, someone may speak English in educational settings
but Haitian Creole with her family and friends, although participants at
home may also code switch – use two languages in the same conversation – a
phenomenon frequently observed in bilingual communication (Myers-
Scotton, 2006). Multilingual people also tend to have strengths in one
language for some of these domains and use their other language(s) for the
other domains.
These are some of the issues that multilingual speakers negotiate as they
traverse diverse linguistic and cultural realms. When their lexical knowl-
edge is insufficient for a particular interaction, they may have to resort to
communication strategies to make themselves understood.

Communication Strategies: Mind the Gap

As I mentioned at the beginning of the chapter, vocabulary is one of the
most signiﬁcant contributors to meaning-making and, at the same time,

Learner-to-Learner Lexical Development

Strategy type Subcategory Process Speciﬁc strategy Example

Appeal for assistance Asking for help (how do you say . . .), comprehension check
Mime Acting out swimming
Gesture Using thumbs-up to signal ‘good’ or pointing to an icon on a map,

Reduction
what is wrong with the car
Approximation Saying blue and green instead of teal
Semantic contiguity
Analogy It is like the color of the sea
Antonymy Not good for discouraging

speakers)
used by L2/Lx
Metonymy Using one word to represent a different idea, such as crown for the
Royal Family in the U.K.

Holistic (more often

Synonymy Windy for stormy
Superordinate Saying leg instead of foot, substituting the entire for the speciﬁc
part
Circumlocution (e.g., size, The thing you boil water in for tea for kettle

Conceptual
color, shape – high-

terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.005

frequency words replace
low-frequency ones)

Achievement / Compensatory
Repetition Repeating a word, perhaps with a rising intonation to signal
uncertainty

Lx competence)
Exempliﬁcation Providing one or more examples, such as car, bus, or subway to
explain transportation

or at higher levels of L2/

Analytic (often used in L1

Transfer & Morpho-creation

pattern of holnapután (‘the day after tomorrow’)

terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.005

Knowledge & skills

ACTIVITY SET 1

L2/Lx: Greek
Learner group: Novice/A1 learners
Source: Advertisement from a Greek supermarket chain called
Bazaar
Duration: 1–2 lessons

culture. Moving from interpreting culturally and sociolinguistically

ACTIVITY SET 2

L2/Lx: English as a second/foreign language

Analytic Approaches
Ethnography of communication and interactional sociolinguistics.

Steps in the Task

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS AND ACTIVITIES

1. Examine a language textbook for its vocabulary presentation. Does the

learners’ interest in and enthusiasm for vocabulary? Reﬂect on your own

Intercultural Communication: Teaching Grammar

Chapter Overview
This chapter explores the relationships between grammar and intercultural
communicative competence. Speciﬁcally, it discusses what we mean by
grammar, recent scholarship regarding the nature of L2 grammatical
development, and key concepts in teaching L2 grammar. This discussion
is followed by a reevaluation of the native speaker ideal, morphosyntactic
language variation, the local situatedness of grammar, and deploying
grammar for creating social meaning. The chapter concludes with practical
suggestions for teaching L2/Lx grammar with an intercultural communi-
cation orientation.

What Do We Mean by ‘Grammar’?

Grammar generally refers to the morphology and syntax of languages
(Myers-Scotton, 2006). Morphology refers to the components of words
that work together to create meaning. For example, in English the mor-
pheme –s indicates plural items, while the present and past tenses in
Swahili are expressed with the infixes -li- and -na- (respectively), and the
prefix leg- and suffix –[vowel]+bb signals superlative in Hungarian
adjectives:
English: song (singular) songs (plural)
Swahili: ninaimba niliimba
[‘I sing’/‘I am singing’; present tense] [‘I sang’/‘I was singing’; past tense]
Hungarian: finom [‘tasty’] legfinomabb [‘the tastiest’]
Syntax, in turn, describes sentence-level aspects such as word order or
the required components for completing a sentence (Thornbury, 2000).
For example, Jack bought a car is the correct word order in English and has
all the required components. In contrast, neither *Bought a car Jack nor
*Jack bought is correct; the former is not in the correct word order in
106

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:44:27, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.006
5 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Grammar 107
English, while the latter is missing a complement, because the verb to buy
usually requires a direct object.
Like morphology, syntax is language specific; what is acceptable in one
language might not be so in another. Because English has few morphemes
that indicate syntactic relationships, its word order is relatively inflexible.
Other languages (e.g., Finnish) with complex derivational and inflectional
systems in which pre-, in- or suffixes express relationships among compo-
nents of a sentence are more flexible. In English, for example the following
two sentences have distinct meanings determined by word order:
Anneli loves Jaakko. Jaako loves Anneli.
In Finnish, however, word order merely shifts emphasis (i.e., that it is
Jaakko and not someone else, whom Anneli loves) but does not change the
meaning of the sentence, since the partitive -a suffix clearly identifies
Jaakko as the object of Anneli’s affections:
Anneli rakastaa Jaakkoa. Jaakkoa rakastaa Anneli.
While psycholinguistic research informs us about the way the brain
organizes grammatical information, and grammar books tell us what is
considered ‘right’ and what is ‘wrong,’ neither explains how grammar is
implemented in social interaction. Yet, what is deemed correct can be
fairly subjective and context dependent. A casual conversation might
sound ‘stuffy’ with rigidly correct grammar, whereas a professional
presentation might sound ‘sloppy’ if the speaker or language user does
not attend carefully to grammar. Two concepts are relevant here: pre-
scriptive grammar proposes how a language should be used, while descrip-
tive grammar describes how a language is actually used by people,
including native speakers of the language in real interactions (Gass
et al., 2013). For example, me and my friends is not ‘proper’ English if
used as the subject of a verb, but this phrase is used extensively among
young people in casual conversation in the United States, where the
grammatically accurate my friends and I would sound stilted. Navigating
grammatical expectations and rules can be tricky even for native speak-
ers. This is especially true in the L2/Lx, over which most learners and
users have incomplete control, due to developmental factors.

The Nature of L2 Grammatical Development

One of the most-debated questions in language acquisition research per-
tains to the relationship between learners’ age and their ability to learn

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:44:27, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.006
108 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
languages. A key hypothesis in first-language acquisition – that there is
a critical period, usually around age 10–12, before which children can learn
a language rather easily, but after which language learning is more challen-
ging if not impossible (Lenneberg, 1967) – has been influential in second
language acquisition (SLA) as well. The arguments behind this claim are
that children have superior neural plasticity (flexibility), are more willing to
experiment with language and do not worry about making mistakes, or
that their main cognitive focus is on communication (Hartshorne,
Tenenbaum, & Pinker, 2018). The primary limitation for L2 speakers is
in pronunciation (i.e., not sounding like a native speaker), but morphology
and syntax are also affected (Dekeyser, 2018). Thus, the argument holds,
nativelike performance among individuals who begin to learn an L2 after
the critical period is impossible, although some may acquire near-native
skills (Abrahamsson & Hyltenstam, 2009; Hyltenstam, 2018).
Nonnativeness ranges from the readily noticeable to the barely perceptible,
although psycholinguistic disparities are measurable with imaging even at
the most advanced levels of bi-/multilingual competence (Gass et al., 2013).
Other scholars, however, contend that successful L2 learning and
attaining near-native and native levels of competence is possible even
if the age-of-onset (when someone begins to learn an L2/Lx) is after
the critical age period (Birdsong, 2006, 2014, 2017; Birdsong &
Gertken, 2013; Hernandez, Li, & MacWhinney, 2005). This argument
is supported by a large-scale study of almost 700,000 respondents,
which led Hartshorne, Tenenbaum, and Pinker (2018) to extend the
critical age period to 17.4 years, significantly later than puberty,
which, the authors argue, might signal the beginning of decline rather
than its upper boundary. The authors also claimed that age is not
inherently limiting, and instead, L2 attainment is influenced by
a combination of other variables, such as motivation (cf. Dörnyei &
Skehan, 2003; Flege, 2018), language aptitude, working memory, the
learner’s L1 (typological similarity to the L21), the amount of time
spent in an L2-speaking environment using the L2 (Birdsong, 2006;
Flege, 2018), or to what extent an L2 user identifies with other L2
speakers (Moyer, 2014). Finally, the authors argued that age is not
simply a cognitive factor, but also a social one; around age 18 young
adults in most cultures finish school and begin working, and, unlike

1
Languages that are closely related to adult speakers’ L1 will be easier to learn (e.g., Amharic and
Hebrew) than languages that are typologically different (e.g., Malayalam and Maltese).

Key Concepts in Grammar Teaching

Since the development of the communicative approach, L2/Lx peda-
gogy has aimed to balance a focus on grammar and preparing learners
to communicate effectively in real-world interactions. How to achieve
this balance remains a topic of debate. To advance this debate, a few
key concepts in L2/Lx pedagogy pertaining to grammar merit con-
sideration: declarative versus procedural knowledge, implicit
versus explicit grammar teaching, inductive and deductive learning,
feedback and error correction, exercise types, and task-based language
teaching.

Implicit versus Explicit Learning and Teaching

Implicit learning and teaching describes a process whereby the learner is
exposed to natural or naturalistic input, without conscious or intentional
discussion of grammar rules (Gass et al., 2013; Hulstijn, 2005; VanPatten
& Williams, 2015). Children learn their L1 – and typically L2/Lxs –
implicitly, through playing, story-telling, and everyday interactions
with their caretakers and peers; only later do they learn rules of formal
aspects of their language in school. Explicit learning, in contrast, refers to
the conscious learning of rules, testing hypotheses, and trying out new
structures, usually in formal instruction (Ellis, 1994; Hulstijn, 2005;
VanPatten & Williams, 2015). Contrary to Krashen’s (1982) earlier con-
ceptualization of the acquisition/learning dichotomy, where learned
material does not become acquired knowledge, scholars now believe
that what is learned explicitly can become implicit, automatized knowl-
edge through practice and further exposure to the L2/Lx (Gass et al.,
2013).

Deductive and Inductive Learning

Another relevant conceptual pair for discussing grammar is deductive
versus inductive learning. In deductive learning rules are presented ﬁrst, as
illustrated by the Hindi example in Figure 5.1, followed by practice in
increasingly more complex situations. For some learners, deductive
instruction is very helpful for organizing patterns and creating a sense of
control over new material; for others, this approach may be difﬁcult to
decipher:2

Figure 5.1 Deductive grammar presentation

2
http://hindiurduﬂagship.org/assets/pdf/Skeleton_Grammar.pdf

Feedback and Error Correction

Grammatical development is uneven, progressing in bursts and stutters
(Abrams & Rott, 2017). Learning something once will not ensure master-
ing it; rather, being aware of grammar helps us notice when certain
structures are used in the input that we receive, and we can connect it
to other, existing information we already have, to reﬁne our knowledge
(Ellis & Wulff, 2015). Feedback can help draw learners’ attention to the
connection between form and meaning. Research suggests that back-
channeling, such as a listener expressing agreement with the speaker/
learner (e.g., a nod or an interjected yes) can provide helpful positive
feedback, while asking for clariﬁcation – for example, I’m sorry, I’m not
sure what you mean or checking if someone really meant what they had
just said) – or providing the correct grammatical form can effectively
draw learners’ attention to their mistakes and encourage them to modify
their utterance and deepen their knowledge of relevant grammatical
structures (Brandl, 2008; Lightbown & Spada, 2014). We should keep
in mind that error correction does not always happen in natural con-
versation, where we are more focused on meaning and might not notice
the grammar mistakes that our interlocutors make. In the classroom we
can take more time providing feedback, including metalinguistic infor-
mation (e.g., having students recall a grammar rule), but we should
ensure that this feedback does not inhibit learner production or interfere
with the learning objectives of an activity, especially those of commu-
nicative tasks. The mistakes we focus on should be salient or pertinent to
completing the activity and we should not include structures that are too
advanced or complex for learners to process (Cook, 2016; Lightbown,
1998, 2014). The multistep process of presenting and learning grammar

Exercise Types
A key objective of L2 pedagogy is to prepare learners for effective language
use in the L2/Lx. This objective has been met with mixed success.
Textbooks were supposed to move away from mechanical grammar prac-
tice that had been common for teaching Latin or Classical Greek, but
progress has been slow and uneven. A cursory review of ESL textbooks
suggests more adherence to communicative goals, whereas foreign-
language (e.g., Arabic, French, German, Spanish) textbooks in the
United States continue to focus on grammar, offering numerous mechan-
ical and meaningful activities, with fewer opportunities for genuine com-
municative practice. The distinction between these activity types is
important to understand for fostering real-world L2/Lx use.
In mechanical exercises, rule practice is the objective, as in the following
example from German:
Conjugate the underlined verb according to each pronoun provided in
parentheses.
1. Ich habe zwei Schwester. (er, wir, du, ‘I have two sisters’ (‘he,’ ‘we,’ ‘you’ sg.,
sie pl.) ‘they’)
To complete this exercise, learners do not have to understand the meaning
either of the sentence or the pronouns, just manipulate the verb form based
on a chart in the textbook.
Meaningful practice, in contrast, requires comprehension, albeit with
limited responses, such as yes or no, or pre-provided choices, here in Italian:
1. Sai andare a cavallo? ‘Do you know how to ride a horse?’
2. Preferisci andare a passeggio o in ‘Do you prefer to walk or ride a bike?’
bicicletta?
Finally, communicative activities prompt learners to provide original
and creative information. Responses in these types of activities are open-
ended and unpredictable, reﬂecting learners’ genuine and unlimited
experiences, as the following Welsh examples illustrate:
1. Ble hoffech chi deithio? ‘Where would you like to travel?’
2. Pwy fyddai’n gwmni teithio delfrydol? ‘Who would be an ideal travel companion?’

Task-Based Language Teaching

According to task-based language teaching (TBLT), language knowl-
edge is:
shaped and organised via the learner’s experience in relation to action in the
real world, so that it can be used ﬂuently and appropriately in real time, in real
contexts, and with the purposes of engaging real meanings with real people.
This implicates the abilities or skills to interpret and produce language
meaningfully in relation to the understandings of others. Neither this ability
nor the knowledge underlying it can be gained without engaging with the
patterns of language in use, and of course engaging with its use is needed in
order to develop the ability to use it (Bygate, 2016, p. 382).
Given this view of language knowledge, L2/Lx learning emerges out of
participating in meaningful tasks that simulate or fulﬁll real-world com-
municative needs; such tasks meet several pedagogical criteria (Ellis, 2003;
Samuda & Bygate, 2008):
1. Meaning as primary: tasks foreground interpreting and making
meaning, such as ordering food or buying an airplane ticket.
2. Real-world L2 use: learners engage in language activities similar to
those completed in comparable authentic communicative contexts
(e.g., sending and receiving text messages or writing academic essays.
3. Learner-centered tasks: L2 learning goals should align with learners’
linguistic need in and beyond the classroom (e.g., students who want

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:44:27, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.006
5 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Grammar 115
to study engineering in France should complete tasks that are similar
to the ones they are expected to perform at their host institution).
4. Holistic language learning: tasks should draw on multiple real-world
contexts to integrate form, function, and sociocultural meaning (e.g.,
knowing how to wish someone a happy birthday entails learning the
appropriate linguistic structures, selecting cards that are appropriate
for the recipient, and knowing how – if at all – birthdays are celebrated
in that culture).
5. Clearly defined communicative outcome: the purpose of tasks and the
language necessary for completing them should be shared with the learners,
along with an explanation of how they are relevant for real-world L2 use.
As these criteria indicate, tasks resemble or are communicative acts that
we perform in everyday life, depending on our age, personal or academic
interests, among other factors. Tasks vary in cognitive demand, requiring
simple or complex vocabulary, grammar, discourse structure, and socio-
linguistic or pragmatic knowledge. Learning to write a shopping list entails
finding the relevant vocabulary, with little grammatical knowledge beyond
plural forms. Writing an email to set up a meeting requires more formal
vocabulary and more precise grammar, while working with Ebola victims3
to try to stem the spread of the disease demands complex linguistic and
cultural knowledge: vocabulary, grammar to express politeness or identify-
ing narrative frames (yesterday I had a minor headache, and today it is much
worse), as well as pragmatic and discourse skills (see Chapter 6), such as
terms of address, rules for turn-taking, and cultural knowledge (e.g., who
decides when to seek medical help and from whom).
Ideally, task sets comprise multiple steps. Pre-tasks help build or activate
relevant vocabulary, discourse structure, or background knowledge and create
a plan of action for completing the task (Ellis & Yuan, 2004). The main task
may also comprise multiple subtasks, each of which allows learners to con-
centrate on different aspects of language, instead of trying to fulfill competing
demands all at once (Abrams, 2017, 2019). Afterwards, post-tasks should help
learners practice and reinforce the knowledge and skills they have gained,
including repetition or expansion, reflections or reiteration in a different
modality (e.g., write a term paper based on an in-class oral debate). This
sequence should help learners solidify and refine their knowledge through
repeated practice of the same or similar tasks (Bygate, 2006; Samuda &
Bygate, 2008). At every stage, meaningful language use – both in terms of

3
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/05/health/ebola-contact-tracing-culture-explainer/index.html

The Relationship between Grammar and Intercultural

Communication
As mentioned in Chapter 3, vocabulary carries the primary burden of
conveying meaning, and can successfully do so, even in the absence of
sophisticated or accurate grammar, depending on context. Yet, grammar
plays an important role in our ability to express ideas. Exploring this role
vis-à-vis intercultural communication requires a reconsideration of the
native speaker ideal, including language variation, understanding the
importance of the local context for determining what is grammatically
appropriate, and teaching grammar to create and reﬂect ideational and
social meaning.

Letting Go of the Idealized Native Speaker

SLA research often measures learners’ performance to that of monolingual
native speakers of a language, mostly focusing on grammar (morphosyn-
tax) and pronunciation (Birdsong, 2006). While there is utility in scholar-
ship in which individuals who speak more than one language or who learn
a second or additional language later than their L1 are compared to native
speakers (Birdsong & Gertken, 2013), any comparison between native and
nonnative speakers is fraught with difﬁculty (Davies, 2003). To begin with,
native-speaker performance is variable and depends on a number of factors,
including (but not limited to) the speaker’s educational level, socioeco-
nomic situation or profession, and even temporary variables, such as their
mood or stress level. Native speakers can also decline in their abilities,
through attrition (language loss after immigration, for example) or due to
physiological problems (Schmid, 2011).
Native-speakerness also has a perception component: the mythical
native speaker usually uses an easily understood and well-respected ‘stan-
dard’ variety of language, has more than average or superior education, and
pays attention to language form (Lippi-Green, 2012). Given these strict
criteria, would someone whose L1 acquisition is incomplete before an L2/
Lx is introduced not be a native speaker of any language? Should we view
anything less than performing at the level of an idealized monolingual

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:44:27, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.006
5 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Grammar 117
native speaker a failure? Such a narrow conceptualization of native-
speakerness discriminates against users of ‘nonstandard’ varieties of lan-
guages as well, whether we think of variation in terms of dialects and
pluricentricity or style and register, morphosyntactic differences are key
features of language variation.
Hyperfocusing on the monolingual native speaker model is problematic,
given the fact that “[m]onolingualism is neither the typical condition nor
the gold standard” in today’s world (Mauranen, 2014). Additionally, L1s
and L2s/Lxs reflect enormous variation, including complementary gram-
mar systems, whose use depends on the context of interaction. In German
there are both national and regional differences in the choice of auxiliary
verbs for the present perfect tense (e.g., ich habe gestanden ‘I stood’ in
northern Germany, but ich bin gestanden in southern Germany, Austria,
and Switzerland – see Duden4) or diminutive endings (e.g., -chen in
German Standard German, but -li in Swiss Standard German, -erl in the
Bavarian or -le in the Swabian dialect), while the use of the genitive case
reflects both dialectic and register-based variation (Fagan, 2009; Scott,
2011; Sick, 2004).
Even in geographically coherent communities, morphosyntactic fea-
tures can vary considerably, reflecting social and cultural patterns in
specific contexts of language use. Based on over 100 hours of recordings
of Bequian natives in three communities, Walker and Meyerhoff (2006)
identified several morphosyntactic features of Caribbean Creole English
that differ not only from ‘standard’ varieties of English, but also from the
local acrolect, the most prestigious dialect on the island of Bequia. The
acrolect and the local dialects are deployed in different interactional situa-
tions, in formal and informal exchanges, for example, even within the same
speech community. Differences include variable markings of subject-verb
agreement (e.g., If he find that people, you know, is a yes-man), the presence
of negative concord in negation (e.g., Well I ain’t into no jazz) or zero
copula (e.g., She ∅ gon run to see me), among other morphosyntactic
elements (Walker & Meyerhoff, 2006, p. 152).
While it takes experience to develop the necessary skills, competent
speakers can adjust the variety of language they speak in different situa-
tions, deploying more or less formal registers, or knowing when and with
whom to use which sociolects. Additionally, individuals can choose to flout
norms to separate themselves from social expectations. Counter-cultural
poetry, jazz, rap, and other genres of music and writing intentionally

4
www.duden.de/sprachwissen/sprachratgeber/Perfektbildung-mit-haben-oder-sein

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:44:27, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.006
118 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
separate the author from accepted societal norms, including linguistic
choices, such as double negatives (not no-how) or replacing he/she with
they as the preferred pronoun used by members of the Lesbian, Gay,
Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer community (Gelder, 2007; Lafrance,
2016).
Highly proficient L2/Lx users further complicate the concept of
native speakerness. Some L2/Lx users have extraordinary control of
vocabulary and grammar, rhetoric and pragmatics, even though they
have a noticeable accent in the L2/Lx (Davies, 2003; Dewaele, 2017).
Yet, their overall language skills might be better than that of less-
educated native speakers. The acknowledgment that multilinguals are
not deficient monolinguals is a welcome shift in L2/Lx research. We
have come a long way since adult L2 learning was viewed as an
“ineluctable failure” to reach native-like levels “to different degrees”
(Bley-Vroman, 1989, p. 7). Building on work by Cook (1999) and
Cook and Singleton (2014), Dewaele describes L2 users not as “defec-
tive monolingual native speakers or – even worse – failed native speak-
ers” (2017, p. 236), but rather as individuals who have a repertoire of
knowledge in multiple languages (Kamhi-Stein, 2016). In fact, some
scholars argue that multilingual language users have access to a broader
range of linguistic and cognitive skills to communicate than mono-
lingual L1 speakers, and may use any and all languages that they know
(Murahata, Muruhata, & Cook, 2016).
Given the breadth of L1 and L2/Lx language experience, models for
teaching grammar must include various sources of information from
both monolingual and multilingual speakers, because such variety
reflects linguistic reality. Moreover, strategy training for comprehend-
ing and interacting with other speakers – of varying L1s and L2s/Lxs
at different degrees of proficiency – should form part of any gramma-
tical curriculum, since understanding what someone says sets the stage
for being able to interact with members of other cultures successfully.
Diverse sources will also help illustrate the vast array of communica-
tive contexts in which multilingual intercultural individuals deploy
grammatical knowledge.

Grammar as Situationally Contextualized and Co-Constructed

Although prescriptive grammar determines what is expected, actual lan-
guage use varies greatly, and is often locally contextualized. For example,
the earlier example me and my friends is heard more frequently among

He propped the invitation on the windowsill, next to the dying herbs.

Then dug out a squat glass tumbler and poured in a slug of the whisky
Hamish Mowat had given him. Toasted the rectangle of card. ‘Sorry,
Hamish. But I can’t.’
Took a sip. Warm and ﬁery and leathery and smooth.
Wait a minute.
He frowned at the tumbler, and the lines of amber crawling down the
inside of the glass. There had been a letter, hadn’t there? Wee Hamish had
handed it over, then the doctor threw them out and Reuben started
throwing his weight around.
Back through to the hall and the collection of coats, jackets, and ﬂeeces.
It was in yesterday’s coat pocket.

The pronoun he at the beginning of this excerpt refers to the main

character, Sergeant Logan McRae, and even though several sentences
after the initial one are grammatically incomplete, the reader is able to
infer that it is Logan who digs out the whisky glass and takes a sip.
Similarly, readers can identify the whisky (line 2) as the referent for
Warm and fiery and leathery and smooth. Many of these sentences are
grammatically ‘inaccurate,’ but are perfectly appropriate for the con-
text: the character’s mood and personal difficulties that surround this
scene, the genre of detective fiction, and the author’s stylistic
preferences.
Thus, whether inaccurate grammar is appropriate or sufficient depends on
the specific contexts in which we communicate. In L2/Lx-speaking contexts,

5
Stuart McBride (2016) In the Cold Dark Ground. New York, NY: Harper Collins. Excerpt from
p. 175.

Summary
This chapter offered an overview of research regarding the development of
L2/Lx grammar. Due to its importance for conveying precise meaning and
for expressing social identity, grammar plays an essential role in intercul-
tural communication. Current pedagogical practices, such as task-based
language teaching (Ellis, 2003, 2005; Samuda & Bygate, 2008), already
place great emphasis on the relationship between grammatical form and
real-world meaning, and this section lays out potential further connections
between grammatical knowledge and intercultural communication.
Following the concepts discussed in Chapter 1 and the guidelines presented
in Chapter 2, the synthesis below models an intercultural communication
oriented pedagogy.

Knowledge & skills

1. Acknowledge psycholinguistic factors that may impact learners’ ability to learn the L2/
Lx grammar fully; awareness can help manage learners’ expectations (e.g., by coping
with backsliding and mistakes, or by recognizing that fluency is unlikely after only six
months of L2/Lx learning) – it also helps learners become more tolerant of others’
mistakes (attitudes; skills of relating).
2. Foster cognitive flexibility for finding different solutions when learners lack
grammatical structures (e.g., using adverbs of time to express the past tense if the
learner cannot remember the correct verb form) (skills of interaction, interpreting, and
relating).
3. Discuss psychosocial factors – such as maintaining affiliation with an L1 speech
community or affiliating with a particular L2/Lx group – that may influence
grammar use (attitude, knowledge, critical cultural awareness).
4. Include authentic materials that reflect regional and stylistic variation reflected in
morphosyntactic choices, and explore how language use relates to social identities
(knowledge, skills of relating, interpreting, and interacting, critical cultural awareness).
Linguistic repertoire
1. Present grammar in smaller installments within ideational and social contexts (e.g., the
simple past in fairy tales in German) rather than as decontextualized sets of abstract
rules, removed from any sociolinguistic context.
2. Discuss grammar explicitly, to take advantage of adult learners’ cognitive and analytic
resources; inductive approaches can help foster learners’ ability to analyze language and
recognize patterns.
3. Move learners from declarative to procedural knowledge.
4. Present both prescriptive and descriptive grammar and explore their appropriate
contexts of use in both speech and writing (i.e., where accurate language is required
and where laxer, casual language is more appropriate).
5. Examine co-constructed, multi-turn grammar.
6. Explore how grammar is used in society to uphold or resist social order.
Curricular considerations
1. Expect and accept grammatical mistakes, since development takes a long time;
mistakes may be a sign of psycholinguistic processes as learners make sense of patterns
they observe, and will likely include grammar from their L1 and L2s/Lxs.
2. Let go of the idealized native speaker model, and set reasonable expectations for
students.
3. Plan to teach grammar over time (not all in the first year), prioritizing what learners
need to know to complete real-world language tasks.
4. Incorporate meaningful and open-ended real-world tasks, avoid mechanical exercises.
5. Use recasts and clarification requests as naturalistic feedback that helps learners
restructure their interlanguage grammars over time.
6. Explore how grammar reflects societal practices, including (but not limited to) high-
versus low-power-distance relationships (e.g., how morphosyntax expresses respect),
orientation towards time; reflect on differences between learners’ L1 and L2/Lx
practices.

ACTIVITY SET 1

L2/Lx: English as a second/foreign language

Learner group: Novice-high/intermediate-low/A2–B1 learners
Source: Report from the weather channel entitled “The coldest
temperatures ever recorded in all 50 states” 6 – in order to
teach the formation and use of the superlative form of
adjectives.
Task duration: Watch the 58-second video, analyze the accompanying map
provided by NOAA, 7 and read the 600-word article.
Done during one or two 50-minute lessons (with post-
tasks).

Learning Objectives
By the end of this activity, learners will be able to do the following:
1. Recognize the formation of the superlative form of adjectives (e.g.,
coldest, oldest, highest, lowest, most) – in both the video and the article as
complementary auditory and textual input.
2. Learn about the difference between Fahrenheit and Celsius.
3. Identify alternative expressions for describing extreme weather (e.g., all-
time record).
4. Identify words and phrases pertaining to the superlative form
of cold (e.g., temperature, degrees below zero, plummet, plunge,
subzero)
5. Recognize regions of the United States and identify expected and
unexpected weather patterns.
Analytic Approach
Multimodal analysis.

Steps in the Task

Pre-Task
1. Look at the title, identify the topic (cold weather in the United States).
2. Brainstorm words the learners already know regarding cold
weather – create a mind-map:

6
https://weather.com/news/climate/news/coldest-temperature-recorded-50-states
7
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | U.S. Department of Commerce; www
.noaa.gov/

cold
wet

Cold weather in the

United States
storm

winter
Alaska
3. Introduce the conversion between Fahrenheit and Celsius, identifying
what temperatures learners are used to during the winter where they
come from. Learners can also discuss who has experienced the coldest
temperatures.
Task
1. Watch the video, supported by true-false questions to ensure content
comprehension

The announcer grew up in Wisconsin true false

Winters are often very cold in his home state true false
In warmer states (like Florida or Hawaii) the temperature true false
stays above zero degrees Fahrenheit

2. Watch the video again and make a list of the state names that are
mentioned [Wisconsin, North Dakota, Alaska, Montana, Florida,
Hawaii].
3. Read the first two sections “At a Glance” and the short paragraphs below
that (“When winter approaches . . . When taking a close look at the data
there are some surprises.”); as a class, identify the theme of the article
[coldest temperatures reported in the 50 states].
4. Scan the article and underline or highlight all instances of the superlative
form of adjectives (e.g., most, coldest, oldest, warmest).
5. Have learners examine the weather map in the article. What do the
colors mean? (e.g., warmest to coldest temperatures). The class should
identify the states they recognize or consult a map that has the names of
the states, to expand their knowledge of U.S. geography.
6. Scan the rest of the article to identify the subsections (I. Continental
states with below-zero temperatures, II. Overall records, III. Regional
differences). Working in three groups, learners fill out the matrix
(Group 1 – section I, etc.) and prepare mini-reports on the facts (i.e.,
dates, locations, temperatures), words and phrases that describe winter
weather (e.g., degrees below zero, flurries, subzero, Arctic outbreak).
Learners take notes during the other presentations.

Record Interesting/
temperatures Other useful useful words
(date, degrees details about about winter
Section Region(s) State(s) in Fahrenheit) the weather weather
I
II
III

[Discuss the answers to ensure comprehension; highlight the connection

between the lexicon and morphology of the superlative adjectival forms:
e.g., coldest weather – subzero temperatures or ‘oldest record’.]
7. Learners discuss how these temperatures are similar to and different
from their own experiences, and how they would feel about living in
such winter conditions.
8. Watch the video again from :20-:40 seconds and identify whether the
reporter describes his own winter experiences as positive or negative –
have learners support their claim (e.g., intonation, lexical choice, mor-
phology, body language).

Post-Tasks (or Possible Alternative Tasks)

1. Learners read the texts linked in the article and summarize them for
a writing assignment or a follow-up in-class report on weather in the
United States.
2. If they have access to people who live in the United States (e.g., through
telecollaboration), learners could conduct brief interviews about perso-
nal experiences and reactions to extreme weather in the United States.
3. Learners prepare a report about weather phenomena they grew up with,
describing records and extremes (using the comparative and superlative
forms of adjectives), as well as their attitude towards that weather.
Whether learners describe their own or American weather events, they
should be encouraged to incorporate language (lexicon and grammar) from
the article and video and use it as a scaffolding for their own text. They
should provide a map, including different shades for temperature bands, if
appropriate, for their home country or region. Depending on learners’
access to and familiarity with technology, they could be asked to create
a brief video as a fun multimodal capstone task integrating a verbal report
and a map.

Analysis
This task fosters intercultural orientation in several ways. First, the target
grammar is presented in a meaningful context, including cultural

contextualization. Second, grammar is cycled through in ways that helps

learners notice the forms, ﬁrst as input then as output, then expanded input
and output in increasingly wider contexts. Third, the grammar form is
connected to relevant words and expressions in the L2/Lx, so learners see
how to use those phrases alongside the grammar to describe phenomena in
their own and the new cultural contexts, connecting language to human
experiences and responses. Fourth, the tasks encourage culturally
contextualized research skills, learning also about reliable sources of
information. Finally, the activity helps learners explore and solidify their
grammatical knowledge by interpreting and creating meaning using
complementary semiotic modes in a multimodal text.

ACTIVITY SET 2

L2/Lx: German as a second/foreign language

Learner group: Advanced-low to -mid/C1 learners
Source: Tatort, a German television series in the detective ﬁction
genre; weekly episodes rotate through German,
Austrian, and Swiss cities; episodes can be watched
individually and independently of each other, in spite of
the serial nature of the show. Episodes are
approximately 90 minutes long.
In class, show ﬁrst three and a half minutes of the episode
entitled Tatort: Freies Land (‘Free land’), which originally
aired on June 3, 2018. (Tatort episodes are available from
www.daserste.de/unterhaltung/krimi/tatort/index.html
for one month after airing, after which most episodes
are available on YouTube – free of charge from both
sources)
Task duration: Over 2–3 lessons

Learning Objectives
By the end of this activity, learners will be able to do the following:
1. Identify different ways to formulate questions in German (yes-no questions
with inverted word order, questions with question words, tag questions
[oder? na? ja? ~ the pragmatic equivalents of ‘well’ or ‘what do you think’],
rhetorical questions).
2. Identify how responses are formulated for each type of question.
3. Recognize the difference between formal and informal questions, as reﬂected
in verb conjugation, pronoun use, and grammatical completeness (e.g.,
formal questions typically receive grammatically more complete responses,
while less formal questions yield more ﬂuid responses).

4. Recognize the cultural meaning of formal and informal questions, how they
signal relationships between strangers or coworkers on one hand, and
friendship or youth on the other (keeping in mind that interpretations are
speciﬁc to particular interactions and reﬂect complex relationships).
5. Recognize that questions and responses are often resolved over multiple
turns
Analytic Approach
Ethnography of communication and interactional sociolinguistics
Steps in the Task
Pre-Task
1. As a class, watch a short segment at the beginning of the episode and ask
learners to identify the participants and what they are doing.
2. Watch the segment again, asking the learners to pay attention to the
relationships between the speakers and support their claim (guide them
to observe language form, but they should be encouraged to use any and
all available clues).

Task
In small groups, review a copy of the transcript and identify different question
types, organizing them into a matrix, based on the following features:

Response type
Question/
Formal/ Complete/ sentence pair
Question informal incomplete or multi-turn Other
type address sentence? response? observations

Have the pairs or groups develop hypotheses for what determines

complete or incomplete responses, and whether a question requires just
a short answer or a multi-turn response
Check answers to ensure accurate comprehension.
For each exchange within the segment, identify the key components of
the Hymes’ (1972) SPEAKING model, although some categories might
have only limited information:
1. Setting and scene: the location and context in which the event takes
place
2. Participants: age, gender, or profession of the interactants, and rela-
tionships among them
3. Ends: interactional expectations, rules for interaction, the objectives the
participants want to accomplish during or with the interaction

4. Act sequence: the content that the communicative event is about

(referential information exchanged by interactants) and what steps the
participants take during the interaction, such as turn-taking, collabora-
tive or competitive overlap
5. Key: the tone of the event, for example, whether it is humorous or
serious
6. Instrumentalities: message form, the type of communication the par-
ticipants engage in, including verbal and nonverbal channels
7. Norms of interpretation: shared knowledge for understanding the
purpose and structure of interaction
8. Genre: the type of communicative event, such as greetings or narration.
Post-Tasks
1. Learners can watch the rest of the episode in 10–15-minute segments
during the lesson or, depending on their proficiency level and motiva-
tion, individually at home.
a. Vocabulary practice and comprehension questions should set up,
monitor and follow up on learners’ understanding of the plot.
b. Each segment could be used to analyze one or two SPEAKING
components, while learners keep track of relevant details in a shared
document; alternately, different groups could keep track of each
component and share their findings with the rest of the class, with
a synthesis of the results after the entire episode has been watched.
c. Learners should discuss how questions are formulated in their own
L1s or other L2s/Lxs they know, examining similar and different
practices across languages (recognize individuals’ preferences and not
only generalizations).
d. The class could discuss how grammatical practices reflect social
personae (e.g., age, gender, profession, in-group and out-group
membership).
((a) is strongly recommended, (b)–(d) can be complementary or
alternate tasks)
2. Small groups can identify their favorite scene from the episode and act
out the scene, demonstrating their understanding of different question
types, formal/informal language use, as well as the social implications of
different linguistic forms and patterns.
3. Learners – individually or in groups – create questions that they might
ask different characters in the episode. They could take on the roles of
reporter, police officer, social worker, or one of the supportive charac-
ters. Discuss as a class how the questions might change depending on the
participants or the purpose of the interaction (e.g., newspaper interview,
a meeting with a social justice advocate, an interrogation by the police).

Analysis
While authentic films are layered through multiple filters, from the
screenwriter to the director, in most cases they draw on realistic language
use. Thus, the dialogs can be used for analyzing question and answer
patterns in German. Importantly for teaching grammar with an
intercultural communication orientation, the dialogs depict real-world
language, since not all responses are grammatically accurate or complete,
and utterances also include fragments and false starts. These ‘inaccuracies’
offer excellent opportunities for exploring register, style, and social
variation. Another realistic feature of the exchanges is that many questions
are resolved across multiple turns (instead of quick question-answer pairs, as
typically modeled by language textbooks). Successful L2/Lx use requires
skills for interpreting and producing such discourse, and authentic resources
can offer accessible modeling.
Throughout the analyses, learners should support their claims with
linguistic evidence from the video regarding question types and the social
meaning they imply, in order to get into the habit of recursive thinking,
where they use linguistic data to generate hypotheses and then use evidence
to confirm, revise, refine, or reject those hypotheses. Analyzing interactional
data and comparing patterns across languages and social contexts helps
learners move beyond viewing grammar as abstract rules to recognizing it as
a real-world communicative tool.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS AND ACTIVITIES

1. What are some morphosyntactic features that overlap between your L1

and L2/Lx? What are some differences between the languages? Do these
similarities or differences help or hinder you in your multilingual
endeavors in any noticeable way?
2. How do you feel about requiring grammatical accuracy in your L1 and
L2/Lx? Do you agree with the arguments presented in this chapter, or
does it bother you when people make mistakes? How does your
approach to accuracy impact your language learning and teaching?
3. Analyze an excerpt of literature, an advertisement, song lyrics, or a movie
for grammatical accuracy and multi-turn grammatical constructions.
Are all utterances grammatically accurate and complete? If yes, what
social meaning might strict adherence to prescriptive norms signal? If
not, what social messages might the non-standard grammar forms con-
vey?

4. Record a conversation with a friend (ideally from a different language

and/or culture) in a casual setting and examine the feedback you
provided each other. Did you use similar or different types of feedback,
or was there no feedback at all (this is fairly common amongst proficient
speakers, who do not correct each other, even if errors occur)? Examine
how your feedback contributed to your conversation: Did it make
participants rephrase or explain their utterances? Did it disrupt the flow
of ideas?
5. In small groups, discuss how you might use the knowledge you gained
from your analysis in Question 4 in your L2/Lx learning and/or teach-
ing.
6. Select a film and design an activity set for beginning language learners.
You could focus on pronoun usage in formal/informal language,
forming yes/no and information questions (and the appropriate word
order in each question type), narrating someone’s day, etc. Include
discussions of how grammatical structures vary depending on the
interlocutors and the purpose of the interaction.

Intercultural Communication: Teaching Pragmatics

Chapter Overview
Pragmatics refers to the way we understand and use language in social
situations. It “examines the choices made by an individual speaker on
a particular occasion to signal meanings such as relative differences in role,
status, age, social distance, and so on” (LoCastro, 2003, p. 21). Calling it her
“cocktail party’ deﬁnition,” Bardovi-Harlig (2013) describes pragmatics as the
study of “how-to-say-what-to-whom-when” (pp. 68–69), referring to the
linguistic choices language users make in social interaction and the effect
they have on their interlocutors as they communicate. Whether in an L1 or
another language, there is ample opportunity for pragmatic mishaps, which
are actually responsible for the majority of L2/Lx miscommunication
(Bardovi-Harlig & Dörnyei, 1998). House (2003) echoes this sentiment
regarding the role of pragmatics in intercultural communication:
[T]he most interesting and puzzling misunderstandings in intercultural inter-
actions will not stem from mishearing, mispronouncing or misusing lexico-
grammatical rules, rather they are likely to arise as a result of a failure to
interpret . . . hidden meanings underlying discourse structures. As work on
communicative styles, politeness phenomena, indirect speech acts, Gricean
implicatures and neo-Gricean relevance theory have revealed, much of ‘nor-
mal talk’ is indirect, which means, of course, that if we want to understand
our interlocutor’s contributions . . . we must ‘infer’ their intentions in order to
ﬁnd out how the words they use are ‘really meant’. (p. 23)
In order to set the stage for an interculturally oriented pedagogy that
emphasizes pragmatics, it is useful to understand pragmatics in more detail.

What Is Pragmatics?
Pragmatics reﬂects the interaction “among language, language users, and
contexts of use” (Taguchi & Kim, 2018, p. 14). That is, the linguistic

130

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:53:21, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.007
6 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Pragmatics 131
features we use index different attitudes and social relationships between
participants, and learning a second language entails figuring out new and
different ways of expressing ideas (i.e., linguistic form), and learning what
social meaning our linguistic choices imply (cf. Culpeper, Marti, Mei,
Nevala, & Schauer, 2010; Kecskés, 2012; Mills, 2009). This process can be
challenging, since what is appropriate in a new linguistic and social context
“is particularly sensitive to linguistic and nonlinguistic context including
users and places,” and thus may be different in each unique conversation
(Bardovi-Harlig, 2013, p. 80). Moreover, interaction is fluid, “achieved
jointly through the dynamic emergence of meaning in conversation”
(p. 600). That is, interactions are collaboratively produced in a local
context, shaped by the participants and their goals for communicating.
The dynamic nature of interactions makes it even more difficult to figure
out expected behaviors beyond individual interactions (Arnold, 1999;
Bella, 2011, 2012; Blattner & Fiori, 2011; Culpeper et al., 2010).
Therefore, instead of teaching pragmatic patterns as universals within
a broader culture (e.g., Germans always greet each other with ‘Guten
Tag ’), it is more fruitful to understand how to analyze the way pragmatic
practices are enacted.
Participating effectively in collaborative exchanges requires pragmalin-
guistic and sociopragmatic skills (Abrams, 2016b; Alcón Soler, 2018;
Bardovi-Harlig, 2013; Bella, 2011, 2012; Cenoz, 2007; Martinez-Flor &
Fukuya, 2005; Taguchi & Kim, 2018). Pragmalinguistic knowledge entails
linguistic features that we use as expressive resources, such as the use of
pronouns (e.g., informal and formal ‘you’ forms), intensifiers (e.g., super
nul [‘it really sucks,’ adjective, French]) or mitigators (e.g., somewhat),
terms of address (e.g., sensei [‘teacher,’ Japanese]), conventional expressions
(e.g., Cik tas maksā? [‘How much is this?’ Latvian]), and speech acts (e.g.,
Would you like to join us?). Sociopragmatic knowledge, in contrast, refers to
a speaker’s ability to know how to use language in social contexts: how to
partake in culturally appropriate practices, when to use specific pragma-
linguistic features, with whom and how. It also allows us to flout social
norms and understand the potential consequences for not adhering to
expectations (e.g., creating humor or being shunned by a community). We
continuously ‘read’ (interpret) complex and subtle cues in order to com-
municate with our interlocutors. For example, the general rule of thumb
for determining which form of the Hungarian equivalent of ‘you’ is to use
te when speaking with friends, family, children, or pets, whereas Ön is used
with adults or strangers. However, a sales person at an H&M clothing store
in Budapest is likely to greet shoppers using the informal pronoun to

humor

implicature speech acts

pragmatics

(im)politeness modifiers

conventional
expressions

Figure 6.1 Aspects of pragmatics

highlight the youthful context, and social media also tends to promote
informality, regardless of the participants’ level of acquaintance. Such
paralinguistic and sociopragmatic knowledge guides our interpretation
and use of various aspects of pragmatics (see Figure 6.1), the focus of the
following sections.

Speech Acts
Speech acts are routinized exchanges such as greetings and leave-taking
sequences, making suggestions or requests, giving compliments or advice,
or expressing agreement or disagreement (Austin, 1975). Basic speech acts
consist of adjacency sequences: a question and an answer, a prompt and
a response (thank you → you’re welcome). However, sequences may also
span multiple turns. Youssouf, Grimshaw, and Bird (2007), for example,
describe an encounter between Tuaregs in the Sahara, where greetings are
“critically important, and lapses can have grave consequences for the
offender or errant traveler” (p. 51); withholding information about the
location of water sources in the desert would have terrible consequences for
participants. The authors describe these greeting rituals as “strongly rule
governed” multi-stage processes, with clear rules about who initiates the
greeting (e.g., depending on number of travelers, age), what information
might be asked for at each stage, as well as what utterances and responses
are required (p. 54). The greeting ritual starts with a summons, the salaam
(‘peace,’ Arabic), a single-word greeting that carries sociocultural

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:53:21, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.007
6 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Pragmatics 133
information about the participants, such as their geographic origins, reli-
gious affiliation or probable knowledge of the region. Following the inter-
action, during which participants try to avoid any appearance of arrogance
or curiosity, the leave-taking speech act is brief, with “minimum social
amenities” (p. 58).
Many speech acts are straightforward and can be easily interpreted and
encoded, as is the case with I would like a cup of tea, please. At other times,
such as the greeting ritual in the Tuareg example, speech acts need to be
teased apart, since the underlying intent may not be evident in the surface-
level utterance. According to Austin (1975), speech acts are comprised of
the locutionary act (what we actually say), the illocutionary act (the under-
lying message that may or may not be the same as the locutionary act) and
the perlocutionary act (the effect on the interlocutor, either in thoughts or
actions):
Locutionary act: Salaam! (surface-level statement)
Illocutionary act: ‘I greet you’ + ‘I want to know if you are safe’ (underlying
message)
Perlocutionary act: Aleikum salaam (the response reassures the original speaker
that no harm is intended)
In order to navigate social demands, speech acts can be modified, with
the help of lexical or grammatical choices the user makes. For example, in
English, apologies may be expressed as Please accept my apology or I’m sorry.
These comprise the head act or the core of the speech act (Alcón Soler,
Safont Jordá, & Martínez-Flor, 2005). Frequently the speech act is mod-
ified either to soften or intensify its impact. These modifications can be
external or internal. I hadn’t realized that I was running so late. Please
accept my apology is an example of an external modification, since the
modification occurs outside of the head act. I am really sorry, in contrast,
is an internal modification, because the head act itself is changed. Table 6.1
presents the modifier types outlined by Alcón Soler et al. (2005):
Speech acts are expressed, structured, and enacted in diverse ways across
languages, cultures, and individuals, and the pragmalinguistic resources
needed to modify them are language-specific (LoCastro, 2003). Modifiers
in English, for example, include lexical items (e.g., perhaps or maybe) and
grammatical structures, such as using the subjunctive to soften a request;
consider the difference between could you open the door, please versus open
the door. Knowing which modifiers are appropriate to use with which
speech acts is an important aspect of L2/Lx pragmatic knowledge (Bardovi-
Harlig, 2012).

Internal modiﬁers External modiﬁers

Mitigators: Preparators (may I interrupt?)

Downgraders (possibly) Grounders (e.g., providing a reason
for a request)
Understatements (for just Disarmers (I’m so sorry to bother you,
a second) but . . .)
Hesitators (uhm) Politeness markers (please)
Intensiﬁers:
Upgraders (e.g., really, deﬁnitely)

Although speech acts are greatly variable across situations, the meaning-
making process is facilitated by routinized, conventional expressions.

Conventional Expressions
Conventional expressions are frequently used, ‘frozen’ multiword units
that make up most of our language use and are generally unanalyzed by
native speakers (Bardovi-Harlig, 2009; Edmonds, 2014). They may be
short, such as that’d be great or extended, such as thank you for inviting
me over (Bardovi-Harlig & Vellenga, 2012). Conventional expressions are
underutilized by L2/Lx learners, who often replace them with grammati-
cally and lexically accurate sequences that are not quite native-like, even at
advanced levels of proﬁciency (Boers & Lindstromberg, 2009). Because
textbooks still treat most vocabulary as isolated lexical items, learners often
do not learn multiword chunks until they have intense exposure to them in
study-abroad contexts (Bardovi-Harlig & Bastos, 2011; Edmonds, 2014).
This approach requires reconsideration, with early and frequent expo-
sure to conventional phrases, including auditory input, to “give students
a model for production that includes tone of voice, stress, intonation,
rhythm, and pronunciation of words,” as those paralinguistic features play
a key role in the underlying message an utterance conveys (Bardovi-Harlig
& Vellenga, 2012, p. 87). Multimodal input is necessary, for example, for
the context-appropriate interpretation of such a simple phrase as come on,
which can convey a range of meanings: encouragement, when we cajole
a friend to go on a roller-coaster, with the implication that ‘It’ll be fun!’;
impatience, when someone is taking too long to get ready; or disbelief in an
interlocutor’s utterance, implying ‘You’re not serious!’ The lexical and
grammatical content is constant, and we require additional contextual

Politeness and Impoliteness

Research on politeness, and more recently impoliteness, has often refer-
enced the model of cooperative interaction that was developed by the
British philosopher H. Paul Grice (1975). The cooperative principles, or
maxims, identify four elements that interactants should be able to expect
from each other:
1. Quantity: provide as much information as possible and as is needed.
2. Quality: provide information that you believe is truthful, not false,
misleading or incorrect.
3. Relevance: provide information that is relevant and pertains to the
discussion at hand.
4. Manner: provide information clearly and logically, in order to avoid
ambiguity or confusion.
Each of these principles is culturally determined; that is, what is sufficient,
truthful, relevant, or unambiguous varies across cultures. However, these
guidelines offer a basic framework for figuring out contextually appropriate
patterns of interaction, from phatic communication (i.e., communication
that serves a social function) to conversations that focus on information
exchange.
Importantly, the relationship between these principles and (im)polite-
ness is complex, as Dynel (2013) notes; meeting all of these maxims may be
either polite (Thank you for your donation to our organization) or impolite
(Get the hell out of here!). Moreover, communication can be efficient and
polite, even when participants do not adhere to all four maxims.
Sometimes, we inadvertently violate one or more principles because we
misjudge how much information is necessary or what is pertinent. We may
also pass on something that we have heard from a trusted source as truthful,
only to find out that the information was incorrect. At other times, we flout
(violate) maxims intentionally, either for nefarious or innocent reasons;
these violations may remain unacknowledged or even unknown by our
interlocutors, if they do not know that our claims are false. However,
people frequently flout the maxims intentionally and obviously. Examples
of flouting include refusals to answer questions, air-quotes to signal the
opposite of what we mean, using linguistic (e.g., so-called) or paralinguistic
(e.g., rising intonation) cues to convey that our underlying meaning differs

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:53:21, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.007
136 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
from the surface-level message. If the violation is recognized, negative
consequences may range from mild to severe: a so-called white lie (e.g.,
Yes, your dress is lovely!) might not harm anyone in the long run, whereas
lying under sworn testimony could have dire consequences. Flouting
behavior is not always negative, of course; it also drives humor and friendly
banter, as long as participants can presume that they share an interest in
mutual, cooperative interaction, whether that interaction is polite or
impolite (Culpeper, 2015; Dynel, 2013).
One of the most influential early models of politeness by Brown and
Levinson (1987) suggested that flouting the maxims was necessary for
politeness. The resultant implicitness would help protect an individual’s
‘face’ – the needs and desires vis-à-vis others (LoCastro, 2003). Their model
has two complementary components: negative face and positive face.
Negative face refers to being able to act without imposition from others.
Threats to negative face are coercive, as they wittingly or unwittingly try to
limit our autonomy. Orders, requests, threats, warnings, dares, some
compliments, or expressions of strong negative emotions are examples of
potential face-threatening acts (Brown & Levinson, 1987). Such acts force
people into a position where they either have to comply or be seen as
uncooperative. For example, asking a friend for money threatens her
negative face, because she is forced into a position of either having to
give me money (an imposition) or tell me No. Positive face, on the other
hand, is the image we wish to project to others. Threats to positive face are
potentially humiliating. Expressions of disapproval, contempt or ridicule,
complaints, insults, disagreements and contradictions, mention of taboo
topics, raising emotionally charged or divisive topics, blatant non-
cooperation, and wrong terms of address are examples of potential positive
face threatening acts (Brown & Levinson, 1987).
Brown and Levinson’s (1987) work has been criticized for being focused
only on the individual, at the exclusion of their identity as “members of
a family, social class, company, or age cohort” (LoCastro, 2003), who co-
construct politeness through interaction. Such a hyper-individualistic view
of politeness, critics argue (Gu, 1990; Matsumoto, 1988), does not reflect
the reality in collectivistic societies, where the emphasis is on one’s position
in relation to other members of society, and face-threatening acts are an
affront to an entire cultural group (e.g., family, organization, nation)
instead of to the individual. Furthermore, Brown and Levinson’s model
did not adequately recognize that what seems to be impolite in one
situation may actually express solidarity or teasing among friends
(LoCastro, 2003).

Humor
Humor, which can take a variety of forms (see Table 6.2), is a universal
human phenomenon, expressed verbally and nonverbally. It improves
cognitive flexibility, memory, attention, and creative problem solving
(Lyubomirski, King, & Diener, 2005; Martin, 2007; Martin & Ford,
2018). It also builds and nurtures relationships, helps identify potential
friends, fosters positive group affiliation and social responsibility, and
eases conflict (Breckler, Olson, & Wiggins, 2006; Gervais & Wilson,
2005; Rizzolatti & Craighero, 2004; Shiota, Campos, Keltner, &
Hertenstein, 2004). Importantly, for L2/Lx learners, humor also helps
reduce stress and anxiety that people in new cultural contexts often
encounter (Isen, 2003; Lefcourt, 2001; Martin, 2007; Martin & Ford,
2018).

Type of humor Deﬁnition Example

Irony The literal and implied meaning of a word or expression Nice weather, eh? while it is raining
differ
Satire Aggressive humor that makes fun of social institutions, A political skit from Saturday Night Live that makes fun of
politics, and of people in power the fact that election polls can be misleading
Sarcasm Aggressive humor directed at individuals Well spotted, Sherlock in response to someone making an
obvious observation
Overstatements/ Humor that relies on intensifiers or modifiers to enhance I waited forever for that phone call
understatements or reduce the intensity of a statement
Self-deprecation Helps put listener(s) at ease or indirectly asks for support No worries, I’m not really good with numbers either.
Teasing Playful humor directed at others, both intimate and Oh, come on. Admit that the Scorpions are way better!
distancing, friendly and hostile (its negative extreme is
bullying)
Replies to rhetorical Responses that flout the expectation that no answer is Is the sky blue? (to indicate that something is obvious) –
questions required No, it’s only the tiny molecules of air in Earth’s atmosphere
scattering light from the sun.
Humorous response Intentional misunderstanding of the questioner’s When should we have our next meeting? – When hell freezes
to a serious intention or the seriousness of the question over?
question
Double entendres Deliberate misunderstanding of a speaker’s utterance, A cartoon on the Sardonic Salad blog depicts two strips of
typically hinting at a sexual connotation film sitting at a bar. One asks: “How about you and
I find a dark room and see what develops?”

terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.007

Transformation of Manipulation of idiomatic expressions and set phrases in In Four Weddings and a Funeral, Rowan Atkinson’s
frozen expressions unexpected ways character plays with the expression ‘the Father, the Son
and the Holy Ghost/Spirit,’ alternately misstating the
last word as “goat” or “spigot”)
Puns Polysemy (multiple meanings of the same word) or I wondered why the baseball was getting bigger. Then it
homophony (words with different meanings but the hit me.
same sound), including witty quips

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:53:21, subject to the Cambridge Core
6 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Pragmatics 139
Humor is primarily a social phenomenon, and it is the social-cultural
context that determines what type of humor is appropriate, with whom,
under what circumstances, and within what social parameters (Martin &
Ford, 2018). What topics are considered funny or taboo, who are the likely
targets and objects of jokes, where, when, and who can employ humor, and
even the preferred responses to humor (ranging from a smile or laughter to
frowning or booing) reflect cultural preferences (Davies, 1990; Gervais &
Wilson, 2005; Oring, 1994; Wyer, 2004; Wyer & Collins, 1992). Cultures
also vary in the types of humor they prefer: affiliative humor that empha-
sizes social cohesion and interpersonal responsibility (i.e., the interdepen-
dence of members of social groups) or aggressive humor that emphasizes
individualism. Thus, humor can illustrate high- or low-power distance,
gender roles, or sociopolitical concerns. Humor – especially negative
humor – can also highlight (or reinforce) existing social structures, ridicule,
bully or coerce an opponent, or stigmatize members of an out-group
(Martin, 2007; Martin & Ford, 2018). Ultimately, however, what is and
is not acceptable humor is determined by participants in specific interac-
tions “depending on the speaker’s intention . . . the hearer’s recognition of
the speaker’s intention, as well as his/her ultimate amusement or taking
offense” (Dynel, 2016, p. 142).
Since, humor is a part of our core personality, when we are unable to
comprehend or create humor in an L2/Lx, our sense of self is greatly
limited. Additionally, humor can help us establish friendships and set
boundaries, for example, by letting someone know gently when someone
does not wish to be hugged, even if it is common practice in a culture,
because the indirect and ambiguous nature of humor allows us to say
things that we would not be able to or wish to say directly (Arriaga,
2002; Martin & Ford, 2018; Pexman & Zvaigzne, 2004). Furthermore,
individuals with a sense of humor are seen as friendly, cooperative, inter-
esting, creative, emotionally more stable, open to new experiences, intel-
ligent, and perceptive (Cann & Calhoun, 2001; Martin, 2007; Martin &
Ford, 2018). Having these traits helps us engage with people who are
different from us, for building positive attitudes towards others and trying
new things, but being perceived to have these characteristics is important as
well, since it makes members of another culture more willing to interact
with us.
Therefore, it is incumbent upon instructors to help L2/Lx learners
express their sense of humor in a way that reflects their personality, in
a wide variety of communicative contexts (Ife, 2007). With sufficient
variety of authentic humorous and playful language, learners can develop

Teaching L2/Lx Pragmatics with an Intercultural Communication

Orientation
Pragmatics is a fundamental component of real-world communication and
intercultural competence (Chun, 2011), yet, integrating findings from
a rich body of research on the development of L2 pragmatics into language
pedagogy has been limited. In spite of its importance, most language-
teacher training textbooks currently on the market do not present prag-
matics at all, while others limit its treatment to providing a basic definition
of pragmatics as a component of communicative competence, without
including suggestions for teaching or highlighting the importance of
pragmatics in L2/Lx use.
Language textbooks give equally short shrift to pragmatic concerns
(Abrams, 2016b; Alcón Soler, 2008; de Pablos-Ortega, 2011; Eisenchlas,
2011; Ellis, 1999; Ohta, 2005; Kasper & Rose, 2001; Taguchi & Kim, 2018).
Textbook dialogs are mostly static and take place between two unfailingly
polite and cooperative interlocutors, who follow sequential turn-taking
patterns and lack hesitations, interruptions, or false starts (Abrams, 2016b).
Additionally, textbooks often equate single grammatical forms with
a pragmatic function (e.g., using the imperative form of verbs to make
requests in German). Moreover, textbooks tend to reflect only standard
language varieties, with little diversity of input in terms of register or
politeness, which are regularly negotiated in authentic communication
(Mills, 2011).
An additional challenge for L2/Lx instruction is that pragmatic mistakes
are more difficult to recognize and correct than lexical or grammatical
errors, because we use pragmatics mostly subconsciously (Bardovi-Harlig
& Dörnyei, 1998; Bardovi-Harlig & Griffin, 2005). This is unfortunate,
because pragmatic mistakes are often blamed on the speaker, rather than
on linguistic difficulties, prompting interactants to make prejudicial and
stereotypical judgments about the speaker (Gass et al., 2013). Negative
appraisals might, in turn, limit L2/Lx learners’ opportunities for develop-
ing pragmatic skills, if they refrain from interacting with others for fear of
making mistakes or being judged by others.
The final barrier is the time it takes to learn pragmatic skills. Research
shows that even in contexts with ready access to relevant linguistic and
cultural input, learners find it difficult to achieve native-like pragmatic

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:53:21, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.007
6 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Pragmatics 141
competence (Bardovi-Hardig & Hartford, 2005; Cohen, 2008; de Pablos-
Ortega, 2011; Ishihara & Cohen, 2010; Kallia, 2005; Kasper & Rose, 2002).
Foreign language learners, whose exposure to the language and culture is
limited, face even greater challenges and are likely to retain more L1
pragmatic features in the L2 (Kasper, 1997; Kasper & Rose, 2002). In
spite of these challenges, given the importance of pragmatic skills in real-
world communication, this area of L2/Lx learning deserves prominent
attention in order to help learners develop “the ability to manage
a complex interplay of language, language users, and context of interac-
tion” (Taguchi, 2011, p. 291). Some variables – such as L2 proficiency,
length of instruction, or time on task may be beyond instructors’ control,
but the pedagogical approach we adopt can help encourage pragmatic
development.
L2 pragmatics research has shown that pragmatics is teachable (Bardovi-
Harlig & Griffin, 2005; Gass et al., 2013; Schmidt, 1993). While some
pragmatic knowledge can be taught implicitly, especially if the L1 and the
L2 overlap in the language-function mapping, more complex pragmatic
concepts (or ones different from a user’s L1) benefit from explicit instruc-
tion, where rules are stated, whether before or after learners examine
relevant examples (Alcón Soler, 2008; Cohen, 2005; Halenko & Jones,
2011; Jeon & Kaya, 2006; Takahashi, 2010). For example, at more
advanced levels, learners would receive explicit training in expressing
agreement, disagreement, and providing constructive criticism (Bardovi-
Harlig, 2015; Bardovi-Harlig, Mossman, & Vellenga, 2015; Nguyen, 2013;
Nguyen & Basturkmen, 2010). Their training would include listening to
authentic data between native speakers, such as a peer review session in
academic contexts and focusing on the linguistic forms used by the speak-
ers, the way they express their views and the organizational structure of
their feedback on their peer’s work. Additionally, providing metaprag-
matic information (i.e., talking about pragmatics), mapping form onto
function, enhancing input (e.g., by bolding the focal point or flooding
a source text with examples), and completing repeated tasks with the same
pragmatic information have also been found effective. Notably, Koike and
Pearson (2005) found that the pedagogical focus impacts learning out-
comes: explicit instruction seems to improve explicit knowledge (i.e.,
judgment tasks), while implicit instruction improved spontaneous prag-
matic production. However, Alcón Soler (2008) found that, while both
implicit and explicit instruction was beneficial, explicit instruction led to
long-term gains, possibly due to greater cognitive engagement by the
learners.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:53:21, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.007
142 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
Building on VanPatten and Williams’ (2007) work, input processing
can make pragmatics accessible for learners. Instruction might entail asking
learners to (1) listen to a dialog with several examples of the target prag-
matic structure, (2) work in small groups or pairs and examine the appro-
priateness of the target structure, evaluating both the linguistic forms and
social context in which they occur, (3) analyze additional texts receptively,
and (4) complete productive tasks, such as discourse completion, role-
playing, or judgment tasks to determine the appropriateness of examples
provided (Takimoto, 2009). Follow-up tasks can be either the same as the
input task or similar to it; the available evidence suggests that repetition
yields slightly better outcomes and may build fluency (Takimoto, 2012).
A recent approach to teaching pragmatics focuses on skills development,
moving learners from declarative (being able to talk about pragmatics) to
procedural knowledge (being able to produce pragmatic constructs).
According to this model, applying pragmatic knowledge during actual
interaction requires repeated practice of rules via tasks that foster receptive
as well as productive skills (Li, 2012). Sample dialogs, discourse completion
tasks (where learners provide correct responses to prompts), and multiple-
choice activities are used to model the use of speech acts in particular
speech events and social contexts (Ishida, 2009).
Martínez-Flor and Usó-Juan (2006) designed a six-stage framework for
fostering pragmatic and intercultural competence through skills-
development. During the first two stages – researching and reflecting –
L2 learners explore pragmatic concepts in their L1 (e.g., speech acts or
politeness formulae), analyzing the data according to gender or age, as well
as other social variables. These stages help learners become aware of
pragmatics and access concepts through familiar interaction (i.e., in their
first language). Stages 3 and 4 – receiving and reasoning – entail explicit
instruction about how the speech acts or politeness formulae are expressed
in the L2, including examining the impact of social variables on the use of
these pragmatic concepts. The final stages – rehearsing and revising – allow
learners to practice what they had learned, both receptively and produc-
tively, focusing on real-world communication and receiving feedback. In
order to ensure accurate pragmatic development, Martínez-Flor and Usó-
Juan’s (2006) recommend comparative analyses between cultures, explicit
instruction and awareness raising, analyzing situated language use, focused
practice, repetition, and feedback.
Skills training may be particularly effective in study-abroad situations.
Shively (2010) suggests that prior to departure, learners receive explicit
instruction in pragmatics and training in analyzing language use. Once

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:53:21, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.007
6 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Pragmatics 143
they are in the L2 community, they practice different speech acts each week
in real-world communication with other L2/Lx users and analyze how
social variables impact language choice. After returning home, learners stay
connected to the host community via social media and continue to explore
pragmatic concepts, including practice, analysis, and interpretation each
time. Skills-training programs like this can give L2/Lx users great auton-
omy and flexibility for learning pragmatics, as they can progress at their
own pace, following their own learning-style preferences.
Like skills-training, task-based approaches to pragmatics instruction also
prioritize socially situated meaningful language use. Studies in a recent
edited volume by Taguchi and Kim (2018) reiterate the effectiveness of
explicit instruction of pragmatic features, collaborative problem-solving
and creative language use (e.g., writing a drama) to foster pragmatic
development. Studies showed, for example, that carefully designed tasks
improved learners’ understanding of pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic
features of Korean honorifics (Kim, Lee, & Kim, 2018), request modifica-
tions used in email (Alcón-Soler, 2018), and persuasive writing (Gomez-
Laich, & Taguchi, 2018).
Reflecting a growing field of related research, González-Lloret and
Ortega (2018) explored how task-based pragmatics learning can be
fostered by technology-mediated communication. In agreement with
Canto, de Graff, and Juaregi (2014), the authors argue that telecolla-
borative tasks, where communicative partners are geographically apart
and interact via social media, promote pragmatic development, which
aligns closely with intercultural competence, if tasks guide learners to
compare their own language use and those of their interlocutors.
González-Lloret and Ortega (2018) identified three guiding principles
for designing tasks that connect technology, task-based language learn-
ing, and L2 pragmatics: actions, language, and technologies. Actions
refer to the objectives learners want to achieve with the language (e.g.,
purchasing a mobile phone) and sociopragmatic features, the cultural,
contextual, and relational norms needed for completing actions. The
language focus includes lexical, structural, and pragmalinguistic knowl-
edge that learners need to access for completing the task (e.g., asking and
answering questions, agreeing and disagreeing, taking turns). The final
component, technologies, includes ensuring students’ access to and
familiarity with technology, as well as their ability to navigate
a website and participate in online communities.
Some computer-mediated task-based language teaching (TBLT)
research explores how online games enhance learners’ pragmatic skills in

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:53:21, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.007
144 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
locally situated interactions, including regional dialects, power, social
distance, and varying levels of imposition (Holden & Sykes, 2012; Sykes,
2017). Furthermore, as Sydorenko (2015) and Taguchi, Li, and Tang (2017)
found, even a few sessions of game-based native-speaker modeling led to
significant and long-term gains in learners’ pragmatic knowledge.
Sydorenko noted, however, that peer practice via role-plays yielded more
creative, humorous language that was pragmatically “inappropriate” but
offered more opportunities for “metapragmatic discussion, and extended
turns similar to those in naturalistic interactions” (2015, p. 333). Thus,
technology-based research repeatedly demonstrated the teachability of L2
pragmatics.
The final approach to teaching L2/Lx pragmatics discussed here focuses
on the local situatedness of interaction. This approach helps learners become
more aware of pragmatic issues through a process of active analysis of
authentic data and incorporates individuals’ prior experiences, both in the
personal and the cultural domains, which help them determine what is
appropriate or how their interlocutors might perceive what the speakers
say in particular situations (Kecskés, 2006, 2012; LoCastro, 2011; Mills,
2009). Our unique experiences as individuals impact our choice of words,
expressions, speech styles, and language use, and our language choices shape
our interactions, which are dynamic, situation-specific, locally contextua-
lized processes (Kecskés, 2010, 2019).
A locally situated pragmatics pedagogy recognizes that there is no single
mapping of linguistic form onto pragmatic meaning, and that language use
varies both across speakers and even within the speech of an individual
speaker across different interactional situations. That is, different indivi-
duals may use divergent speech acts to express the same pragmatic func-
tion, and even the same person might use different expressions to describe
the same idea at different moments in time (Cohen, 2005). Similarly,
politeness and impoliteness are expressed in diverse ways, depending on
the unique, local, dynamic social context (e.g., the same behavior may be
acceptable or disruptive, depending on the interlocutors and interactional
goals), in which the interaction takes place (Culpeper et al., 2010; Mills,
2009; Spencer-Oatey, 2002). Importantly, this approach also recognizes
that there is no single norm or standard form to which L2/Lx speakers must
aspire (Mills, 2011). Instead, a broad spectrum of language varieties, speak-
ers, social roles, and communicative purposes should be modeled so that
learners can make choices regarding their interactions. This is important for
college-aged learners in particular, who may wish to adopt some but not all
L2/Lx pragmatic practices (Barron, 2005; Kallia, 2005; Washburn, 2001).

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:53:21, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.007
6 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Pragmatics 145
Discourse-rich material (movies, documentaries, newspaper articles, etc.)
can provide sufficiently contextualized pragmatic modeling to help lear-
ners understand interaction as a dynamic, “moment-to-moment . . . emer-
gent process” (Davies, 2004, pp. 210–211).
In addition to describing the different approaches, there are a few
general points regarding pragmatics instruction that merit attention.
First, while research tends to focus on advanced L2/Lx learners’ pragmatic
development, earlier intervention is possible and useful; beginning lan-
guage learners are quite capable of developing sociopragmatic skills and
should be exposed to pragmalinguistic features of the L2/Lx as well
(Abrams, 2014; Dewaele, 2008). Second, longer authentic materials (e.g.,
a television series, longer feature film, documentary, novel) can serve as
crucial input for learners by modeling dyadic and multi-participant inter-
actions, with messy turn-taking patterns, false starts, interruptions, and
discontinuities, along with numerous cultural references (Abrams, 2016b;
Gilmore, 2015). Third, authentic materials represent many different types
of spoken, written, and signed language – such as formal talks, interviews,
informal chats, storytelling, opinion pieces, gossip, and jokes – genres that
are usually inadequately represented in textbooks. Such socially situated
materials can “sensitise learners to the ways in which the discourse reflects
its context” (Gilmore, 2015, p. 103). Fourth, tasks should prompt learners
to interpret the social meaning of interactions and allow them to identify
and adopt appropriate participant roles, reflecting learners’ needs for
genuine interpersonal exchanges in which they may have to participate in
real, authentic communication (DeBot, Verspoor, & Verspoor, 2005;
Eisenchlas, 2011; Seedhouse, 1996). Fifth, the profession needs to move
away from comparing learners’ pragmatic performance to that of native
speaker models in both research and pedagogy (Martínez-Flor & Fukuya,
2005). Aiming for native-speaker standards is unrealistic in the typical two
to four years of L2 instruction most students complete in the United States,
given how difficult it is to learn pragmatics even when one spends a long
time in the host culture. Native speaker ‘norms’ are also unrealistic,
because there is great diversity among individuals’ pragmatic preferences,
influenced by gender, age, education, or the participants’ interest in
succeeding at the interaction (Culpeper et al., 2010; Mills, 2009). Even if
norms could be identified, L2 practices might not be desirable for some
learners because they do not match the interactional preferences of the
particular social group, whose language is modeled (Kallia, 2005;
Washburn, 2001). However, although individual conversations may differ
from normative practices, analyzing cultural trends can be useful. For

Summary
Pragmatics is an obvious language feature to connect to intercultural
communication, since it focuses on the creation and interpretation of
meaning in a social context. This section lays out existing and potential
further connections between pragmatics and intercultural communica-
tion, in terms of the theoretical concepts presented in Chapters 1 and 2.
The resulting synthesis suggests how intercultural communication-
oriented pedagogy might foster the development of pragmatic
competence:

Knowledge & skills

1. Help learners become aware of pragmatics, that there is social meaning behind surface-
level language (knowledge; skills of interaction, interpreting, and relating).
2. Recognize interaction as a dynamic, interpersonal process, co-constructed by specific
individuals, who enact broader cultural practices as well as idiosyncratic preferences
(knowledge; skills of relating, interpreting, and interacting).
3. Help learners examine cultural differences in the realization of Gricean maxims (e.g.,
what is pertinent to the interaction) (skills of interpreting and interacting).
4. Foster learners’ cognitive flexibility and attitudes towards L2/Lx-speaking communities
by using humorous material as input and encouraging learners to play with the language,
creating humor in the L2/Lx themselves (knowledge; skills of relating, interpreting, and
interacting; critical cultural awareness).
5. Discuss the role humor plays in building and nurturing relationships, fostering group
cohesion and affiliation, managing conflict, and adjusting to new linguistic and
cultural situations. Also raise awareness of negative uses of humor (knowledge;
attitude; skills of relating; critical cultural awareness).
6. Analyze how speech acts and politeness reflect power-distance, individualism or
collectivism, gender equality, etc. Pay special attention to intracultural variation, to
reiterate that cultures are not monolithic (knowledge; critical cultural awareness).
7. Discuss explicitly that knowledge of expected language use does not mean that learners
must adhere to ‘norms.’ Help L2/Lx users make informed choices by discussing possible
consequences to flouting expectations (attitude; skills of relating, interpreting, and
interacting; critical cultural awareness).
8. Help learners develop the skills to collect, observe, and analyze authentic language data
for understanding socially situated (im)politeness (skills of discovery; critical cultural
awareness).

Linguistic repertoire
1. Introduce conventional expressions to facilitate more natural and fluid interactions
(e.g., Don’t mind me! ).
2. Ensure that learners understand terms of address, both their linguistic form and
appropriate contexts of use.
3. Teach speech acts, raising learners’ awareness that the expressions we use differ across
languages, both how often and what we need to say in response to a request or an
invitation, for example.
4. Examine phrases, terms of address and other linguistic forms used to express politeness
and impoliteness in various social contexts. Help learners identify when something they
say is perceived as acceptable and when it is not.
5. Explore how pragmatic miscalculations can be repaired (e.g., apology, humor).
6. Teach typical frames and topics of humor, including references to current events.
Curricular considerations
1. Incorporate pragmatic skills into the curriculum from the beginning – let students tap
into their L1 sociopragmatic knowledge at early stages of L2/Lx development,
expanding that knowledge to L2/Lx-speaking contexts and pragmalinguistic
knowledge gradually.
2. Provide activities that foster awareness raising, skills training, explicit instruction, and
extensive practice focusing on pragmatics.
3. Treat pragmatics explicitly, including analyzing multiple ways of expressing the same
sentiment (e.g., making a request); activities and tasks should focus on the social
meaning conveyed by users’ choices, in addition to the surface-level content.
4. Ensure that tasks across the curriculum explore how pragmatics reflects societal,
institutional and smaller social group trends, as well as personal preferences, enacted in
unique interactions moment-by-moment.
5. Include humor as an essential component of pragmatic knowledge and self-expression
as learners’ intercultural selves emerge (e.g., cross-linguistic puns, mixed frames for
jokes).
6. Utilize longer authentic materials – particularly movies, documentaries, or TV shows –
that can fill in the contextual gap often characteristic of textbooks.

Sample Teaching Activities

ACTIVITY SET 1

L2/Lx: English as a second/foreign language

Learner group: Advanced/C1–C2 learners – telecollaborative project
Source: Cartoons and comedy shows discussing current cultural
issues
Task duration: Six weeks, some in-class work, telecollaboration in
groups of four and homework

Learning Objectives
By the end of this telecollaborative project, learners will be able to do the
following:
1. Identify preferred genres of humor about social and political issues (see
Table 6.2).
2. Recognize how verbal and nonverbal communication is used to express
humor.
3. Comprehend how visual cues and language reciprocally support each
other to create humor in particular contexts (e.g., an artist’s message,
political afﬁliation, target audience, etc.).
4. Identify topics that are current in political humor and what each venue
might concentrate on (e.g., The Economist, a local paper, late night
comedy), including jokes on current events and politics, historical
events and references, gender roles, social issues.
5. Create a joke, including visual and linguistic content to convey
a humorous message.
Analytic Approach
Multimodal analysis. Students learn to interpret the complementary
semiotic systems of images, verbal, and nonverbal communication, as well
as how information is presented.

Steps in the Task

Pre-Task
Students in groups of four meet their telecollaborative partners using
available media (Skype, FaceTime, etc.); the ﬁrst week is spent getting to
know each other and discussing the objectives of the project (to ensure
commitment from all participants).

Task 1
During week 2, student-groups brainstorm, where they see humor in
the media, what kinds of humor they like and read/watch, what topics
are current, and what kind of language is allowed by different artists
and performers, etc. The instructor provides students with information
regarding different genres of humor.

Type of Artist/ Topics Genre of humor;

medium performer covered language
features

In each location, students should share their ﬁndings with their class for
a broader coverage of ideas.

Task 2
Weeks 3–4: Student-groups share two or three social/political cartoons that
they saw in their home culture and explain them to their telecollaborative
peers, including pragmalinguistic features, the sociopragmatic context, any
required background information required for understanding the joke, and
why it is currently relevant.

Task 3
1. Weeks 5–6: Student-groups watch one comedy show from each cultural
context, taking turns (e.g., week 4: an episode of Trevor Noah’s Daily Show,
and week 5: an episode of the Joe Show from Egypt with Youssef Houssein).
Learners analyze the format of the show, the participants, permissible
topics, relevant cultural and linguistic background knowledge, verbal and
nonverbal communication used to express humor, etc. Each side helps the
other make sense of the show; students will have to conduct some research
to find the necessary information.
2. Students present their findings to their classmates, comparing different
types of humor, current topics, and how they are treated humorously
(and what purpose humor serves), stating explicitly how multimodal
information is used to create humor; as each group presents, the rest of
class should take notes, perhaps creating a matrix as shown in the pre-
task.
Post-Task
1. Student-groups (either telecollaborative groups or newly formed groups
from each class) collaboratively create a cartoon that depicts a topic
related to a social or political issue they are interested in, showing that
issue from the perspectives of both cultural groups involved in the
telecollaborative project, using multimodal humor, effectively incor-
porating pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic features based on their
preceding analyses.
2. Alternately, groups could create a short skit from their favorite comedy
show, addressing the same points as with the cartoon project in (1).
Analysis
These activities build awareness of the pragmatics of humor with the help of
in-group informants. The repeated analyses, explicit discussions of
pragmatics, genre-specific terminology (metapragmatic knowledge), and
examinations of how culturally contextualized language and visual
information mutually reinforce each other help learners expand and deepen
their knowledge of socially contextualized pragmatics as it relates to humor.
Noticing cultural comparisons, including variation among cultural groups,
helps enhance learners’ intercultural communicative competence. This
project also raises learners’ awareness of political, historical, and other
cultural issues relevant for intercultural communication (see Chapter 9).

ACTIVITY SET 2

L2/Lx: German as a second/foreign language

Learner group: Novice/A1 learners
Source: German feature ﬁlm The Edukators (2004)
Task duration: Four 50-minute class periods

Learning Objectives
By the end of this activity, learners will be able to do the following:
1. Identify different ways of greeting people, terms of address, pronouns,
verb forms to express formal and informal language; note how partici-
pants use grammatical forms to express solidarity or distance with their
interlocutors.
2. Express politeness and impoliteness, using a few targeted downgraders
and intensiﬁers.
3. Identify a few pragmatic particles (e.g., ja, also, and doch), understand-
ing how they reﬂect participants’ understanding of the interaction.
Analytic Approach
Ethnography of communication and interactional sociolinguistics.

Steps in the Task

Pre-Viewing
1. As a class, watch a short segment (ca. 10–12 minutes) of the film, identify
the participants (this list will be expanded later) and the setting, noting
details that are relevant for understanding both the characters and the
contexts of their interactions.
2. Watch the next 10-minute segment: students note terms of address,
greetings or leave-taking expressions, pronouns and verb forms, and
how they are used by the participants – keep track of these details
in a collaborative document to establish a shared foundation for
analyses.
3. The instructor introduces the pragmatic concepts learners might be less
familiar with: downgraders, intensifiers, modal particles; give examples for
each from the film to help learners recognize them while viewing the rest of
the film.
Viewing
1. Working in groups, learners observe and keep track of one of the target
pragmatic features (e.g., greetings, leave-taking, downgraders/intensi-
fiers, pronouns, and verb forms) – their notes should include who used
the feature with whom, and what language was used to express that
pragmatic feature.

2. The class watches the ﬁlm in segments of 15–20 minutes. In-between

segments, comprehension questions, and vocabulary-building activities
should ensure that learners understand the plot (subtitles should be used
at this level to ensure overall comprehension). Learners should discuss
their observations with their groups, to hone and refine their analytic
skills.
3. After the final segment of the film has been watched, and comprehen-
sion questions have been answered, learners present their findings
regarding their assigned pragmatic concept. Following these presenta-
tions, every student, regardless of original group assignment, should be
able to understand how each pragmatic feature was realized linguistically
in the film, and how they were used in different interactional situations
by the interactants.

Post-Viewing
Working in small groups of four or ﬁve (preferably not in their original
group), learners identify their favorite scene – or important scenes for the
plot – and re-create it in their own words, using the pragmatic features the
class had discussed.

Analysis
These tasks encourage noticing and raise learners’ awareness of pragmatics,
helping them recognize different terms of address, greetings, and leave-
taking formulae, as well as the social meaning (e.g., politeness and
impoliteness) expressed by the choice of pronouns and verb forms. Learners
also become aware of the dynamic nature of interaction, how interactants’
comments prompt another’s responses, as well as its local situatedness (some
interactions use seemingly impolite language to bond, for example). The
analyses described in this task also ensure that learners recognize
pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic aspects of contextualized language.
Additionally, such analyses help learners recognize unanalyzed formulaic
units (e.g., thank you/can you, please . . .) at early stages of L2/Lx
development, to prepare them for using increasingly complex forms of
nuanced, multifunctional language later on.
If desired, this task could be expanded by having learners ﬁrst analyze
a pragmatic feature in their own L1 and use their observations as
a springboard for understanding these features in the L2/Lx, based on
variations of the following questions:
How do greetings work in your own speech community? . . . Can you
develop an inventory of different types of greetings? Does a greeting
tend to take a certain form? . . . What can you tell about people’s
relationship from the way they greet each other? What do you think
would happen if someone used a greeting form that was not appro-
priate to their relationship? (Youssouf et al., 2007, p. 50).

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS AND ACTIVITIES

1. Select a speech act in your L1 (e.g., apologizing, giving advice) and

identify several ways of realizing it. Under what circumstances would
you use each way of expressing this speech act? In conversations with
whom? What sociopragmatic and pragmalinguistic differences do you
notice among the different ways of expressing this speech act? Now
compare the same process in your L2/Lx. What would be different ways
of expressing this speech act in different situations? In what ways do the
sociopragmatic conditions and pragmalinguistic features change? What
do you base your decisions on?
2. With your peers, discuss your L1 and L2/Lx speech acts from Question 1
and evaluate how the way they are formulated reﬂects cultural prefer-
ences for interpersonal relationships (e.g., individualism v. collectivism,
power-distance, preference for avoiding uncertainty).
3. Consider how you might encourage learners at early stages of L2/Lx
development to become aware of their L1 sociopragmatic knowledge,
and how that knowledge could be harnessed to foster learners’ awareness
of L2/Lx pragmatic features.
4. Record a conversation with three to four different people, and analyze
how you co-construct ‘politeness’ and ‘impoliteness’ (e.g., terms of
address, style, register, profanity). What determined how your language
choices were interpreted by the interlocutors? Which social and prag-
matic purposes did your language choices serve?
5. Select a show you like to watch (documentary, drama, comedy, talk-
show, etc.) and analyze a 30-minute segment of it for pragmatic features.
What pragmatic functions could it be used to teach? At what level of
proﬁciency would you be able to use this material? Design a task (set) to
teach pragmatics with this 30-minute segment, using one of the peda-
gogical approaches discussed in this chapter. Share your ideas with your
classmates.
6. Explore two to three instances of humor in the L2/Lx context (e.g.,
jokes, puns, co-constructed humorous exchanges in social media, chil-
dren’s literature) and identify what linguistic and cultural knowledge
learners need in order to understand this humor. Discuss how you
might handle humor that is acceptable in the L2/Lx context that may
not be ‘appropriate’ in learners’ L1 (or vice versa).

Intercultural Communication: Teaching

Paralinguistic Features

Chapter Overview
In the Concise Oxford Dictionary of Linguistics, P. H. Matthews (2014)
deﬁnes paralanguage as:
Any aspect of vocal behaviour which can be seen as meaningful but is not
described as part of the language system. Thus, in particular, aspects of voice
quality; of the speed, loudness, and overall pitch of speech; of the use of
hesitation; of intonation to the extent that it is not covered by an account of
phonology.
Thus, the term paralinguistics (from ‘alongside language’ in ancient
Greek) describes sounds that do not serve symbolic referential pur-
poses themselves (Frawley, 2003), but rather subtly shade “the way we
say what is on our mind” (Townsend, 1985, p. 27). The affective
information people try to convey to each other is not always clear,
perhaps leaving us with a sense of ‘It wasn’t what they said, but how
they said it.’ In order to interpret the speaker’s tone, then, partici-
pants often rely on the context of the interaction, as the following
example from the British Parliament illustrates. In this excerpt from
July 24, 20181, the Secretary of State, Dominic Raab, attempts to
reassure Members of Parliament that the withdrawal of the United
Kingdom from the European Union (Brexit) can be done smoothly,
in spite of a rapidly approaching deadline.
mr. raab: With permission Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement on the
White Paper published today setting out the Government’s plans for
legislating for the withdrawal agreement and implementation period. On
Friday 29 March 2019, the UK will leave the European Union, giving effect

1
https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018–07-24/debates/D49F4F4C-FC7C-403A-8BFE-C
D9999DF1F2B/EUWithdrawalAgreementLegislation

153

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:47:55, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.008
154 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
to the historic decision taken by the British people in the 2016
referendum. The Government are committed to delivering a
smooth and orderly Brexit. That is why we have already passed
the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018.
several mps: [loud laughter by numerous MPs immediately following “smooth
and orderly Brexit,” overlapping with the ﬁnal sentence]
mr. raab: The Shadow Foreign Secretary2 is laughing. She and her party
voted against the Bill, thereby undermining her commitment to
give effect to the referendum . . .
mr. starmer: I thank the Secretary of State for providing advance copies of his
statement and the White Paper. I am glad to say that that was two
HOURS ago, and it is MUCH appreciated.
The debate took place in the House of Commons, as members of the
opposition expressed their cynicism regarding comments made by a
member of the Executive Branch through laughter. The laughter was
sufﬁciently loud to make the opposition’s disbelief in Mr. Raab’s
claims evident, and its meaning was reiterated when the Shadow
Secretary of State highlighted the brief time his party had to read
the document provided by Mr. Raab. In combination with the
emphasis on two hours, in contrast to the falling intonation of I am
glad to say, and a pause (along with background knowledge about the
topic) the audience was able to interpret the meaning of the laughter
as ridicule.
As this example illustrates, paralinguistic features are integrated with
other facets of language or “modulated onto or embedded into the verbal
message” (Schuller & Batliner, 2014, p. 9; emphasis original). They
contribute details about a speaker’s affect, forming an important layer
of communication (Blommaert, 2008; Austin, Hampel & Kukulska-
Hulme, 2017). To explore this topic in depth, this chapter looks at
paralinguistic features in the four categories set forth by Matthews
(2014) – voice quality, prosody, conversational management, and
accent,3 – followed by a discussion of affect in electronic communica-
tion. Afterwards, these concepts are connected to an intercultural
communication-oriented pedagogy.

2
www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-ofﬁces/government-and-opposition1/opposition-holding/
3
Sometimes kinesics (body language), proxemics (preferences for personal space), and haptics (touch-
ing) are included in paralinguistics (Celce-Murcia, 2007, p. 49). Research in the social sciences,
however, typically separates paralinguistic features from nonverbal communication, a distinction
maintained in this book. All emojis are from Twitter and the graphics are licensed under the CC-
BY 4.0.

Speech Rate
The rate or tempo of speech varies with our intended meaning, emotion(s),
attitude, and personality. Sometimes we can control the rate of our speech,
at other times its tempo is involuntary. A slow tempo may suggest hesita-
tion, uncertainty, a warning, self-assurance, or higher status, whereas a fast
tempo conveys “[a] care-free attitude, gaiety . . . anger, annoyance, impa-
tience, haste, urgency” (Poyatos, 2002, p. 8). Fast and slow speech can also
reflect personality, such as extroversion or introversion, respectively,
although stereotypes exaggerate the actual differences between these traits
(Feldstein & Sloan, 1984; Schuller & Batliner, 2014). Since some of these
characterizations are contradictory, the local context is particularly impor-
tant for accurate interpretation.
In addition to personal and situational factors, some languages are
believed to be spoken more rapidly than others. For example, cowboys in
Western movies seem to drawl, whereas films set in New York tend to reflect
faster speech (Roach, 1998). In reality, numerous factors impact how quick
speech sounds. Some languages (e.g., agglutinative languages like Quechua,
in which syntactic relationships are expressed by extensive morphemes) have
long words with comparatively infrequent stops, which might make them
sound faster than languages with shorter words. Also, early investigations
into the idea that speakers of stress-timed languages (e.g., Arabic) may
perceive syllable-timed languages (e.g., Spanish) as being fast (and vice
versa) seemed to show that perception may reflect familiarity with a language
instead of its phonetic structure. In spite of a lack of measurable differences
between languages in terms of tempo, stereotypes exist about fast or slow
languages (Poyatos, 2002), which may lead people to associate certain
personal characteristics with their speakers, considering faster speakers to
be more competent or slower speakers to be more respectful and sincere,
depending on our own cultural practices (Roach, 1998). Specific types of
speech events, such as religious rituals, as well as situational conditions (e.g.,
being in a hurry versus chatting with friends) similarly prompt varied rates of
speech, as does a speaker’s personal style and emotional state.
The rate at which we speak may also be a function of interactional
dynamics: interlocutors may mirror each other’s speech rate to influence
their interactant(s) or express affiliation, whereas a mismatch may indicate
an unwillingness to accommodate them (Poyatos, 2002). Alternately, by
speaking unnecessarily slowly, interactants may insult their conversation

Volume
Along with tempo, the volume of speech also varies across cultures and
languages. In the United States, for example, loudness is typically perceived
as a sign of a high-achieving, charismatic, and conﬁdent person (Schuller
& Batliner, 2014). Using our own cultural practices as a baseline, we
perceive speakers of other languages as being particularly loud and judge
entire nationalities based on our perceptions of a few members of another
culture. Cultural preferences also account for locations where we may
speak loudly and where we are expected to be quieter. In Latin America
and many Mediterranean cultures, for example, public spaces encourage
louder speech than what we are likely to ﬁnd in North America in similar
types of venues or in the same countries in other locations. It is useful to
understand differences in loudness – perceived or real – across languages
and cultures and to develop a sense of what Poyatos (2002) calls the
“cultural standard level ” (p. 5), so that we can interpret the meaning of
volume more accurately in its local linguistic and cultural contexts and not
mistake an enthusiastic loudness for an argument or quietness for disin-
terest. Mistaking the meaning of loud or quiet speech can have detrimental
effects for interactants. In the 1960s, children in a school for Native
Americans thought that their teachers were angry or mean, because they
were speaking so loudly, while the teachers found the children disengaged
or even rude, due to their quietness (Key, 1975).
Preferences for loud, soft, quiet, or inconspicuous speech also depend on
the social roles participants enact. Disparate power distributions, such as
student–teacher or doctor–patient might demand louder or quieter speech
or silence (Poyatos, 2002). Furthermore, interactants of relatively compar-
able social status in low-stakes contexts will interpret differences in volume

Pitch
Poyatos (2002) describes pitch as the “most versatile message-conveying
feature of voice, which accompanies all verbal and nonverbal communica-
tive sounds with the subtlest possible symbolic variations” (p. 10). The
pitch of our voice has some physiological determinants: the longer and
thicker our vocal chords, the slower their vibrations or frequency, therefore
the lower the pitch (most men’s voices); conversely, shorter and thinner
vocal chords produce higher pitch, typical of women and children
(Kreiman & Sidtis, 2011; Poyatos, 2002). Although the physiological
characteristics of our vocal chords post puberty are relatively stable
(Schötz, 2007), our pitch changes across conversational situations and
conveys social meaning. Occupational (e.g., somebody working with
small children will likely have a higher pitch) and situational factors
(e.g., excitement or humor), language fluency, and geographical location
can impact pitch (Schuller & Batliner, 2014).
Other elements of pitch, such as creakiness or laryngealization, are
language-specific: Danish has a suprasegmental glottal catch (stød
[‘shock’]) (Fischer-Jørgensen, 1989), as do Latvian and certain Lithuanian
dialects (Kiparsky, 2018). Elsewhere, creakiness carries attitudinal connota-
tions. According to Laver (1994) and Grivičić and Nilep (2004), the ‘creak’
in English Received Pronunciation signals boredom, commiseration in
Tzeltal (an indigenous language in Southern Mexico), an apology in
Oto-Manguean languages (an indigenous language family in Central
America), or rejection of a speaker.
Variations in pitch also reflect intra- and intercultural variation, encod-
ing differences among social groups. Van Bezooijen (1995) found, for
example, that Japanese women have a higher pitch range than Dutch
women, possibly because a higher pitch in Japan seemed to “project a
vocal image associated with feminine attributes of powerlessness” (p. 253).

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:47:55, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.008
158 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
In a more recent study, Yuasa (2010) observed that many English-speaking
women in California use a creaky voice to project an image of someone
who is “hesitant, nonaggressive, and informal but also educated, urban-
oriented, and upwardly mobile” (p. 315). Young U.S. American women
have also been found to use a phrase-final vocal fry (a low-pitch, vibrato
sound or glottalization) to signal hesitation and positive affiliation with
their interlocutors (Wolk, Abdelli-Beruh, and Slavin, 2012). Schuller and
Batliner (2014) posit that laryngealization might also be a way to counter a
higher feminine pitch in order to signal competence, since a “low voice
means big and powerful. This feature can be adapted by groups that are not
big and powerful, such as female teenagers” (p. 90). The authors also
observed that young women in Germany use nasalization and uptalk
(a raised pitch at the end of phrases or sentences) to signal group member-
ship, a phenomenon possibly influenced by soap operas that have effected a
cultural shift in pitch.
Variation in men’s voices also carries social meaning. Puts, Gaulin, and
Verdolini (2006), Puts, Hodges, Cárdenas, and Gaulin (2007), and
Weninger, Krajewski, Batliner, and Schuller (2012) found, for example,
that a deeper voice among men was perceived as more dominant, especially
in the contexts of romance or friendship, whereas in politics, a higher pitch
more positively correlated with charisma and leadership. Thus, pitch has
implications for being perceived as strong, feminine or masculine, ener-
getic, mature/immature, wise, emotional or unemotional, among other
characteristics (Poyatos, 2002).
Interpretations of pitch, however, are variable. Individuals may find the
same pitch range alluring in one person but irritating in another. The
perceived attractiveness of a particular pitch may also shift over time:
“female pitch has been lowered in the US and other Western countries
since the 1950s due to the changing role of women in society” (Schuller &
Batliner, 2014, p. 83). The appropriateness or attractiveness is also situa-
tionally variable. A breathy voice might be considered soft and sexy on a
date, but puzzling while purchasing a movie ticket, and perhaps detri-
mental in a job interview. Similarly, a high pitch might indicate anxiety
before an exam or excitement at a party.

Prosody/Intonation
Languages reﬂect diverse intonation patterns that differentiate between
statements and questions, surprise or consternation, innuendo or sarcasm,
nervousness or self-assurance, among other affective connotations. Thus,

Intonation and stress Meaning

Flat intonation, equal stress on each word Acknowledgment of a small favor

(unmarked in U.S. English)
Rising intonation, stress on a lot Enthusiastic gratitude for a perceived large
favor or kindness
Falling intonation, stress on a lot Sarcastic comment, perhaps on a perceived
slight
Staccato rhythm (thanks a lot) Expression of hurt or disappointment
Punctuated (thanks.a.lot. in social media) Expression of sarcasm, reprimand
Falling intonation, emphasis on thanks, Relief (e.g., from an exhausted traveler,
expressed with a soft sigh when somebody helps lift their suitcase)
Thanks followed by a pause, then by a lot; Expressing sincere gratitude
both thanks and lot are stressed

intonation is essential for encoding and decoding the intended meaning in

communication and for “signalling contextual presuppositions or assump-
tions that are used to infer meaning accurately” (Satar, 2016, p. 308). To
illustrate how intonation affects meaning, consider the various interpreta-
tions of the phrase thanks a lot shown in Table 7.1.
Learning intonation in an L2/Lx requires the ability to hear – then
replicate – different patterns of prosody and to understand speakers’
intended meaning, by observing their verbal and nonverbal behavior, as
well as the preceding and subsequent reactions by other interlocutors
(Poyatos, 2002). Does a rising intonation signal a question or uptalk
intended to express social affiliation? What is the intonation for a yes-no
versus a referential question or for a command versus a polite request? The
ability to identify intonation accurately requires significant exposure to the
L2/Lx in authentic discourse (Graham, Hamblin, & Feldstein, 2001),
which reflects the dynamic, negotiated nature of interactions.

Conversation Management
Interaction is jointly created by participants within social and cogni-
tive contexts (Bardovi-Harlig, 2015; LoCastro, 2003). It is like a dance
between two or more partners, during which speakers and listeners
actively contribute to communicate (Tannen, 2007). Their contribu-
tions include conversational devices – such as hedges, ﬁller words,
pauses, silence, laughter – that, although often verbal (how interesting

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:47:55, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.008
160 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
or aha), add little or no substance to the interaction but nonetheless
shape its meaning.
Speakers can use hesitation markers, filler words, and hedges, for exam-
ple, to indicate their enthusiasm or disdain for a topic or their interlocu-
tors, to suggest that they wish to soften a claim or to let their interlocutors
know that they are finished speaking (Tannen, 2007). In order to engage
their listeners, speakers might use tag questions (e.g., ikke [‘no?’] in Danish
or oder [the pragmatic equivalent of ‘right’] in German) to prompt an
acknowledgment or reaction; they may or may not also yield the conversa-
tional floor to an interlocutor. In contrast, filler words and hedges, such as
ehm, like, or actually in English, asszem (azt hiszem [‘I think’]) in
Hungarian, or แบบ (bàep [‘like’]) in Thai help retain the speaker’s turn at
talk or soften and modify an actual utterance (G. Lakoff, 1973; Ranganath,
Jurafsky, & McFarland, 2013; Schuller & Batliner, 2014).
During interaction, listeners also play an active role. They signal their
interest or (dis)approval with various backchanneling devices, such as
expressive interjections (e.g., really? or wow), laughter, silence, yawning,
or coughing (Ephratt, 2011; Provine, 2012). These features provide direct or
indirect feedback to the speaker, such as aha to express agreement, hmmm
to indicate surprise in English, rising intonation to encourage the speaker
to continue, or laughter with a raised eyebrow to signal disbelief in the
speaker’s utterance.
Gender, social status, linguistic differences (e.g., language variety spo-
ken), as well as the speaker’s intention and personality impact the use of
hedges and filler words (Dixon & Foster, 1997; R. Lakoff, 1973).
Additionally, there are broad cultural patterns that guide how such para-
linguistic features are used. For example, Salager-Meyer (2011) reported
that research papers written by French, Finnish, and Bulgarian academics
used fewer hedges than their English-speaking colleagues, which their
readers perceived as more arrogant, self-confident, decisive, authoritarian,
and categorical, showing less deference towards readers than the language
used by English-speaking authors. However, empirical evidence suggest
that, in most interactions, contextual influences (the particular interlocu-
tors, purpose of the interaction, etc.) are more relevant for the use of hedges
and fillers than general cultural practices (Dixon & Foster, 1997).
Similarly, the use of silence as a conversational device reflects situational
as well as cultural preferences. Brief pauses can provide thinking time as we
plan our next comment, or they can help us emphasize a point; they may
also express disapproval or sadness. There may be expected pauses between
interactants in some cultures to indicate respect and deference to other

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:47:55, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.008
7 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Paralinguistic Features 161
interlocutors. Pauses may also be a function of language proficiency,
especially at earlier stages of L2/Lx development, where they may signal
communication breakdown and prompt interlocutors to step in and help
with vocabulary, for example (Grimshaw & Cardoso, 2018; Schuller &
Batliner, 2014). Disfluency, that can occur during both L1 and L2/Lx use,
also depends on the modality of communication. Spontaneous speech, for
example, tends to include more hesitations, false starts, repetitions, or slips
of the tongue than planned speech or written communication (Schuller &
Batliner, 2014). In order to maintain their turn at conversation, while also
reducing the appearance of hesitation, speakers can lengthen syllables to
buy more time and prevent their interlocutors from taking over the
conversational floor or use fillers and hedges (Böhm & Shattuck-
Hufnagel, 2007, cited in Schuller & Batliner, 2014).
How long participants may or should speak also pertains to conversa-
tional management, determined, for example, by cultural preferences, the
number of interlocutors, the purpose of the interaction, the level of
intimacy among interlocutors, their interest in each other and the topic,
as well as the power distribution among participants. More powerful
people, or people who hold a more powerful position in a particular
interaction, tend to talk more than less powerful individuals (Spender,
1980). Contrary to stereotypical views in many cultures, however, women
do not speak more than men (Mehl, Vazire, Ramírez-Esparza, Slatcher, &
Pennebaker, 2007).
Native or advanced L2/Lx speakers use conversational signals or devices
mostly subconsciously and only notice them if the conversation goes awry.
For example, an interactant may not realize that the speaker has finished
her turn and waits too long before making his own contribution, which the
speaker might misinterpret as disinterest. Once interlocutors realize that a
misunderstanding has occurred, they can apologize, complain, or adjust
their responses, depending on what they are trying to accomplish with the
interaction, and whether they are able to find a more effective interactional
pattern (which may depend on the speaker’s language skills).
Knowing when and what kinds of backchanneling devices can be used in
particular contexts is an important skill to develop in any language at other
stages of L2/Lx development as well, since a “participant in the active,
speaking role would be very irritated if the listener either did not produce
any backchanneling signals at all, or did so in the wrong places” (Schuller
& Batliner, 2014, p. 134). In an L2/Lx, participants have to acquire new
linguistic manifestations of conversational signals and devices, and
understand how and when they are used in communication.

Accent and Pronunciation

Apart from our appearance, accent – of individual phonemes and overall
prosody – is often the most obvious marker of our social identity, and on
the phone, the most salient one. We acquire our L1 pronunciation through
primary socialization (Ochs & Schieffelin, 2008) and add to our repertoire
through life experience. When we move to a new place, attend school, or
join social groups, our accents might change or we learn to shift between
multiple language varieties, using one in the home and another at work. In
“Why I faked an accent for years,” Hana Jafar,4 the daughter of Indian and
Pakistani parents living in the United Kingdom, uses standard British
English for everyday interactions, because it is perceived as socially more
affluent, but in the domestic domain adjusts her speech to sound more like
her Arabic-speaking friends to express affiliation with them. Students on a
study-abroad program in Spain reported similar adjustments in their
speech. If they affiliated with the local variety of Spanish, they adopted
the voiceless interdental fricative /θ/ in their speech, the norm in Madrid
and other speech communities on the Iberian peninsula (Ringer-Hilfinger,
2012). Conversely, students who had had significant exposure to Latinxs
before studying abroad showed less use of the /θ/, because their affiliation
pushed them towards a U.S.-centric variety of Spanish. Geeslin and

4
https://medium.com/@hana.jafar09/why-i-faked-an-accent-for-years-dabe0c6a04ff

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:47:55, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.008
7 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Paralinguistic Features 163
Gudmestad (2011) likewise found that, instead of L2 proficiency or time
spent studying abroad, it was learners’ attitude towards the host commu-
nity that determined their adoption of the local language variety.
The cultural forces we are socialized by also impact how we perceive
accents that differ from ours (Lippi-Green, 2012). We find certain accents
more pleasant than others, and attribute traits or intentions to speakers
with those accents based on stories we read or hear during our childhood
and throughout our lives. We may judge people to be exotic, (un)attrac-
tive, (un)trustworthy, (un)intelligent, emotional, or cold, drawing on
stereotypes we develop as a shorthand for determining what a person is
like merely based on their pronunciation (Fuertes, Gottdiener, Martin,
Gilbert, & Giles, 2012; Lippi-Green, 2012; Popp, Donovan, Crawford,
Marsh, & Peele, 2003; Ng, 2007; Vincze & McIntyre, 2017). Typically,
‘standard’ dialects are rated more positively than ‘nonstandard’ or non-
native varieties in terms of competence, status, intelligence, and literacy
(Lev-Ari & Keysar, 2010; Wolfram & Schilling-Estes, 2015; Saito,
Trofimovich, Isaacs, & Webb, 2017; Vincze & McIntyre, 2017).
Consequently, speakers of varieties other than a prestigious standard may
be systematically disadvantaged in job interviews, healthcare and
education:
Accent might reduce the credibility of non-native job seekers, eyewitnesses,
reporters or news anchors . . . such insidious impact of accent is even
apparent when the non-native speaker is merely a messenger. Most likely,
neither the native nor the non-native speakers are aware of this, making the
difficulty of understanding accented speech an ever present reason for
perceiving non-native speakers as less credible. (Lev-Ari & Keysar, 2010,
p. 1095)
In contrast with ‘nonstandard’ varieties, having a nonnative accent
might help interlocutors accommodate the speaker, because they listen
more carefully and accept nonnative language use (e.g., lexical choice,
grammar, pragmatics). Some individuals with nonnative or nonprestigious
accents try to ‘correct’ their pronunciation (Schuller & Batliner, 2014);
their age, motivation, access to L2/Lx materials, and the context of lan-
guage learning and use can facilitate or limit their success (e.g., second
versus foreign language environment). Although as linguists we tend to
view all varieties of language as equal and equally valuable, learners should
be allowed to determine what their language needs are regarding accent. If
their lives are not impacted by having a particular accent (foreign or
regional), they might not want to change it. However, some individuals

Emojis as Paralinguistic Features of Computer-Mediated

Communication
In written communication in general, and computer-mediated commu-
nication in particular (e.g., chat, forums, social media), it is notoriously
difficult to express affect. Is this email brusque, because its author is busy or
upset? Was this post meant to support my point or counter it sarcastically?
Is this comment angry or enthusiastic? While expressing affect online is not
as sophisticated as in spoken language, netizens (people engaged in online
communication) have learned to harness images, fonts, and punctuation to
convey affective information and interpersonal stance (Aldunate &
González-Ibáñez, 2017; Pavalanathan & Eisenstein, 2016).
Emojis are pictographic representations of emotions, conveying crucial
affective information via a semiotic system parallel to textual communica-
tion (Aldunate & González-Ibánez, 2017; Dresner & Herring, 2014). Since
their precursors, emoticons (e.g., :) for smile or <3 for heart), appeared in
emails in the early 1980s, emojis have become increasingly more nuanced.
According to emojipedia.org, there are almost 3000 emojis serving numer-
ous affective communicative functions, from the nerdy to the sarcastic
eyeroll. Emojis sometimes supplement verbal content, for example,
when a poster’s comment very stable indeed is complemented by two
crying-laughing emojis, indicating that the message is humorous,
possibly meaning the opposite of the verbal statement. Emojis may replace
verbal comments as well, such as a simple face-palm emoji indicating
that the respondent found the previous post nonsensical or self-defeating.
Additionally, commenters may state their emotions in parentheses: we
don’t have enough hands on deck – lmao (internally sobs) or with abbrevia-
tions, such as LOL (‘laughing out loud’) or the affiliative IKR? (‘I know,
right?’). With technological advancements, social media communication
has become more effective at expressing increasingly subtle emotions via
these paralinguistic tools (Pavalanathan & Eisenstein, 2016).
Importantly, Dresner and Herring (2014) and Riordan (2017) observe
that emojis do not merely reflect emotion, but rather reflect affect in
combination with textual information. Consequently, Dresner and
Herring argue, emojis straddle language and affect: “emoticons are used
not as signs of emotion, but as indications of the illocutionary force of the
textual utterances that they accompany” (p. 62). Thus, a smiley face may

Figure 7.1 Meme combining visual and textual information

mitigate a request – May I turn in my homework late ☺? – and a blush-

emoji may represent an apology, not merely depict someone’s embarrass-
ment. Whether reﬂecting emotions or illocutionary force, emojis and other
online expressions of affect co-construct meaning and contribute to the
creation and interpretation of meaning.
Like emojis, gifs and memes – humorous images used in online com-
munication – also combine textual and visual information to express affect,
as seen in Figure 7.1. The grin of the breaded dragon complements the
verbal message If you’re happy and you know it . . . you’re a beardie (a
nickname for this reptile) and plays on the children’s song ‘If you’re
happy and you know it, clap your hands’. Thus, the text and image
reinforce each other to communicate a humorous message.
Visual manipulation, such as punctuation and font, contributes to affect
as well (Bezemer & Kress, 2016). Social media users have developed
numerous creative expressions, such as /s to signal that a comment is
sarcastic. Similarly, quotation marks, which may indicate a direct quote,
have also come to imply that the stated content actually means the
opposite, such as naming an undesirable task an “opportunity” to lessen
its negative perception. Asterisks can serve the same function, signaling

Teaching Lx Paralinguistic Features with an Intercultural

Communication Orientation
Differences or perceived differences in speakers’ paralinguistic features may
lead to miscommunication and stereotyping, even if only subconsciously
(Townsend, 1985). Thus, learners need to become aware of how they and
their interlocutors perceive each other’s paralinguistic characteristics, since
these often have signiﬁcant implications for access to educational and
employment opportunities and professional advancement (Schuller &
Batliner 2014).

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:47:55, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.008
7 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Paralinguistic Features 167
The nascent research on L2/Lx development regarding paralinguis-
tics has offered promising results. Specifically, findings suggest that
paralinguistic features are essential for comprehensibility in an L2/Lx
and are teachable, especially with video-supported pedagogy. Chiu
(2012) found, for example, that film dubbing helped ESL learners
produce diverse intonation patterns and stress to express emotions,
emphasize important points, and increase their fluency, possibly
because the intonation patterns in the authentic interactional situa-
tions presented in the movie were easier to distinguish than in
textbook dialogs. Since many students wish to reduce their L1 accents
(even though developing native-like pronunciation is not an objective
in intercultural pedagogy), such activities can improve learners’ self-
confidence, lower their L2 anxiety, and increase their willingness to
communicate (Vincze & McIntyre, 2017).
Similarly, several studies on telecollaboration (groups of students inter-
acting online for pedagogical purposes) utilized video conferencing and
found that these projects helped learners develop more fluent and seamless
conversations, improving their turn-taking skills, intonation, and emo-
tional expressiveness in the L2/Lx, as they formed new social arrangements
and interactions with their interlocutors (Austin et al., 2017; Guichon &
Cohen, 2014; Vurdien & Puranen, 2018). While not the same as face-to-
face interaction, Internet-mediated communication is also part of new,
twenty-first-century skills of using information and communication tech-
nology (Austin et al., 2017), that is ubiquitous in real-world communica-
tion (Satar, 2016).
Undoubtedly, paralinguistic features play an important role in lear-
ners’ ability to interpret and create meaning. Equally importantly, how-
ever, learners’ paralinguistic features impact how they are perceived by
other users of the L2/Lx as well. Saito, Trofimovich, and Isaacs (2017)
conducted a study with native French speakers learning English and
found that learners’ comprehensibility was closely linked with their
pronunciation (of individual phonemes and overall prosody). The
authors emphasize that, while it is important to set realistic instructional
goals regarding what L2/Lx learners can achieve pronunciation-wise,
even small improvements in word and sentence stress, speech rate,
pitch, stress, and pauses can make a large difference in comprehensibility.
These gains are possible if pronunciation practice encourages “learners to
notice, practice, and ultimately automatize various linguistic dimensions
of speech” (p. 460).

Summary
As the preceding discussion has demonstrated, voice quality, prosody,
conversational management, and accent play an important role in
communication and serve as markers of social identities both in
spoken and written communication. These paralinguistic features do
not serve symbolic referential purposes per se, but rather shape how
we say what we say, thus contributing important details about the
speaker’s affect, emotion, and personality. Fortunately, paralinguistic
features are teachable, especially using ﬁlmic materials. Instruction
should go beyond the nation-as-culture level analyses and examine
speciﬁc contexts of use; it should also deal explicitly with L1–L2/Lx
(perceived) differences in paralinguistic features, as this approach may
help learners preempt or mitigate miscommunication and stereotyp-
ing. With these points in mind, the following suggestions synthesize
the concepts and guidelines presented in Chapters 1 and 2 in relation
to teaching paralinguistic features in an intercultural communication-
oriented pedagogy.

Knowledge, skills and attitudes

1. Explore paralinguistic features with learners, to raise their awareness of the use and
impact of this semiotic system, for example:
a. how intonation is used to differentiate between statements and questions, surprise
or consternation, innuendo or sarcasm, nervousness or self-assurance, and express a
myriad other emotions);
b. how to wrap up our claim to the conversational floor, by reducing or increasing our
rate of speech or raising or lowering our intonation as appropriate for the L2/Lx.
2. Help learners examine cultural differences in the realization of paralinguistic features
(e.g., the types, varieties and implementation of backchanneling, laughter, silence, rate
of speech, volume); explore the implications of flouting cultural expectations.
3. Teach hedges, backchanneling and other conversation management devices;
encourage students to notice how their own practices differ from those of L2/Lx
speakers.
4. Emphasize the locally situated nature of paralinguistic features in interaction, that it is
co-constructed by specific individuals, who reflect broader cultural practices as well as
idiosyncratic preferences, enacted in specific communicative situations.
5. Analyze how paralinguistic features reflect power distance, individualism or
collectivism, gender roles, etc. Pay special attention to intracultural variation and
heterogeneity.
6. Guide learners to understand how L1 speakers might view nonnative accents, so they
become aware of their own potential prejudices and reactions when others speak
their L1.
Linguistic repertoire
1. Introduce specific backchanneling devices in the L2/Lx, including their contexts of use
(e.g., hmmm, aha, laughter).
2. Explore paralinguistic tools for conversation management, encouraging students to
notice how their own practices differ from those of L2/Lx speakers (e.g., when and how
to interrupt, how loudly to speak where, how much to say).
3. Analyze speech events (e.g., work meeting, classroom interaction, funeral) in terms of
voice quality (speech rate, volume, pitch); determine what is deemed appropriate, and
what consequences there might be for flouting expectations.
Curricular considerations
1. Incorporate awareness raising and practice activities regarding paralinguistic features
from the beginning of the L2/Lx curriculum.
2. Develop procedural knowledge by using filmic materials with which students interact, as
well as genuine interaction with other L2/Lx users (e.g., via telecollaborative exchanges).
3. Include ample opportunities for students to develop fluency (e.g., pronunciation of
individual phonemes, overall prosody and chunking) with repeated practice of the
same or similar task.
4. Include activities or projects that explore the social meaning that is conveyed by users’
choices of paralinguistic features underlying the surface-level content of speakers’
utterances.
5. Ensure that tasks over time explore paralinguistic features not only as national/societal
trends, but also how they vary at the institutional, smaller cultural-group, and
idiosyncratic levels.

ACTIVITY SET 1

L2/Lx: Arabic as a second/foreign language

Learner group: Novice/A1 learners
Source: Six Egyptian commercials Accessed at www.youtube.com/
watch?v=rZo6KzwEDwg
Task duration: One 50-minute class period, including pre- and post-viewing
activities.

Learning Objectives
By the end of this activity, learners will be able to do the following:
1. Develop an awareness of how intonation signals questions, commands,
suggestions in these commercials by speciﬁc participants.
2. Identify unexpected paralinguistic features and explore why these might
be humorous and what underlying social expectations they may ﬂout.
3. Analyze how paralinguistic features support verbal messages in these
commercials.
Analytic Approach
Multimodal analysis.

Steps in the Task

Pre-Viewing
Watch a minute of the video and let students identify the genre
(commercials); elicit from students that their aim is to persuade viewers to
buy certain products.

Viewing
1. Watch all six commercials without sound and identify the product adver-
tised in each and the participants, ﬁlling in the ﬁrst two rows of the matrix.

Ad 1 Ad 2 Ad 3 Ad 4 Ad 5 Ad 5
1. Product advertised
2. Participants
3. Notes on voice quality
4. Notes on intonation
5. Possible target audience
6. How does voice quality
and intonation help
convey the ad’s message
to the target audience?

Ad 1 Ad 2 Ad 3 Ad 4 Ad 5 Ad 5

7. Other observations (e.g.,

verbal and nonverbal cues)

2. Working in six groups, one per ad, learners observe the voice quality and
intonation patterns of the speakers in each commercial, watch the video
once, then have groups discuss their findings, filling in Rows 3 and 4.
3. Watch the video for a second time, giving groups a few minutes to refine
their observations and polish their notes in Rows 3 and 4.
4. Have groups present their findings to the rest of the class.
5. Together, discuss the responses to Rows 5 and 6. When discussing Row
6, use guiding questions: What does a fast v. a slow tempo imply in this
particular context? When do the speakers speak loudly or quietly and
why? Is a higher or lower pitch – especially when unexpected (see the
ring tone ad) – associated with a particular social expectation for men or
for women? What social expectations regarding paralinguistic features
do these ads indicate?

Post-Viewing
Forming new groups of three to ﬁve, learners create a commercial for a product
of their choice; include the paralinguistic features analyzed in the main task.

Analysis
The analyses at this level might be relatively superficial, but the objective is
simply to raise learners’ awareness about and ability to analyze paralinguistic
features in natural/naturalistic discourse. By drawing their attention to
these features, learners can process future interactions more carefully and
identify ways in which they may wish to adopt paralinguistic features into
their own communicative practices. To facilitate this process, learners need
to be able to build hypotheses (Row 5 prompts this) and evaluate the
accuracy of their hypotheses based on language data (Row 6). While such
tasks are time-consuming at first, the process becomes faster with practice,
and since paralinguistic features contribute in significant ways to meaning-
making and the way learners are perceived by other speakers of the L2/Lx,
this is a worthwhile investment of time. This set of activities intentionally
focuses on only a few paralinguistic features (tempo, volume, pitch, and
intonation), because beginning-level learners cannot process longer
discourse segments that would allow for more nuanced analyses of
conversation management or the impact of language variation. Tasks
should encourage observation, not frustrate learners.

ACTIVITY SET 2

L2/Lx: English as a second/foreign language

Learner group: Advanced/C1–C2 learners
Source: Three to four different English-language television shows
(e.g., a news segment with expert analysis, a talk show)
Task duration: Last 20 minutes of a class period, followed by a full class
period a few days or a week later; including some activities
done as homework.

Learning Objectives
By the end of this activity, learners will be able to identify the following:
1. Several conversation management devices (e.g., hedges, fillers, laughter)
appropriate for the specific genre of each show.
2. Whether overlapping turn-taking is allowed or even encouraged, and in
what way participants (e.g., the host, guest, studio audience) participate
in the interaction.
3. How conversation management devices help create meaning in combi-
nation with the verbal message.
4. The consequences of flouting expectations, for example, by attending to
the reactions of the studio audience to the speakers’ utterances (e.g.,
gasps, laughter, disapproval).
Analytic Approach
Multimodal analysis, ethnography of communication, and interactional
sociolinguistics.

Steps in the Task

Pre-Viewing
Watch a brief (3–4 minute) segment of a television show with two or more
interlocutors, present the concepts of conversation management (e.g.,
hedges, ﬁllers, overlap, interruption, backchanneling), and analyze the
segment in depth pertaining to these paralinguistic features.

Viewing
Students view and analyze their shows alone or (ideally) in groups as
homework, using guided questions. Sample questions may include the
following:
1. What is the name of the show?
2. What do you know about that channel and the show (owner/host,
reporting bias, etc.)?
3. What is its genre or purpose?

4. Who are the participants?

5. What is the structure of the show (e.g., introductory monologue,
interview with a guest, reports from correspondents)?
6. What conversation management devices do different participants use,
including peripheral participants? Feel free to focus on one segment in
the show and analyze the language in more depth.
7. What social connotation might these devices signal about the
participants?
8. Are there examples where a participant seems to ﬂout social expecta-
tions? Which one(s)? How can you tell that their response was unex-
pected (i.e., what data supports your claim)?
9. Are there situations in which you cannot tell how the paralinguistic
features support a speaker’s message? What additional information
would help you interpret the participants’ reactions?
10. Can you reexamine what happened just before and immediately after
this puzzling incident? What can you deduce from the surrounding
interactional context? What other resources might help you under-
stand the interaction better (e.g., could you ask someone who has lived
in the L2/Lx-speaking context for a while or use social media to seek
information)?

Post-Viewing
1. Students report their findings to the rest of the class. If multiple students
watch the same show individually as homework, they should have the
opportunity to meet for 15–20 minutes in class to discuss their findings
and prepare a collective presentation.
2. Time permitting, and depending on learners’ interest, small groups
could perform a segment of a show to practice producing paralinguistic
features to complement their verbal messages.
Analysis
By analyzing a small section of one show together, learners’ attention can be
drawn to the local context. Who are the participants? What is the purpose of
this segment? Explore the emotions expressed by the participants. What
conversation management devices, such as hedges, fillers, backchanneling
devices, or other features can learners observe? How do the participants
cooperatively or competitively construct their conversation with the help of
these devices? These questions help raise learners’ awareness of
conversation-management devices, while simultaneously building their
analytic skills using authentic resources that reflect multiple layers of
cultural patterns (e.g., national, regional, local) and individual variation. If
learners get to re-create a segment of the show, the repeated practice can
foster fluency and improve learners’ use of paralinguistic features.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS AND ACTIVITIES

1. Keep track of paralinguistic conversation management devices you

encounter for a day in spoken language. Which ones do you hear and use
most often? What is their function? What are the contexts of use for these
devices?
2. Reflect on your use of overlapping speech. Do you dislike interruptions,
or do you view them as collaborative speech? If you have experienced a
different interactional pattern, what were your affective and cognitive
responses?
3. Are there accents that you find particularly (un)attractive? What
experiences or commonly held beliefs shape your evaluation of those
accents? How can you change any negative attitudes you might have
towards that accent?
4. In small groups, select a five-minute segment from your favorite movie
or television show and transcribe it, including prosodic features, linking,
stress, and volume (see Chiu, 2012). Reenact the scene as you play the
video without the sound. What has this exercise taught you about
paralinguistic features? How might you implement such a task in your
own teaching?
5. Examine samples of your own Internet-based communication (e.g.,
social media, emails, text messages) for expressions of affect. Compare
your practices with others in your class and discuss what factors might
influence individuals’ choices (e.g., their L1, L2/Lx, age, the medium).
How can you teach your students to become aware of and learn to use
affective signals in their own L2/Lx online communication?
6. Analyze a few social media posts for the way users express affect.
Compare your findings to those of your classmates who examined
interactions in a different linguistic or cultural context. Consider how
paralinguistic features might reflect power distance, individualism or
collectivism, gender roles, etc. Pay attention to intracultural variation
and heterogeneity. At what level of L2/Lx proficiency might you teach
such paralinguistic patterns? Why?

Intercultural Communication: Teaching Nonverbal

Communication

Chapter Overview
Our appearance, gestures, body language, and other modes of nonverbal
communication convey large amounts of information about who we are,
what we want to accomplish in an interaction, or our attitude towards
others (Pentland, 2008). In addition, nonverbal communication estab-
lishes and maintains relationships, status, honesty, or deception (Martin
& Nakayama, 2018); it is perceived quickly and mostly subconsciously,
drawing on culturally patterned expectations. Some nonverbal commu-
nication is consistent across cultures (e.g., the palm-up gesture for ‘give me’
and raised eyebrows in recognition of someone; Martin & Nakayama,
2018), but otherwise, nonverbal communication reflects great cultural
variation. For example, when and how we touch others, how we relate to
time, or what clothes we wear is interpreted and enacted differently among
social communities.
The expressive capacity of nonverbal communication sometimes enables
us to rely on it completely in the absence of a shared language. In the Tate
Modern Museum in London, an exhibit by the Turkish artist Erkan
Özgen’s – Wonderland 2016 1 – presents a short video in which
Muhammed, a child refugee from Syria, describes his horrific experiences
in his devastated home country. He is deaf and does not know Turkish, yet
Muhammed vividly portrays the horrors he had seen in war to the inter-
viewer and his multilingual audiences: bombs exploding, houses collap-
sing, prisoners being executed, and feeling sad. The viewer cannot but
agree with the artist who explained that “perhaps only Muhammed could
truly communicate this unseen and unheard brutality . . . The power of his
body language made any other language form insufficient and insignif-
icant.” Indeed, nonverbal communication is an important conveyor of

1
Artist and Society, Summer 2018; www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuUz3giIbSg

175

Signs: Icons, Indexes, and Symbols

The meaning we associate with signs is culture dependent; we are socialized
into connecting particular stimuli with particular meanings (Short, 2007).
Two terms from the Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure (1986) are
relevant for understanding signs: the signifier and the signified. The former
is the form of a sign, including sounds, words, images, or facial expressions.
The latter, the signified, is the concept or object that the signifier represents,
such as an actual cat, anger, thunder, or peace.
Charles S. Peirce (1982), a nineteenth-century philosopher, identified
three kinds of signs: icons, indexes, and symbols. Icons physically resemble
what they signify. The image of a castle on a map is an icon, and airplanes
use a recognizable image of a seatbelt to indicate when it is time to buckle
up (see Figure 8.1).
This icon, like many others, is shared across cultures. Others have
meaning only for smaller communities, as might be the case with the

Figure 8.1 Fasten your seatbelt sign

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:48:43, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.009
8 Intercultural Communication 177
photograph of a swim-team. Similarly, onomatopoetic words, like hiss for
the sound of a snake or tick-tock for a clock, vary across languages (e.g.,
English dogs say bow-wow, while Hungarian dogs go vau-vau). Icons must
closely resemble what they signify in order to be recognized, although their
core representation may vary across different cultures.
An index, the second type of sign, indicates an observable phenomenon,
something we can see, hear, sense, smell, or taste. A tornado siren indexes
the arrival of a damaging storm, a referee’s whistle indicates that a player
did not follow the rules of the game, while an accent can reveal a speaker’s
affiliation with a particular social group. Although some facial expressions
(e.g., a frown) and other indexes (e.g., storm clouds) are universal, many
are culture specific. We are socialized into interpreting and using them in
particular ways in our interactions. An example of this would be the bindi
(the red dot on the forehead) in Hindu culture2, which can be used to ward
off bad luck, similar to the blue and white evil eye talismans, called mati in
Greek and nazar boncuğu in Turkish (see Figure 8.2). Several lexical items
are also indexes: here, there, this, that, and personal pronouns, because they
reference specific observable places or individuals.
Finally, symbols do not resemble the signified object, concept, or person.
Instead, the connection between the signifier and the signified is culturally
determined. Some supranational symbols represent the Olympic Games or
the International Red Cross and Red Crescent organizations, whose aim is
to help provide relief during large-scale emergencies. Similarly, fans of the
Harry Potter books have learned that the four animals on the Hogwarts
coat of arms represent courage, intelligence, power, and loyalty. Infamous
symbols include the swastika that Nazis appropriated from Hinduism3
(where it signals good fortune and prosperity) and the white pointed hat

Figure 8.2 Mati or nazar boncuğu talisman

2
https://nileswestnews.org/31336/west-word/bindis-are-not-a-fashion-trend/
3
www.britannica.com/story/how-the-symbolism-of-the-swastika-was-ruined

Figure 8.3 Peace symbol

used by the Ku Klux Klan,4 a violently racist organization in the United

States. Positive symbols include the peace symbol (see Figure 8.3).
Most words are symbols as well. Suitcase is a label for a container
with a handle used for carrying clothing while traveling, but it is
a valise in French, ferðatösku in Icelandic, and atopau in Samoan. The
signifier, therefore, neither sounds nor looks like the signified; it is
merely an arbitrary label assigned to an object to make communication
possible.
Symbols frequently have historical or emotional meaning. The asso-
ciations may be somber, like a flag draped over a coffin, or commercial,
such as the blue-gold buildings of IKEA stores across the globe. Symbols
are typically associated with other words, concepts, and expressions,
which contribute to and help refine the meaning of the symbol. These
culturally learned meanings and associations are often activated in uni-
son. For example, many Americans would associate Woodstock, peace-
nik, a white dove, two fingers held up in a V, tie-dyed clothing, or the
music of the counter-culture of the 1960s with the peace symbol. Think
of a symbol in your own cultural framework and consider what words
and expressions you associate with it: What do these words reveal about
the symbol?
Similar to signs, people’s appearance communicates meaning, activating
positive or negative associations that are shaped by socialization and
personal experience.

Personal Presentation
How we present ourselves to others – our appearance and adornments,
such as jewelry, vehicles, tattoos, body piercings, clothing – conveys

4
www.history.com/topics/ku-klux-klan

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:48:43, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.009
8 Intercultural Communication 179
messages to our interlocutors, whether intentionally or unintentionally.
We may have short hair to present an image of being hip, sporty, or young.
We may wear a suit and tie to appear more professional at a business
meeting, or wear nurse’s scrubs with prints of fun animals to help kids relax
at the hospital. These are intentional messages. Other messages we convey
unintentionally. For example, we might wear a color that has special
meaning for a culture (e.g., red for luck in China) or one that a social
group finds threatening (e.g., a gang identifier in Los Angeles5). Yet other
messages that we convey are beyond our control, such as skin color or
height. The value placed on skin color is socially learned and can have life-
altering implications, such as longer and harsher prison sentences, as has
been found in Brazil and the United States6 (Wade & Bielitz, 2005).
Notably, the intended meaning of nonverbal communication comprises
only part of the message that is received by our interlocutors, whose
socialization, personal experiences, and preferences influence the meaning
they glean from nonverbal cues. One person might find a tattooed, long-
haired young man scary, while another individual happily greets a kindred
spirit in him. Similarly, some fans of the Cleveland Indians might consider
t-shirts with their team logo to reflect team spirit, whereas other fans and
many members of Native American tribes7 find the image offensive and
dismissive of the long history of the U.S. government’s oppression of
indigenous peoples. Such cultural appropriation – the adoption of imagery,
clothing, and behaviors that is part of the fabric of a particular social group
by powerful, dominant cultures – is often used to ridicule or repress
members of that social group (Riley & Carpenter, 2016; Matthes, 2016).
Whether clothing with Native American symbolism elicits support or
condemnation, and how that support or condemnation is expressed, is
codetermined by immediate and secondary, ratified and unratified parti-
cipants in the communicative event: how the fans, the team, its manage-
ment, affected Native American tribes, viewers, courts, and the
government interpret the situation.
As with other aspects of communication, situational factors are neces-
sary to consider when interpreting nonverbal communication. Showing up
in sweatpants and a t-shirt for a job interview at a multicultural company in
Taiwan will unlikely net the candidate a job, but this attire is perfectly
acceptable for a summer camp counselor. Similarly, situational factors

5
www.lapdonline.org/get_informed/content_basic_view/23468
6
https://courses2.cit.cornell.edu/sociallaw/student_projects/Deﬁningbias.html
7
www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2018/02/looking-beyond-chief-wahoo/552386/

Kinesics (Body Language)

The term kinesics (from the Greek kinein ‘to move’) was coined by the
anthropologist Ray Birdwhistell in the 1950s to describe how we use our
bodies to express meaning through eye-contact (oculesics), facial expres-
sions, hand and arm gestures, other body movements, and posture. Ekman
(2004) and Jones (2017) identify ﬁve types of kinesic behaviors, which are
illustrated in Table 8.1 below.
As we may expect, most kinesic communication is locally situated,
informed by broader and narrower cultural forces (e.g., from supranational
to idiosyncratic factors) that determine whether we prefer to hug or shake
hands, kiss or bow, or how long we can look someone in the eye.

Table 8.1 Types of kinesic behaviors

Kinesic
behaviors Deﬁnition Example

Emblems Body movement or gesture that Crooking a ﬁnger repeatedly (palm

represents a word or up) or curling all five fingers palm
expression directly down to indicate ‘come here’
Illustrators Body movement that Pointing to a person or a building
accompanies or reinforces while describing it (deitic) or
verbal messages depicting walking up some stairs
(kinetograph)
Affect Body movements depicting Indicating tear drops falling from
displays emotions or affective states one’s eyes or telling someone to
smile by pointing to the corners of
the mouth and pushing them
upwards
Regulators Body movements controlling Holding up a hand to request that
communication (flow, pace, an interlocutor not interrupt
pauses, turn-taking)
Manipulators Body movements that help Leaning forward to express interest
or adaptors release physical or emotional and leaning back to indicate
tension distancing, whether out of
boredom or defensiveness (these
might be voluntary or
involuntary movements)

Facial Expressions
Like eye-contact, facial expressions contribute important information to our
interlocutors. Several facial expressions had been long held to be universal
across humans: anger, disgust, fear, happiness, and sadness (Andersen, 1999).
Recent psychophysical research using image analyses, however, suggests that
rather than being biologically hard-wired and innate, recognizing even basic
emotions is culturally informed. Jack, Caldara, and Schyns (2012), whose
study sorted participants into members of Western Caucasian and East Asian
cultures, found that cultural conditioning generated distinct internal repre-
sentations of facial expressions between the two groups: Western Caucasian
participants seemed to rely on the eyebrows and mouth in the images to
determine what emotion they conveyed, while East Asian participants seemed
to focus on the eyes and gaze direction depicted in the images (see Chapter 7
regarding the use of emojis in different cultural contexts as well). Other
research (Sauter, 2006; Sauter, Eisner, Ekman, & Scott, 2010, cited in

8
“The eye is the true outrider and faithful guide of the soul; it is the soul’s well-polished mirror, by
means of which it comprehends all truths, attains all qualities, and understands all sensible
phenomena.” Translation based on Arthur John Arberry’s translation of “The Ring of the
Dove” by Ibn Hazm, 994–1064. Accessed at https://blogs.transparent.com/arabic/the-arabic-art-
of-hinting-with-the-eyes/

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:48:43, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.009
182 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
Schuller & Batliner, 2014; Susskind, Lee, Cusi, Feiman, Grabski, &
Anderson, 2008) found similar perceptions of negative facial expressions
(fear, anger) across two distinct cultural groups, but divergent perceptions
for positive emotions, suggesting that the latter are communicated in culture-
specific ways.
While the universality of negative emotions suggests an evolutionary
necessity for recognizing potential threats in order to stay alive, what causes
people to experience these emotions, and how they express them with facial
expressions, is determined by cultural and social expectations. We may retain
the full-throated belly-laugh of childhood if our cultural expectations allow, or
we learn to soften it and express joy in more ‘decorous’ ways. We may also
laugh differently at a wedding than when watching a child’s antics or when we
feel compelled to laugh at our supervisor’s joke. Not just the how, but the
where and when we can laugh is culturally determined: Is laughter appropriate
in church? At a funeral? During a job interview? With an elder of our
community?
Some facial expressions are involuntary – including some laughter, pain,
or surprise – but most of them are under our control. They can help
support our verbal communication, aligning two modes of expression to
convey meaning to our interlocutors. When we enter a new cultural
context, however, we have to learn new ways of expressing our thoughts,
often matching expectations different from our socialization. In order to
learn how facial expressions are used (alongside verbal messages) in another
culture, authentic documentaries or feature films, comedy shows, or news
reports can offer valuable data. What emotions do speakers convey when
they are smiling: openness and confidence or sarcasm? Do their raised
eyebrows signal excitement, curiosity, incredulity, or smugness?
Importantly, facial expressions should be interpreted as a component of
a larger communicative palette, which includes verbal, paralinguistic, and
other nonverbal channels of meaning-making.

Gestures
Gestures vary greatly across cultures, in terms of their meaning, how much
they are used, and how much space they are used in. They help individuals
process their thoughts as they speak, connect concrete ideas with their
inner thoughts, lessen the listeners’ cognitive load by reducing the amount
of time required to express an idea (gestures can act as short-cuts to larger
concepts), and mitigate potential social risk by expressing afﬁliation or
hesitation (Park, Carter, Wiebe, Reid-Grifﬁn, & Butler, 2006).

personal space 4 feet

intimate space 1.5 feet

self

Figure 8.4 Proxemic zones in the United States (based on Hall, 1968 and Jones,
2017)

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:48:43, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.009
186 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
people live and interact with greater physical proximity than in rural areas.
When our cultural patterns and personal experiences are a mismatch with
the expectations of our interlocutors and the local setting, we feel out of our
‘comfort zone,’ an apt metaphor for mismatches that can lead to confusion
regarding our intentions or actions.
After having spent thirty years in the United States with only brief visits
to Hungary, I got to spend six months in my home country on sabbatical
a year ago. Standing in the line at the bakery, I – reflexively, based on my
habit in the United States – stood a comfortable 3–4 feet away from the
person in front of me, who was ordering. I felt that the person behind me
was really crowding into my personal space, and in fact, she ended up going
ahead of me, thinking that I was waiting around for someone else and not
actually standing in line. The salesperson smiled when I finally got my turn
and told me that next time I should stand ‘properly’ close to the window.
During the six months, I still often found myself feeling uncomfortable
with how little space people seemed to need, but I became more aware of
the source of my discomfort, recognizing that less space was culturally
more appropriate in that tightly spaced urban area.
Many different reactions may be appropriate when we encounter spatial
miscalculations (whether we are the perpetrators or others). Depending on
the interactional context, we may ignore a transgression, apologize, express
discomfort with a glare or a sharp excuse me, or react with anger or humor.
Although there are occasions when territory is deadly serious (e.g., gang
violence), usually, a smile, an apology, or a humorous comment can be
effective tools for diffusing an embarrassing but unintentional mishap,
which is most often the case in intercultural encounters.
In addition to personal space, the notion of private and public space is
also relevant. From our primary space – the home, imbued with cultural
references pertaining to socioeconomic status, cultural heritage, etc. – to
the neighborhood and region (e.g., city or state), the country and the
physical environment all shape social and power structures, and the iden-
tities of people who live there. Do we keep the doors closed in the house or
is the space more open? Is there a well-funded school in the neighborhood?
Is it safe to live there? Is there public transportation? Hiking? Watersports?
These so-called cultural spaces (Martin & Nakayama, 2018) influence
communal practices, including how people do their shopping (e.g., at
the supermarket, the local market, small shops), how they interact with
each other (e.g., in cafés or the public square), and how much contact they
may have with other cultural groups.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:48:43, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.009
8 Intercultural Communication 187
Chronemics
Chronemics refers to temporal aspects of nonverbal communication, and,
according to Andersen (1999), include:
1. biological time: physiological pattern of life, such as the circadian
rhythm; disruptions of this rhythm affect our ability to function and
cope with novel situations;
2. cultural time: notions of time as viewed by cultural groups
polychronic time: preference for a flexible schedule; not knowing
when something will happen or arriving late to events is
acceptable or even preferred;
monochronic time: preference for a set schedule, punctuality, and
completing one task at a time; activities and time are broken up
into smaller units; participants (e.g., guests, colleagues) are
expected to arrive on time for events or work;
3. personal time: individual perceptions of time (i.e., fast or slow);
orientation towards the past or present (past-oriented individuals
spend a great deal of time on visiting old friends, while future-
oriented individuals spend their time planning out their next actions
and goals). Polychronic cultures tend to be past-oriented, whereas
monochronic cultures are more likely to be future-oriented
(Neuliep, 2018); and
4. physical time: the pattern of days (e.g., availability of sunlight), years
and seasons, which can affect emotional states (e.g., prompting happi-
ness or sadness).
Two contexts illustrate these concepts. First, in many African cultures,
time is viewed as cyclical and polychronic (Nwosu, 2009). Historical
orientation is very important, but present-time schedules are flexible,
leaving enough flexibility to allow for lengthy greeting rituals.
Relationships are prioritized over schedules, “because time is not
a quantifiable commodity” (Nwosu, 2009, p. 171). In contrast, in mono-
chronic cultures, like Germany or the United States, punctuality is of the
essence in most social situations. Whereas arriving a few minutes late to
a party is acceptable, we must arrive on time to class and we ‘must hurry!’ if
a flash sale ends in just an hour. However, social roles impact how people
view time: a doctor may come late to an appointment in the United States
and ‘get away’ with a quick apology (or none at all), whereas the patient is
expected to be on time. Similarly, the Chief Executive Officer of

Nonverbal Communication as an Integrated System

Nonverbal communication is highly integrated; its components work in
congress to create meaning: appearance and movement, gestures and facial
expressions, facial expressions and touching, or any combination of these
aspects of nonverbal communication.
The analysis of Tuareg greetings by Youssouf et al. (2007) in Chapter 6
effectively illustrates the concept of integration. Complementing the verbal
exchanges between travelers, participants engage in a lengthy process of
intricate interpretation of appearance, bodily movements, facial expres-
sions, and other nonverbal communicative clues. Since reading other
travelers correctly is crucial for one’s safety and well-being (due to the
need to find water or avoid feuding parties), “the identification of the
other – as early as possible – is critically important” (Youssouf et al.,
2007, p. 52).
The process begins when the potential participants are still far from
each other, because the desert allows for visibility miles away; the
travelers can see where each participant is coming from and in which
direction he is headed. Similarly, the camels the travelers ride may
provide further evidence of origin, since various tribes specialize in
distinct breeds, which the Tuareg can distinguish like some people can
identify different types of cars. The saddles (e.g., color, shape, cost), the
way the rider sits in the saddle, and how he holds the reigns offer further
information; for example, older riders are likely to sit more relaxed in the
saddle, while young riders may be more upright and uptight (the former
might be more knowledgeable, the latter more unpredictable). The speed
at which the rider travels signals whether he has a specific destination in
mind or if he is moving at leisure: the former is less likely to provide
directions, whereas the latter is a good source of information. Once the
interactants are closer to each other, their veil (tagalmust) conveys
information regarding their wealth. An ashshash, a plain white cotton
veil, indicates lower economic status, while an elegantly dyed indigo
alashsho signals more wealth (Youssouf et al., 2007). Upon meeting, the
participants greet each other, either with tense arms, in case a potential
enemy needs to be pulled from the saddle, or lax to indicate peace. The

Teaching Nonverbal Communication with an Intercultural

Communication Orientation
In order to discuss pedagogical activities to teach nonverbal commu-
nication, two points need to be reiterated. First, understanding how
another culture employs nonverbal communication does not mean
that we must adopt those practices. We need to know the meaning
of nonverbal communication in order to be able to interpret our
interlocutors’ messages, and we need to understand the consequences
of accepting and ﬂouting expectations, but ultimately, except for
involuntary movements, we can choose how we communicate non-
verbally. Second, given the essential role it plays in conveying mean-
ing, the process of learning to decode and encode nonverbal
communication should begin early in the L2/Lx curriculum. Yet,
apart from surface-level mentions of greetings (e.g., kissing on the
cheek or a handshake), there is often little discussion of the meaning
of signs, personal presentation, chronemics, or proxemics in L2/Lx
textbooks. Nor is nonverbal communication addressed in L2/Lx tea-
cher-training textbooks currently available, apart from Jackson (2014),
whose book focuses on intercultural communication in applied lin-
guistics rather than L2/Lx pedagogy.

Summary
This section lays out explicitly the existing and potential further con-
nections between nonverbal communication and intercultural commu-
nication, in terms of the guidelines presented in Chapter 2 (Byram, 1997;
Hua, 2014; Kramsch, 2009; Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013) and the concepts
discussed in Chapter 1 (e.g., Hall, 1976; Hofstede, et al., 2010;
Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck, 1961). Several suggestions emerge out of
these discussions to support an intercultural communication-oriented
pedagogy.

Knowledge & skills

1. Help learners become aware of the importance of nonverbal communication, which is
processed mostly subconsciously.
2. Teach nonverbal communication as an integrated system, conveyed through multiple
channels (e.g., eyes, kinesics, proxemics).
3. Explore possible consequences of flouting nonverbal communication in various
contexts (e.g., making a mistake among friends may result in teasing, whereas the same
mistake may be quite consequential in other situations).
4. Promote positive attitudes and curiosity towards and cultural knowledge about
nonverbal communication, identifying similarities and differences between learners’
current cultural practices and those of new cultural groups.
5. Analyze how nonverbal communication reflects power distance, individualism or
collectivism, gender equality, preferences and attitudes about time, personal
relationships, etc. Pay special attention to intracultural variation, reiterating that
cultures are not monolithic in their use of nonverbal communication.
6. Discuss explicitly that knowledge of appropriate nonverbal communication does not
mean that learners must adhere to expected ‘norms.’ It is important to consider
possible consequences to flouting expectations, so that learners can make informed
choices whether or not to adapt nonverbal practices. Ideally, they can reflect in advance
on what they are comfortable with and what they may disprefer (e.g., being kissed on
the lips or having little personal space), and how they might convey their preferences to
members of the other culture.
7. Recognize that the meaning of nonverbal communication is negotiated by
participants: we may wish to convey certain messages by our appearance or behavior,
but our interlocutors apply their own interpretive framework to decode them.
8. Help learners develop the skills to collect, observe, and analyze authentic sources for
understanding socially situated nonverbal communication.
Nonverbal repertoire
1. Introduce icons, indexes, and symbols used in the other culture, including their
significance and contexts of use.
2. Teach the meaning of gestures, head movements, facial expressions, haptics, and other
body language: how to use them, when, and with whom.
3. Ensure that learners understand how to use eye contact with various interlocutors, and
discuss the consequences of flouting expectations.
4. Explore a culture’s relationship and orientation to time and space (including what
actions are performed in private and public spaces).
5. Teach various components of nonverbal communication as an integrated system,
including verbal communication (e.g., how to use touching, head movement,
paralinguistic features, and verbal cues to soften a refusal).
6. Examine components of appearance and seek to understand the social meaning they
convey both in the present moment and historically (hairstyle, jewelry, clothing,
tattoos, etc.).
Curricular considerations
1. Include nonverbal communication explicitly in the L2/Lx curriculum from the
beginning – help students make comparisons of similarities and differences between
cultural expectations and practices in their own and the other culture(s).

2. Learn to recognize variation in nonverbal communication at the institutional, smaller

community of practice, and personal/idiosyncratic levels, and beyond that during the
moment-by-moment emergence in dynamic interactions.
3. Offer diverse activities that foster awareness raising, skills training, explicit instruction,
and extensive practice focusing on nonverbal communication.
4. Include analyses of multiple ways of expressing the same sentiment nonverbally (e.g.,
congratulating someone with a thumbs-up, a handshake, or a hug) as well as the
divergent meanings of the same nonverbal communicative acts in different situations
(e.g., a comforting touch versus a condescending one).
5. Utilize longer authentic materials – particularly movies, documentaries, or TV
shows – that demonstrate nonverbal communication as an integrated system, shaped
by the setting and emerging as a negotiated practice among participants as social
actors.

Sample Teaching Activities

ACTIVITY SET 1

L2/Lx: German as a second/foreign language

Learner group: Novice–high-intermediate–low/A2 learners
Source: Episodes of the television serial Lindenstraße (watch
one or two episodes; may be done partially outside of
class as homework)
Task duration: Two or three 50-minute class periods, including pre-
and post-viewing activities

Learning Objectives
By the end of this activity, learners will develop an awareness of the
following:
1. Different personal presentations and some social connotations associated
with them (e.g., hairstyle, clothing, jewelry).
2. Several kinesic preferences and their meaning in context (e.g., facial
expressions, eye contact, gestures, body movement).
3. Preferences for haptics (e.g., touching, kissing), proxemics (e.g., perso-
nal and public spaces), and time (e.g., punctuality, orientation) among
different relationship types.
Depending on pedagogical objectives, learner interest or practical
considerations (e.g., available time), instructors may wish to focus on only
one or a few of these objectives.

Analytic approach
Ethnography of communication and multimodal analysis.

Steps in the Task

Pre-Viewing
Watch the ﬁrst ten minutes of an episode and identify the genre of the TV
series (with English subtitles, if available), the characters and the
relationships between them, and the gist of each conversation.

Viewing
1. Watch the next 10-minute segment, providing students with one or two
content questions to ensure comprehension (multiple-choice or true-
false for speed) and a few questions that ask learners to focus on ONE
aspect of nonverbal communication in the show (e.g., proxemics, hap-
tics, or self-presentation).
2. Discuss the answers to the comprehension questions, as well as learners’
ﬁndings regarding nonverbal communication.
3. Watch the next 10-minute segment of the episode, including content
questions to support comprehension, as well as a few questions pertaining to:
• the same nonverbal communication aspect, if that is the focal point
of the day,
• a different nonverbal communication aspect for the entire class, or
• different aspects of nonverbal communication for small groups of
learners.
Sample questions might include:
• What were different characters wearing to various events in the
show? What does their appearance suggest about how they wish to
present themselves to others?
• What did the gesture by Character X mean? How was it used to
support the character’s verbal message? What were the other char-
acters’ responses to the gesture?
• How did different characters greet each other nonverbally? (e.g.,
kinesics, haptics)? What information did their greeting seem to
communicate about their relationships towards each other (or
towards other participants)?
4. Discuss the answers to the comprehension questions, as well as the
groups’ ﬁndings regarding nonverbal communication.
• Depending on learners’ access to the L2/Lx-speaking community, they
could request further information by vetting their hypotheses with
people who have more experience living in that culture/those cultures.
• If students perceived the character’s appearance differently, this
could help them realize that aspects of nonverbal communication
can be decoded in divergent ways.

Post-Viewing
Using pictures from magazines, drawings or an online program,10 learner
groups create a storyboard for a scene for a future episode of the TV series,
including verbal and nonverbal communication that characters would use;
groups present their stories.

Analysis
In this activity set, the emphasis is on the process of observation – identifying
nonverbal communication and recognizing other participants’ responses to
it – and the locally contextualized interpretation of nonverbal communication.
Thus, learners should not draw generalized conclusions about individuals’
behavior, but focus on how nonverbal communication is enacted in speciﬁc
interactions, until sufﬁcient data has been compiled to be able to draw
tentative conclusions about patterns of behavior and the social meaning they
intend to convey. At the same time, learners’ reactions are acknowledged,
since they are a natural component of the interpersonal nature of encoding
and decoding nonverbal communication (e.g., strong reactions to nonverbal
behavior suggesting or depicting violence). During the analytic process,
learners’ reactions and the reasons for those reactions should be part of the
conversation, especially how they impact the interpretation of others’
nonverbal messages. As an important pedagogical point, learners do not need
to learn all the technical terms (e.g., emblems, illustrators, affect displays,
regulators, or adaptors). Instead, questions and activity prompts should help
them develop the procedural knowledge for observing and interpreting
nonverbal communication.

ACTIVITY SET 2

L2/Lx: Adaptable to any L2/Lx

Learner group: Advanced/C1–C2 learners
Source: Magazines, blogs, news media, social media, television
shows, feature ﬁlms, interviews with members and
participants of the L2/Lx culture(s)
Task duration: Regular class meetings over the course of a 6–15-week
term.

10
www.storyboardthat.com/storyboard-creator

Learning Objectives
By the end of the term, learners will have achieved the following:
1. Have developed in-depth knowledge of nonverbal communication used
in several everyday routines and special rituals.
2. Be able to synthesize complementary, contradictory, or confirmatory
information about nonverbal behaviors in specific contexts and on
a specific topic.
3. Be able to conduct systematic observations, supported by evidence,
regarding nonverbal behaviors in specific situations in the L2/Lx culture.
Analytic Approach
Ethnography of communication and multimodal analysis.

Steps in the Task

Pre-Task
1. Brainstorm in class about a communicative event in the L2/Lx context
(e.g., a family or community dinner, holiday, celebration of life or
soccer/football practice).
2. As a class, create a mind-map about one of these communicative events,
by addressing some of the following questions or similar ones:
• What is the purpose of the event? How does it contribute to the sense
of community by its participants?
• Who are the interlocutors – the primary and peripheral participants –
in the event?
• How is the event structured?
• What verbal and nonverbal communicative components comprise
the event (e.g., signs, clothing or adornments, gestures and body
movement, preferences for touching, proxemics, and time)?
• Are there similar events in the learners’ own cultural communities? If
yes, what are some differences and similarities between how this event
is realized in each culture (viewing culture either as a nation or
a smaller community)?
3. In small groups, learners brainstorm a detailed mind-map for other
possible communicative events, then share their ﬁndings with the rest of
the class.

Task
Over the course of the semester, learners – either individually or in small
groups – create a multimodal/multimedia montage of a communicative
event they are interested in. Learners present their reports during 15-minute
presentations in class, engaging their peers in reﬂective discussions about the
event. The presentations can be done orally, on PowerPoint, in a wiki or
blog, via social media or other collaborative platforms (e.g., Facebook or

Google Classroom). Presentations could include the following information,

depending on the course learning objectives:

• What is the event and what is its signiﬁcance for the community in which
it takes place?
• Who are the participants in the event?
• What signs (symbols, icons, indexes) are a part of this event, if any
(including music)? What is the meaning and origin of these signs? Has
the meaning of these signs changed over time? What are the affective
connotations of these signs, and do these vary for different cultural
groups?
• How do people present themselves and with what purpose?
• What kinesic features are particular to this event (facial expressions, eye-
contact, gestures, body movement)?
• How do participants touch each other as part of this event?
• How do participants view space in this event (personal space, public
versus private space)?
• When does this event occur? Why then? What is its orientation towards
time (past or future)? How long does it last? How frequently?
This task can be done via telecollaboration as well, with members of both
cultural groups sharing their knowledge and expertise. The dialog between
each group’s emic and etic understanding of nonverbal communication can
lend itself well to awareness raising and in-depth analysis.

Post-Task
As a possible post-task, learners could write a brief reﬂective paper
describing what they learned from this research project, what they had not
expected but found. The objective should be trying to understand how
multiple channels of nonverbal communication contribute to meaning-
making in this communicative event.

Analysis
As throughout the book, the emphasis is on the local situatedness of
communication; thus, learners should focus on one event, and perhaps one
social group, to help prevent stereotyping or overgeneralizations. Imagine,
for example, how a family with small children might celebrate Halloween
(our example from Chapter 4) as opposed to a group of college students or
colleagues at their workplace. Each will have unique ways of celebrating the
holiday as well as sharing some nonverbal features.
It is important to remember that the communicative events that students
research and report on should not be only big cultural events (e.g., holidays,
religious or government celebrations), but also include everyday culture,

such as a potluck dinner, going to the dentist, or getting one’s driver’s

license. As before, the main objective is to learn to analyze events,
developing the skills to understand them in depth, within the culturally
meaningful contexts in which the events take place.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS AND ACTIVITIES

1. What are some significant icons, indexes, and symbols that you
encounter regularly in your various cultural affiliations? In what contexts
are they used, and what is their meaning for those who use them (they
might have divergent connotations for members of different cultural
groups)?
2. What are some hand gestures that are common in your own cultural
experience? What do they signify, who can use them and in which
situations? Do they have the same meaning in cultures in which your L2/
Lx is spoken?
3. What are the cultural practices regarding time in the communities where
your L1 and L2/Lx are spoken (e.g., orientation, punctuality, meta-
phors)?
4. Observe how people use eye-contact in everyday communication in
your current cultural context. Who makes eye-contact (first)? Are there
power-distance rules for eye-contact or gender-role expectations? How
does eye-contact vary across different social situations (e.g., in classroom
interaction, with a sales associate at the store)? If possible (while staying
safe), flout expectations and record what you observe. What was your
affective response to the experience? How did people react?
5. Observe proxemics and haptics in your own cultural practices. What are
comfortable ways of touching friends and colleagues? What is not
allowed? Are there power-distance rules or gender-based differences in
permissible touching? How close can people stand to each other? How
does the permitted distance vary according to social situation?
6. Analyze a speech event in terms of the verbal and nonverbal commu-
nication participants enact. How do multiple modes of communication
co-create meaning?

Intercultural Communication: Teaching Cultural

Knowledge

Chapter Overview
Cultural knowledge is a fundamental part of participating in intercultural
communication. Our knowledge of the world – including history, current
issues, belief systems, values, and daily practices – helps us navigate both
the surface-level meaning of language and its cultural significance. Cultural
knowledge allows us to participate in social/cultural practices (e.g., know-
ing how to participate in the educational system or attending prayers).
Conversely, without adequate or appropriate cultural knowledge, the
message of our interlocutors remains incomplete, even if we comprehend
the lexicon or grammar accurately, as the following example between
a graduate student from the United States studying in London, England
and a potential landlord illustrates:
flat owner: Hello, Mick.
student: Hi, my name is Jack. I’m calling about the room you’re renting out.
Is it still available?
mick: Oh, yeah. Like it said in the advert, it’s ehm £240 a week, furnished.
We share the bathroom and the kitchen, and there is a garden in the
back that we share with the downstairs flat.
student: That sounds great. Could I come and take a look at it?
mick: Yes, can you come tomorrow at half three?
student: O.K. [pause] Half three. I’ll be there.
mick: Ehm, do you know how to find it?
student: Yeah, it’s just off of the Camden Town tube station, right?
mick: Yes, just up Kentish Town Road a ways, then you’ll see the Abbey
Tavern Pub on the right, turn right there . . . [gives directions]
Since Jack is a native speaker of English, he recognized all the words uttered
by his interlocutor, and he could draw on his background knowledge to
understand most of Mick’s responses. Jack was able to figure out from the
written advertisement that flat meant apartment. He also knew that in
London he was going to have to pay in pounds, and he was aware after
198

What We Need to Know

Communication requires that the lexical, grammatical and pragmatic
choices people make, as well as the meaning of their paralinguistic features
and nonverbal communication, be interpreted based on the cultural con-
text in which the interaction takes place. It is cultural knowledge that
makes socially meaningful communication possible. How much and what
kinds of knowledge we need to have about a culture, however, depends on
a number of factors, such as the purposes of the interaction, whether we
interact as outsiders or wish to become members of a community, which
social groups we want to interact with or participate in, how long we are in
contact with members of that culture, just to name a few variables. This
section examines models of cultural knowledge and explores the connec-
tion between its components and learners’ communicative objectives.

Models of Cultural Knowledge

At the early stages of exploring the role of culture in L2 pedagogy, Brooks
(1968) proposed a model comprised of biological growth, personal

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:28, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.010
200 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
refinement, literature and the fine arts, patterns of life, and the totality of
life. He suggested emphasizing patterns of life in particular, in order to help
learners manage “life situations of every kind and the rules and models for
attitude and conduct in them” (p. 210). Similarly, Lafayette’s (1988) model
included both everyday and special aspects of culture:
1. facts about high culture (e.g., major geographical monuments,
historical events, institutions);
2. knowledge about popular, everyday culture;
3. values and affect (i.e., developing respect towards other peoples and
societies);
4. respect for various ethnic groups and people in other cultures as well as
learners’ own culture(s); and
5. critical knowledge about interpreting culture (i.e., being able to eval-
uate the validity of claims about cultures).
To capture this duality, cultural knowledge has been described as ‘small
c’ and ‘big C’ culture (Brooks, 1971; Seelye, 1993). Small-c culture subsumes
those components of life with which we deal every day, the mundane and
quotidian: when we begin and stop working, how we spend our weekends,
when we eat and with whom, or how to get a cellphone. Big-C culture, in
contrast, refers to the more idealized sense of a community, “the best of
everything in human life” (Brooks, 1971, p. 20): famous people and events
in history, great works of music, literature, and the arts, and national- or
supranational-level celebrations. Since culture “embraces all aspects of
human life” (Seelye, 1993, p. 22), it is impossible to list everything pertinent
in these pages, therefore Table 9.1 presents only a sampling of cultural
information we need to learn and understand to function in society.
Additionally, Seelye (1993) recommended several metacognitive goals to
be included in L2/Lx pedagogy, including that students should:
1. develop an interest in other cultures, and empathy for members of
those cultures;
2. recognize how social variables (e.g., age, sex, class, religion) and role
expectations impact our language use and behavior;
3. understand that culturally conditioned images and expectations shape
how we think, act, and react to the world;
4. recognize that our behavior is shaped both by both situation-specific
and broader societal forces;
5. realize that people make socially conditioned choices regarding their
basic physical and psychological needs;

Small-c culture Big-C culture

1. Daily routines 1. Images, music, behaviors that might be

associated with important events – knowing
why and how these symbols came to be
associated with solemn occasions
2. Different types of school, workplaces 2. Important/famous historical figures and
events
3. Modes of transportation 3. Important/famous artistic figures and
products (e.g., authors-books;
composers-music; painters-paintings)
4. Typical meals: when, what, and with 4. Important/meaningful locations, both
whom they are they eaten natural and artificial, and their
significance for the community
5. Where to get groceries, how often (e.g., 5. Main themes of a culture, such as ideals
Trader Joe’s in Minneapolis, the market (e.g., democracy, freedom, rationality,
in Bruges or ‘going to the Alfa’ in Cairo) individualism, community)
6. Information about types of jobs and 6. Institutions (political, educational, law
the social status that might be enforcement, etc.)
associated with them
7. Social roles: teacher–student; doctor–
patient, etc. (e.g., social and power
distance, gender roles)
8. Preferences for individual versus
community orientation
9. How we earn, collect, and spend money
(e.g., Do we pay by card, check or cash?
Do we scan our card, insert it, or touch it
to a device?)
10. IDs required – for daily use, traveling
11. Where people live, how, with whom
(e.g., multiple generations living
together)
12. Notions of etiquette in various domains
of life (e.g., giving up one’s seat to the
elderly)
13. Popular culture
14. Relationships to time, nature

6. develop the ability to evaluate generalizations about another culture by

examining evidence from diverse sources.
Building on this early work regarding teaching culturally useful lan-
guage and communication skills, educators in the United States

Geocultural factors: language, landscape, climate, cultural identity, people, religion

Socioeconomic factors: political climate, national history, economic and technological
development

These aspects overlap in some ways with Byram and Masuhara’s (2013)
conceptualization of knowledge as including “knowledge of self (and own

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:28, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.010
9 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Cultural Knowledge 203
society/social group) and of the other (and their society/social group)”
(p. 148):
• historical and contemporary relationships between one’s own and one’s
interlocutor’s countries;
• the means of achieving contact with interlocutors from another country
(at a distance or in proximity), of travel to and from, and the institu-
tions which facilitate contact or help resolve problems;
• the types of cause and process of misunderstanding between interlocu-
tors of different cultural origins;
• the national memory of one’s own country and how its events are
related to and seen from the perspective of one’s interlocutor’s country;
• the national memory of one’s interlocutor’s country and the perspective
on it from one’s own;
• the national definitions of geographical space in one’s own country and
how these are perceived from the perspective of other countries;
• the national definitions of geographical space in one’s interlocutor ‘s
country and the perspective on them from one’s own;
• the processes and institutions of socialization in one’s own and one’s
interlocutor’s country;
• social distinctions and their principal markers in one’s own country and
one’s interlocutor’s;
• institutions, and perceptions of them, which impinge on daily life
within one’s own and one’s interlocutor’s country and which conduct
and influence relationships between them;
• the processes of social interaction in one’s interlocutor’s country.
(p. 148)
With reframing Byram and Masuhara’s culture as a layered construct, as
this book has advocated, this list can serve as a roadmap for the body of
knowledge L2/Lx learners and users need to gain about new cultural
contexts.
A synthesis of these models offers an overview of cultural knowledge that
we build over time and which includes, but is not limited to, the following:
• myths: creation and history;
• stories: fairy tales, historical narratives;
• beliefs: religious, historical, folk stories;
• history: people, events (including reasons for events happening and
their outcome);

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:28, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.010
204 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
• politics: current, past, development, and progression, structure of
various layers of culture (nation vis-à-vis smaller communities and the
individual), governmental organization;
• geography: natural and social (e.g., natural resources and their impact
on society);
• art: visual arts (painting, sculpture, multimedia), music (national
songs, folksongs), literature, artists old and new;
• language: historical changes, proverbs, expressions, national language
policies, personal language choices;
• practices: daily habits (ranging from the supranational to the indivi-
dual, transportation, when to eat what, banking, relationship to time,
etc.), special occasions, customs, and rituals, personal/family stories and
histories.
These domains of knowledge guide our everyday lives as well as special
occasions. They inform what events we celebrate and how, as well as how
we conduct ourselves day-to-day. As these models also show, we navigate
a complex system of knowledge in order to understand and participate in
interactions or make regular as well as unique decisions every day. For
example, in 2018 retirees in Japan volunteered to clean up nuclear waste,1
exposing themselves to radiation in order to protect younger generations
from dangerous diseases. In this case, long-standing historical values of
serving a community larger than the self interacted with the speciﬁc
situation of the retirees, who were predominantly engineers, factory design
experts, and former power station workers, and are mostly above seventy
years of age. These broad societal codes (or ethos) interact with those we
develop at more personal levels, socialized by our families and smaller
communities or cultures we participate in. The interaction between dif-
ferent types of background knowledge guide our culturally contextualized
actions. As Figure 9.1 presents, facets of cultural knowledge align along two
axes: concrete versus abstract knowledge on the vertical axis, and the
personal/individual versus broader societal codes that guide our beliefs,
behaviors, or values on the horizontal axis.
As the preceding discussion demonstrated, cultural knowledge spans all
aspects of everyday life and unique events. We need to develop
a considerable amount of this knowledge to be able to participate in our
own and other cultures. As L2/Lx learners gain this knowledge, they face
two challenges. They must become aware of what they only know

1
www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-paciﬁc-13598607

Personal/individual codes of behaviour

Broader societal codes of behaviour

– educational choices (e.g., elementary schools, – personal relationships (e.g., how we maintain them)
middle or high schools of various kinds)
– available natural resources (e.g., food, geography)
– important works in the arts
– important events, past and present

– structure of governance (e.g., democracy, – personal codes of ethics (e.g., work ethic)
monarchy) – personality
– national history – orientation towards others
beliefs, myths – personal world view
– national/supranational notions of heroism (e.g., – personal beliefs
what it takes to earn a nation’s or supranational – relationship between national / supranational
organization’s respect) expectations and our personal attitudes towards them
– national/supranational relationships across the (e.g., whether we aspire to them or reject them)
globe
– reasons of considering certain people and events
important
abstract

Figure 9.1 Facets of cultural knowledge

subconsciously in their own cultural realms, namely, their own perspec-

tives, practices, and products. Simultaneously, they need to learn to
recognize with increasing skill – depth and nuance – the products, obser-
vable practices, and underlying values of another culture.
Given the enormity of the task, several points merit consideration. First
and foremost, developing cultural knowledge takes a long time, years if not
decades. Second, we do not and cannot know everything about a culture,
even cultures of which we are life-long members. We do not know all its
history, geography, artistic output, the practices of every social group and
their motivations, every perspective on political or social issues that are
being debated on the cultural ‘ﬂoor’ at any given moment. Furthermore,
successful adaptation to new cultural environments is possible even with-
out full command of all cultural knowledge (we are all living examples of
this). Third, one member of a culture – whether culture means women,
athletes, the Khas in Nepal, etc. – does not represent all members of that
culture, and we need to acknowledge our limitations when talking about
culture with others. Fourth, in a related vein, we must realize that the same
event, the same issue, the same idea will be perceived in different ways –
sometimes irreconcilably so – by different members of a culture. Social and
economic policies often have supporters and detractors, who view the
consequences of those policies differently. Finally, knowledge is not the
restricted domain of in-group members of a culture. Out-group members

Schemata: Frames and Scripts of Knowledge

Moving beyond theoretical models of cultural knowledge, this section
examines how we organize knowledge. Our ability to decode and encode
inferences relies on cognitive strategies that allow us to recognize and
apply patterns that we subconsciously learn from our communicative
environment. That is, in order to participate in communication, we
draw from schemata, which are “formed on the basis of past experience
with objects, scenes, or events and consists of a set of (usually uncon-
scious) expectations about what things look like and/or the order in
which they occur” (Mandler, 1979, p. 263). Schemata are frameworks for
closely linked information, including prototypical concepts of objects or
events, with sufficient details about them to ensure quick and accurate
identification. Introduced originally by Piaget (1972), schemata include
the abstract representations of concepts, as well as physical, experiential
knowledge (e.g., we can retrieve cash from a bank machine ‘on autopi-
lot,’ because our minds and bodies remember how to coordinate the
process). We access schemata quickly and mostly subconsciously, acti-
vating a wealth of background knowledge as a psycholinguistic and
cultural packet, speeding up information processing and improving
recall (Rumelhart, 2017).
There are two types of schemata that pertain to our knowledge about the
physical world and routine activities: frames and scripts (Abelson, 1981;
Emmott & Alexander, 2014; Rumelhart, 2017; Schank & Abelson, 1977).
Frames describe our knowledge of the physical world; for example, the
frame ‘cars’ entails their purpose, their generic shape, and the position of
tires and windows. Scripts, in contrast, define the knowledge of how events
or interactions are structured and sequenced.
We develop important schemata throughout our lives and have to
assimilate or adapt them – or learn new ones – when we encounter novel
situations, as is the case during L2/Lx learning. Some of our existing
schemata are useful for interpreting new cultural experiences, while others

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:28, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.010
9 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Cultural Knowledge 207
need to be revised or created anew. To illustrate the way existing and new
schemata work, let us examine an interaction in depth and identify the
different types of cultural knowledge required to make sense of it. In series
1, episode 3 of the British television series The Good Karma Hospital,
Maggie Smart, one of the main characters, is walking down the street
with her husband, Paul (at 10:45–11:28 minutes).
maggie: Oh, look, look. ((coughs)) . . . Can I have two please? ((holds up index and
middle ﬁnger of right hand, palm facing towards a street vendor selling drinks))
paul: You don’t even know what that is.
maggie: Oh, it’s traditional. Something called bhang. ((they both drink from small
plastic cups))
paul: It smells like disinfectant! What’s in it?
seller: Better not to smell, sir. Just . . . ((pinches nose)) . . . drink.
maggie: Come on. One, two . . .
paul: If I go blind, I’ll come looking for you.
maggie: . . . three! Oooh! ((both she and Paul cough and bend over))
seller: ((laughs)) For you!
maggie: ((laughing)) Pay the man!
paul: Here you go, mate.
seller: ((puts hands together, touching his forehead and bows slightly))
maggie: Thank you. That was strong. ((laughs))
In order to understand this polylog, we need linguistic, cultural, and
situational knowledge. In linguistic terms, the words are easy enough to
understand for individuals who know basic English, since words like pay,
hands, or know are high-frequency lexical items.2 The least frequent lexical
item, disinfectant, can be guessed as something unpleasant from the con-
text, even if a viewer cannot glean the speciﬁc meaning of the word.
Examining the conversation with a slightly broader lens, we can decipher
its overall meaning if we have a script of purchasing something to drink
from a street vendor, either by having participated in or heard of such an
exchange. This script is not unique to the local culture, but instead shared
across various cultures. It entails the buyers expressing what they would
like to purchase, the seller providing the item(s), the buyers paying the
seller and consuming what they had ordered.
In addition to the buying script, we need to access or learn several frames
and scripts pertaining to Indian cultures in order to understand the
interaction more fully. As the videoclip shows, the community is celebrat-
ing holi, where people celebrate the end of winter by throwing colorful
2
Frequency numbers 1236, 174, 47, respectively, according to www.wordandphrase.info/frequencyList
.asp

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:28, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.010
208 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
powder into the air, dance in the streets, wear vibrantly colored attire, and
play drums.3 The celebrations include thandai, a traditional fruit-based
drink made with bhang4 (a compound ground from cannabis leaves). The
community of fans who watch this television series can appreciate this
scene even more completely, because they are aware of several locally
situated frames as well. This is a moment of character development, as
a timid woman from England lets go of her inhibitions and embraces life.
This festival is of great personal significance for Maggie, because shortly
before this scene she had been diagnosed with cancer and decided to live
her remaining life to the fullest.
Our – correct, incorrect, or incomplete – knowledge of the cultural
context that surrounds an interaction informs all aspects of communica-
tion: vocabulary, grammar, pragmatics, paralinguistics, and nonverbal
communication. In fact, much of the information needed for comprehen-
sion is found in shared contextual knowledge and not in the utterances
themselves (Labov & Fanshel, 1977). What social groups are we a part of?
Which of our cultural selves are we enacting in any given conversation?
How much respect do we express to whom? Answers to questions such as
these are all part of our contextual knowledge even before we begin
speaking, signing, or writing.
When implemented accurately, schemata can speed up our lives and
communication. In such situations, our inferences are usually correct, and
we feel confident in drawing them. However, difficulties may arise when
participants hold different assumptions, come from different cultural or
ethnic groups, generations, or gender identities. The more group affiliations
are dissimilar (or at least the group affiliations that are salient to a particular
interaction), the more challenging inferencing becomes. Unfortunately, there
are also situations where our underlying interpretive frameworks mislead us.
We might not have an accurate or complete knowledge of the information we
need, and our communication falters or falls apart completely. By selecting
the sources we use to build our cultural knowledge carefully, we can improve
our chances for more successful intercultural communication.

Sources of Cultural Knowledge

We acquire cultural knowledge from larger and smaller social groups (e.g.,
classmates), parents, elders, and family members with whom we come into

3
http://time.com/5182369/what-is-holi-2018/
4
www.bbc.com/travel/story/20170307-the-intoxicating-drug-of-an-indian-god

ica
, li

l&
influences
ion

su
vis

pra
ele

nat
rs, t

iona
newspape

l organizations
Mid-level
community Personal
contextual contextual
factors factors

pa
es

re
at

nt
m

s
,e
lde am
rs, te
fam tes,
ily, ma
mem lass
bers & traditions, c

Figure 9.2 Interplay of broader societal and local, personal cultural inﬂuences

contact. Other sources include books, movies, documentaries, literature,

newspapers, various news and social media, among others. The broader
social contexts tend to provide political, religious, institutional, or national
structures, while at the other end of the spectrum, we gain personal
experiences through work and interpersonal relationships. These influ-
ences on our worldview and cultural knowledge interact. Personal experi-
ences are shaped in part by engaging with larger societal and smaller
communities, while personal experiences influence social behavior. The
interrelationship among sources of influence on our cultural knowledge
can be represented with the diagram shown in Figure 9.2.
The efforts that led to giving women the right to vote in the United
Kingdom can help illustrate the interplay of different sources of cultural
influence depicted in this diagram, where developments in the broader
cultural context, groups of willing activists, and the actions of specific
individuals in positions of (relative) power who supported this movement
were crucial for this change. At the societal level, voting rights were changing
for men, to include more working-class people, not only property owners,
and women were entering the workforce as well, who were earning for the
first time and had to pay taxes. The perceived discrepancy between the rights

Critical Selection of Sources

The development of cultural knowledge occurs both implicitly and expli-
citly. Much of our early socialization (i.e., cultural learning) in childhood is
implicit, as parents, care takers, religious and other community leaders,
and coaches, among others, model behaviors, beliefs, and practices for us
(Ochs & Schieffelin, 2008). During our school years and youth, friendship
circles and many informal settings continue the implicit socialization

5
www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/electionsvoting/womenvote/over
view/earlysuffragist/
6
www.britannica.com/biography/Millicent-Fawcett
7
www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_ﬁgures/pankhurst_emmeline.shtml
8
www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/electionsvoting/womenvote/over
view/thevote/

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:28, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.010
9 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Cultural Knowledge 211
process. Such learning does not entail reflection or analysis, and there is
little discussion involved about the values underscoring expected beha-
viors. Explicit learning, conversely, emerges as a result of asking questions
about why and how things happen, examining, analyzing, and interpreting
evidence, reflecting on assumptions, and being willing to revise or refine
our understanding of the world when necessary and appropriate.
Identifying reliable sources of information is part of explicit learning, as
it requires reflection and conscious choice.
The sources we draw on for information depend on a number of
factors. What is it that we are learning about? A coach can explain the
upcoming team schedule, for example, but official government sources
are required for finding out how to apply for a work permit overseas.
A scientific organization’s work is best suited to understand recent
epidemics, while a spiritual leader may be the right person to ask
questions about one’s beliefs. Importantly, the availability of informa-
tion also influences the outcome of our quest. In many parts of the
world, freedom of the press is protected, representing multiple voices
and perspectives in print and audio-visual media, and individuals have
a right to express their ideas freely as well (e.g., Norway, Australia, South
Africa). In other places, however, people face significant limitations,
because the government controls access to information and restricts
freedom of speech (e.g., China, Iran, North Korea). When multiple
sources of information are available, we should examine several of
them and seek reliable and complete knowledge.
With the advent of the Internet, there has been an explosion of
available information online over the past decade. Although many
sources are well researched and readily accessible across the globe
(e.g., health information from the Mayo Clinic is a resource now
available to nurses in training in Africa), not all of them are equally
trustworthy, and learners need critical analytic skills to evaluate the
material they read, in order to ensure that our information is as
reliable and accurate as possible:9
1. Use multiple sources of information:
• Does the source present multiple perspectives?
• What are different views regarding the same issue?

9
https://guides.library.ucsc.edu/writing/evaluate

Teaching Cultural Knowledge with an Intercultural Communication

Orientation
Omaggio-Hadley (2001) acknowledged how difﬁcult language educators
found teaching culture, either because they did not know enough about the
target culture themselves, or because they were unable to ﬁt discussions
about culture into already packed curricula. With increased access to the
Internet, these problems have been both lessened and worsened. The
situation is better because learners can seek out information on their
own, providing endless opportunities for engaging with other cultures.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:28, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.010
9 Intercultural Communication: Teaching Cultural Knowledge 213
At the same time, access to sometimes overwhelming sources of informa-
tion, some unreliable, has made culture teaching more challenging.
Therefore, instruction must include safeguards for learning accurate infor-
mation about other cultures. We also must recognize that not all teachers
and students have the same access to technology, and pedagogical planning
needs to take specific learning and teaching contexts into consideration.
Another challenge of teaching cultural knowledge is a lack of awareness
by many learners about their own cultural practices, attitudes, and per-
spectives. As Kumaravadivelu (2003) observed, such limitations likely
impact what teachers and their learners can achieve in the classroom in
terms of critical cultural understanding. In order to become intercultural
learners, however, what was subconscious before must become conscious.
Additionally, we tend to identify closely with our values and habits, so
potential challenges may be perceived as threatening. Therefore, teaching
culture requires instructors to develop the ability to guide difficult con-
versations meaningfully but sensitively, because we want to encourage
learners to explore their beliefs and practices and adapt them to new
cultural contexts. Ideally, the process of developing cultural knowledge
aims to understand another social group from an emic point of view (i.e.,
from the standpoint of members of that culture), rather than an etic or
outsider perspective. Retaining an etic stance raises the possibility of view-
ing another culture only as differences, in a sensationalistic way, instead of
examining similarities as well as differences, while also recognizing varia-
tion within culture(s) and across individuals.
Another important consideration for teaching culture is that it is a long-
term process. We cannot teach everything right from the beginning.
Instead, culture should be incorporated into the L2 curriculum in stages,
which allows us to teach it in the L2/Lx (since many instructors feel
uncomfortable with using the L1 in the classroom, if that is shared
among the students). Facts and figures, key events in history and how
they developed, important geographical aspects of a culture and their
bearing on the economy or history, everyday issues like shopping, and
other factual details are readily accessible for students in their first two years
of L2/Lx learning. Major historical, literary, and artistic movements and
their impact on modern society can be introduced in the second year and
beyond. At this stage, learners should also gain more familiarity with
everyday needs, such as renting an apartment, registering for university
courses, or setting up a bank account, to help them prepare for living
abroad. More complex ideas about belief systems, society, politics, the arts,
as well as historical and sociopolitical issues are easier to address in years 3

Summary
This section lays out existing and potential further connections between
cultural knowledge and intercultural communication, connecting this
chapter to the concepts and guidelines presented in Chapters 1 and 2.
Speciﬁcally, that the discussion yields several suggestions for an intercul-
tural communication-oriented pedagogy.

Knowledge & skills

1. Help learners become aware of their own cultural practices, products, and perspectives
(make the subconscious conscious), while they explore these aspects of the other
culture as well.
2. Recognize that cultural knowledge entails understanding broader and narrower (e.g.,
personal) forces that influence our interactions (e.g., beliefs, practices, behaviors).
3. Recognize intracultural variation in practices and perspectives.
4. Guide learners to explore aspects of culture from multiple viewpoints, including the
emic perspective.
5. Accept that learners might be aware of cultural practices and perspectives but prefer not
to adopt them; make sure that learners are aware of the consequences of flouting
expected behaviors, so they can make informed choices.
6. Guide learners to explore social structures (e.g., gender roles, power distance,
individual v. community orientation) and cultural values in relation to nature.
7. Identify important cultural events and places (i.e., historical, artistic, literary
figures, battles, movements), current cultural references, and significant ideals
(i.e., values).
Cultural repertoire
1. Teach learners how to perform numerous everyday tasks, such as using public
transportation, borrowing books from the library or searching for an apartment.
2. Encourage learners to participate in special events and celebrations with members of
the L2/Lx-speaking culture.
3. Guide learners to identify and use reliable sources of information, and ways of asking
questions that foster cultural knowledge as well as creating contacts with members of
the L2/Lx-speaking communities.
4. Ensure that learners can make comparisons between their own cultural experiences and
those of the other culture.
Curricular considerations
1. Incorporate the teaching of culture explicitly in the L2/Lx curriculum from the
beginning – help students make comparisons of similarities and differences
between cultural beliefs, expectations, and practices in their own and the other
cultures.

2. Accept that as an instructor you are not responsible for knowing everything about the
cultures where the L2/Lx are spoken; take advantage of external sources of information
(guest speakers, telecollaborative partners, documents, multimedia sources, etc.).
3. Accept also that you are not the sole representative of the culture in which the L2/Lx is
spoken; you are one multifaceted representative of that culture, with a wealth of
information, but cannot speak for the entire diverse community.
4. When possible, include nonnative members of the culture; their experiences are
uniquely relevant for your students, who may wish to transition to the new culture,
whether for work or studying or other reasons.
5. Include analytic tasks for students to learn new schemata that are relevant for their new
cultural environment, since they can speed up and facilitate interactions and reduce
miscommunication in unfamiliar contexts.
6. Utilize longer authentic materials – particularly movies, documentaries, or TV shows –
that depict important social, historical, and literary movements from multiple
perspectives. As a complement, include materials that portray everyday social realities
(e.g., how work is viewed and organized, how families and friends interact).

Sample Teaching Activities

ACTIVITY SET 1

L2/Lx: Any second/foreign language

Learner group: Beginning/A1 learners (can be done at any level)
Source: Learners’ own lives, member(s) of the culture(s) under study
Task duration: One 50-minute class period

Learning Objectives
By the end of this activity, learners will develop the following:
1. An awareness of various types of cultural knowledge needed to complete
four to ﬁve everyday tasks they complete in their own lives.
2. Skills necessary to interview members of the L2/Lx community regard-
ing their daily routines (the same or similar types of tasks that the
learners identify in their own lives).
3. The language knowledge to ask and answer questions regarding daily
routines in the L2/Lx.
Analytic Approach
Ethnography of communication and multimodal analysis.

Steps in the Task

Pre-Task
1. In small groups, learners brainstorm two or three daily tasks they partici-
pate in.
2. As homework, learners take one of the daily tasks and describe in the L2/
Lx how they complete them, based on observation (i.e., journal their
own actions).
3. In class, learners identify the schemata they need to know in order to
complete these tasks and describe them in some detail (appropriate for
the level), based on observation and reflection. Learners can collect notes
in a collaborative media platform (e.g., Google Docs).
Task
1. Based on this discussion, the class generates questions they can ask one or
more members of the L2/Lx-speaking culture regarding the way they
accomplish these tasks.
2. In class or via social media (e.g., Skype, Google Hangouts, Facebook
Messenger), learners can interview one or more knowledgeable members
of the culture, taking notes about the individuals, the tasks they
describe, and comments they make regarding general practices in the
L2/Lx-speaking communities. Ideally, each group of three to four
learners can interview a different cultural informant. Importantly, the
informants are not restricted to ‘native’ members of the culture. Current
or previous study-abroad participants might be great resources, who
know some of the new cultural practices, but can also reflect on the
experience of living between and across two cultural contexts.
3. Groups share their findings regarding what cultural knowledge is required
for accomplishing everyday tasks. If more than one informant was inter-
viewed, similarities and differences in practices (and perspectives, if pro-
vided) should be compared.
Post-Task
Learner groups describe in detail a few everyday tasks in their own culture in
the L2/Lx, as models for other speakers of the L2/Lx (e.g., describing
practices in Malaysia in Korean, for potential study-abroad students coming
to Malaysia from Korea).

Analysis
In this activity, learners first develop an awareness of aspects of their daily routine
that they had completed mostly subconsciously beforehand. Simultaneously,
they improve their ability to observe, articulate what they see and do, and reflect
on cultural influences that shape their practices (perhaps also perspectives,
depending on the tasks they choose, such as a university or sports event).
Learners also improve their interviewing skills; the ability to ask questions is
essential for learning about other cultures. If several members of the L2/Lx

culture are interviewed, learners may begin to note how social variables (e.g., age,
sex, class) impact language use and behavior, and what role, if any, individual
preferences play. Would a grandparent perform the same tasks, in the same way,
as college students? Do all college students complete the same tasks the same
way? Recognizing patterns of similarities and differences can help learners focus
on what is shared across a cultural group and what are individual preferences,
thus limiting overgeneralizations. Importantly, the interview subjects do not
have to be native speakers of the L2/Lx; a returning student from a study-abroad
program can provide useful information for learners interested in similar
opportunities, and insider (emic) knowledge is not the sole purview of ‘native’
members of a culture.

ACTIVITY SET 2

L2/Lx: Any second/foreign language

Learner group: Advanced/C1–C2 learners
Source: Magazines, blogs, news media, social media,
telecollaboration, television shows, feature ﬁlms,
interviews with members and participants of the L2/
Lx culture(s)
Task duration: Several (or weekly) class meetings over the course of
a 6–15-week term

Learning Objectives
By the end of this activity, learners will learn the following:
1. Information about two or three topics related to current events in depth
(e.g., historical development of an issue).
2. How to conduct research pertaining to the cultural background of
current events.
3. How to evaluate the reliability of information sources in the L2/Lx
context.
Analytic Approach
Multimodal analysis, interactional sociolinguistics, and ethnography of
communication.

Steps in the Task

Pre-Task
1. Identify potential news sources in print- or multimedia commonly read
or watched in an L2/Lx-speaking community – learners could work in

pairs or small groups of three or four and conduct an Internet search,

gather information from family or friends or during a study-abroad
program; done in class on computers.
2. Select one news item and read or watch it together in class (including
identifying the genre, the title/topic, comprehension questions, and
reading/viewing analysis).
3. As a class, create a list of questions to seek answers regarding the news
item; questions may pertain to the following topics (but are not limited
to this list and should reﬂect the actual content of sample news report):
• What current event is being discussed?
• In what medium is it presented, and what features does this med-
ium use?
• What is the structure of the news report?
• What is the historical background for this issue, and why is it of
interest right now?
• What are the multimodal components of the news report (e.g., how
are signs, music, language, etc. used to present the topic)?
• Who is the author of the report (e.g., the individual or the organi-
zation)? From what perspective is this issue being reported in this
particular news source?
• What information is available regarding this news source (e.g.,
audience, reporting bias, language use)? What evidence is there to
suggest that this source is (un)reliable?
• Find a news report on the same issue in the learners’ own culture.
How is it presented there? What are some differences and similarities
between how this event is dealt with in the news source that learners
are familiar with?

Task
Weekly, over the course of the term, learners – either individually or in
small groups – research one or more current events and analyze the
background knowledge in detail: both historical and current issues that
pertain to this event, the impact on people’s lives (at various levels of
culture, from the personal to the broader societal level). They seek answers
to the questions listed in pre-task (3) or similar questions. Learners present
their ﬁndings to their peers in the L2/Lx.

Post-Task
As a possible post-task assignment, learners could analyze the same issue
presented in two or three news sources, comparing and contrasting the way
it is discussed (e.g., symbolism, language choice), including any author bias
and the impact of the intended audience.

Analysis
This activity simultaneously builds learners’ contextual/background
knowledge of current events and their ability to conduct research by
examining evidence from diverse, reliable sources. By delving into
sociopolitical, socioeconomic, or sociocultural aspects of the L2/Lx culture,
learners develop an appreciation of how culturally conditioned images and
expectations shape how members of the culture think, act, and react to the
world. Learners should also (begin to) understand (or investigate) several
broader societal variables that shape people’s behavior and how different
social groups might react differently to similar events. If learners continue
their language studies into the third or fourth year at university, they are
likely to have a signiﬁcant interest in participating in a culture where the L2/
Lx is spoken. Therefore, in-depth knowledge is required, as well as the
ability to gain that in-depth knowledge through systematic research,
investigation, and analysis. Research projects help learners widen and
deepen their knowledge of relevant cultural schemata, expanding networks
of knowledge they can access quickly and reliably.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS AND ACTIVITIES

1. Thinking of your ﬁrst-year students, many of whom might never live in

an L2-speaking community, what would be their most useful take-away
from learning to compare cultural knowledge between their own cultural
practices, beliefs, and values and those of the L2-speaking community?
How would your answer change, if you consider your second-year
students, who might wish to study abroad and need to prepare for life in
a new cultural context?
2. What are cultural practices like in contexts where your L1 is spoken, in
terms of the concepts of intercultural communication discussed in
Chapter 1 (e.g., Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s, Hofstede’s, or Hall’s
models)? How might they be different in contexts in which your L2/Lx is
spoken? Have these differences ever tripped you up in interaction? If yes,
how did you resolve any possible difficulties that arose?
3. If you are teaching a language that is used in different countries, such as
Spanish, French, Chinese, or Arabic, how can you prepare your
advanced students for studying or working in their respective target
countries with adequate and relevant cultural knowledge? Reflect also on
how you might handle situations in which you do not have sufficient
cultural knowledge, such as when a student asks you a question to which
you do not know the answer.

4. Think about one of your typical days and reﬂect on the types of
knowledge that enable you to function in the different cultural groups
to which you belong. Which of Byram and Masuhara’s domains of
knowledge do you utilize every day and which ones do you need less
frequently? How did you develop this knowledge? How much of this
knowledge are you in command of regarding the culture(s) where your
L2/Lx is spoken?
5. Interview someone who is a relative newcomer to your own culture
(e.g., someone who has lived there for 1–3 years). What cultural
knowledge had they mastered prior to their arrival, how accurate and
useful was that knowledge, and what did they need to learn after they
arrived? How could you incorporate their insights into your own
pedagogical practices?
6. Thinking of beginning L2/Lx learners, design two activities that teaches
students (a) an everyday practice and (b) a special event, famous person,
or topic of cultural signiﬁcance (i.e., small-c and big-c culture). The
task should encourage learners to consider multiple perspectives of an
issue (e.g., the history of one-child versus two-children policy in
China).

Assessing Intercultural Communication

Chapter Overview
Assessing intercultural communicative competence can be challenging for
a number of reasons. First, there is little consensus regarding the precise
definitions of subcomponents of intercultural competence, making it
difficult to identify specific constructs to assess. Second, the “overall
external outcome of intercultural competence is defined as effective and
appropriate behavior and communication in intercultural situations”
(Deardorff, 2011, p. 66; emphasis original), but the “same behavior or
skill may be perceived as competent in one context but not another or
[by] one perceiver but not another, and thus no particular skill or ability is
likely to ever be universally ‘competent’” (Spitzberg & Changnon, 2009,
p. 6). Third, in a related vein, some aspects of intercultural communicative
competence might not be suitable for classroom assessment, which is why
this chapter is located at the end of the pedagogical section of the book and
does not follow aspects of the intercultural journey (Part III). This issue is
addressed in more detail towards the end of this chapter.
In spite of these challenges, for personal and institutional purposes,
assessing learners’ progress in intercultural communicative competence
remains an important educational objective. Thus, this chapter reviews
several theoretical concepts in L2/Lx assessment, relating them to inter-
cultural communicative competence and illustrating them with three case
studies.

Key Concepts in Assessment

Traditional assessment typically measures what Liddicoat and Scarino
(2013) call “assessment of learning” (p. 124; emphasis original) or the
knowledge students have gained. Such assessment frequently uses ‘objec-
tive’ one-time measurements and is used for summative evaluations (e.g.,

221

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:02, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.011
222 Part II Pedagogical Implementation
assigning grades or determining qualifications). As a complement, the
authors suggest two additional conceptualizations of assessment: “assess-
ment for learning and as learning” (p. 124), both of which are better
addressed with ‘alternative’ forms of assessment, such as portfolios, per-
formance, peer- and self-assessments, and observations or tasks. Each focus
may be appropriate, depending on the purpose of specific assessments.
Before selecting appropriate forms of assessment, however, a number of
issues must be considered: validity, reliability, authenticity, practicality,
and washback effects. Validity pertains to the question of whether an
assessment actually measures the construct it aims to measure, whereas
reliability ensures that a measurement tool can elicit the same result on
repeated administrations or if two versions of a test elicit the same results
(Bachman & Damböck, 2018). Authenticity reflects language that is as
natural as possible, in meaningful contexts, adhering to real-world com-
munication, while practicality addresses questions such as how feasible it is
to develop, administer, and interpret the results of an assessment (e.g.,
large-scale assessment may preclude extensive portfolio evaluation).
Finally, washback effect refers to the effect an assessment has on pedagogy
and learning (Brown & Abeywickrama, 2010).
Different types of assessment support these constructs to varying
degrees. Psychometric measurement tools (e.g., the Test of English as a
Foreign Language) have high reliability and validity, are practical for their
purposes, but have negative washback effects (if students study for the test
at the exclusion of more real-world language), and rate low on authenticity.
These types of tests represent the majority of assessments of learning. In
contrast, alternative assessment methods may score lower on reliability
(although carefully designed rubrics can improve consistent evaluation)
and may be time-consuming (i.e., are less practical), but hew closer to real-
world communication and tasks. As a result, their washback effect tends to
be positive, in that they also promote real-world language use in prepara-
tion for the test and demonstrate to learners that such language use is
valued. Moreover, the information learners receive can serve as assessment
for and as learning, since learners can use the feedback they receive from
their peers or instructors to advance their intercultural communicative
competence. Consequently, Liddicoat and Scarino’s (2013) argument that
“Assessing language learning within an intercultural perspective is more
fruitfully conceptualized within an alternate assessment paradigm” (p. 125)
seems convincing. Alternative forms of assessment are also more in line
with sociocognitive views of L2/Lx learning, as they measure not just
cognitive, but also social aspects of learners’ progress. Nonetheless, a

Assessing Intercultural Communicative Competence

Ideally, teaching and assessment should be inherently linked, to ensure
pedagogic and programmatic cohesion (Byram, 1997). Therefore, the same
theoretical concepts that inform learning activities should form the basis of
assessment as well, which in this book include (1) Byram’s (1997) compo-
nents of linguistic, sociolinguistic, discourse, and the four dimensions of
intercultural competence (i.e., skills, knowledge, attitudes, critical cultural
awareness) and (2) the synthesis of recent research discussed in Chapter 2
(e.g., Kramsch, Liddicoat & Scarino, Hua). Implementing assessment in
practice can be difficult, however, because most components of intercul-
tural communicative competence (e.g., being able to understand multiple
perspectives of an issue) are broadly defined and take a long time to
develop, whereas classroom assessment tends to be done on a short-term
basis. To wit, some aspects of communication have been measured in
traditional assessment (such as linguistic, sociolinguistic, or discourse
knowledge), but they have not typically been explicitly connected to
intercultural communicative competence.
To begin addressing these concerns, Deardorff (2011) and her colleagues
identified four concepts that lend themselves more readily to assessment:
attitudes, knowledge and comprehension, desired internal outcome, and
desired external outcome. Attitude refers to respecting and being open
towards and curious about other cultures; knowledge and comprehension
entails cultural self-awareness and knowledge about other cultures (includ-
ing sociolinguistic knowledge) as well as the skills to observe, analyze,
interpret, and evaluate information; desired internal outcome means adapt-
ability, flexibility, empathy, and a shift of worldview to be less ethno-
centric; and desired external outcome denotes “effective and appropriate
communication and behavior in an intercultural situation” (Deardorff,
2006, p. 256). Deardorff’s proposals include assessing students during or
after study-abroad programs, service learning, or regular encounters with
international students on campus. These proposals are well suited for
measuring programmatic learning (e.g., exit requirements for graduation),
but classroom-based assessment needs to narrow the focus even further and
evaluate intercultural communication using micro-level (i.e., smaller)

Case Study 1: Assessing Lexical Knowledge

The target audience is novice learners of German, and the object of the
assessment (the concept/construct being measured) is receptive vocabulary
needed to interpret a multimodal university menu. In order to assess
learners’ ability to make sense of the relevant authentic materials, they
are asked to gather information from the cafeteria website at the University
of Göttingen (www.studentenwerk-goettingen.de/campusgastronomie/m
ensen/speiseplaene?L=1.html), using assessment for learning. Eliciting the
relevant information (using a worksheet) might entail any or all of the
following components (the scoring guidelines are included in parentheses
or under each section):
1. Recognizing the meaning of key vocabulary:
• sorting six menu choices into meat-based and vegetarian groups,
which helps learners connect the icons to the content as well (6
points – 1 for each correctly sorted item);

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:02, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.011
10 Assessing Intercultural Communication 225
• identifying six lexical items the learners already know, their L1
equivalents, and the source of their knowledge (e.g., learned this
word in class, guessed its meaning from the context, or recognized
it, because it is a cognate with a language they already know) (9
points – half for each word, half for each correct L1 equivalent, and
half for each label).
2. Navigating the cafeteria website:
• finding the location of each cafeteria by clicking on the link
‘Mensen’ and using GoogleMaps (they can list one major attrac-
tion near each cafeteria for better orientation) (4 points – 1 for each
correct address);
• exploring hours of operation (by clicking on each of the four
cafeteria links) (4 points – 1 for each correct address);
• identifying two menu choices that they might like and learning
their prices, using the same cafeteria links (4 points – 1 for each
menu choice, 1 for each correct price).
3. Reflecting on differences and similarities with learners’ own university
meal opportunities:
• commenting on meal choices (e.g., values reflected in price or focus
on natural foods).
Rubric:
• 4 points for including both a similarity and a difference that
demonstrate an awareness of shifting ‘between cultures’
using observation and evidence (e.g., both my university and
Göttingen seem to value healthy food choices; but in Göttingen,
the food is more affordable, making healthy choices more
accessible);
• 3 points for including both a similarity and a difference that
demonstrate some awareness of cultural patterns, using some evi-
dence (e.g., both universities have many options to choose from; in
Göttingen, the meals seem to be pre-determined);
• 2 points if only a similarity or difference is provided, or if both are
provided but the answers reflect superficial differences and lack
critical thinking (e.g., both universities serve chicken; difference: in
German the word for salad is Salat);
• 1 point if only a similarity or difference is provided and the answer
reflects superficial differences (e.g., both universities serve chicken);
• 0 points for missing or irrelevant responses.

Case Study 2: Assessing Pragmatic, Paralinguistic, and Cultural Skills

The target audience is intermediate learners of Modern Standard
Arabic, and the object of the assessment is the productive skills
needed to get a taxi from the airport in Cairo to a university
dormitory at the beginning of a study-abroad sojourn. To assess
learners’ ability to implement the relevant lexical, grammatical,

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:02, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.011
10 Assessing Intercultural Communication 227
pragmatic, and paralinguistic information (i.e., elicitation), they can
perform skits with an instructor, another student, another Arabic-
speaking volunteer who acts as the taxi driver, or online using gaming
or artificial intelligence. This activity can be conducted as assessment
of, as, or for learning, depending on the students’ or institutional
needs. Learners would have learned about and participated in similar
interactive tasks. The interaction should include the following
components:
• appropriate greeting;
• stating the destination;
• asking about the cost of the ride, whether credit cards are accepted or if
the driver can provide change for a larger bill;
• participating in basic interaction (phatic communication, such as Are
you here for vacation, This is a nice time of the year to be in Cairo or Is this
your first visit to Egypt?);
• paying and tipping;
• leave-taking;
• self-reflection by the learner (either in dialog with the instructor/inter-
actant or as a journal entry).
Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) is the typical variety that L2/Lx
learners study in the classroom context. In real-world interactions in
Cairo, however, students will encounter other varieties, especially the
colloquial style. Learners will have to demonstrate some flexibility in
adjusting their receptive language skills and work with their interac-
tants to navigate genuine exchanges. They will have to be able
to recognize and respond to truncated questions, such as where to
instead of the more likely classroom form of where would you like a
ride today? At the same time, their interactants will likely accommo-
date some of their language needs (e.g., taxi drivers will be quite used
to driving tourists and want their customers to be content). The
assessment should reflect real-world interactions as much as possible,
including possible language accommodations. For example, students
should be allowed to use their smart phones to point out their
destination, in addition to stating the address, and there can be
multiple repetitions of questions and answers during the assessment
event. Learners’ performance can be evaluated with the holistic rubric
in Table 10.1.

9–10 points • Recognizes colloquial expressions (even if only responds using MSA).
• Maintains each section of the exchange with situationally appropriate
responses (e.g., greetings, terms of address, leave-taking, politeness
formulae).
• Participates in the interaction actively by initiating some questions.
• Provides responses without significant lexical or grammatical errors
that prevent comprehension (occasional errors are acceptable, as is
real-world grammar usage).
• Includes culturally appropriate content (e.g., currency, locations).
• Upon reflection, is aware of different language variety used, recog-
nizes the need for adjustment in listening skills and expresses curi-
osity regarding this new experience.
7–8 points • Recognizes some colloquial expressions (even if only responds
using MSA).
• Maintains most sections of the exchange; responses are generally
situationally appropriate (e.g., greetings, terms of address, leave-tak-
ing, politeness formulae).
• Participates in the interaction by initiating one or two questions.
• Provides responses without significant lexical or grammatical errors
that prevent comprehension (occasional errors are acceptable, as is
real-world grammar usage).
• Includes culturally appropriate content (e.g., currency, locations).
• Upon reflection, is aware of different language variety used, recog-
nizes the need for adjustment in listening skills.
5–6 points • Has difficulty recognizing colloquial expressions.
• Maintains half of the exchange with situationally somewhat appro-
priate responses (e.g., greetings, terms of address, leave-taking,
politeness formulae).
• Participates in the interaction by asking one question.
• Provides responses with some systematic lexical or grammatical errors
that may interfere with comprehension.
• Includes some culturally appropriate content (e.g., currency, locations).
• Upon reflection, is aware of different language variety used but does
not recognize the need for adjustment in listening skills.
3–4 points • Has difficulty recognizing colloquial expressions.
• Partially maintains the exchange with responses that are not consis-
tentlysituationally appropriate (e.g., greetings, terms of address).
• Does not successfully initiate questions.
• Provides responses with partially correct lexicon and grammar that
makes comprehension difficult.
• Content is not entirely culturally appropriate (e.g., currency, locations).
• Upon reflection, may not be aware of different language variety used,
does not recognize the need for adjustment in listening skills, and
may expresses frustration at having to interact with someone using an
unfamiliar communication style.

1–2 points • Does not recognize colloquial expressions.

• Cannot maintain the exchange and responses are not situationally
appropriate (e.g., greetings, terms of address, leave-taking, politeness
formulae).
• Does not initiate questions.
• Provides responses with systematic lexical or grammatical errors that
prevent comprehension.
• Content is culturally inappropriate (e.g., currency, locations).
• Upon reﬂection, is unaware of different language variety used (there-
fore does not recognize the need for adjustment in listening skills);
expresses frustration or disdain towards someone not speaking the
‘standard’ language variety.

Note: circle all criteria met; the row in which most responses are circled should be the grade
assigned

Case Study 3: Assessing Multiple Aspects of Intercultural Communicative

Competence
In this project, advanced learners of English in the United States would
prepare a formal multimodal presentation – as expert witnesses in front of a
Congressional committee – regarding gun violence (alternate topics could
include sustainable building, presence of religious symbols in public
spaces, immigration, or other political, social, or cultural issues of current
import). The speciﬁc criteria to be assessed are:
• academic speaking skills (including vocabulary, clarity, intonation);
• academic writing skills (including vocabulary, discourse, and the struc-
ture of a persuasive research paper);
• the ability to research an idea thoroughly from more than one perspec-
tive, while clearly arguing for one side, using reliable sources of
information;
• the ability to give a well-structured, multimodal presentation (structure
refers to expected organization of American research presentations);
• openness and curiosity regarding the histories, practices, and beliefs of
another culture.
An e-portofolio – which can be presented individually, in pairs or small
groups – would be a useful way to assess learners’ performance on these
criteria. The portfolio should be compiled through smaller steps during the
course, such as a proposal for the speciﬁc topic, reliable sources, a draft of

Table 10.2 Analytic rubric assessing learners’ oral and written presentation on
culturally relevant topic

5 Uses varied, appropriate and idiomatic academic vocabulary effectively

with comprehensible pronunciation and intonation.
Academic speaking skills

4 Uses somewhat varied and appropriate academic vocabulary mostly

effectively with comprehensible pronunciation and intonation.
3 Uses academic vocabulary generally correctly, with some mistakes in
pronunciation or intonation that may impede comprehensibility.
2 Uses non-academic vocabulary, with regular mistakes in pronunciation
or intonation that may interfere with comprehensibility.
1 Uses non-academic vocabulary, with mistakes in pronunciation or
intonation that make comprehensibility difficult, even for someone
used to working with nonnative speakers.
5 Uses academic writing (including vocabulary, discourse, and structure)
effectively, reflecting academic conventions; line of argumentation is clear.
4 Uses academic writing (including vocabulary, discourse, and structure)
mostly effectively, reflecting academic conventions mostly accurately;
Academic writing skills

line of argumentation is clear.

3 Uses academic writing (including vocabulary, discourse, and structure)
mostly effectively, but academic conventions are frequently unmet;
line of argumentation is somewhat clear.
2 Uses nonacademic writing (e.g., incorrect register, discursive devices, or
structure), which does not reﬂect academic conventions; line of
argumentation is somewhat unclear.
1 Uses nonacademic writing (e.g., incorrect register, discursive devices, or
structure) with many mistakes, and which does not reﬂect academic
conventions; line of argumentation is unclear.
5 Demonstrates a high degree of comprehension of source materials; uses
reliable sources effectively, conveying information clearly.
4 Demonstrates comprehension of source materials; uses reliable sources
effectively, conveying information mostly clearly.
Research skills

3 Demonstrates a moderate degree of comprehension of source materials;

uses mostly reliable sources, conveying information mostly clearly,
although with some inaccuracies.
2 Demonstrates a low degree of comprehension of source materials; uses
some unreliable sources, conveying information with little clarity, and
with some inaccuracies.
1 Demonstrates little comprehension of source materials; uses mostly
unreliable (or no) sources, conveying information with little clarity,
and with many inaccuracies.

5 Well-organized and thorough multimodal presentation; effective use of

background information, presented clearly.
Well-organized multimodal presentation; mostly effective use of
Presentation skills

4
background information, presented clearly.
3 Some organization evident in the multimodal presentation; mostly
effective use of background information, although the presentation
may be somewhat unclear.
2 Limited organization, modality, use of background information; the
presentation is somewhat difﬁcult to follow.
1 Little or no evident organization, not multimodal, limited, or incorrect
use of background information; the presentation is difﬁcult to follow.
3 Asks complex questions about a topic of current cultural interest; is able
to answer these questions from multiple perspectives; can suspend
Openness and curiosity*

affective judgment in interpreting data, while taking a stance.

2 Asks simple questions about a topic of current cultural interest, with
somewhat limited engagement; answers these questions from multiple,
albeit limited, perspectives; has difﬁculty suspending affective
judgment during the project, although is aware of this and is open to
change.
1 Expresses (directly or indirectly) minimal interest in learning about the
assigned topic; does not pursue multiple perspectives; bases
interpretation on affective judgment and/or is not open to changing
interpretive frame.

* These descriptors are adapted from the value rubrics set forth by the American
Association of Colleges and Universities (www.aacu.org/value/rubrics)

video representing impact statements, and so on, with a ﬁnal oral pre-
sentation in class. Each stage should provide learners with feedback from
the instructor and their peers. Learners’ performance can be evaluated with
the analytic rubric in Table 10.2.
Before each assessment, the evaluation criteria should be shared with
students, so that they have a clearer understanding of what is expected of
them. This can enhance the impact of assessment for and as learning. The
format of assessment materials should also reﬂect classroom pedagogical
practices, in order to make the link between teaching and testing more
closely linked, making both – hopefully – more authentic in the process,
creating a positive washback effect.
At the other end of the process, after evaluating learners’ performance (not
only in these case studies, but also as a general practice), the instructor –
ideally, with input from the learners – should collect information regarding
the effectiveness of the assessment process for fostering intercultural

Determining What Can/Should and Cannot/Should

Not Be Assessed
The primary functions of assessment in L2/Lx instruction are to measure
how well learners are able to perform based on material covered in class
(achievement tests) or more generally in the target language (proficiency
tests). Assessment also provides information on the effectiveness of peda-
gogical practices (Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013) and serves as important
feedback for students as to what is important content to focus on.
Therefore, in an ideal situation, all components of intercultural commu-
nication that we want to include in pedagogy would be appropriate for
assessment purposes as well. However, developing intercultural commu-
nicative competence is a long-term endeavor, and regular (weekly or
monthly) exams are not a suitable way to assess learners’ progress short
term. Thus, the decision regarding what to test, when, and how requires
careful consideration, especially since most students in our language
courses are genuinely interested in and motivated to learn about other
languages and cultures, and mishaps in assessment may thwart their
openness.
As mentioned with the case-study descriptions, traditional assessment
has already included many features that comprise intercultural commu-
nication, albeit without making the connection explicit. Thus, vocabulary
and grammar can continue to be assessed quantitatively, as long as the
cultural context is included in source materials, and if the pedagogical and
assessment materials pertaining to lexical and grammatical knowledge also
push intercultural communicative competence (see Chapters 4 and 5).
Pragmatics, paralinguistic features, and nonverbal communication are
underrepresented in textbooks, and commensurately in assessment as
well; they need to play a more significant role in curricular planning (see
Chapters 6–8). Culture has been assessed in terms of its facts and figures
component, but our discipline has moved away from this approach,
perhaps considering these aspects too old fashioned. However, there is
nothing wrong with learning and knowing about important dates, events,

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:02, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.011
10 Assessing Intercultural Communication 233
and geographic locations. They often explain common, everyday phrases
(e.g., több is veszett Mohácsnál [‘more was lost at Mohách’] in Hungarian
refers to a devastating loss Hungary suffered in 1526, but now means
roughly the equivalent of ‘no point crying over spilled milk’). These facts
and figures can easily be assessed with traditional assessment tools as well.
The crucial thing to remember is not to equate cultural background
knowledge only with facts and figures, but rather to assess it more fully
(see Chapter 9), evaluating cultural understanding from multiple perspec-
tives, including intracultural variation. This can be achieved creatively,
using portfolios, presentations, video projects, among other forms of
alternative assessment that show the process of learning, the ability to
interpret information and develop intercultural perspectives. The e-port-
folio described in the third case study above is an assessment that includes
cultural background knowledge, both as an assessment of and for learning.
Alternative assessment can also test skills of discovery, the ability to shift
our interaction to accommodate others, the skills to compare and under-
stand source materials, the ability to interpret ideas in context, or the
ability to reflect, using metalanguage skills (Kramsch, 2009).
However, there are aspects of intercultural communicative competence
that perhaps should not be included in classroom assessment at all, such as
attitude, identity, or the personal journey, which is why this chapter is
positioned here instead of at the end of the book. Measuring attitude, for
example, is problematic. Although valid survey instruments are available to
test learners’ attitudes within the intercultural communicative context (cf.
The University of Michigan at www.crlt.umich.edu/interculturalcompe
tence or the Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory at http://ccaiassess.co
m/index.html), how would you measure development over one ten-week
term? What if someone already has positive attitudes to begin with and
consequently does not show any evidence of growth? Additionally, attitude
is relational (Abrams, 2020) and varies across contexts; a person can have an
overall positive attitude towards other cultures and yet struggle with a
particular interaction or interactant.
Similarly, it is difficult and even undesirable to set learning objectives for
assessing identity. First, this process might require learners to share aspects
of their identity that are private (e.g., if I can relate to another person due to
shared religious affiliations, would I need to share that with my instruc-
tor?). As Borghetti (2017) rightly cautions, there are ethical considerations
for assessing intercultural communicative competence, whose “conse-
quence for individuals [is] that there is a need to make even personal and
private preferences visible and explicit” (p. 1404). Second, being able to

Summary
Developing intercultural communicative competence is a complex process.
Some of its components can be assessed using traditional assessment types,
such as lexical, grammatical or cultural knowledge, skills of discovery and
interpreting, just to name a few. More beneﬁcial, however, would be
alternate forms of assessment, including skits, creative writing, portfolios
(on- or ofﬂine), performance assessments, or formal presentations that are
better suited to glean insights about learners’ ability to implement various
aspects of their intercultural communicative competence – entailing com-
ponents covered in Chapters 4–9 – in practice. Yet other components
pertaining to personal motivation or attitude, personality traits or identity
do not lend themselves well to assessment.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS AND ACTIVITIES

1. What are your views regarding using traditional and alternative

assessments to measure intercultural communicative competence? What
other components of intercultural communicative competence can
traditional assessment cover beyond what was discussed in this chapter?
2. Have you used alternative modes of assessment in L2/Lx learning? What
was your experience with them? How would you use them in your own
teaching to foster and assess intercultural communicative competence?
3. Do you agree with the argument that some aspects of intercultural
communicative competence should not be assessed? Can you envision
teaching intercultural communicative competence in an L2/Lx
classroom, where these skills are not assessed? What are the potential

beneﬁts and challenges/disadvantages of not assessing? Discuss your

reasoning with your classmates.
4. Using a recording you have made for one of the earlier chapters (e.g.,
Chapters 3, 5, 6, or 8), evaluate the interaction according to the holistic
rubric in Table 10.1. How did native speakers of an L1 versus L2/Lx-
speakers perform? What pedagogical implications can you draw from
your observations?
5. Select a topic of current cultural interest and consider what various
aspects of ‘openness and curiosity’ (see Table 10.2) would entail. What
would each level of performance actually mean?
• Asks complex questions about a topic of current cultural interest; is
able to answer these questions from multiple perspectives; can sus-
pend affective judgment in interpreting data, while taking a stance.
• Asks simple questions about a topic of current cultural interest, with
somewhat limited engagement; answers these questions from multi-
ple, albeit limited, perspectives; has difﬁculty suspending affective
judgment during the project, although is aware of this and is open to
change.
• Expresses (directly or indirectly) minimal interest in learning about
the assigned topic; does not pursue multiple perspectives; bases
interpretation on affective judgment and/or is not open to changing
interpretive frame.
6. Referring to the pedagogical activities in Chapters 4–9, create an
assessment activity (assessing of, for, or as learning) that measures the
same constructs. Use the models presented in the case studies in this
chapter to design your assessment tools and evaluation criteria. Then
reﬂect on the following questions: How does this activity measure up
regarding reliability, validity, authenticity, and practicality? If there is a
trade-off among these aspects of testing, is this trade-off acceptable for
you in terms of your teaching philosophy (pertaining to teaching/
learning intercultural communicative competence)?

Cultural Transitions

Chapter Overview
The history of the world is a tapestry of people on the move. For thousands
of years, war, conquest, economic demands, colonization, natural disasters,
or the urge to discover unknown regions has led to migration. This process
continues today, with approximately “244 million international migrants
in the world in 2015, which equates to 3.3 per cent of the global population”
(McAuliffe & Ruhs, 2018, p. 2). The International Organization for
Migration (IOM) in Switzerland defines a migrant as
any person who is moving or has moved across an international border or
within a State away from his/her habitual place of residence, regardless of (1)
the person’s legal status; (2) whether the movement is voluntary or invo-
luntary; (3) what the causes for the movement are; or (4) what the length of
the stay is.1
While the term migrant sometimes carries negative connotations, it is
used in this chapter as a neutral label, in accordance with IOM’s definition,
to depict a wide range of complex experiences. It includes people whose
journeys are brief and those who must find permanent new homes; those
who are welcomed by the host-communities and those who encounter
serious challenges. As appropriate, other terms are introduced to illustrate
the diverse paths that cultural journeys take; however, in spite of their
diversity, these journeys also share common characteristics: the need to
recognize and adapt to new situations, people, beliefs, practices, and ways
of communicating. To understand the diversity of personal journeys, this
chapter examines the process of cultural transitions, the change from one’s
old self to an intercultural one.

1
www.iom.int/who-is-a-migrant

239

Reasons for Migration: The Voluntary–Involuntary Continuum

Social scientists categorize the reasons behind human migration as volun-
tary or involuntary. Voluntary migrants undertake an intercultural journey
because they want to work, travel, or study abroad, for example (see Figure
11.1). In contrast, involuntary migrants have little or no choice about
leaving their home, due to external reasons such as war, famine, economic
hardships, or natural disasters (Jackson, 2014; Kramsch & Uryu, 2012;
Martin & Nakayama, 2018). Involuntary migrants are also called refugees, if
they are “unable or unwilling to return [to their countries] because of
persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race,
religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political
opinion,” according to the 1967 Protocol of the United Nations
Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.2 Current examples of

2
www.unhcr.org/en-us/1951-refugee-convention.html

tourism studying abroad military deployment fleeing war

& violence
volunteering working abroad
visiting family or religious
exploring heritage missionary work
international peace-keeping mission

Figure 11.1 The voluntary–involuntary continuum for migration

such groups include the Uighur,3 who are sent to ‘reeducation’ camps in
China, or Muslim Rohingya refugees fleeing ethnic cleansing in Myanmar;
their lives are permanently impacted by forced removal (Habib, Jubb,
Ahmad, Rahman, & Pallard, 2018).
While groups at the ends of the continuum might be relatively easy to
categorize, the distinction between voluntary and involuntary migration is
often less clear. A young employee from South Africa might be transferred
to her company’s headquarters in Singapore (involuntary), but she is also
interested in gaining international work experience and living in a thriving
financial center (voluntary). Similarly, some international students may
place themselves all the way at the ‘voluntary’ end of the spectrum, while
others see their sojourn as more ‘involuntary,’ if they are driven by
significant parental or peer pressures. Thus, the continuum is more appro-
priately viewed as a flexible representation of the intercultural journey,
where individual experiences may vary from the position of the current
labels.
As we can see, migration, whether “imagined, desired, resisted, experi-
enced, managed, and represented … is a multifaceted reality” (Carling &
Collins, 2018, p. 909), often driven by conflicting and dynamic reasons
(Van Hear, Bakewell, & Long, 2018). Labor demands, political and social
factors, education, personal interests, or family and friends who already live
in the host communities can drive intercultural movement (Chirkov,
Vansteenkiste, Tao, & Lynch, 2007; Martin, 1993; Richmond, 1993).
These factors push or pull migration (Carling & Collins, 2018):
• Push factors typically refer to negative conditions in one’s home culture,
such as a poor employment prospects, poverty, war, political and/or
religious persecution, famine or natural disasters.

3
www.bbc.com/news/av/world-asia-45959533/uighur-detentions-searching-for-china-s-hidden-
camps

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:47, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.012
242 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
• Pull factors are positive conditions in a new cultural context: improved
economic and/or educational opportunities, improved living condi-
tions, available land for settling and agriculture, political and/or reli-
gious freedom, better healthcare, natural beauty, etc.
The journey is similarly diverse once migrants arrive to their destination.
They may or may not be welcomed by the existing community, whose
attitudes are often revealed by labels they use for the newcomers. Erdal and
Oppen (2018) report, for example, that many countries in the European
community identify migrants as
forced or voluntary to sort them into bureaucratic categories such as asylum
seeker, refugee, labour migrant, family reunification migrant and interna-
tional student, amongst others; where the first two categories are seen as
forced migrants and the latter three are seen as voluntary migrants. (p. 982)
The authors note that discursive practices can have significant con-
sequences for migrants in host countries, where the existing popula-
tion, out of fear or prejudice, may see the newcomers as a threat or
undeserving of support, and consequently label them as the “illegal
immigrant” or “bogus asylum seeker” (p. 983), even if the migrants
have valid reasons for leaving their homes (e.g., war, famine, persecu-
tion). Negative labels have tangible and intangible consequences if the
migrants cannot receive work permits, financial, social and political
support, acceptance, or status (e.g., eligibility for permanent residence).
In contrast, if migrants are viewed in a positive light, the host com-
munity is more likely to help them to assimilate, which eases the
cultural adaptation process for both groups.

The Temporal Continuum

The diverse reasons for which migrants undertake intercultural journeys
also impact the length of time they are likely to spend in the new culture
and the extent to which they have to or wish to adapt to that culture’s
beliefs, values, or practices.
Tourists spend the least amount of time in another culture, ranging from a
few hours to a few weeks (Byram, 1997). They have significant control over
where they go, what they see, and with whom they interact. They often have
very specific short-term goals, such as learning about nature (e.g., ecotourism)
or sightseeing, and their likely interlocutors are typically eager to accommo-
date them, for example, by learning sufficient transactional language skills to

Types of Adaptation
The process of adaptation entails changes that groups or individuals
undergo “as a result of contact with another cultural group” (Berry,
Poortinga, Breugelmans, Chasiotis, & Sam, 2011, p. 464). Both the host
community and the individual might change, adjusting their belief sys-
tems, values, practices, and behaviors; the newcomers typically experience
linguistic and cultural socialization (Duff, 2010). The acculturation process
often entails trade-offs between maintaining one’s original culture, lan-
guage, and social identities on the one hand, and forming new cultural and
linguistic afﬁliations and identities on the other (Berry, 2006). The strate-
gies involved in balancing these competing forces yield four possible out-
comes, according to Berry (2006): assimilation, integration, separation
(segregation), or marginalization.
The ﬁrst outcome, assimilation, describes a process in which individuals
retain little of their original cultural identity and adopt the beliefs, values,

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:47, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.012
244 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
and practices of the host culture(s). These individuals are likely to use the
language(s) of the host community and often abandon their L1, resulting in
the loss of the familial language and cultural practices within a generation
(Jackson, 2014). Many immigrants to new countries experience this, pro-
vided they are motivated and allowed to participate in new cultural
practices, and have the resources to do so. This process describes
my experience as an international student from Hungary. Studying in a
mid-sized city in Wisconsin without other Hungarians around, I soon
assimilated into the host culture: using its language, attending college,
befriending American students and my host family, and enthusiastically
embracing life in my adopted home. Since having children, we have
developed a more hybrid cultural existence (see below), incorporating
aspects of Hungarian culture into our American lives, adopting intercul-
tural practices and perspectives.
Integration, in contrast, happens when intercultural individuals adopt
certain aspects of the host culture and develop a positive relationship with
it, while also maintaining their original cultural and linguistic heritage.
They may seek out other people who speak their L1 and share their cultural
practices in their new home (Martin & Nakayama, 2018). Nineteenth-
century Norwegian settlers in Minnesota exemplify this experience well
(Gierde & Qualey, 2002). They arrived in large enough numbers, and into
an environment without a dominant ‘American’ culture, to have a large
impact on cultural practices to this day; Lutheran churches, Norwegian-
themed restaurants and shops, a commitment to teaching Norwegian, and
particular speech patterns in English reflect this heritage. Over time, these
settlers integrated into the U.S. American culture, while maintaining close
ties to their Norwegian ancestry. Integration often happens in cultural
groups with high ethnic group strength, groups that enjoy large numbers and
are respected by the host community. They are more capable of retaining
their own practices in a new culture than groups with less power.
Large numbers do not always reflect successful integration, though.
Instead, some large cultural groups experience separation or segrega-
tion, if they remain isolated from the host community or broader
cultural context. If the distance is initiated by the individual or
cultural group (Martin & Nakayama, 2018), perhaps because they
wish to differentiate themselves from the dominant society and main-
tain their own cultural or linguistic identity, then we speak of separa-
tion. The Amish community in the United States is an example of
this phenomenon: due to religious traditions, they remain relatively
isolated from the influences of popular American culture and embrace

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:47, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.012
11 Cultural Transitions 245
their own values, practices, and language (Nolt, 2016). Extreme cases
of separation can have devastating consequences, however, including
honor killings committed in Germany4 and Canada,5 when daughters
in immigrant families date members of the host community.
Conversely, segregation is a function of the host society shunting
immigrants, refugees, or minority ethnic and racial groups into geo-
graphically and socially isolated areas (Martin & Nakayama, 2018).
Segregation has significant socioeconomic consequences for members
of nondominant cultural groups, ranging from a lack of access to
education, financial resources, or healthcare to an individual’s sense of
identity; this is a recurring finding in research on African American
and Latinx communities in the United States (Charles, 2003; Smedley,
2012; Uzogara, 2019).
Marginalization reflects a process in which the immigrants’ or refugees’
original culture is not maintained, yet there is no adaptation to the host
culture either (Jackson, 2014). Some international students report feeling
marginalized; they find it difficult to maintain ties to their original culture
or communicate with other speakers of their L1, while also do not learn the
L2/Lx well enough to develop sufficiently positive connections with the
new community to participate in the new culture. This is also the experi-
ence of many refugees (e.g., Syrian refugees in Lebanon6), who cannot
maintain their own cultural practices but also cannot become full partici-
pants in their host community, given the complex geopolitical situation
that necessitated their fleeing Syria.
Martin and Nakayama (2018) describe a combined experience as well –
cultural hybridity – in which migrants assimilate to the host culture in some
respects and integrate with or remain separate from it in others. With
increased mobility, more and more people find themselves reflecting such
cultural hybridity, creating a “‘salad’ society, where each group retains a
distinctive flavor but blends together to make up one great society,” as
opposed to the metaphor of the American ‘melting pot,’ which requires its
members to assimilate to some common multicultural self (Martin &
Nakayama, 2018, p. 331). While cultural hybridity is an increasingly com-
mon phenomenon, it can make intergenerational adaptation challenging.
Children may be more able and willing to adapt to the host culture (e.g.,
language, personal appearance), while their parents long to retain more of

4
www.ehrenmord.de/doku/2018/doku_2018.php
5
www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2011/11/14/qc-shaﬁa-murder-trial-wiretap.html
6
www.executive-magazine.com/economics-policy/the-fate-of-syrian-refugees-in-lebanon

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:47, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.012
246 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
their original culture. Alternately, children within the same family may
react differently, whereby one adheres to her parents’ practices, while her
siblings may assimilate more thoroughly into their new cultural context.
Finding a balance of assimilating, integrating, and retaining aspects of
previous cultural practices is possible, however, such as the case of a recent
immigrant who prefers to live in Chinatown in San Francisco (social
separation), uses Chinese at home and English in the broader community
(linguistic integration), and works at an international shipping company
(economic assimilation).
Importantly, the host community’s receptivity or attitudes towards the
newcomers – openness and tolerance or disdain and disrespect – plays a
signiﬁcant role in the adaptation process. A diverse community that
accepts different cultural perspectives and practices is a more comfortable
landing place for immigrants than communities with little experience with
outsiders, as these communities might be more fearful and less welcoming,
creating a less pleasant environment for all participants, and potentially less
safe for the immigrant population (Kim, 2012). Even in contexts where the
overall sentiment is welcoming, migrants can encounter discrimination
from individuals based on their ethnic, racial, gender, religious, national,
or linguistic identities. For example, in 2018, two women in separate
incidents were attacked in London for speaking Spanish.7 Similarly, people
in South American countries that belong to the Mercosur trade organiza-
tion8 (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Venezuela) and that have
relatively open immigration policies, generally view skilled immigrants as a
welcome addition to society, yet immigrants are frequently blamed for
rising unemployment, housing costs, and drops in educational quality.9
Such sentiments are often heard where cultures collide, as it is easier to
blame ‘the other’ than explore and solve deeper causes of social dissatisfac-
tion (e.g., the root causes of rising unemployment, automatization, con-
ﬂict, or environmental conditions).

Individual Variables and Intercultural Adaptation

Psychological, sociocultural, cognitive, and other variables that individuals
contribute to the process help shape each unique intercultural journey.

7
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/woman-punched-racist-attack-london-overground-speak
ing-spanish-tﬂ-police-a8604436.html
8
www.cfr.org/backgrounder/mercosur-south-americas-fractious-trade-bloc
9
www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2017–07-10/south-americas-progressive-immigra
tion-laws-begin-to-fray

Tolerance of Ambiguity
Tolerance of ambiguity refers to one’s ability or inability to cope with
situations “in which participants lack information they need to understand
the situation or possible outcomes” (Endres, Camp, & Milner, 2015, p. 2).
This trait is domain specific, meaning that we may be more tolerant of
ambiguity in one setting (e.g., learning grammar) but less so in others (e.g.,
open-ended use of the L2/Lx), so conversely, feeling uncomfortable in one
setting does not mean we feel that way in all situations (Chu, Lin, Chen,
Tsai, & Wang, 2015; Durrheim & Foster, 1997). Practicing speaking in the
L2/Lx with less reliance on the L1, using learning strategies that help us
remember vocabulary better or increase our comfort level regarding practi-
cing the L2/Lx with others in social situations can increase our tolerance of
ambiguity in new cultural situations as well (Ely, 1989; Oxford, 2002). A
solid self-concept, self-esteem, flexible attitudes, empathy, and the ability
to consider others as complex (e.g., identifying similarities and differences,
avoiding stereotypes) can help reduce stress during intercultural transitions
(Jackson, 2014). Additionally, mindfulness training may alleviate
difficulties for individuals with low tolerance of ambiguity and build
resilience, which may lead to improved chances for adaptation as well
(Brendel, Hankerson, Byun, & Cunningham, 2016).

Motivation
Motivation, which has long been recognized as a key ingredient of L2/Lx
learning success, is also essential for intercultural adaptation, because it is
one of the main driving forces behind learners’ willingness to engage with
other cultures and languages (Gardner & Lambert, 1972). Robert Gardner
(2006), one of the leading scholars on this topic, considered motivation to
be comprised of affective, cognitive, and behavioral aspects that include,
but are not limited to, goal-directedness, a commitment to effort, persis-
tence, self-conﬁdence (self-efﬁcacy), attention, positive affect, and making
“the language part of the self” (p. 4).

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:47, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.012
248 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
This construct has often been separated into integrative and instrumen-
tal motivation (Gardner, 2006). Integrative motivation refers to an interest
in another culture, a desire to interact with its members, and a generally
positive attitude towards that culture. Integrative motivation correlates
very highly with language learning success. Importantly, the positive
interest and attitude (i.e., openness) do not have to be limited to a single
culture, but rather refer to “other cultural communities in general (i.e., an
absence of Ethnocentrism and authoritarianism, or the presence of
Xenophilic attitudes, etc.)” (Gardner, 2006, p. 7). In other words, if
someone develops positive attitudes towards learning one new culture,
that person is more likely to express openness and tolerance towards others
as well. In contrast, instrumental motivation reflects a more practical
orientation towards language learning (e.g., finding learning language X
useful). While instrumental motivation may be less powerful than inte-
grative motivation, Gardner (2006) argues that it is in fact “the intensity of
the motivation … that is important” (p. 12; emphasis mine). In other
words, the type of motivation is less significant than how motivated
someone is.
MacIntyre, Mackinnon, and Clément (2009) reiterate the importance
of three factors for language-learning success:
• integrativeness: a sincere personal interest in communicating with, tak-
ing on characteristics of, and perhaps identifying with members of
another culture;
• attitude: a positive orientation towards and enjoyment of the learning
situation; and
• motivation: the desire to learn another language, enjoyment of the
learning process and a consistent effort to improve one’s L2 skills.
The authors note that the relationship among these components is
mutually supportive, in that “integrativeness and attitudes toward the
learning situation combine to support motivation. In turn, motivation
supports the behaviours necessary to learn a language” (p. 44).
Recently, psychologists (Locke & Schattke, 2019) have revisited the
concept of motivation, by adding achievement motivation to intrinsic and
extrinsic motivational factors. Intrinsic motivation (similar to Gardner’s
integrative motivation) is experienced when an individual takes pleasure
in a particular activity for its own sake, such as learning a language,
traveling for fun, establishing meaningful relationships, striving for perso-
nal growth, or contributing to social causes, without concerns regarding a
particular outcome or external reward (Chirkov et al., 2007; Locke &

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:47, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.012
11 Cultural Transitions 249
Schattke, 2019). Conversely, extrinsic motivation (Gardner’s instrumental
motivation) is “doing something as a means to an end” (Locke & Schattke,
2019, p. 277). Here, the source of motivation resides outside of a task (but not
necessarily outside of an individual), such as learning a language in order to
get a job or building relationships that will yield some beneﬁt. The new
component in this model, achievement motivation, pertains to a desire to do
well in something, whether or not an individual ﬁnds personal pleasure in the
task, such as performing well on a language test, regardless of enjoyment of
the learning process or the particular language. The focus, instead, is on
making progress towards a higher standard from one’s current abilities (Klein,
Cooper, & Manahan, 2013). Locke and Schattke (2019) concur with Gardner
(2006) that no type of motivation is inferior or superior to the others in terms
of outcome. Moreover, the authors argue, motivations can shift, when some-
thing that was originally external becomes personally valuable. For example,
we may start to learn a language because it was required, but then meet other
speakers of that language and begin to enjoy using and learning it.
L2/Lx research – including works by Higgins, Klein, and Strauman
(1985), Markus and Nurius (1986), and Dörnyei (2009) – connect motiva-
tion to a model of a dynamic ‘L2 self system’ that mediates personal
behavior. This system consists of multiple complex selves, changing over
time and across situations (MacIntyre et al., 2009). Higgins et al. (1985)
and Dörnyei (2009) distinguished the ideal self (how individuals wish to be
seen) from an ought-to-self (how individuals think they should be, to meet
expectations placed on them by other people), selves that we could become
(multiple possible selves), and selves we are afraid of becoming (what a
person fears). If possible, learners should identify ideal selves that are
realistic and in harmony with their ought-to-selves, while also powerful
enough to countereffect feared selves. These notions of self need to be
accompanied by actual strategies for implementing them, which might
include creating images of the speaker being able to speak the L2 skillfully
or interacting successfully with members of the culture whose language
they are learning (Dörnyei, 2009; MacIntyre et al., 2009).
From a socially oriented perspective, Ushioda (2009) suggests a “person-
in-context” view of L2 motivation, which she sees as being “emergent from
relations between real persons, with particular social identities, and the
unfolding cultural context of activity” (p. 215). The premise of her under-
standing of motivation is the complex social relationships among indivi-
duals and other people (e.g., friends, family, co-workers), places, and
cultural practices. She also argues that motivation may be experienced
differently in Western and Eastern cultures, further highlighting the

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:47, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.012
250 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
Table 11.1 Self-determination continuum

Autonomous motivation Control and coercion

Internalized
Intrinsic motivation extrinsic motivation Introjected motivation External motivation

Travel because it is Participate as a Peace Avoid feeling guilty or Participate in a

seen as personally Corps volunteer complete a task to study-abroad
enjoyable because individual gain social approval program because
and fun. has identiﬁed with by meeting others’ someone’s parents
values represented expectations (partial force him to do
by the organization internationalization this (merely
and has internalized of the activity, but it avoiding
them as personally feels coerced). punishment or
important. obtaining an
external reward).

importance of analyzing motivation in social context as opposed to a

cognitive process situated solely in the individual (Unemori, Omoregie,
& Marksu, 2004; Ushioda, 2009).
Exploring motivation, Chirkov and her colleagues (2007) used the self-
determination theory developed by Ryan and Deci (2001, 2002) and
Sheldon, Ryan, Deci, and Kasser (2004) to investigate the adaptation
process of international students. According to this theory, self-determina-
tion ranges from autonomous choices at one end of the continuum to
coercion at the other end (Table 11.1). The study revealed that autonomous
motivation and a sense of control over events correlate highly with personal
well-being (Chirkov et al., 2007). The ﬁndings also suggested that
motivation is dynamic and situation-speciﬁc rather than functioning as
an overarching trait.
In addition to improving learners’ tolerance of ambiguity and motiva-
tion, increasing metacognitive awareness of social and psychological pro-
cesses entailed in intercultural transitions can identify potential challenges
and strategies for mitigating them.

The U-Curve and W-Curve: Stages of Cultural Adaptation

Learning to live between and across cultures is very rewarding, but the
process is not without stress (Jackson, 2014; Klopf & McCroskey, 2007).
We have to use new languages, ﬁnd new ways of getting around, eat new

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:47, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.012
11 Cultural Transitions 251
food, and constantly meet new people, among other sources of stress. Even
if we are excited about life in a new cultural setting, the sheer amount of
new experiences may lead to culture shock and language fatigue or shock.10 In
our home culture, we are comfortable with the physical and social signs
that help us navigate everyday life, but when we enter a new cultural
context, our existing schemata may be irrelevant or ineffective, and until
we build up new ones that are appropriate in the new culture, we may feel
disoriented and overwhelmed. For example, German hospitals, which face
significant staffing shortages, regularly recruit doctors from other countries
to fill positions. Klingler and Marckmann (2016) interviewed several such
doctors about their experience and found that most of them struggle in
some way, with language skills, with cultural knowledge about the orga-
nization of the German healthcare system, available treatments, or rules
about patient privacy. Many of the doctors also found the more equally
distributed power structures between themselves and the patients or nurses
confusing, since in many source countries, doctors had a distinctly higher
status than either of the other groups. Such experiences of disorientation
are shared by many sojourners who leave a context, where they process the
world largely subconsciously, for a new culture, where even the smallest
decisions might require conscious thought and deliberate effort to navigate
(Arthur, 2004). Transitional challenges are often exacerbated by the overly
romantic images of the other culture we create prior to arrival, to which it
cannot live up. Fortunately, the stresses experienced during transition do
abate, as we improve our skills and adopt better to our new cultural
context.
The process of cultural adaptation is often described as a U-shaped curve
(Lysgaard, 1955); however, scholarship on intercultural communication has
recognized the need to expand the adaptation process to situations in
which migrants – temporary or long-term – return to their original cultures
(or the cultures of their parents and ancestors), resulting in a W-shaped
model (Gullahorn & Gullahorn, 1963). While these two models have been
criticized for being overly simplistic, with low predictive ability (Berardo,
2006, 2012; La Brack, 2010; La Brack & Berardo, 2007; Ward, Okura,
Kennedy, & Kojima, 1998; Ward & Kennedy 2001), they are used exten-
sively in presojourn orientations inside and outside of academia (e.g., by
study-abroad programs and global corporations), and they provide a useful

10
International students often report that it is not any one thing that triggers culture shock, but rather
the fact that many or most things, behaviors, practices, places are new all at once.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:47, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.012
252 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
shared language to describe divergent experiences that students (and their
instructors) may have during intercultural journeys.

The U-Curve Model

The U-curve model of adaptation was developed by Sverre Lysgaard (1955),
based on the experiences of Norwegian Fulbright students in the United
States. The model proposes four fairly predictable stages in the accultura-
tion process, as illustrated in Figure 11.2, and his findings have been
confirmed by other studies, including a variety of migrant populations
(Martin & Nakayama, 2018).
During the first phase, the honeymoon period, sojourners experience
excitement and curiosity about their new cultural and linguistic environ-
ment. This state is characterized by minimal apprehension and great
anticipation. Some tourists and international students, especially if they
are in the host culture for only a short period of time with supportive peers
or partners, have reported never leaving the honeymoon phase and experi-
encing happiness and joy throughout their sojourn (Jackson, 2014).
The second phase is less comfortable. Culture shock, a term developed by
the Canadian anthropologist Kalvero Oberg (1960), refers to an indivi-
dual’s sense of disorientation, dissatisfaction with or alienation from the
new culture, its practices, values, or members. Feelings of stress and
anxiety, criticism, and possibly rejection of the new culture are not
uncommon when sojourners experience significant acculturative stress
(Berry et al., 2011). In extreme cases (especially in situations of forced
migration), the overwhelming novelty in all aspects of one’s life may result

Honeymoon Adaptation
phase phase

Adjustment
phase

Crisis / Culture shock phase

Figure 11.2 The U-curve model of cultural adaptation

Transition shock A sense of loss of identity, unfamiliar social roles, state of

disorientation, identity confusion shortly after arriving in a new
culture.
Culture shock Feelings of confusion when confronted with new customs, practices,
and values; disorientation when an individual’s original cultural
frames and scripts offer little support in interpreting stimuli from
the new environment.
Language shock A sense of incompetence in a new L2/Lx, when our cognitive abilities
are not matched by commensurate linguistic skill; even when a
language is shared, differences in lexicon, grammar, pragmatics,
humor, (im-)politeness, slang, discourse, and nonverbal
communication can be challenging. Students participating in study-
abroad programs often report that the L2/Lx skills they developed in
formal courses prior to departure do not match the communicative
needs of their new environments; they lack useful colloquialisms,
slang, and special phrases used by their peers.
Identity/self-shock A sense of loss when individuals cannot take care of themselves in
another culture, have difﬁculty expressing their identities in that
context and language; when experiencing intercultural transitions,
we have an “increased need to conﬁrm self-identities, with [a]
diminished ability to do so” (Zaharna, 1989, p. 516). Even with
excellent language skills, L2/Lx users are often reminded of their
‘foreignness’ or ‘otherness’ by the host community (e.g., due to their
accent or pragmatics), which can be demoralizing.

Symptoms of language and culture shock may include a number of

affective and even physiological changes (Arthur, 2004; Bochner, 2006;
Gebhard, 2010; Jackson, 2014; Ward & Kennedy, 2001):

• irritability and mood swings • seeking out others from home (at the
• powerlessness and vulnerability exclusion of the host culture)
• anxiety, sadness, and loneliness • difﬁculties with decision-making and
• physical ailments (e.g., body aches, problem-solving
headaches) • negative comparisons between one’s
• homesickness home and the new culture(s)
• romanticized views of home • hostility towards members of the host
• fear of novel experiences (meeting new culture (i.e., ‘us’ versus ‘them’)
people, trying new food, etc.) • refusal to learn or use the L2/Lx
• feelings of inadequacy (self-doubt)
• confusion about sense of self

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:47, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.012
254 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
Importantly, some sojourners never experience culture shock, or experi-
ence it only brieﬂy and with minor effects, possibly because they adapt so
successfully to the host culture that they view any irritation as easily
resolved. For others, this phase is relatively short and entails only moderate
discomfort. Surprisingly, more culture shock does not mean having a
worse experience in the new culture. Quite to the contrary, often more
communication with ‘natives’ (socializing with peers, host families, and
friends) in the new culture leads to more pronounced feelings of culture
shock, but also more satisfaction with the overall experience and better
adaptation, possibly because the same social interactions that cause culture
shock also provide the individual with social support (Rohrlich & Martin
1991; Zimmerman, 1995).
Phase 3, adjustment, represents a more peaceful stage of the intercultural
journey, including the ability to appreciate or laugh about mishaps in the
new cultural setting and integrate aspects of one’s original and new cultures
with increasing effectiveness (Martin & Nakayama, 2018). During this
period, the sojourner learns how to inhabit the new culture, use the new
language, and manage day-to-day life successfully. He or she is increasingly
more comfortable in the new cultural context, accepting differences with-
out feeling overwhelmed or threatened by them. Because at this stage
language skills have improved as well, it is easier to form social connections.
Ideally, the adjustment process leads to adaptation, at which stage sojour-
ners are able to participate in their new culture, have better-developed
social networks, see the differences and similarities between their original
and adopted cultures (perspectives, behaviors, practices, products), and
navigate them effectively, if not always easily (Jackson, 2014). This stage
often entails bi- or multilingualism and a complex intercultural identity.
Many sojourners and immigrants do not progress through all four stages
or not linearly. Instead, individuals may make progress in some areas, only
to backslide in others, as they try to integrate existing and novel beliefs and
practices or adapt to new expectations. This progression may alternate
“between feeling relatively adjusted and experiencing culture shock,” ide-
ally, with an overall positive development (Martin & Nakayama, 2018,
p. 342). Kim (2012) describes this progression as stress-adaptation-growth
cycles (see Figure 11.3) or a cyclical process, in which stress leads to adapta-
tion and growth over time (Kim, 2001a):
The stress-adaptation experiences bring about change and growth – the
creative responses to new circumstances. Over time, the stress-adaptation-
growth dynamic plays out not in a smooth, linear progression but in a cyclic
and continual ‘draw-back-to-leap’ pattern … Each stressful experience

stress

new creative
experiences solutions

growth adaptation

Figure 11.3 Stress-adaptation-growth model (adapted from Kim, 2001a)

[causes the sojourners to] ‘draw back,’ which then activates their adaptive
energy to help them reorganize themselves and ‘leap forward …’ [in a
process of] engagement and disengagement. (p. 238)
This growth process can be facilitated by several individual variables
(Kim, 2012):
1. preparation: how prepared a sojourner is for the journey,
2. ethnic proximity/distance: how similar or different the migrant is from
the host community culturally, ethnically, racially, and
3. personality disposition: openness to new information, strength, resilience,
and positivity (i.e., optimistic outlook).
Intercultural growth is worth striving for, since it confers significant
benefits, including improved functional fitness (ability to manage tasks in
new environments), psychological health (ability to communicate well
enough to overcome culture shock and establish new social networks in
novel cultural contexts), intercultural identity orientation (the ability to see
oneself flexibly connected to multiple cultures, neither rigidly grounded in
the home culture nor overly dependent on the host culture), and inter-
cultural transformation (the ability to inhabit “a new, alternative identity
that is broader, more inclusive, more intercultural” Kim, 2001b, pp.
232–233).
The recursivity of the adaptation process, including surprising periods
of adaptation required for reentering one’s own culture after a sojourn
elsewhere prompted the expansion of the U-Curve model into a W-
Curve one.

Honeymoon Adaptation
phase Euphoria
phase Adaptation

Adjust- Re-adjustment
ment phase
phase

Re-entry
Crisis / Culture shock phase shock

Host culture Home culture

Figure 11.4 The W-curve model (adapted from LaMorte, 2016)

The W-Curve Model

While most of us expect to make some changes and adjustments when
entering a new culture, it is less obvious that returning to one’s original
culture may be just challenging as well. As a matter of fact, reentry may be
even more challenging in some ways, practically and emotionally, because
we typically do not anticipate the difficulties (Martin & Harrell, 2004;
Szkudlarek, 2010). The readaptation process (Storti, 2001) – also called
reverse culture shock or reentry shock – may entail all components of the
U-Curve model once again, as individuals find that they have to reaccli-
mate to or reintegrate into their original culture after living elsewhere for a
significant amount of time (Gaw, 2000). Figure 11.4 illustrates the W-curve
model.
The University of Ottawa11 describes the stages of the readaptation
process as
• euphoria: excitement about reuniting with friends and family, return-
ing to what is familiar (places, practices, everyday life);
• reentry shock: surprise at how much the sojourner has changed during
their travels, while people at home either have not or have changed in
unexpected ways themselves (i.e., the previously familiar context is not
the same); additionally, few people can relate to the sojourner’s experi-
ences or want to hear about them in detail; the traveler might miss his/
her friends and life from abroad, leading to feelings of separation and
loss; there might be health issues (e.g., headaches, body aches, nausea).

11
https://international.uottawa.ca/sites/international.uottawa.ca/ﬁles/a-exchanges-outgoing-reverse
cultureshock-re-entry.pdf

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:47, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.012
11 Cultural Transitions 257
These feelings can be mitigated by going for walks, meeting with
friends, connecting to others who have lived in the same culture,
showing interest in others, and rekindling old friendships;
• re-adjustment: acceptance of what is good and what is less ideal at
home, developing routines, finding the humorous in everyday mis-
takes, there are fewer health problems;
• adaptation: (added to the guidance materials) participation in the
home culture, expanded social networks that include members from
all cultures that the sojourner was a part of at home and abroad,
integrated perspectives, behaviors, practices, products; bi- or multi-
lingualism and a complex intercultural identity.
There are several reasons why sojourners sometimes find it difficult to
return home. They may have changed after adapting to their host culture’s
values, perspectives, and practices; some people might even prefer their
lifestyle abroad. Therefore, they do not fit into the social structures or
cultural habits of the home culture the same way as they had prior to their
original departure. This may be challenging both for the returnees and for
their friends, family, or coworkers. Perhaps not surprisingly, people who
integrate better and more fully into the host community – by making
friends, adjusting to the language and cultural norms – may find reaccul-
turation more challenging (Jackson, 2014). When the adjustment between
the cultures is significant, the sojourner may also face identity confusion,
the feeling of being “caught between two distinct worlds, the one they left
behind and the one they have returned to. They may not feel that they fit
into either” (Jackson, 2014, p. 208).
Sometimes, however, it is not the people who change but the socio-
political context from which they left, especially during times of political or
social upheaval. This was the case for many refugees who left Eastern
Europe during the Soviet regime and returned to their home countries
after the political changes of the early 1990s. During the 30–40 years they
spent abroad, popular culture, family, technology, language have all chan-
ged, making reentry strange and disorienting.

Teaching about Cultural Transitions in the L2/Lx Classroom

This chapter has demonstrated that the migrant journey is not uniform;
however, most people will likely relate to several concepts presented in the
discussions above. The chapter also showed that with effective strategies,
the challenges migrants face can be mitigated, before, during, and after the

Pedagogical Activities for Supporting Intercultural Transitions

• Help learners identify and enhance their intrinsic/integrative motiva-

tions for studying the L2/Lx; even if a language is a requirement, there
was a reason why they chose a particular language.
• Discuss realistic L2/Lx development from the beginning, to help set
achievable goals, when learners plan to study or work abroad.
• Include diverse authentic materials from the beginning that model
everyday language use (e.g., slang, colloquialisms).
• Read short stories written by immigrants to the host culture that relate
funny and poignant events regarding acculturation in insightful ways
(e.g., Wladimir Kaminer’s work about life in Germany).
• Use GoogleMaps to teach directions, so that students can familiarize
themselves with various real-world locations (the Street View provides
visual context for many places around the globe).
• Invite representatives (native members as well as people who have lived
there as sojourners themselves) of the cultures whose language you are
teaching to talk about their day-to-day experiences; interview these
guests about their experiences with cultural transitions as well (e.g.,

Summary
As this chapter has demonstrated, successful intercultural transitions
depend on individual and contextual factors, including language skills,
knowledge of the host culture, tolerance of ambiguity, the attitude and
motivation of the sojourner within various social contexts, and, not neg-
ligibly, the attitudes, values, and behavior of the host community towards
temporary visitors and long-term immigrants.
The intercultural transition process has been described as a U- or
W-shaped curve. The former illustrates the adaptation-process
involved in moving from one’s home culture to a new social context,
while the latter includes a migrant’s reentry into his or her original
culture, a transition that many people do not anticipate to be challen-
ging. Another model examines a dialectic view of how discomfort can
lead to an emergent process of adaptation and personal growth. These
models serve as useful tools for describing intercultural transitions but

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:54:47, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.012
260 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
Table 11.2 Strategies to facilitate intercultural transitions

Pre-departure
1. Research your destination.
2. Keep your goals and expectations realistic.
3. Study intercultural communication.
4. Develop a strong sense of humor; the ability to laugh at your mistakes encourages you
to keep trying and can mitigate potential relational mistakes (e.g., it can soften any
offenses committed).
5. Reframe difﬁculties as useful stepping stones for personal growth, rather than failures
or insurmountable obstacles.
6. Build your L2/Lx skills and practice as much as possible, especially every-day,
culturally appropriate (e.g., colloquial) language.
7. Attend pre-sojourn orientations, if available.
In the new environment
1. Get to know your environment.
2. Be patient, adjustment takes time.
3. Keep in touch with your support network (parents, friends, etc.) at home.
4. Find a good routine to follow.
5. Attend orientation activities.
6. Suspend judgment; be open to new experiences, be adventurous, view the other
culture’s values as neither good nor bad, just different.
7. Form friendships with people from the host community, your home culture, and other
international students.
8. Take temporary breathers; recognize issues that make you irritated, angry, fearful, or
upset; occasionally retreating to something familiar (e.g., meals) can make the
adaptation process more successful.
9. Find a cultural ally who can help you navigate the new culture (either a member of the
host community or another international student who has lived there for a longer
period of time).
10. Set goals for your sojourn and revisit them often; develop habits of self-reﬂection and
analysis.
11. Analyze values mindfully (i.e., recognize that you do not have to accept or adopt all
practices and perspectives of the other culture; you have a choice).
12. Engage with the culture; practice the L2/Lx in various contexts to improve your
language skills.
13. Embrace miscommunication; seek help to understand its source and resolve it,
apologizing as needed.
14. Understand the limitations of cultural assumptions (e.g., stereotypes).
15. Accept that you will experience setbacks and persevere through them.
16. Ask questions, seek out new knowledge about practices, perspectives, and products
from a variety of sources.
Prior to returning home
1. Prepare for your reentry into your home culture.
2. Recognize that identities likely change as a result of emotional and sensory experiences
in the new culture, which can affect how you might feel in your original culture upon
reentry.

3. Ensure closure; take the time to say good-bye to friends you have made and celebrate
shared experiences.
4. Seek advice online and from experts about successful readjustment.
5. Set realistic expectations for the reentry process; be aware that confusion may
accompany your return home.
6. Reflect on and prepare to apply skills of adjustment (e.g., patience, empathy,
curiosity), since readjustment to the home culture can mirror experiences that you
underwent at the beginning of your journey.
7. Look for jobs or other opportunities in which you can put to use the linguistic,
cognitive, and affective skills and the new sense of self that you developed during your
sojourn; jobs in translation, social justice, or with international companies can help
maintain and expand your skills, while improving the lives of those who benefit from
your skills.
Back home
1. Establish structure, set up a clear schedule and tasks to reduce the many choices that
make reentry confusing.
2. Share your stories in small doses and reciprocally; while relating stories about
adventures, ask questions of and express an interest in the lives and experiences of
people who had stayed behind.
3. Participate in reentry courses if available.
4. Recognize that reentry adaptation takes time and will likely occur in cycles of stress,
growth, and adaptation.
5. Recognize negative thoughts and avoid snap judgments about cultural differences,
events, or people at home.
6. Connect with other returnees through a course, clubs, or international organizations.
7. Serve as a cultural ally to immigrants in your community.
8. Use social media to nurture the international friendships you made during your
sojourn (i.e., stay in touch).
9. Continue to practice and improve your L2/Lx skills.
10. Reflect on your experiences and make concrete plans for future intercultural
experiences.
11. Continue to seek advice online and from experts about successful readjustment.
12. Rekindle old friendships, while recognizing that some relationships may flounder if
your values have changed and are incompatible with those of your previous friends.

should not be seen as reﬂecting all intercultural journeys, which are

unique experiences.
The chapter also offered strategies that can help individuals prepare
for life in new cultural contexts, enjoy it more fully during their
sojourn, then reenter their original culture more smoothly, with a
newly developed ability to act situationally in multiple cultural
contexts.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS AND ACTIVITIES

1. What do you know about your likely student population in terms of
their potential push-pull drives for wanting to live in contexts where the
L2/Lx is spoken? How can you, as their instructor, guide them through
their transition to a new culture?
2. As Jackson (2014) noted, realistic expectations can smooth intercultural
transitions. How can L2/Lx instructors help learners “identify ideal
selves that are realistic and in harmony with their ought-to-selves, while
also powerful enough to countereffect feared selves” (p. 249)?
3. In what ways have your own experiences reflected the U- or W-shaped
curves of adaptation? In what ways were your experiences different from
those models? Examine the possible reasons behind the similarities and
differences from those models in your particular situation.
4. Think of a specific example for when you experienced stress-adaptation
and growth. What were the cognitive, linguistic, cultural, and affective
outcomes of that process?
5. Reread the synthesis of Jackson (2014) and Smith’s (2002) suggestions
for pre-, during- and postjourney preparation. Which strategies have you
already utilized? Which ones have you found especially useful? Are there
other ones that you have drawn on that are not listed here?
6. Interview someone whose intercultural journey differs from yours (e.g.,
a refugee or temporary sojourner) and find out about how their
experiences diverged from or mirrored your own.

Cultures and Identities

Chapter Overview
Each individual represents a complex network of social relationships,
which begin with primary socialization by parents or caretakers (Duff,
2010; Ochs & Schieffelin, 2008). As we grow up, we get socialized into
more and more social groups, including families, friendships, sports teams,
religious organizations, or professional associations, just to name a few.
These social relationships shape our identity throughout our lives. Some
aspects of our identity are determined for us: our nationality, ethnicity, or
race. Others we control, such as friendships, most working relationships,
athletic organizations, or politics. Some aspects are relatively constant,
since societies and social groups strive for stability, preferring little or
slow change (Byram 1997). Other aspects are malleable. We present
ourselves in different ways depending on speciﬁc situations; for example,
we may emphasize our professional or familial selves or our sexual identity
in different interactional contexts.
We can visualize the process of expanding social afﬁliations as etching
new facets on a crystal (see Figure 12.1), transforming it from its original
form (our infancy, on the left) into a multifaceted prism.

Figure 12.1 Increasing and reﬁned facets of cultural afﬁliation

263

Identity as Multiplex
By identity, we generally mean the essence of who we are, how we want to
be seen, and how others view us. Our identity is complex, as the following
meme circulating on Facebook on April 15, 2018, effectively illustrates:
When I went to college, I thought about joining one of those Asian student
organizations. But I wasn’t sure if I wanted to go ‘all in’ on being Asian. I had to
ask myself how integral it was to my identity. I’ve never been very traditional.
I grew up in a white town on Long Island. If I described myself in three
adjectives, ‘Asian’ wouldn’t be one of them. But on the other hand, the world is
going to see race anyway. I view myself as Chinese, but Asian is the first thing
people see. So if it’s how everyone sees you, should you see yourself the
same way?
As the poster’s self-reflection suggests, our identities originate both
within ourselves and externally, encompassing “an individual’s unique
characteristics . . . defined as one’s knowledge of membership in
certain social groups and the social meanings attached to the group”
(Abrams, O’Connor, & Giles, 2002, p. 226). These groups include
friends and family, various social circles to which we belong, nations,
and supranational organizations. Aspects of identity can be viewed as
categories delineated by similarities with and differences from these
groups.
Previous psychological understandings of identity considered it to be
relatively static, homogenized, created and maintained by individuals as
they relate to cultural groups, such as women or men, ethnic or linguistic
groups, or social class (Duff, 2012; Hua, 2014). Identity, according to this
paradigm, is comprised of:
1. individualized identity: the distinction between self and others;
2. familial identity: an individual’s place in connection to others within
a cultural group; and
3. spiritual identity: the sense of self in relation to belief systems (Martin
& Nakayama, 2018).

relational
identities

interactional
identities
personal
identities

master
identities
stable
More

Figure 12.2 Layers of identity (based on Hua, 2014 and Tracy, 2002)

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:58:48, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.013
266 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
respondent stay quite steady, but the interactants move out of these roles at
the end of the interview. In contrast, the relational identities that form the
next layer are situationally dynamic, shifting quickly and frequently within
one interaction, depending on our interlocutors. Recently, I had
a conversation with a close friend, who is a fellow faculty member at
a large university in the United States. We started our regular conversation
chatting about our children and the latest updates on our summer plans,
emphasizing our identities as friends and mothers. Then we discussed our
research plans for the upcoming weeks and the courses we would be
teaching next year, thus, highlighting our scholarly, professional selves.
Our chat concluded with an extended leave-taking sequence during which
we talked about our plans for the upcoming holiday weekend and sent
greetings to each other’s family. The variable topics prompted shifting
relational identities.
The word ‘identities’ is used in the plural intentionally, as we embody
a range of possible selves, shaped by emotional, moral, and cognitive forces.
Table 12.1 presents several identities and illustrates them with specific
linguistic examples.
Multiple aspects of identity co-occur, since we simultaneously have
a gender, national, familial, linguistic, and minority/majority identity,
and the unique combination we embody make up our personal identity.
This identity is not necessarily coherent or unified, because some aspects of
it may be in conflict with each other. For example, taking care of elderly
parents may cause tension between a person’s identities as ‘child’ and
‘caretaker’ or when we juggle traditional social roles at home, while having
to adopt modern ones at work.
In addition to being complex at any given moment, our personal identities
also change over time. From early infancy, before any awareness of social
categories becomes relevant for us as newborns, we are ascribed a gender
identity and become a daughter or a son, grandchild, sibling, a citizen of
a nation, and a member of a social class. Later, as we expand our social
experiences beyond our home, we become swimmers, ice skaters, mathema-
ticians, travelers, social rights activists, or actors. As we age, we take on further
social roles: spouses, parents, aunts, uncles, employees, and employers.
Our personal identity is inherently linked to our social identities (which
straddle all four of Hua and Tracy’s categories) which make up most facets
of our identity and reflect various group affiliations and the emotional
significance of such relationships (Liu, Volcic, & Gallois, 2011; Wintergerst
& McVeigh, 2011). We associate with some people because we share

Aspect of
identity Deﬁnition and description Language example

Majority A sense of belonging to culturally In Myanmar, Burmese is the ofﬁcial

identity dominant groups (dominant and dominant language, while the
group membership is often use of other (minority) languages,
unexamined or subconscious, which number close to a hundred,
without an awareness of that is discouraged (Goddard, 2005).
group’s privileges in cultural,
sociopolitical, socioeconomic, or
other terms).
Minority A sense of belonging to a culturally Hungarian speakers in Serbia use
identity non-dominant group; the Hungarian – and enact their
function of minority languages Vojvodinian Hungarian
typically reflects their status in identities – only in the domestic
a country: the more prestige domain, whereas in public
a language has, the more domains contexts they shift to/navigate the
it is spoken in. majority identity (Gábrity, 2012).
Gender Psychological identification with Many languages reflect gender in the
identity a biological gender; gender lexicon (e.g., the pronouns he or
identity does not always align she in English) or grammar (e.g.,
with one’s biological gender (e.g., verb endings in Russian, such as
transgender individuals identify был (masc.) and была (fem.) for
as male or female, but their ‘I was’), which can be challenging
biological gender may be to navigate vis-à-vis gender
different). How we embody identity in addition to learning an
a gender is culture-dependent as L2/Lx.
well, since notions of what a man
does and how he acts or how
a woman acts and what she does
vary across cultures.
Sexual identity An identity based on orientation Refining one’s sense of sexual
and attraction towards others identity is an important part of
(or a lack of attraction):1 teenage years, and language play –
• asexual (no attraction towards including self-labeling, ‘trying on’
others), gendered language such as
• heterosexual (attraction to the emotional expression, or topic
opposite gender), choice – serves an essential
• gay/lesbian (attraction to the function for exploring this
same gender), identity (Huffaker & Calvert,
• bisexual (attraction to both 2006).
genders),

1
www.soc.ucsb.edu/sexinfo/article/overview-sexual-orientations

Aspect of
identity Deﬁnition and description Language example

•pansexual (attraction to people

with all sexual identities),
• queer (identifying with sexual
identity beyond binary
categorizations), or
• demisexual (forming attraction
only based on emotional
connection) identity.
Age identity Identifying as young or old, in terms Many languages have specific terms
of how we are expected to act, to use at different stages of life
look, feel or behave. (e.g., giving someone a name
Importantly, what is deemed before or well after birth, terms of
‘appropriate’ behavior at various address, formal or informal
life stages is culturally language use), and there may be
determined; what is acceptable verbal and nonverbal rituals at
for a child or middle-aged adults specific speech events that
in one culture may be considered accompany certain milestones as
‘inappropriate’ in others. well (e.g., the enkipaata adult
In many cultures, significant initiation for Maasai boys and
milestones are celebrated in later their circumcision
unique ways (e.g., the quinceañera ceremony2).
on a girl’s 15th birthday in
Mexico, being allowed to vote at
age 16 in Malta, or celebrating
one’s 100th birthday.
Racial identity Identifying with a particular race, Language and race intertwine in
where race is a social construct ways that can reinforce (e.g.,
(fluid and subjective) defined by racist epithets) or challenge (e.g.,
some aspects of physical poetry or rap) existing power
appearance and issues of privilege disparities among racial groups;
or disadvantage (e.g., apartheid President Barack Obama’s ability
and genocide in the Sudan, to style shift between different
historical apartheid in South audiences, for example, helped
Africa). challenge and transgress racial
It is important to note that no boundaries (Alim, Rickford, &
scientific evidence supports Ball, 2016).
differentiating humans as
belonging to biologically different
races (Templeton, 2013).

2
www.maasai-association.org/ceremonies.html

Aspect of
identity Deﬁnition and description Language example

Ethnic identity A sense of belonging to a particular The language used by an ethnic

ethnic group, having knowledge group may reflect both
about that group’s culture (e.g., a dominant language spoken in
history, practices, beliefs, and the wider community and the
values), and having an emotional heritage language spoken by
connection to that ethnic group. members of the ethnic group,
Similar to racial identity, there may such as code-switching between
be a historical power disparity Spanish and English among the
between groups; for example, Latinx community in California
nowadays, most Americans with (Fought, 2006).
Irish and Italian heritage celebrate Language knowledge may also entail
their ethnic legacy, but in the late songs, poetry, myths, tales, and
nineteenth and early twentieth rituals transmitted across
centuries, their predecessors and generations within the ethnic
ancestors experienced systemic group.
social and socioeconomic
discrimination.3
Religious A sense of affiliation with a religious Religious identity may be expressed
identity group, its practices, belief system, by using phrases in one’s
and values; some religions require discourse (e.g., Inshallah [‘if Allah
particular types of clothing or wills it’]) and during religious
adornments, and may regulate ceremonies as clearly structured
a person’s appearance (e.g., in the speech events, such as Aboriginal
Amish community, married men funeral ceremonies in Australia,
do not shave their beards). which determine who may
participate and how, who speaks
and how they use the traditional
ceremonial language (Butcher,
2008).
Socioeconomic A sense of affiliation with In mass media, certain accents are
or Class a particular socioeconomic, identified with particular social
identity occupational or social status. classes as a short-cut to the
In hierarchical societies (high power stereotypical views the audience
distance), the class structure is holds of that class, such as the
fairly rigid, with little movement Boston Southie accent
from less privileged classes to representing a hard-working,
higher status ones, while cultures scrappy person (Lippi-Green,
with low power distance among 2012); partially due to such
their members offer more stereotypes, individuals who

3
www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/11/racist-anti-immigrant-cartoons-from-the-turn-of-the
-20th-century/383248/

Aspect of
identity Deﬁnition and description Language example

mobility (e.g., Chile and Brazil speak less privileged class-based

belong in the former category, language varieties often feel
while Denmark, Norway, compelled to code-switch in
Finland, and Canada to the educational and other public
latter). settings (Elkins & Hanke, 2018).
National Unlike other identities, national The use of Tetum in increasing
identity identity has a legal component domains in Timor-Leste,
(e.g., someone born to a German replacing the colonial and
parent will be a German citizen, occupational languages of
or someone born on U.S. soil or Portuguese and Indonesian,
to U.S. citizen parents will be respectively, is a reflection of
a U.S. citizen). Tetum’s “role as an icon of
National identity is not always nationalism” in a young,
straightforward: (1) we may have emergent democracy (Taylor-
more or less affinity to our legal Leech, 2012, p. 20).
home, depending on our attitude
toward its politics or values, (2)
the nation is in flux (e.g., Latvia,
Lithuania, and Estonia were
former Soviet Republics but now
are their own nation-states), or (3)
our national identity is uncertain
(e.g., refugees awaiting
resettlement).
Regional Identifying with a geographic A somewhat complex example of
identity region, whose boundaries may regional identity is Dutch Street
overlap with or cross national Language, which has an ethnic
borders. origin in Surinamese (Surinam
In Germany, for example, the was a former Dutch colony): this
regional boundaries are within language incorporates many
the national ones: people are lexical items from Sranan Tongo,
more likely to identify with their Arabic, and (African) American
region, such as Bavaria (and English (Nortier, 2008) and has
within that the northern or the its own phonological and
Alpine regions) or Rhineland- grammatical features (Kuiken,
Palatinate than with the country 2009).
(given Germany’s history of Mixed ethnicity youth in
nationalism during the two world Amsterdam tend to adopt this
wars in the twentieth century), particular variety of Dutch,
whereas the Bedouin are likely to because its use sets them apart
traverse national boundaries, from white speakers of Standard
both in Northern Africa and the Dutch (de Rooij & Cornips, 2003
Middle East. cited in Boekesteijn, 2015).

Aspect of
identity Deﬁnition and description Language example

Familial The relationships we form with In many cultures, surnames reﬂect

identity members of our family – parents, hereditary naming systems, often
grandparents, siblings, children, based on paternal lineage or clan,
broader family circles, etc. – shape signaling family unity and
our familial identity. These continuity (Mateos, 2014):
relationships play a role in how • Rodríguez (Spanish → son of
we view ourselves even beyond Rodrigo)
the family, our sense of self-worth • McAlister (Scottish → son of
and self-esteem. Alister)
President Obama (2004) relates his
excitement when upon his arrival
in Kenya someone recognized his
name, making him feel welcome:
“For the first time in my life, I felt
comfort, the firmness of identity
that a name might provide, how it
could carry an entire history in
other people’s memories, so that
they might nod and say
knowingly, ‘Oh you are so and
so’s son.’ No one here in Kenya
would ask how to spell my name,
or mangle it with an unfamiliar
tongue. My name belonged and
so I belonged, drawn into a web of
relationships, alliances, and
grudges that I did not yet
understand” (p. 305).
Linguistic This identity reflects the Language that reflects the personal
identity relationship(s) between our sense identity can be most closely
of self and the language aligned with one’s idiolect, our
communities we identify with individual ways of using
(Block, 2007). vocabulary, idiomatic expressions
Subcomponents of linguistic and other phrases, style,
identity connect us to all the grammar, pragmatic and
different cultural affiliations we paralinguistic features, non-
develop in relation to our verbal communication.
families, friends, smaller and Idiolects are difficult to study,
larger cultural groups, as well as because they vary according to
national and supranational one’s interactants (e.g., the same
entities; we may speak a particular individual is likely to use one type
national variety of a language, in of language in formal settings

Aspect of
identity Deﬁnition and description Language example

addition to a regional variety, and with a ﬁgure of authority and

various sociolects (e.g., another with close friends in
a profession). informal contexts).
The idiolect plays a primary role in In a study of British Prime Minister
communication, and its Tony Blair’s speech patterns,
characteristics reﬂect a unique Mollin (2009) found 25 recurring
combination of social varieties, and distinct pairings of maximizer
reﬂecting the language of cultural collocations, for example
groups that the individual belongs absolutely committed (maximizer +
to; the idiolect, in spite of its adjective) and extremely closely
adaptability to one’s interlocutors (maximizer + adverb).
and the communicative context, Idiolect analyses are also used in
is both consistent and distinct forensic linguistics, when
(Barlow, 2013; Hudson, 1996; linguists try to identify the author
Wright, 2017). of a certain text, such as an email
Individuals develop a linguistic or a text message on somebody’s
repertoire that is unique to them, phone.
not shared in the exact
combination with anybody else;
this unique repertoire emerges
from “the different expressions
and constructions encountered by
the speaker” during interactions
in various cultural groups
(Barlow, 2013, p. 444), who
represent complex sociohistorical
and linguistic backgrounds (Nini
& Grant 2013).

interests or characteristics with them (Oetzel, 2009; Ting-Toomey &

Chung, 2012). As Jackson (2014) observes:
we can identify ourselves according to our religion (Taoist, Jain, Christian),
place of origin, (Gibraltar, Macau, North Korea), political afﬁliation (Green
party, Independent, Muslim Brotherhood), profession or educational status
(university student, English language teacher, civil engineer), language and
accent (Yorkshire accent, Singlish, Tagalog) or relationship (step-mother,
great-aunt, ﬁrst cousin, friend, lover). Some of our social identities are stigma-
tized (drug addict, homeless person, unemployed, high school dropout). Most

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:58:48, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.013
12 Cultures and Identities 273
social identities are multiple (e.g. a multilingual, gay British Indian male
student who is a devout Hindu and belongs to Green Peace). Together, all of
our diverse roles and attributes help us to realize our overall social identity,
which continues to evolve throughout our life as our preferences, interests,
financial situation, job status, marital situation and other social dimensions
change. (p. 137)
The group affiliations we establish reflect diverse social belongings,
through which we develop relevant schemata for processing the world,
such as organizing knowledge, getting things done, and interacting with
others. At the same time, social identities are fluid; they describe an
individual’s sense of belonging, which might shift across situations, as
Hofstede (2001) explains:
Populations that fight each other on the basis of their different ‘felt’
identities may very well share the same values. Examples are the linguistic
regions in Belgium, the religions in Northern Ireland, and tribal groups in
Africa. A shared identity needs a shared Other: At home, I feel Dutch and
very different from other Europeans, such as Belgians and Germans; in Asia
or the United States, we all feel like Europeans. (p. 10)
This quote illustrates the changing perspectives that lie behind identities.
The frame of reference impacts which aspects of our identity become
salient (i.e., relevant). A graduating senior from university, majoring in
applied linguistics, is an avid hiker, a bilingual speaker of English and
Spanish, and an aspiring elementary school teacher. She will be working in
Madrid, Spain after graduation, teaching English as a Second Language to
elementary school children. At work, her training in applied linguistics and
plans for teaching will be most salient; consequently, she will use language
with her colleagues and students that reflect her training and professional
interests. At the same time, she can meet fellow hikers (Spanish or inter-
national) to establish friendships with and help reduce feelings of home-
sickness. By seeking out such work-external communities, she can also
practice and continue to improve her Spanish language skills.
Usually, we navigate our various identities seamlessly and subcon-
sciously, but sometimes, we become aware of them, when others’ assump-
tions about us do not align with how we view ourselves.

Avowed and Ascribed Identities

Identity is both avowed and ascribed (Hua, 2014; Martin & Nakayama,
2018; Pavlenko & Blackledge, 2004). Avowed identities are the ones we

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:58:48, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.013
274 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
adopt ourselves, subconsciously or consciously. Ascribed identities, in con-
trast, are imposed on us by others. Ideally, avowed identity is aligned with
ascribed identity: college student, spiritual leader, politician, or father. At
other times, there might be a misalignment between the two views. Many
native speakers of English report the experience of studying abroad where
their L2/Lx is spoken and try to interact with native speakers of that
language, only to find that those speakers switch to English immediately.
These French, Arabic, Swahili, or Chinese speakers might not recognize
the L2/Lx learner as capable enough to communicate. These experiences
can be annoying, but other instances of misalignment can have serious
consequences. After the terror attacks on New York on September 11, 2001,
for example, many Americans conflated Islam and terrorism,4 resulting in
a decades-long increase in hate crimes against people of the Muslim faith in
the United States. Moreover, anyone to whom an American ascribed
a Muslim identity could be in danger, regardless of their actual religious
affiliation. Many members of the Sikh community experienced rising hate
crimes,5 as their Sikh identity was erased, replaced by inaccurate ascribed
identities by their attackers as Muslims and terrorists. Such misidentifica-
tions are incorrect in two regards: most Muslims are not terrorists, and
Sikhs are not Muslim.
Scholars who approach intercultural communication from a critical,
advocacy perspective aim to draw attention to discrimination based on
identity, which they view as being shaped and constrained by institutional
and societal structures, including historical, economic, political, and dis-
cursive inequalities (Collier, 2005; Martin & Nakayama, 2018). Often,
multiple aspects of identity intersect, each contributing in unique but
compounding ways to experiences of societal oppression (Crenshaw,
1989). The reasons for and ways in which such oppression differs across
cultures, requiring new understandings beyond what we know of our own
local cultural contexts. Within a critical advocacy framework, avowed and
ascribed identities are often contested (questioned and resisted), if they are
in conflict. Women’s increased political presence in Tunisia is one illus-
trative case of dynamic identity development as a contested site.
Written after gaining independence from France, Tunisia’s constitution in
1959 did not mention women, either regarding legislative power or legal
protections (Hitman, 2018). In spite of “state feminism,” where those in

4
http://theconversation.com/explaining-the-rise-in-hate-crimes-against-muslims-in-the-us-80304
5
www.npr.org/2018/09/14/647426417/people-saw-only-a-turban-and-a-beard-reﬂecting-on-a-post-
sept-11-death

Language, Identity, and Power

Not surprisingly, language and identity are closely connected and enjoy
a dynamic relationship across interactional situations in which we partake.
During interactions, people make conscious or subconscious calculations
about how language identiﬁes them to other interactants. They express
various facets of their identity via national, regional, and local varieties of
a language; they also reveal their identities in particular sociolects, jargon,
styles, and registers (Block, 2006; Duff, 2012; Myers-Scotton, 2006). As
Myers-Scotton (2006) observes, “each language does ‘social work’ for its
speakers” (p. 9), and languages are one of the ﬁrst features we learn about
another person, when we recognize the variety of language or accent that
they speak. In other words, we manage impressions with our linguistic

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:58:48, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.013
276 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
choices (Ting-Toomey, 2005), which may benefit or disadvantage us
socially, economically, or personally.
One important social benefit is that languages are powerful symbols of
group membership. They can be used to signal positive linguistic affiliation
with a cultural group, such as wearing a heart-shaped sticker with the word
Italiano or Español by L2/Lx learners. For similar reasons, we self-identify
as Francophiles or use jargon to signal our in-group identity as medical
professionals or athletes. The 2019 Democratic debates likewise prompted
many presidential hopefuls to include messages in Spanish in order to
express their commitment to the Latinx community in the United States.6
There are also increasing instances where individuals and communities
have come to accentuate previously marginalized language varieties, help-
ing to revitalize them and raise their prestige. By recognizing diverse
varieties of languages, such as Hawai‘i Creole English (Drager, 2012) or
Kristang in Singapore (i.e., Malaccan Creole Portuguese) (Wong, 2017),
members of these speech communities feel more empowered, recognized,
and legitimated in society. The immense power of language should not be
underestimated: the ability to use a language that one closely affiliates with
positively impacts that individual’s sense of belonging to society, sense of
self-worth, and legitimacy (Lee, 2017).
Unfortunately, the power of symbols can also be negative, as languages
can be used to exclude others. If a government does not provide sufficient
educational materials in certain languages, it restricts academic access to
some social groups and limits their scholarly achievements (Office of the
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2017). In
a comparable situation, trainee teachers from Northern England were
asked to reduce their linguistic and regional identities in favor of one
that was perceived to be more prestigious, under the guise of making
themselves more comprehensible to their students and their parents.7
Such incidents can be found in many places around the globe.
In multilingual contexts, it is often sociopolitical forces that shape
linguistic boundaries, resulting in more or less powerful languages vying
for use, respect, and prestige. Power distributions in bilingual and multi-
lingual communities are typically uneven: migrant populations usually
have to adapt to the dominant culture (e.g., Turkish migrants in
Germany, North African migrants in France, or South Asian migrants in
6
www.npr.org/2019/06/27/736520658/spanish-speakers-highlight-democratic-primary-debate
7
www.bbc.com/capital/story/20170523-does-your-accent-make-you-sound-smarter and
www.theguardian.com/education/2016/may/12/trainee-teachers-from-northern-england-told-to-
modify-their-accents

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:58:48, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.013
12 Cultures and Identities 277
Australia). This nonreciprocal relationship arises from and reflects clear
power differentials. Such power differentials also arose when colonial
powers in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries did not take ethnic
and linguistic identity into consideration, when creating national and
political boundaries, thus forcing multilingual and cultural identities on
most inhabitants in West Africa and the Middle East (Myers-Scotton,
2006).
Bourdieu (1991), a French sociologist, proposed that languages have
symbolic capital. That is, some languages enjoy significant prestige and
cultural value, while others lack both. The value society places on
a language – and by extension, its speakers – is usually determined by
social groups who are in positions of power; they decide who is allowed
to join the community and who is not. The driving force most often is
to reinforce the existing power structures. Consequently, it is the power-
ful in society who determine which languages or language varieties are
valuable and which are less so. They also determine who has access to
power through language (e.g., controlling voting ballots, educational
and healthcare materials). Not having access to a qualified interpreter
in legal interactions, for example, not only denies a defendant his or her
human rights but also serves to perpetuate existing power structures.
One illustrative example pertains to a Mexican national, who tried to
enter the United States (legally and as an informant on a drug smuggling
operation) and was detained at the border because the government used
an ad hoc rather than a professional, trained interpreter, who mistrans-
lated both the language and the cultural content of a two-hour inter-
rogation (Angelelli, 2015). By conveying the border agents’ questions as
assertions and not being able to see the detainee’s nonverbal commu-
nication that played a crucial role in his communication with nonnative
speakers of his language, the interpreter reinforced the disparate power
relationships among the participants which resulted in the detainee
being sent to jail for two months before he was acquitted. ‘José’s’ case
is not unique by any means; linguistic discrimination is systemic at the
border:
There are no dedicated professional interpreters to serve the communica-
tive needs of this federal office. The agents are told that when they need
interpreting services they have to call a company that provides this service
remotely. When recruiting interpreters, companies providing over-the-
phone interpreting services seem to focus more on the bottom line than
on the quality of the service offered. The interpreter used by the tele-
phone company in this case is not a certified legal/court interpreter . . .

Intercultural Identity
The ideal outcome of extensive L2/Lx learning is the development of an
intercultural identity. Reitenauer, Cress, and Bennett (2005) define inter-
cultural identity as one that can traverse cultural situations, based on “the
creation of learned and shared values, beliefs, and behaviors in
a community of interacting people”; this new identity is shaped by “the
many cultural influences that impact us, including nationality, ethnicity,
race, age, gender, physical characteristics, sexual orientation, economic
status, education, profession, religion, and organizational affiliation”
(p. 68). An intercultural identity enables the “intercultural speaker”
(Byram, 1997, p. 32) to participate in intercultural communication in
a way that no interlocutor is considered to be better than the other (even
when one is a native speaker of a language and the other is not), just
speaking on equal footing, presenting social identities they wish to make

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:58:48, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.013
12 Cultures and Identities 279
salient in that particular exchange. Interactional success would be mea-
sured in terms of the “effective exchange of information,” as the goal may be
building a relationship rather than a transaction of information (Byram,
1997, p. 32; emphasis mine). Moreover, an intercultural identity allows
individuals to engage with another culture by “exploring the ways language
and culture relate to lived realities – the learners’ as well as that of the target
community” (Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013, p. 49). Such individuals under-
stand social meanings in the different cultural contexts they inhabit and
how these social meanings affect them.
Consequently, intercultural individuals understand and enact their
social identities, knowing what is possible and how to realize it through
verbal and nonverbal communication in various cultural settings. They
also understand the values, practices, and behaviors these social roles reflect
in each cultural context (e.g., how is a business executive supposed to
behave in both settings?). At the same time, intercultural individuals also
know that they can accept some values and practices from each culture
with which they affiliate and simultaneously reject others (while being
aware of the possible consequences for flouting expectations).
The process of developing intercultural identity entails making connec-
tions to others who overlap with facets of our identity; such connections
facilitate the emergence of social group identities, and it is social groups
that can help socialize newcomers into their communities. Students return-
ing from study-abroad sojourns have reported finding friendships through
shared passions for karate, board games, or studying an additional L2/Lx.
In addition to modeling a range of socially acceptable behaviors in a new
cultural context, these identity-based social groups allow learners to see
other people as individuals, with whom they share common ground,
although they might at first glance appear different (e.g., different gender,
nationality, profession). This revelation helps reshape learners form cross-
cultural to intercultural individuals. Whereas prior to their travels they
viewed themselves as Americans versus German and Japanese host cultures,
the students realized that national identity was not the most salient aspect
of their encounters. Instead, their social group identities were more rele-
vant and helped them find a ready connection with their peers.
As mentioned in previous chapters, cultures reflect “complex systems of
thought and behavior that people create and perpetuate in and for associa-
tion” (Omaggio-Hadley, 2001, p. 348). Their beliefs, values, and behaviors
are deeply ingrained in the collective consciousness, and in-group members
may hold them as “universal truth,” labeling their preferences “‘human
nature,’ ‘instinct,’ ‘common sense,’ ‘logic,’” while beliefs, values, and

Teaching about Identity in the L2/Lx Classroom

Language and identity are inherently welded in the real world, an issue that
becomes especially poignant when we learn another language, both from
the learners’ perspective and from that of the instructor, as the following
discussion reveals.

The Student’s Perspective

Several issues arise from the learners’ perspective, pertaining to expecta-
tions, opportunities, and contextual possibilities. L2/Lx learners often set
unreasonable expectations for themselves in terms of language-learning
outcomes. Some of these expectations come from advertisements from
language-learning platforms that promise ﬂuency in the L2/Lx in as little as
three weeks; such expectations can damage learners’ sense of L2/Lx speaker
identity, when they inevitably cannot meet these unrealistic goals.
Instructors also contribute to a sense of ‘failure,’ if they expect perfection
from their students or are intolerant of their learners’ mistakes. Jia and Lai
Jia (2017), for example, reports on the case of Burmese migrant students
studying in China, who are frequently shamed by their Chinese instructors
for the variety of language they speak and their literacy skills.8 This kind of
linguistic deﬁciency orientation (Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013; Piller, 2016) is
misguided. As Chapter 2 presented, few Lx learners will develop native-like
abilities, and in any case, comparisons to native speakers are fraught with
problems: Which native speaker do we measure learning against? Someone
without formal education? Someone with a high school diploma? With
a college degree? Also, native speakers speak different varieties of languages,
some of which are excluded from a conceptualization of ‘norms’ and
‘ideals’ due to reasons of racism or socioeconomic prejudice (Davies,
2003). At the same time, language competence is complex. Some L2/Lx

8
This issue is discussed in further detail at www.languageonthemove.com/explorations-in-language-
shaming/

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:58:48, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.013
12 Cultures and Identities 281
learners may be better speakers, while others are more comfortable with
writing. Some learners may have the same level of control over grammar,
lexicon, or pragmatics as an educated native speaker, yet may retain
a ‘nonnative’ accent in the L2. That accent marks them as nonnative
speakers, even when their other competences reﬂect outstanding L2/Lx
knowledge.
In addition to language skills possibly limiting the variety of and extent
to which learners can express their identities in the L2/Lx, classroom
contexts offer meager opportunities for practicing diverse social roles.
Learners practice language skills but tend to perform solely the social role
of language learner, and often feel infantilized by the input. Due to such
limited sociolinguistic preparation, they are often unable to inhabit the
typical range of social roles they would normally encounter in the real
world, and which actually reﬂect their identities (e.g., developing common
interest-based friendships, expressing their style of humor, or being socially
and politically active). To foster successful intercultural identity develop-
ment, then, we need to commit to changing learners’ and our own attitude
towards L2/Lx learning outcomes. Both they and we need to realize that
multilingual learners can express a range of identities, albeit imperfectly, in
another language. They are legitimate participants in L2/Lx communica-
tive practices, who can tap into a wealth of multiple linguistic and cultural
repertoires in their intercultural interactions (Dewaele, 2017).
Another possible reason why L2/Lx learners are hesitant about expres-
sing the full palette of identities is that they do not quite know how those
identities are enacted in new cultural contexts. What verbal and nonverbal
communication should be used to express one’s gender or professional
identity? Are all aspects of one’s identity safe to express in a new cultural
context? Will our way of speaking, be it our pronunciation or pragmatic
knowledge, lead to linguistic discrimination (Hua, 2014; Myers-Scotton,
2006)? A former student, who was very interested in learning Arabic,
hesitated signing up for teaching English abroad in Morocco or Jordan,
because he was unsure how, how openly, where, and with whom he would
be able to express his identity as a gay man, an aspect of identity that is
important to him.
In order to help learners navigate complex multilingual realities, they
need opportunities to become aware of possible identities, both avowed
and ascribed, in the L2/Lx-speaking context and learn how to express those
identities verbally and nonverbally. Awareness raising can be accomplished
by presenting cultures from multiple identity perspectives, and not just
from the perspective of members of a dominant cultural group, and as

The Teacher’s Perspective

Like language learners, L2/Lx instructors bring issues of identity to the
classroom as well. Ghanem (2018) highlights this experience in teacher
education. In a study analyzing the identities of graduate instructors of
German, she acknowledged that “Foreign languages differ from any
other subject in that the subject that is taught should be also the
medium of instruction, which can often complicate the construction
and development of teacher identities” (p. 46). While language educa-
tors need to convey ideas about language and identity to their stu-
dents, they need to be aware of how their own social self is shaped by
language and how they constantly renegotiate their linguistic identities
as part of their career (Kumaravadivelu, 2003). To this end, Ghanem
(2018) recommends regular professional development that focuses not
only on pedagogical and subject-matter content, but also on opportu-
nities for language instructors to reﬂect “on identity constructs, such as
conﬁdence, authority, roles as instructors versus graduate students,
struggles the instructors encounter and possible solutions” (p. 60).
Professional development should also entail acknowledging the forces
impacting instructors’ identity, both self-avowed and other-ascribed,
since identity impacts the content that instructors are likely to teach,
whether they feel comfortable including culture and culturally
embedded language use or not (Ghanem, 2015). This sentiment is

Pedagogical Activities to Foster Intercultural Identity Development

in the L2/Lx Classroom
Identities are essential to each person; therefore, this issue must be
treated with great care, especially when learners’ L2/Lx skills are
limited. However, given the importance of expressing the full array
of our identities, learners need opportunities to develop the linguistic
skills and cultural knowledge to do so in L2/Lx-speaking contexts.
The following activities, which connect the information covered in
Chapters 4–9 to the material discussed in this chapter, can help
achieve these goals.
• Using a movie or video recording, examine how identities (e.g.,
gender, age, profession, interest) are expressed verbally and
nonverbally.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 01:58:48, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.013
284 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
• Selecting a smaller speech event, include tasks that help learners recog-
nize the dynamic nature of interaction, how different aspects of identity
might be more or less salient during a communicative event; observe
how participants emphasize and express that aspect ﬂuidly.
• Using the same video or a new one, analyze aspects of politeness and
impoliteness, to understand how language and power are performed by
social actors.
• Explore terms of address (and corresponding lexico-grammatical
features) to identify social roles and relationships among them (e.g.,
how do people address colleagues or express support for friends and
family?).
• Analyze authentic interactions to see how humor is deployed to express
in-group and out-group identities among different social groups.
• Using various authentic materials as input sources, have learners engage
in role-playing, so that they can enact and embody diverse social roles in
the L2/Lx, using verbal and nonverbal communicative tools creatively.
• Analyze values associated with social and interpersonal roles, as well as
cultural groups from multiple perspectives. Learners should develop an
understanding of intracultural variation in the expression of identities.
Include language samples and works from people who come from
communities with little cultural capital.
• Have learners research a community that reﬂects one of their social
identities (e.g., skateboarders or anime enthusiasts): How does that
community identify itself? What verbal and nonverbal communication
is unique to them (or is used in unique ways by them)? How are they
viewed by other members of the broader cultural community? This
group can be the learners’ entry point into full participation in the L2/
Lx-speaking community.
• Include research projects regarding cultural and social symbols, images,
objects and their connection to identity (e.g., school mascots in the
United States, including the debates surrounding culturally appro-
priated images; religious songs; peace or environmental movements).
• Have students research a social group’s relation to power, both histori-
cally and the implication for the group at the present time in terms of its
multicultural identities (e.g., Italian colonization in the Horn of Africa;
Trento, 2012).
• Incorporate stories written by immigrants to the host culture that
explore the process of identity development in an L2/Lx-speaking
community.

Summary
This chapter explored the multifaceted nature of identity, which we begin
developing at birth and shape throughout our lives via the affiliations we
form with other individuals and groups. Including academic and athletic
organizations, political and professional associations, gender and age,
ethnicity and race, we wear various ‘hats’ in our lifetime, reflecting our
identities. Language and identity are inherently enmeshed, both at the
societal and individual levels, as they relate both to avowed (self-
determined) and ascribed (other-determined) facets to our sense of self.
Learning an L2/Lx provides ideal opportunities for exploring our
identities, as it is often when we reflect on how we are similar to and
different from others that we have the chance to refine our understanding
of who we are. Learning to speak other languages may reflect or add new
facets to our identity, depending on the reasons behind our studying that
language, whether our background leads us to learning it or a new
language results in the development of new identities. In L2/Lx educa-
tion, it is essential to draw both learners’ and instructors’ attention to
facets of identity, and the dynamic nature of identity, that changes over
time and across situations, including based on each of the languages we
enact. For students and instructors, regular opportunities for self-
reflection can improve awareness of the relationship between language
and identity.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS AND ACTIVITIES

1. Fill in the image of the prism below with the various identities you
inhabit, then identify which aspects are relatively stable and which ones
are interactional/situational. Do you inhabit different identities in your
L2/Lx? How do you express these identities verbally and nonverbally in
your L1 and L2/Lx?
I am . . .

2. Examine the identities in Table 12.1 and, focusing on two

or three of them, consider how they would be realized
verbally and nonverbally in the context of the language you
will be teaching.
3. Watch a movie or observe an extended interaction among speakers
of your L2/Lx and note how they deﬁne and express their identities.
Examine issues such as individualism versus collectivism, equality,
gender roles, etc. What does this source reveal about the different
cultural identities represented? How do people/characters convey
these identities verbally and nonverbally? Please keep in mind that
this is one data source and should not be viewed as a categorical
representation of the culture.
4. Identify a community in an L2/Lx-speaking context that could be
a good entry-point for you into the broader culture, and research it in
depth: How does that community identify itself? What verbal and
nonverbal communication is unique to them (or is used in unique ways
by them)? How are they viewed by other members of the broader
cultural community?
5. How would you prepare L2/Lx learners for participation in
a cultural context that is more or less inclusive (i.e., accepting of
diversity) than their current context? What are the ethical
responsibilities of you as an instructor, and how would you discuss
this with your L2/Lx learner(s)?

6. Select an activity presented in this chapter on pages 283–284

and, working with a peer or a small group, develop a lesson
plan that fosters the development of intercultural identity in
your learners.

Miscommunication, Conﬂict, and Intercultural

Communicative Competence

Chapter Overview
Miscommunication and conflict are inevitable in human interactions.
Managing them can be challenging even when participants share cultural
and linguistic knowledge, but “[w]hen a second language is involved, the
situation may be exacerbated. Our cultural ignorance or ineptness often-
times clutters our ability to communicate appropriately, effectively, and
adaptively across cultural and linguistic lines” (Ting-Toomey, 2012, p.
279). Our limited language skills may make us misunderstand someone’s
utterances or prevent us from being able to express what we wish to. We
may miss the implications of linguistic and cultural practices or employ
disparate communication styles. Alternately, there may be external reasons
for conflict, that make interaction problematic.
The causes, contexts, and resolutions for conflict are numerous, and we
need to recognize that miscommunication is not a matter of ‘if’ but ‘when’ –
it is a regular feature of intercultural existence, and learning to accept and
manage it is part of intercultural communicative competence. To foster this
competence, this chapter examines communication accommodation for
managing miscommunication, causes of conflict, and possible paths towards
resolving it. The discussion closes with an examination of what it means to
become a more effective intercultural communicator.

Communication Accommodation Theory

Social cohesion underlines the Communication Accommodation Theory
(CAT), whose premise is that “Communicative adjustment is ubiquitous
and constitutes a fundamental, and arguably necessary, part of successful
social interaction” (Dragojevic, Gasiorek, & Giles, 2016, p. 36). CAT was
originally developed by Howard Giles, a social psychologist and self-
identiﬁed sociolinguist, based on his observations regarding accent

288

Convergence
The ﬁrst pattern, convergence, refers to accommodation where speakers align
their verbal and nonverbal communication to be more similar to others
(Dragojevic & Giles, 2014; Myers-Scotton, 2006). Convergence typically
highlights similarities and solidarity between speakers by emphasizing shared
identities. For example, surfers of different nationalities may emphasize their
common athletic interest, making that aspect of their identity most salient
facilitating interaction even in the absence of a shared linguistic code.
Successful communication accommodation is an essential component of
politeness as well, because it improves positive perceptions among participants,
increasing mutual intelligibility and a sense of interpersonal involvement
(Dragojevic & Giles, 2014). Convergent behavior is mostly subconscious,
although participants may also accommodate intentionally (Giles, 2016). A
multilingual instructor of English as a Second Language in Santa Cruz, for
example, regularly helps her students by switching to their native French,
Spanish, or Arabic to help clarify lexical items or answer questions they might
have. This allows the learners to understand the course content better, and also
makes them recognize that their languages serve as useful resources.
Several features of communication adjustment are pertinent to
accommodation:
1. Adjustments can be made when personal variables are more salient
(interpersonal accommodation) or when social group characteristics
are more salient (intergroup accommodation), but when interlocutors
do not know each other, group categories tend to be more salient.
Learning to see individual variation – especially similarities – is key to
building relationships (Dragojevic & Giles, 2014; Giles, 2016). For

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:04:31, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.014
290 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
example, a student from South Africa may become friends with a
fellow student from Morocco (intergroup similarity) during an intern-
ship program in Japan, because they are both studying biomedical
engineering, which gives them a shared interest (interpersonal
similarity).
2. Self-disclosures by different interlocutors can identify interpersonal
similarities and improve the interactants’ attitudes towards each other,
thus facilitating communication (Gasiorek, 2016). A Chilean student
studying abroad in South Korea can connect with peers who enjoy K-
Pop by wearing t-shirts that reveal his interest in this musical genre.
3. Interpersonal and intergroup salience is dynamic and depends on the
participants’ attitudes, the topic of conversation, among other factors.
In a single online chat with my siblings, for example, I may check to
see how they are doing (sibling identity salience), how our parents are
(child identity), then ask my brother, a doctor, for medical advice
(professional identity).
4. In-group and out-group identities are only partially self-determined,
since others also ascribe identities to us, which may overlap with our
perceptions or differ from them (Coupland, 2007). Self-avowed and
other-ascribed social identities may prompt (appropriate or mistaken)
communication adjustments. For example, a seventy-five-year old
woman might view herself as spry and healthy, but if a younger person
considers her old and frail, they may miscommunicate until and unless
their perceptions become better aligned.
While we regularly synchronize adjustments in interaction in order to
accommodate our interlocutors, sometimes our attempts are not successful.
This is often the case when we are speaking an L2/Lx, since it takes time to
build the necessary skills to be able to adjust our language to local contexts.
Language proficiency level, exposure to and experience with the L2/Lx in
diverse contexts all impact learners’ ability to adjust their language, and no
matter how much they might want to accommodate their interlocutor, they
might not be able to do so. In other cases, non-accommodation may be
irrespective of language proficiency and rather reflects the participants’
attitudes towards their interlocutors.

Non-Accommodation
When adjustments are unsuccessful, they may result in overaccommoda-
tion, underaccommodation, maintenance, or divergence. The source of

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:04:31, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.014
13 Miscommunication, Conflict, and ICC 291
overaccommodation is often stereotyped thinking about another cultural
group, essentializing (i.e., reducing) members of that group to a simplistic
prototype that accentuates intergroup differences and intragroup simila-
rities (Dragojevic & Giles, 2014). Overaccommodation can take the form
of overly simplified grammatical structures and lexicon, unnecessary repe-
titions, a reduced speech rate, or exaggerated phonological articulation
(Hummert & Ryan, 1996). Native-speakers sometimes deploy overaccom-
modative behaviors, when they perceive a nonnative interactant as being
less capable than the individual actually is, which behavior often comes
across as patronizing and infantilizing (Giles & Gasiorek, 2011).
In contrast to overaccommodation, underaccommodation refers to
insufficient adjustment, when it would be warranted. Discussing private
concerns when an interlocutor would prefer not to be included or inatten-
tive and disrespectful behavior, dismissiveness, impolite or indifferent
attitudes may all characterize underaccommodation (Dixon, Schell,
Giles, & Drogos, 2008; Hummert, 2012). Underaccommodation, like
overaccommodation, may be intentional or inadvertent. If two interactants
have different approaches to turn-taking or using backchanneling devices,
and neither knows how to adjust his or her discourse management style to
match that of the other participant, they inadvertently underaccommodate
each other (Palomares, Giles, Soliz, & Gallois, 2016). If done intentionally,
underaccommodation may express the speakers’ desire to distance them-
selves from their interlocutors. Jones, Sheeran, Lanyon, Evans, and
Martincovic (2018), for example, report on nurses’ interactions with min-
ority patients at an Australian hospital, where they cut off young mothers’
questions and adopted an overly reserved, professional stance (attitude
towards the interaction) towards the patients’ parents, if they had an
unpleasant experience with them early on in the interaction. In this case,
underaccommodation had real ramifications, resulting in lower quality
patient care, as well as disparate health experiences and outcomes.
Especially if they occur repeatedly, over- and under-accommodation can
lead to “a range of adverse consequences . . . including misunderstandings,
communication breakdown, and negative evaluations of both interactions
and speakers” (Gasiorek & Dragojevic, 2017, p. 276).
Slightly different in potential outcome, divergence and maintenance may
be negative, neutral, or positive types of non-accommodation. Since verbal
and nonverbal communication reflect important aspects of social identity, we
often maintain communication features when interacting with others to mark
in-group identity or to make out-group distinctions more salient (Dragojevic
& Giles, 2014; Tajfel & Turner, 1986). The results can be innocuous, such as

Societal Non-Accommodation
In addition to specific individuals’ ability to moderate communication,
historical and geopolitical forces help shape language, identity, and the
willingness to accommodate others. These forces often serve to create
psychological distance (i.e., subjective barriers) and establish, maintain,
and confirm existing social dynamics, almost always benefitting those in
power (Myers-Scotton, 2006). Examples include using English in school in
Nigeria at the exclusion of indigenous languages or giving preference to one
regional dialect over another (e.g., hiring only speakers of Parisian instead of
Tunisian French) to perpetuate language-based social exclusion. These
historical and geopolitical forces play out in everyday interactions, when
speakers emphasize their differences in an attempt to undermine commu-
nication or force others to accommodate them. In one such incident, on
June 14, 2018, a woman wearing a t-shirt with the flag of Puerto Rico on it
was celebrating her birthday in a park in Illinois with her family and friends,
when a white man approached her, then verbally assaulted and physically
threatened her because of her clothing and use of Spanish.1 His anger was
triggered by the young woman’s support of a contextually nondominant
culture and language. Policies and everyday incidents that prioritize one
language over another can reinforce in-group and out-group thinking, often
relying on the (incorrect) argument that certain languages or language
varieties are less desirable, as are the people who speak those languages and
varieties. Such beliefs are grounded in stereotyped and prejudicial thinking.

1
www.cnn.com/2018/07/10/us/illinois-puerto-rico-park-ofﬁcer/index.html

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:04:31, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.014
13 Miscommunication, Conflict, and ICC 293
Stereotypes and Prejudices
We learn stereotypes – widely held beliefs about groups of people (e.g.,
millennials, Eastern Europeans) – from a variety of sources, such as our
families or society (Abrams, 2002). Stereotypes, for the most part, are
negative, showing members of another group as being less desirable in
some way, be it because of their beliefs, behaviors, or other traits. With
stereotyped thinking we ascribe specific characteristics – positive or nega-
tive – to an entire cultural group and essentialize its members to those
characteristics. Even purported positive stereotypes can be detrimental. For
example, a common stereotype in the United States is the ‘model minor-
ity,’ according to which “Asians comprise the racial minority group that
has ‘made it’ in America through hard work and education, and therefore
serve as a model for other racial minorities to follow” (Wing, 2007, p. 455).
This stereotype can make students invisible, as Wing (2007) found in a
study of high school students in Berkeley, California. Asian students there
were regularly viewed as a homogeneous group of aggregate data, instead of
reflecting the diverse cultural heritages they actually represented (e.g.,
Korean, Thai, Japanese, Chinese). Differences in the students’ socioeco-
nomic and social situations were also ignored, and students who lived in
poverty, did not speak English as their L1, were first in their families to
complete high school, and were struggling to meet college eligibility
requirements had limited access to much-needed educational resources
(Wing, 2007). Consequently, the students reported feeling anxious, in part
due to their own pressure of having to live up to the stereotype of the
‘model minority.’
While stereotypes are generalized cognitive beliefs about cultural groups,
prejudices are “unfavorable affective reactions to or evaluations of groups
and their members,” although both may lead to interpersonal or institu-
tional discrimination, which is defined as “differential treatment by indi-
viduals toward some groups and their members relative to other groups
and their members . . . [and] policies and contexts that create, enact, reify,
and maintain inequality” (The APA Resolution on Prejudice, Stereotypes, and
Discrimination, 20062). The consequences of prejudice include microag-
gressions (subtle verbal, nonverbal, and/or visual insults based on some-
one’s identity), limited opportunities for interaction by newcomers to a
community, unfair hiring practices, intentional miscommunication, or, in
extreme cases, violence or genocide. Prejudices can be based on a single

2
www.apa.org/about/policy/prejudice.pdf

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:04:31, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.014
294 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
encounter with a member of another culture or not even require personal
experience with that culture. Although quick to establish, prejudices are
difficult to eradicate, because they are mostly subconscious and get
continually reiterated in humor, politics, and other cultural texts (e.g.,
movies, graphic art). That stereotypes and prejudices are persistent,
Brislin (2000) argues, is due in part to the cognitive and affective
functions they serve.
First, they can serve a utilitarian function. Sharing the prejudices of one’s
family or friends helps retain in-group membership with them, while
opposing their views may lead to taunts or rejection. It also serves an ego-
defensive function. Holding prejudices about other people allows us to
protect our sense of self, by providing reasons external to us for not
succeeding at something. If I believe that ‘I did not get this job, because
person X got special treatment,’ I do not have to admit that I am not as
qualified for the job as another person. The third function is value-
expressive. Prejudices can provide us with consistency across our values,
norms, practices, and behaviors. Typically shared across larger social
groups, value-based prejudices make us believe that our religion, political
view, or other long-held beliefs or practices are correct, while we ridicule
the perspectives of another group and deem them inferior. Taken to the
extreme, such prejudices may lead to unfavorable government policies,
ethnic cleansing, or even genocide. Finally, prejudices fulfill a knowledge
function. They can help organize and categorize experiences that we accu-
mulate over our lifetime, a process that takes considerable time and energy;
this knowledge system helps prevent stimulus overload and speeds up
decision-making. Consequently, we may not wish to give up our views
too readily, so instead we describe those who hold different views as
ignorant or deficient in some way. Notably, prejudices can serve multiple
functions simultaneously.
While most training on intercultural communication addresses the
knowledge function, the other three functions are just as important,
especially since they reflect complex emotional connections to our world-
view. These prejudices guide the assumptions we make about other people
and our attitudes towards them. Their appearance, accent, ethnic back-
ground, or religious affiliation impacts our interactions with them. We
may decide not to talk to others because we are afraid of them (which can
result in either their or our own isolation) or we may use slower language
because we believe that they will not understand us. Prejudices also shape
sociopolitical power: How much do we ask immigrants to change to ‘fit
in’? To what extent are they able and allowed to hold on to their established

Sources of Conflict
Human beings sometimes misunderstand or misattribute intentions and
make mistakes in what they say and how. If these misunderstandings are
minor and have no long-lasting consequences, they usually go unnoticed.
Given the complexity of value-laden human emotions, language, and
history, it is inevitable, however, that some misunderstandings rise to the
level of conflict (Mortensen, 2006). Conflict arises “when people have
incompatible expectations, values, norms, interests, or goals in their inter-
actions” (Dai & Chen, 2017, p. 1). Conflict may range from short-term,
mild incompatibilities to severe, ongoing rifts that have devastating effects
on individuals, communities, or nation-states across the world. Conflict
also varies by participants (Abigail & Cahn, 2011; Gudykunst, 2005;
Jackson, 2014):
• intrapersonal conflict: is experienced by one individual (e.g., choosing
whether to adhere to local gender expectations or maintain one’s own
preferences);
• interpersonal conflict: occurs between two or more individuals, when
personal preferences and characteristics are more relevant (e.g., indivi-
duals with different relationship goals);
• intracultural conflict: transpires within one cultural group (e.g.,
debates regarding a country changing its laws to allow women to drive);
• intercultural conflict: arises between two or more cultural groups,
when group membership is highly salient (e.g., a community protesting
the arrival of refugees, whose values they feel they do not share).
Regardless of its duration or participant-structure, resolving conflict
requires us to make sense of complex interactions and identify its causes
accurately. These causes include perceived or real threats to in-group
identity and security or incompatible expectations in one or more of the

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:04:31, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.014
296 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
following areas (Dai & Chen, 2017; Martin & Nakayama, 2018; Jackson,
2014; Oetzel & Ting-Toomey, 2013; Wilmot & Hocker, 2007; Worchel,
2005):
• Values: different ideologies pertaining to specific issues, such as send-
ing children to a religious or a public school; value conflicts can be
particularly challenging to solve.
• Norms: mismatched expectations for behavior, for example removing
shoes upon entering a house or living in coeducational dorms when it is
not common practice for someone.
• Face-orientations: different preferences for prioritizing one’s own
needs and image (likely in individualistic societies/individuals) versus
those of others (more collectivistic societies/individuals tend to prior-
itize the needs of a social group or one’s interlocutor).
• Resources: misaligned access to or allocation of shared resources (e.g.,
natural or financial assets), such as using funds for public education
versus the military-industrial complex.
• Goals: disparate or incompatible objectives for an event or action, for
example, when a group of students gets together after class to study, but
some participants socialize instead.
• Affective orientations: feelings and emotions are incompatible, for
example notions of who is considered to be a friend as opposed to an
acquaintance or what kinds of behaviors are expected and accepted of
friends.
• Interests: incompatible preferences for a course of action or plan;
Native American tribes opposed the construction of an oil pipeline
through tribal lands in the United States, while the government sup-
ported the project, citing national energy and economic security.3
• Cognition/Perceptions: incongruent interpretations of an event, or the
intentions or language of another person (e.g., for Person A, having
coffee is just to get to know Person B, while Person B views the
interaction as a job-interview).
In addition to these sources of conflict, it is important to understand the
role that our conflict style – the way we engage in and resolve disagree-
ments – might play in reducing or escalating conflict.

3
www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-pipeline-keystone-explainer/what-is-at-stake-in-the-keystone-xl-pi
peline-ruling-idUSKCN1NE23A?il=0

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:04:31, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.014
13 Miscommunication, Conflict, and ICC 297
Conflict Styles
Humans engage in conflict in a variety of styles – accommodation, avoid-
ance, compromise, collaboration, or competition – depending on cultural
and personal factors. Ting-Toomey and Oetzel (2001) define conflict styles
as “patterned responses to conflict” (p. 45), reflecting divergent levels of
cooperativeness and competitiveness. Accommodation (high cooperative-
ness, low competitiveness) helps maintain harmony among participants,
although one party likely has to give up his or her position or needs and
accede to their interlocutor. If participants prefer to withdraw from a
situation rather than engage in what may be construed as conflict, they
are showing a preference for avoidance strategies (in this case, possibly
neither party achieves their goals). Collaboration (high cooperativeness,
high competitiveness) may generate a range of choices for problem-solving,
achieving a win-win outcome for all parties involved, whereas competing
(low cooperativeness, high competitiveness) has a zero-sum orientation (a
win-lose perspective) among participants. The fifth style, compromising,
tries to find a solution to problems and conflicts that is at least somewhat
acceptable to all parties and tries to maintain a relationship; each party will
likely have to give up some of their expectations. Although this model has
been used for decades in business and academia,4 with occasional mod-
ifications of the labels (Rahim, 1983; Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994) and
categories (Wilmot & Hocker, 2010), it is heavily weighted in favor of
Western values of individualism. Consequently, a new model has been
developed that better reflects values and beliefs across broader cultural
contexts (Hammer, 2003, 2005, 2009). This model is designed as a four-
way matrix, reflecting varying degrees of directness and affect, as Table 13.1
demonstrates.
As this table indicates, each style combines aspects of directness and
affect. The discussion style entails direct communication, with relatively low
emotional expression (Hammer, 2005). The focus tends to be on problem-
solving and factual information. Low power distance, individualistic cul-
tures – such as Northern/Western Europeans or European-Americans,
Australians, and New Zealanders – tend to prefer this style, which empha-
sizes explicit verbal communication (Dai & Chen, 2017).
The engagement style also reflects a preference for directness, but with
strong affective involvement (Hammer, 2005). Substantive issues are

4
www.talent.wisc.edu/home/HideATab/LeadershipManagementDevelopment/ConflictResolution/
AboutConflict/ConflictStyles/tabid/228/Default.aspx

Emotional restraint Emotional expressiveness

Discussion style Engagement style

Direct
Communication

(‘Say what you mean and mean (‘Tell me how you really feel’)
what you say’)
Indirect

Accommodation style Dynamic style

(‘The ﬁrst person to raise his voice (‘Let your heart
loses the argument’) speak’)

discussed explicitly, and emotional engagement – displayed through

intense verbal and nonverbal expressions – is seen as acknowledging the
importance of the topic and the seriousness of participants’ intentions.
Conversely, a lack of emotional expression may be interpreted as apathy, a
sign of weakness or disrespect. This style is preferred among Russians,
Israelis, African Americans, Southern Europeans, and in Latin America
(Martin & Nakayama, 2018).
In the lower left quadrant is the accommodation style, with preferences
for indirect approaches to problem- and dispute-solving, alongside emo-
tional restraint (Hammer, 2005). Its adherents may deploy ambiguous
stories, metaphors, or quotes to make their point, with sufficient vagueness
to allow participants to save face and avoid direct threats to another
person’s self. Emotions are masked or controlled, and relationships are
valued above ‘truth’ or ‘winning.’ High power distance, collectivistic
societies tend to show more concern for other-face and mutual-face and
prefer to avoid conflict or turn to mediation by a third-party to negotiate it
(Dai & Chen, 2017; Miller, 2011). This style is common among many
Southeast Asian cultures and indigenous peoples of North and South
America.
Lastly, the dynamic style combines indirect communication – including
hyperbolic expressions, ambiguity, metaphors, and humor – with emo-
tional expressiveness. Cultural groups that prefer this style also tend to
employ third-party mediators – such as elders or religious leaders – to
resolve conflict and avoid direct confrontation. Emotional expression is
used as the primary channel of conveying substance, rather than verbal
enumeration of facts (Hammer, 2005). Middle Eastern, Indian, and Sub-
Saharan African cultures tend to prefer this style.

Table 13.2 Characteristics of conﬂict styles

Direct Indirect
Meaning is ‘inside’ the verbal message Meaning ‘outside’ the verbal message
Precise and explicit language use Ambiguous and vague language use
Reliance on face-to-face resolution of Reliance on third parties for resolution of
disagreements disagreements
Speaking your mind Discretion in voicing goals
Verbally assert differences of opinion ‘Talk around’ disagreements
Persuasion through reasoned argument Persuasion through facework
Substantive disagreement focus Relationship repair focus
Emotionally restrained Emotionally expressive
Disguised display of emotions Overt displays of emotion
Control emotions by ‘internalizing’ Control emotions by ‘externalizing’
Minimal display of feelings through Visible displays of feelings through
nonverbal behavior nonverbal behavior
Constrained vocalization Expansive vocalization
Sensitive to hurting feelings of Sensitive to constraints on expressing
other party feelings
Relational trust through emotional Relational trust through emotional
maturity commitment
Emotional suppression necessary for Emotional information is necessary for
credibility credibility

Adapted from the University of Calgary presentation.

5
www.ucalgary.ca/ssc/ﬁles/ssc/intercultural-conﬂict-styles-general.pdf

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:04:31, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.014
300 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
Conflict Management and Resolution
Conflict resolution is a complex process, but it can be an excellent oppor-
tunity for improving communication skills and understanding, and
strengthening relationships (Dai & Chen, 2017). In ideal situations, con-
flict can “serve as an impetus for individual and social changes that need to
be made” (Broome, 2017, p. 14). Also ideally, this process would entail
sustained dialog, leading to harmony, which Broome (2017) defines as:
a generative and creative process in which diverse elements are brought
together to form a complex and inclusive world . . . [where] various elements
enrich one another by forming a relationship in which they mutually
compensate for one another’s short-comings; mutually reinforce one
another’s strengths; and mutually advance each other’s path toward fulfill-
ment . . . [through] a continuous process of . . . give and take. (p. 16)
Reconsidering conflict as a potential source of growth and positive
change, people experiencing it may be more willing to expend the neces-
sary patience, perseverance, kindness, openness, and acceptance that is
required to resolve it. The more serious a conflict situation is, the more
effort and collaboration is required for its resolution (Mortensen, 2006),
but finding shared moral norms and principles – such as human dignity,
equality, ethics of care, justice, sincerity, tolerance, and mutual responsi-
bility – facilitates the process (Broome, 2017; Chen, 2015; Dai & Chen,
2017; Jia & Lai Jia, 2017; Ojelabi, 2010). Whether conflict is resolved
depends on a number of variables:
• Is there a strong, existing relationship among the participants?
• Will the relationship (need to) continue?
• How important is it to resolve the conflict?
• Can the conflict be resolved?
With strong existing relationships, such as solid friendships or positive
collegial ties, participants may not only be more willing to negotiate
conflict situations, but may have better tools to do so, including knowledge
of the other’s conflict styles, shared interpretive frameworks for under-
standing the sources of conflict, and a common language. Participants also
need to consider the second point: Does the relationship need to continue?
Naturally, participants who have to live or work together (e.g., roommates
or students collaborating on a project) do not have the luxury of walking
away from conflict and have to find a resolution. In contrast, in the case of
temporary relationships (e.g., seat-mates in an airplane), conflict might not
even have to be resolved: it just dissipates in a little while.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:04:31, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.014
13 Miscommunication, Conflict, and ICC 301
Another aspect of conflict resolution is the significance of the problem.
If a traveler’s safety is jeopardized in an airplane (e.g., a child seated next to
a drunk passenger), the need for a solution is high, unlike when the issue is
a mere want (e.g., I would prefer to sit with my friend rather than a
stranger). Finally, examining the causes of the conflict and the participants’
willingness to find a mutually acceptable solution, we can determine
whether the conflict can be resolved at all. In a particular cultural context,
can a student talk to the professor about an exam he or she did poorly on?
Can two international students state clear expectations for house rules in
order to avoid conflict? Is there an opportunity to retrain employees to
bring their interaction styles in line with company practices? Sometimes we
can take a step away from the conflict, reframe or reduce an emotional
engagement, and find a compromise solution that is (at least minimally)
acceptable to all parties involved. Solutions are more elusive for large-scale,
global conflict, that has been shaped by long-term historical forces.
Resolving violent conflict (typically arising between ethnic and religious
cultural groups in the same geographic region) requires extraordinary
measures, and attempts often remain unsuccessful (see the conflict in
Syria, the refugee crisis in Europe, etc.). Such conflicts require facilitated
intergroup dialog (Broome, 2004; Obika & Ovuga, 2018) and sustained
peacebuilding (Martin & Nakayama, 2018). Attempts at resolving conflict
at this level must start with members of the community, leaders who are
willing to sit down with their counterpoints from the opposing side and
identify a collective vision for the future, and developing specific action
plans to achieve effective cooperation/collaboration. The conflict resolu-
tion process must acknowledge disparate power relationships and the
relative privilege of each group; it also requires great awareness, under-
standing, empathy, and sensitivity (Broome & Collier, 2012). Such conflict
and its resolutions are beyond the scope of the present volume. However,
we can each strive towards resolving miscommunication and conflict in our
own lives, whether their source is interpersonal or intercultural
misalignment.
Chen and Starosta (2005), Jackson (2014), Moran, Abramson, and
Moran (2014), and Martin and Nakayama (2018) offer several suggestions
for promoting effective conflict resolution and engaging in cooperative
interaction:
1. Identify the causes of the conflict – and the social context in which it
is situated – from the perspectives of all participants. If appropriate,

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:04:31, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.014
302 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
conduct research and ask questions to obtain a more complete
understanding of the issue and the context.
2. Look for common ground and shared goals with your interlocutor(s);
go beyond ‘us’ versus ‘them’ and think interpersonally, not inter-
culturally. Develop empathy and sensitivity towards each other, and
act in cooperation.
3. Listen attentively, especially in situations where participants do not
share the same L1; patience and collaboration can help clarify every-
one’s messages to mutual benefit.
4. Be cognizant of issues of power and privilege during interactions
(being able to use your L1 during conflict is a type of privilege).
5. Focus on the topic at hand, without resorting to ad hominem attacks
or hyperbolic language and de-escalate the situation, if possible.
6. Check in with trusted members of other cultural groups to explore
your understanding of communication and conflict styles, which
reflect both personal and cultural preferences. Be open to learning
new communication and conflict styles and expanding your
repertoire.
7. Tap into and develop your sense of humor, which can promote a
willingness from everyone to let go of negative feelings – admit and
learn from your mistakes.
8. Find creative solutions that combine elements of all perspectives in a
way that everyone can accept: What solution will work interperson-
ally or interculturally? How do we implement it?
9. Ask third-party mediators as needed; reconciling divergent views may
be difficult when the topics are sensitive, such as racial relations,
abortion rights, or when the interactants’ language skills are insuffi-
cient to handle the topic well.
10. Understand that conflict does not have to end relationships. Be
willing to forgive; anger and grudges take up exorbitant amounts of
energy, whereas forgiveness promotes cooperation and peaceful
relationships.
These suggestions inherently reflect skills each of us can develop for
improved intercultural competence. However, a few points merit further
reflection. First, in some instances conflict resolution is not possible, and
participants must walk away from the situation; if individuals are in danger,
they should not feel compelled to stay in contact with their opponent (e.g.,
a stalker). Knowing when conflict can and cannot be resolved is just as
important as knowing how to engage in the resolution process. Second,

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:04:31, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.014
13 Miscommunication, Conflict, and ICC 303
people are not limited to their preferred conflict style; they can and should
practice different styles during low-stakes situations, when there is no
actual conflict, when one’s sense of self is not at risk, or when there are
friendly ‘opponents’ available to try out new skills. Equally useful is
observing how members of the in-group or more experienced members
of the out-group manage conflict, learning from them how to use conflict
styles that are not yet familiar or comfortable.
The final recommendation in the above list calls for practicing forgive-
ness, a process that begins with acknowledging another person’s or group’s
feelings of hurt, anger, disappointment, and the need for healing (Zhang,
Ting-Toomey, & Oetzel, 2014). Waldron and Kelley (2008) and Kelley,
Waldron, and Kloeber (2018) recommend practicing forgiveness by (a)
learning to identify when remembering is helpful (to avoid repeating a
mistake) and when forgetting might be more appropriate (a one-time
mistake); (b) recognizing tensions between strong affective responses and
the cognitive, intellectual aspects of conflict; (c) balancing trust and risk
(e.g., rebuilding trust while reducing potential future risk in the
relationship); and (d) considering mercy versus justice, letting go of
angry and hostile feelings, such as vengeance and retribution.
Forgiveness benefits from kind and other-oriented communication,
where the transgressor is still seen to be worthy of friendship, caring, and
respect (Kelley, Waldron, & Kloeber, 2018). The offender contributes to
this process by asking for forgiveness, apologizing, and making some kind
of restitution (e.g., volunteer work, financial compensation). Romig and
Veenstra (1998) highlight the social aspect of forgiveness: “it is an inter-
personal process that represents a possible response to wounds or injustices
encountered in a relational context” (p. 188). However, victims can practice
unilateral forgiveness, letting go of feelings of hurt or anger, without
expecting anything of the perpetrator, so that they are not consumed by
their negative feelings, and cycles of violence may be broken (Obika &
Ovuga, 2018). Participants’ resilience and psychosocial strength may influ-
ence their ability to forgive and the path they take towards forgiveness
(Poston, Hanson, Schwiebert, 2012).
As the preceding discussion illustrated, conflict resolution begins with
an individual’s or social group’s willingness and ability to adapt, to find
common ground with, and accommodate towards others. This process also
requires that the parties commit to mutual nurturance and respect, to
develop social sensitivity and reciprocity with each other, and to be honest
(Haslett, 2017; Mortensen, 2006). Mistakes are opportunities for develop-
ing situationally appropriate knowledge regarding what works and what

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:04:31, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.014
304 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
does not, so that we can better align our interests with others in future
instances of conflict. From this perspective,
[conflict resolution] may be envisioned as a quest, a journey, and an arduous
process of constant probing, questioning, and testing generated by all the
tensions, contradictions, triumphs, and tragedies of everyday life . . . and
[m]aking sense of productive social outcomes requires the capacity and
willingness to put certain matters to the test of direct exposure to multiple
perspectives and alternative standards of critical personal assessment . . . In
solving problems, we test our own ability and willingness to compare
possibilities, to discriminate between good or bad decisions, to tolerate
better or worse outcomes, and to improve our condition by making selective
choices that enable us to feel better or avoid feeling worse (Mortensen, 2006,
pp. 26–28).
In addition to societal or group-level initiatives, individuals can also
strive to resolve conflict and contribute to peace through citizen diplomacy.
International organizations in support of such endeavors (e.g., the Center
for Citizen Diplomacy) connect people who share a vision of “a world that
thrives because of true global engagement, where individuals and commu-
nities benefit from person-to-person interactions that result in greater
understanding between people and cultures” (www.centerforcitizendiplo
macy.org/).
Projects that embrace this vision, but without a formal organization, are
also possible. In 2012, Ronny Edry,6 an Israeli graphic designer, started a
poster campaign (see Figure 13.1) to work towards peace. Specifically, he
wanted to demonstrate that even though the governments of Israel and
Iran were in conflict, individuals could extend kindness and friendship to
one another. What started out as a single poster by one man became a
positive, affiliative social movement – The Peace Factory7 – as he explains
in his TED Talk.8 Acts like this that start locally can shape international
relationships.

Striving for Intercultural Communicative Competence

The suggestions for promoting effective conﬂict resolution and engaging
in cooperative interaction are useful guidelines for training global citizens
as well. Jackson (2014) describes global citizens as “people who care deeply

6
https://archive.org/details/RonnyEdry_2012X 7 https://thepeacefactory.org/israel-loves-iran/
8
www.google.com/search?q=ronny+edry+ted+talk&oq=ronny+eddry+&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0
l5.6127j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Figure 13.1 Friendship poster created by Ronny Edry

about the current state of our planet and the quality of life of future
generations . . . [who] should work together to solve the major problems
facing humanity” (p. 299). Social responsibility (concern for others), global
competence (open-mindedness, striving for mutual understanding with
others), and global civic engagement (e.g., volunteering or political acti-
vism beyond national boundaries) are core elements of global citizenship.
To reach this level of intercultural competence, individuals need to develop
intercultural sensitivity (Bennett, 2017), which rests on the assumption
that “as one’s experiences of cultural difference become more sophisticated,
one’s competence in intercultural relations increases” (Bennett & Bennett,
2004, p. 152). Movement between two end stages of a continuum, ethno-
centrism and ethnorelativism, frames the developmental model shown in
Figure 13.2, with Bennett and Bennett’s version on the left, and Hammer’s
(2012) version on the right.
Ethnocentrism refers to a monocultural worldview in which one’s own
culture is the ﬁlter through which all values, perceptions, behaviors, and
communication are processed. Individuals at this stage are not curious about
other cultures and are not ready to engage with cultural differences or
similarities. Any discussion of variation relies on stereotyped images of the

Bennett & Hammer’s

Bennett’s Model Model

Ethnocentrism

Intercultural
Mindset
integration
adaptation
adaptation

acceptance
Ethnorelativism

Monocultural
minimization

Mindset
defense polarization

denial

Figure 13.2 Models of intercultural development (adapted from Bennett & Bennett,
2004 and Hammer, 2012)

‘other.’ The next stage – defense (Bennett & Bennett) or polarization

(Hammer) – recognizes cultural differences, but maintains a clear distinction
between ‘us’ and ‘them,’ where ‘us’ is seen as the correct understanding of the
world and perceptions of ‘them’ still rely on stereotypes. Minimization, in
turn, is a transitional stage, during which similarities between cultures are
highlighted, often dismissing differences that nondominant cultural group
members may experience. In spite of a surface-level enthusiasm for other
cultural groups, this is still a relatively self-centered, ethnocentric, and non-
reflective perspective of cultural variation.
The next stages, acceptance and adaptation, reflect a worldview in which
all cultures are increasingly seen as equally valid and acceptable, complex
and dynamic social systems. Individuals at these stages are increasingly able
to adapt their verbal and nonverbal communication to specific cultural
situations. Moreover, they recognize, accept, and respect both cultural
similarities and differences. In Hammer’s model, adaptation is the end-
stage of intercultural development. Adaptation suggests individuals’ ability
to shift their cultural perspective (how they interpret experiences, for
example) between two or more ways of thinking, being, and behaving
and can participate in cultural practices in authentic, appropriate ways. In
contrast, in the model presented by Bennett and Bennet (2004), adapta-
tion ideally leads to integration, a stage that reflects true ethnorelativism and

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:04:31, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.014
13 Miscommunication, Conflict, and ICC 307
an interculturally competent person who is “comfortable with many
standards and customs and to having an ability to adapt behavior and
judgment to a variety of interpersonal settings” (Bennett, 1993, p. 26).
Although progression often includes backward sliding (e.g., as a con-
sequence of culture shock) and forward lurches (Stuart, 2012), the further
one moves along the developmental stages, the better they should be able to
understand patterns of interaction both from their own perspective and
from the perspective of the culture they are visiting or in which they live or
work, “shifting cultural perspective and adapting behavior to cultural
context” (Hammer, 2009, p. 5). Progression from the monocultural,
ethnocentric end of the continuum towards the intercultural, ethnorelative
one often parallels the development of L2/Lx competence as well, since
better linguistic skills allow individuals to interact with people and texts (of
all kinds) from another culture and thus broaden their perspectives
(Bennett, 2012; Jackson, 2014).
The nature of the interculturally competent individual has long been of
interest to social scientists and applied linguists. The former group tends to
emphasize aspects of cultural knowledge (often at the exclusion of lan-
guage), while the latter accentuates language without sufficient attention to
its cultural context (Jackson, 2014). Ideally, however, culture and language
exist in synergy, mutually reinforcing each other. From this perspective
emerge several personal traits and skills that define competent global
citizens, a view supported by global organizations (e.g., the International
Red Cross, Oxfam, the Stanley Foundation) and scholarship (Allwright,
2006; Byram & Zarate, 1997; Chen & Starosta, 2008; Donatelli, Yngve,
Miller, & Ellis, 2005; Feuerstein & Mandelzis, 2017; Jackson, 2014; Jandl,
2013; Martin & Nakayama, 2018; Patel, Li, & Sooknanan, 2011). Thus, an
interculturally competent individual
• recognizes the interconnectedness of the world (i.e., raising awareness,
seeking knowledge from beyond traditional, local, national news
sources);
• is motivated to interact with others who differ from him or her
culturally (e.g., by befriending fellow students, colleagues, neighbors
from other cultural backgrounds; studying, working, or volunteering in
programs in different cultural settings);
• focuses on individuals (not stereotyped groups) as representing complex
feelings, thoughts, identities, personalities, histories, and motivations;
• listens carefully and respects diverse perspectives, values, practices – not
seeing them as a threat, but as a richness in the world (NB: you do not

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:04:31, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.014
308 Part III Intercultural Communication and the Personal Journey
have to adopt all perspectives, values, and practices or respect them
equally);
• considers events and other people in a nonjudgmental way; learns to
observe each from multiple perspectives (cognitive ﬂexibility) and to
describe events without assigning affective or evaluative judgments to
them;
• learns to observe, identify, and achieve goals set forth by all participants
in an interaction to everyone’s beneﬁt;
• seeks feedback (asks others, such as a trusted member of the in-group or
a more experienced member of the out-group, for suggestions for
improving communication or behavior);
• develops intercultural communication skills:
o L2/Lx communication skills (both verbal and nonverbal, the lin-
guistic code, and how language is used in social situations),
o empathy,
o self-awareness (e.g., recognizing anxiety in new situations),
o personal strength (sense of self),
o tolerance of ambiguity (learning to be comfortable with uncer-
tainty, especially while one’s level of L2/Lx competence is still low),
o anticipation of potential sources of misunderstanding and the
ability to negotiate or mediate those,
o psychological adaptability (to new situations),
o background knowledge about one’s own and other cultures (e.g.,
history, political, and social contexts, see Chapter 9), using multiple
reliable sources of information;
• develops the ability to live in cultural situations other than one’s own
childhood culture (e.g., having good coping skills, such as identifying
positive things about the environment, rather than focusing on negative
aspects);
• strives for ethical practices, such as social justice and equality, linguistic
rights, human rights, environmental protection, and sustainability; and
• works towards peaceful coexistence around the globe.
These suggestions – and the process of becoming an interculturally com-
petent global citizen – require a genuine commitment to personal growth,
which can be challenging. Letting go of the familiar and pushing the
boundaries of what is possible takes courage. This process also requires
patience, since it takes years to learn an additional language, and we must
make a real effort to get to know members of a host community. In order to
develop into an intercultural being, we have to be willing to ‘put ourselves

Pedagogical Ideas for Teaching Conﬂict Resolution and

Intercultural Communicative Competence in the L2/Lx Classroom
As in Chapters 11 and 12, the skills and knowledge necessary for successful
intercultural communication, conﬂict resolution, and developing intercul-
tural competence are closely related to the concepts presented in Chapters
4–9. Therefore, instead of separate activity sets, the following suggestions
simply make these connections explicit. The L2/Lx should be used as much
as possible, but discussions in the L1 are useful as well, since they can
improve learners’ experiences while they are studying or working in new
cultural contexts.
• Analyze videos with students that depict instances of successful and
unsuccessful attempts at communicative accommodations, including
verbal and nonverbal communication.
• Have students take a conﬂict style survey,9 so they are aware of their
preferences and can compare them to the styles that might be generally
preferred in the L2/Lx speaking community in which they are
participating.
• Implement telecollaborative projects in the L2/Lx classroom, where
students can build one-on-one relationships with members of other

9
www.usip.org/public-education/students/conﬂict-styles-assessment or https://sielearning.tafensw.e
du.au/MBA/9791F/BusinessServices/LO/1207_020138_605F_02_wi/1207_020138_605F_0220_wi.
htm

Summary
Resolving miscommunication and conﬂict requires us to explore paths
to other ways of being. If participants are willing and are oriented
towards mutual understanding – be it language or content – inter-
cultural interactions can enrich the human experience. Conversely,
participants who are unwilling or unable to work through linguistic
mishaps, the initial stresses of acculturation, and the strains of mis-
understanding may cause (potentially long-term) conﬂict (Chen,

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS AND ACTIVITIES

1. Audio- or video-record an interaction with a few friends and analyze it in
terms of the accommodation/non-accommodation that you perform.
What are some verbal and nonverbal moves that each of you enacted? If
you do not have access to recording devices, you can also analyze a
segment of a movie for the same features of communication
accommodation.
2. Identify your preferred conflict style. In what respects do your
preferences reflect broader cultural practices, smaller social-group or
individual preferences? In what contexts, with whom, and how do you
use different conflict styles? How effective is your preferred style in
various interactional situations?
3. In small groups, act out conflict styles that are less comfortable for you.
Reflect on your cognitive and affective responses to each style. Can you
imagine using all four styles flexibly, if the situation required you to
do so?
4. Consider a specific cultural context in which the language you plan to
teach is spoken. What stereotypes are you aware of regarding that
culture? How would you help your students counter those stereotypes?
5. Review the suggestions for developing intercultural (communicative)
competence provided in this chapter, and discuss with your classmates
which of these suggestions you have used in your own intercultural
journey. Were some strategies more useful for you than others?
Considering your likely student population, reflect on strategies that you

could incorporate into your teaching. Are there strategies that are better
suited for beginning, intermediate, or advanced L2/Lx learners? Explain
your reasoning.
6. Reﬂect on your goals as language teachers: What objectives will you set
for your learners in terms of intercultural communicative competence?
Working in small groups, design an activity for your likely student
population that teaches a point in this chapter that really captured your
attention. Discuss how this activity might help you and your learners
achieve your pedagogical objectives.

Curricular Plans for Teaching with an Intercultural

Communication Orientation

The following proposed four-year curricular plan for teaching an L2/Lx

with an intercultural communicative competence-orientation is based on
benchmarks set forth in the Common European Framework of Reference
for Languages and the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign
Languages (where information is available). It is useful to remember that
it takes approximately 600 to 900+ contact hours to reach intermediate-
high or B2 levels of proﬁciency, at which point students can interpret and
create lexically sophisticated and accurate language (cf. Goertler, Kraemer,
& Schenker, 2016).

313

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:44:34, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.015
Pedagogical focus

Year Vocabulary Grammar Pragmatics

1 • Focus intensively on lexical develop- • Foster grammar development by using • Make pragmatics an explicit, emphasized
ment, using sociolinguistically and sociolinguistically contextualized models component of language learning and use.
culturally contextualized vocabulary. as input and scaffolding for output in • Focus on chunked, formulaic expres-
• Prioritize high-frequency, everyday various modalities. sions, basic speech acts (e.g., greeting,
vocabulary, developing a repertoire • Prioritize structures that are used most thanking, inviting, asking for help, leave-
of synonyms, antonyms, and com- often in everyday communication; taking).
mon collocations. include words and phrases that frequently • Recognize broader and narrower cultural
• Introduce learners to formal and co-occur with these structures (e.g., trends (e.g., typical politeness formulae in
casual styles (incl. slang) in ‘stan- adverbs of time with narrating the past). ‘standard’ varieties), while noting the
dard’ varieties of languages. • Introduce learners to the most common importance of individual preferences in
• Introduce skills for conducting mini- genres they are likely to encounter (e.g., pragmatics; raise learners’ awareness of
ethnographies on authentic resources newspapers, Instagram posts for personal situational variables that affect
to identify different language vari- use) or specialized texts (e.g., for students interaction.
eties and styles, and multimodal of tourism or other professions). • Recognize how multiturn, multiparticipant
analyses to recognize the interaction Recognize different grammatical expec- interactions are structured, using richly
of multiple semiotic systems of tations (e.g., computer-mediated com- contextualized models as scaffolding for
meaning-making in the L2/Lx per- munication is less prescriptive than an written and spoken output.
taining to the lexicon. academic essay). • Identify learners’ communicative and prag-
• Help learners reﬂect on their L1, • Introduce learners to morphosyntactic pat- matic needs in the L2/Lx, and help them
comparing it to the L2/Lx lexicon. terns in ‘standard’ varieties of languages, explore genres of texts they are likely to
• Foster language play and engagement including different standards of pluricentric encounter outside the classroom (e.g.,
with vocabulary of interest for languages, and some formal and casual emailing professors and peers or interacting
learners. styles in these varieties. with clients at a health clinic).
• Help students develop skills for conducting • Include humorous authentic sources to

terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.015

mini-ethnographies with authentic explore the L2/Lx.
resources to identify L2/Lx practices, and • Help students develop skills for conduct-
multimodal analyses to recognize how ing mini-ethnographies on authentic
multiple semiotic systems interact to create resources to identify who uses the L2/Lx,
grammatical meaning in the L2/Lx. how, and when, and multimodal analysis
to recognize how multiple semiotic sys-
tems create pragmatic meaning.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:44:34, subject to the Cambridge Core
2 • Develop lexicon further, introducing • Expand learners’ knowledge of grammar • Introduce learners to pragmatic features
academic or professional vocabulary, structures, including more nuanced past, (e.g., hedging, politeness formulae,
depending on learners’ objectives. present, and/or future tenses, a wider speech acts) in ‘standard’ varieties of lan-
• Continue introducing richly contex- range of cases if applicable in the language guages, with some stylistic and regional
tualized vocabulary, multiword and (teach most common first, rarer later), or variation.
idiomatic expressions, in a manner; common moods and aspects. • Expand learners’ understanding and use
introduce word meanings farther • Help learners recognize connections of internal and external modifiers (e.g.,
from the core, including abstract between varieties of the L2/Lx and the downgraders, intensifiers, subjunctive
concepts (primarily receptively). social identities they represent. forms if they are used in politeness).
• Help learners make connections • Build receptive knowledge of stylistic var- • Introduce learners to common themes
between language varieties and iation (casual v. formal language) and and types of humor in the L2/Lx-
social identity, expanding receptive learn about appropriate contexts of use. speaking cultures (e.g., common frames,
knowledge of lexical variation and Discuss explicitly involuntary (e.g., L2/ scripts, and sources of humor in the host
contexts of use. Lx use of the language) and voluntary society). Discuss the importance of
• Increase leaners’ ability to reflect on flouting of grammar forms, such as rap humor as a part of one’s identity, build
their L1 lexicon, exploring similarities music or poetry. awareness of the role of humor in helping
and differences, including intracul- • Deepen learners’ ability to conduct eth- people get through challenging times,
tural variation. nographies and multimodal analyses, such as studying abroad.
• Encourage learners to research voca- using authentic sources, examining how • Continue enhancing learners’ skills to
bulary in-depth that they find inter- grammar contributes to meaning in dif- conduct mini-ethnographies and multi-
esting and/or useful. ferent types of texts (e.g., advertisements, modal analyses to analyze L2/Lx
poetry, lyrics, journal articles). pragmatics.
3 • Emphasize productive knowledge of • Emphasize productive knowledge of • Increase learners’ knowledge of and use of
vocabulary, in diverse casual and grammar in diverse casual and formal broader and narrower cultural trends
formal contexts, including multi- contexts, including an increasingly wider (e.g., politeness formulae and adjacency

terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.015

word and idiomatic expressions. range of grammatical structures. pairs in regional varieties of language, in
• Push ﬂuency and accuracy, breadth • Emphasize ﬂuency and accuracy, breadth different standards of pluricentric lan-
a well as depth of lexical knowledge. and depth of grammatical knowledge guages, both formal and casual styles).
(including metalanguage).

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:44:34, subject to the Cambridge Core
(cont.)

Pedagogical focus

Year Vocabulary Grammar Pragmatics

• Expand learners’ knowledge of low- • Introduce learners to lower-frequency, • Expand learners’ awareness of situational
frequency, professional and academic professional, and academic structures variables that affect interaction at the
vocabulary, especially targeted to (e.g., embedded clauses), especially tar- local level (e.g., intentional impoliteness).
their personal interests and language geted to their personal interests and lan- • Help learners recognize a broader range
use needs. guage needs. of pragmatic functions in particular con-
• Increase learners’ knowledge of vari- • Increase learners’ knowledge of varieties texts: e.g., What linguistic forms are used
eties of language (in terms of the of grammar use in diverse contexts (e.g., in interaction at a party with friends, at
lexicon), which is appropriate in spoken by whom, when, where, under the doctor’s office, or in an interview with
what contexts (e.g., spoken by what circumstances, with which interlo- an immigration officer? How does our
whom, when, for what communica- cutors, for what communicative pur- audience influence what language we use?
tive purposes) using extended data, poses) using ethnographic analyses of • Expand learners’ understanding of
such as television serials or a novel, extended data, such as television serials or humor in different media – introduce
expanding the repertoire of genres. a novel, expanding the repertoire of learners to a broader range of humor (e.g.,
• Deepen learners’ ability to analyze genres. taboo topics, ‘appropriateness,’ and
the relationship between the lexicon flouting social norms to shape sociopoli-
and cultural values (e.g., language tical practices).
and power). • Develop learners’ skills to conduct mini-
• Build leaners’ lexicon to be able to ethnographies, including with native

terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.015

understand and discuss current speakers of the L2/Lx, and more in-depth
social, political and economic issues. multimodal analyses to understand how
to communicate pragmatic intent in the
L2/Lx.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:44:34, subject to the Cambridge Core
4 • Continue building lexical knowledge • Continue refining learners’ grammatical • Expand learners’ knowledge of pragmatic
in diverse casual and formal contexts, knowledge in diverse casual and formal functions to debate, disagree, suggest,
expanding creative language use and contexts. offer advice, etc., which can be face-
metaphorical expression (analyze the • Study model texts and speeches and have threatening, so the nuance between dis-
cultural values they reflect). learners edit their own writing and speech agreeing with humor versus strongly
• Continue to build lexical fluency, based on those models, focusing on assertive language, just to name one
expanding depth of knowledge to grammatical accuracy, to prepare for example, should be examined.
include historical perspectives on academic and professional • Explore in depth the pragmatic skills par-
culturally significant words and communication. ticular to professions that learners might
phrases (e.g., democracy or • Expand learners’ breadth and depth of undertake: What skills do musicians
nationalism). grammatical knowledge to include his- need? Mathematicians? School teachers,
• Expand learners’ knowledge of rele- torical developments and change, so that when interacting with children, their
vant academic or professional voca- they can access older texts. parents, or school administrators?
bularies (e.g., natural or social • Expand knowledge of grammatical struc- • Expand learners’ understanding of
sciences, diplomacy). tures that are relevant for their own aca- humor as a sociopolitical tool, used in
• Increase learners’ knowledge of lan- demic or professional purposes (e.g., ‘appropriate’ and ‘inappropriate’ ways,
guage varieties, including historical structures that might be unique in law, both reflecting and shaping cultural and
developments of social, political, and medicine, diplomacy). sociopolitical practices. What – if any –
economic cultural patterns and their • Improve learners’ knowledge of varieties are the consequences for flouting
effect on the lexicon, using critical of language (in terms of grammar), expectations?
and ethnographic analyses of multi- including historical and sociopolitically • Enhance learners’ skills to analyze
ple data sources. Explore similarities divergent contexts, using ethnographic authentic resources to identify who uses
and differences among the cultures analyses of multiple data sources. the L2/Lx, how, and when via multiple
they are increasingly familiar with. semiotic systems of meaning-making in
• Foster critical awareness of how lin- the L2/Lx as it pertains to pragmatics.

terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.015

guistic codes disguise bias and power
structures.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:44:34, subject to the Cambridge Core
Pedagogical focus

Year Paralinguistic features Nonverbal communication Cultural background knowledge

1 • Address paralinguistic features expli- • Address nonverbal communication expli- • Address cultural knowledge explicitly in
citly in course materials (e.g., how citly in course materials. course materials.
intonation differs in questions, • Expose learners to authentic materials, so • Expose learners to authentic materials, so
answers). that they can familiarize themselves with that they can familiarize themselves with
• Use authentic materials to familiarize nonverbal communication used by other potential sources of information used by
learners with the rate and volume of speakers of the L2/Lx. other speakers of the L2/Lx.
speech used by other L2/Lx speakers; • Introduce common symbols, icons, and • Introduce commonly known informa-
include extensive pre-viewing and indexes that are meaningful in L2/Lx- tion about both everyday and unique
viewing tasks to support authentic speaking communities, focusing on cur- events (e.g., important historical events
materials instead of adapting or sim- rent practices, as well as the cognitive and and geographical facts; famous authors,
plifying them. affective responses members of the cul- writers, members of popular culture;
• Explore the use of affective devices in ture have to these signs (e.g., the sche- everyday needs, such as names of grocery
computer-mediated communication. mata they activate and emotional stores, electronics websites).
• Introduce basic conversation man- reactions to the signs). • Help students develop the skills for ana-
agement devices, especially ones • Help students develop skills to analyze lyzing authentic resources and interacting
used to hold the ﬂoor while thinking, authentic resources as they pertain to with members of the community to gain
and the most common backchannel- L2/Lx nonverbal communication. cultural knowledge.
ing devices to signal continued
interest in conversation.
• Help students develop skills for ana-
lyzing authentic resources for para-
linguistic features of the L2/Lx.
2 • Introduce learners to paralinguistic • Help learners recognize more nonverbal • Introduce learners to further resources
features in more diverse interac- communication in sociolinguistic contexts, that help build cultural knowledge (e.g.,

terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.015

tional situations (e.g., where to speak emphasizing the need to understand them differing perspectives, with the sociocul-
quietly/loudly, what the implications in particular interactional situations. tural context explained, such as journals
of fast or slow speech might be). • Explore how personal presentation, kine- or websites with different political
• Explore how personality and emotions sics, haptics, and proxemics are enacted biases).
might inﬂuence intonation patterns. in various L2/Lx cultural situations, • Explore how everyday and unique events
• Include opportunities for students to expected behaviors and potential conse- (e.g., historical events and geography)
express affect in computer-mediated quences for ﬂouting those expectations. impact the perspectives, practices, and
communication. products of the culture, how members of

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:44:34, subject to the Cambridge Core
• Expand the range of conversation • Analyze practices related to proxemics a culture view themselves or their culture,
management devices used in differ- and orientation to time. and their interactions with other cultures.
ent social contexts and how their use • Continue enhancing learners’ skills to • Examine how the culture has viewed
might be perceived. conduct mini-ethnographies and multi- famous authors, writers, members of
• Continue enhancing learners’ skills modal analyses on authentic resources to popular culture and how these views have
to conduct mini-ethnographies and identify how nonverbal communication changed over time.
multimodal analyses on authentic is realized among members of different • Help students develop further skills to
resources to identify how paralin- L2/Lx-speaking communities. analyze authentic resources for gaining
guistic features impact the emotional cultural background and contextual
tone of speakers’ or online users’ knowledge; improve skills of discovery.
utterances in the L2/Lx.
3 • Expand learners’ knowledge of con- • Refine learners’ knowledge and use of • Refine learners’ knowledge of potential
versation-management devices: how nonverbal communication among differ- resources that help build background
to interject effectively, express nega- ent participants and in various social and contextual information.
tive responses to a speaker’s utter- contexts • Explore in depth current and historical
ances, or convey personal interest. • Expand learners’ knowledge of how per- cultural forces that have shaped and con-
• Explore how paralinguistic features sonal presentation, kinesics, haptics and tinue to shape the culture’s perspectives,
can be used to express positive proxemics can be used to convey specific practices, and products.
(affiliative) and negative (e.g., sar- social meaning, including polite and • Enhance learners’ skills to conduct mini-
casm, social distance) affect, includ- impolite behaviors and their ethnographies and multimodal analyses
ing how these features are expressed consequences. on authentic resources to increase their
across interactional situations (i.e., • Continue to explore subcultural variation cultural knowledge, both at the societal
when, how, and with whom). in the use of nonverbal communication and individual levels (i.e., analyze broader
• Introduce learners to diverse dialect (regional and other cultural groups) and social forces, as well as how knowledge of
and register variation as well as non- what social connotations different enact- local factors impacts intercultural
native accents. Examine critically ments of nonverbal communication communication).
how accents are perceived and what carry. • Guide learners to reflect on current social,
social connotations they carry among • Continue to improve learners’ ability to political, and economic issues, exploring
L2/Lx speakers as well as in learners’ conduct mini-ethnographies and multi- similarities and differences among the

terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.015

L1 contexts. modal analyses on authentic resources to practices of their own and other cultures.
• Enhance learners’ skills to analyze increase their knowledge of who uses • Foster critical digital literacy (e.g., aware-
authentic resources to increase their nonverbal communication in what ways ness of sources of online materials, bias
knowledge of various contexts-of-use and which social situations. represented in these sources).
of paralinguistic features.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:44:34, subject to the Cambridge Core
(cont.)
Pedagogical focus

Year Paralinguistic features Nonverbal communication Cultural background knowledge

4 • Continue to expand learners’ knowl- • Continue to expand learners’ knowledge • Explore the impact of popular culture
edge of nuanced paralinguistic fea- of nonverbal communication, including (including changes over time) on every-
tures (e.g., interviews, celebrations), a historical overview of the origins of day perspectives, practices, and products.
including increasingly wider ranges various features of nonverbal communi- • Learn in-depth about current events,
of emotions they encounter in diverse cation: signs, personal presentation, their historical origins, and possible
interactional contexts. kinesics, haptics, proxemics, and chrone- future trajectories.
• Explore in depth the paralinguistic mics (e.g., from literary or historical • Explore subcultural variation in how
features that might be characteristic documents). members of the culture might view the
of professions learners might under- • Explore nonverbal communication that same events (current and historical) dif-
take: Are there particular ways nurses might be characteristic of various profes- ferently and why.
speak? Business people? sions or in diverse interpersonal commu- • Continue enhancing learners’ ability to
• Expand learners’ critical understand- nicative settings. conduct research, mini-ethnographies,
ing of how paralinguistic features are • Continue to improve learners’ ability to and multimodal analyses in order to
evaluated by society, both positively conduct mini-ethnographies and multi- increase their cultural knowledge, using
and negatively, and explore social modal analysis of nonverbal communi- reliable sources.
movements that try to change discri- cation in the L2/Lx in increasingly diverse • Increase learners’ ability to reﬂect –
minatory practices. (A positive recent interactional situations. increasingly independently – on current
development has been the addition of social, political, and economic issues,
multilingual speakers, representing exploring similarities and differences
a richer tapestry of accents in some among the practices of their own and
television series, such as the British- other cultural groups (including intra-
French crime drama series Death in cultural variation).
Paradise.) • Continue to increase learners’ critical

terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780360.015

• Enhance learners’ ability to conduct digital literacy (e.g., by examining bias).
mini-ethnographies, interactional
sociolinguistic and multimodal ana-
lyses of paralinguistic features inde-
pendently in the L2/Lx in
increasingly diverse interactional
situations.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Connecticut, on 17 Aug 2020 at 02:44:34, subject to the Cambridge Core

T e 1682002718 Esl What I Did Last Weekend Past Simple PPT Adults A1 - Ver - 2
No ratings yet
T e 1682002718 Esl What I Did Last Weekend Past Simple PPT Adults A1 - Ver - 2
20 pages
Material Evaluation Checklist
No ratings yet
Material Evaluation Checklist
7 pages
Media and Information Literacy: Quarter 1 - Module 3
No ratings yet
Media and Information Literacy: Quarter 1 - Module 3
15 pages
The Study of Language 5th Ed PDF
47% (17)
The Study of Language 5th Ed PDF
12 pages
Communication For Academic Purposes
No ratings yet
Communication For Academic Purposes
5 pages
Academic Writing 1 Outline - Semester 1 2022 - 2023
No ratings yet
Academic Writing 1 Outline - Semester 1 2022 - 2023
11 pages
Courseguide For Language and Media 24062014 - English Version
No ratings yet
Courseguide For Language and Media 24062014 - English Version
19 pages
Practices in Social Studies Instruction
No ratings yet
Practices in Social Studies Instruction
32 pages
Teaching Grammar Through TEXT TYPES
No ratings yet
Teaching Grammar Through TEXT TYPES
53 pages
Eight Differences Between Indigenous and Western Worldviews
No ratings yet
Eight Differences Between Indigenous and Western Worldviews
1 page
Module 4 Communication in Various Purposes Lesson 6 LITERATURE AS COMMUNICATION
No ratings yet
Module 4 Communication in Various Purposes Lesson 6 LITERATURE AS COMMUNICATION
12 pages
Reading and Writing
No ratings yet
Reading and Writing
46 pages
204-262-1-SM - The Analysis of English Teachers' Lesson Plans Through Objectives Theory
No ratings yet
204-262-1-SM - The Analysis of English Teachers' Lesson Plans Through Objectives Theory
5 pages
Non Literary Text Materials
No ratings yet
Non Literary Text Materials
4 pages
Disccourse Analysis
No ratings yet
Disccourse Analysis
14 pages
Development of Socio-Cultural Competence
No ratings yet
Development of Socio-Cultural Competence
10 pages
Communication For Academic Purposes
100% (1)
Communication For Academic Purposes
55 pages
Oral Communication - Exam
No ratings yet
Oral Communication - Exam
3 pages
Reading and Writing Skills Handouts
No ratings yet
Reading and Writing Skills Handouts
3 pages
Public Speaking 1-Merged
No ratings yet
Public Speaking 1-Merged
69 pages
A Framework For Materials Writing
No ratings yet
A Framework For Materials Writing
11 pages
One-Pagers: Trying To Deliberately Increase The Chances of Learning
No ratings yet
One-Pagers: Trying To Deliberately Increase The Chances of Learning
15 pages
Culture
No ratings yet
Culture
17 pages
Accomplishment Report SHS
No ratings yet
Accomplishment Report SHS
13 pages
A REVIEW ON Emerging Issues in TEFL
No ratings yet
A REVIEW ON Emerging Issues in TEFL
7 pages
Chapter 5
No ratings yet
Chapter 5
36 pages
What Is Critical Literacy?: Journal of Pedagogy, Pluralism, and Practice
No ratings yet
What Is Critical Literacy?: Journal of Pedagogy, Pluralism, and Practice
32 pages
Qualitative Variable
No ratings yet
Qualitative Variable
11 pages
Introduction To Media and Information Literacy: (MEIL 2122)
No ratings yet
Introduction To Media and Information Literacy: (MEIL 2122)
31 pages
Socio Cultural Competence
No ratings yet
Socio Cultural Competence
5 pages
Chapter 3 DC
No ratings yet
Chapter 3 DC
17 pages
Course Cross Cultural Communication SUB 2021
No ratings yet
Course Cross Cultural Communication SUB 2021
3 pages
Wordtune and Writing
No ratings yet
Wordtune and Writing
23 pages
Met 4 Ucsp PPT Week 4
No ratings yet
Met 4 Ucsp PPT Week 4
18 pages
Trends Q1 Week4
No ratings yet
Trends Q1 Week4
3 pages
Morphology 1
No ratings yet
Morphology 1
32 pages
Three Modes of Communication
100% (1)
Three Modes of Communication
3 pages
Keys To Effective Journalism in The Multimedia Era
No ratings yet
Keys To Effective Journalism in The Multimedia Era
13 pages
Preliminary Reviewer For Purcom
No ratings yet
Preliminary Reviewer For Purcom
27 pages
EmpoTech Module 10
No ratings yet
EmpoTech Module 10
12 pages
PGCE FT Notes On Approaches, Methods Etc
No ratings yet
PGCE FT Notes On Approaches, Methods Etc
12 pages
Exploring Formal and Informal Diction
No ratings yet
Exploring Formal and Informal Diction
2 pages
ESL New Year Vocabulary
No ratings yet
ESL New Year Vocabulary
1 page
Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad (Department of English Language and Applied Linguistics)
No ratings yet
Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad (Department of English Language and Applied Linguistics)
3 pages
Code Mixing of Short Story
No ratings yet
Code Mixing of Short Story
12 pages
Rules On Capitalization and Punctuation
No ratings yet
Rules On Capitalization and Punctuation
37 pages
Format & Presentation
No ratings yet
Format & Presentation
48 pages
Read The Following Passage and Then Answer The Question
No ratings yet
Read The Following Passage and Then Answer The Question
1 page
Tefl Mid Term Assignment
No ratings yet
Tefl Mid Term Assignment
9 pages
Media and Information Literacy
No ratings yet
Media and Information Literacy
40 pages
Listening Exercises
No ratings yet
Listening Exercises
6 pages
Presentation On Interactional Sociolinguistics
No ratings yet
Presentation On Interactional Sociolinguistics
24 pages
Fun Activities For Prepositions of Time
No ratings yet
Fun Activities For Prepositions of Time
5 pages
Communicative English Skills II Final Exam 2024BT
0% (1)
Communicative English Skills II Final Exam 2024BT
13 pages
The Effect of Learning Styles On Education and The Teaching Process
100% (1)
The Effect of Learning Styles On Education and The Teaching Process
8 pages
The Development of Syntax and Morphology 2
No ratings yet
The Development of Syntax and Morphology 2
81 pages
Sample Essay
No ratings yet
Sample Essay
4 pages
Chapter 2 - Understanding Culture and Society
No ratings yet
Chapter 2 - Understanding Culture and Society
5 pages
Key Concepts in Intercultural Communication
No ratings yet
Key Concepts in Intercultural Communication
21 pages
UNESCO on the Ground: Local Perspectives on Intangible Cultural Heritage
From Everand
UNESCO on the Ground: Local Perspectives on Intangible Cultural Heritage
Michael Dylan Foster
No ratings yet
Shaping Worldviews
From Everand
Shaping Worldviews
Richard Skiba
No ratings yet
Introduction To Words and Morphemes: Dr. Leany Nani Harsa, M.Si
No ratings yet
Introduction To Words and Morphemes: Dr. Leany Nani Harsa, M.Si
47 pages
(Ebook PDF) An Introduction To Language 10th Edition PDF Download
100% (1)
(Ebook PDF) An Introduction To Language 10th Edition PDF Download
51 pages
Verse (15:1) - Word by Word: Quranic Arabic Corpus
No ratings yet
Verse (15:1) - Word by Word: Quranic Arabic Corpus
91 pages
Processes of Language Production
No ratings yet
Processes of Language Production
7 pages
07 Spelling and Morphology
No ratings yet
07 Spelling and Morphology
4 pages
University of California, Berkeley University of Lancaster: The Word in Luganda
No ratings yet
University of California, Berkeley University of Lancaster: The Word in Luganda
19 pages
Linguistic BA All
No ratings yet
Linguistic BA All
22 pages
4 - Himmelmann - 2008 - Lexical Categories and Voice in Tagalog
No ratings yet
4 - Himmelmann - 2008 - Lexical Categories and Voice in Tagalog
31 pages
Morphology English Exercise 1
No ratings yet
Morphology English Exercise 1
13 pages
What Is Morphology
No ratings yet
What Is Morphology
9 pages
Componential Analysis and The Study of Meaning
No ratings yet
Componential Analysis and The Study of Meaning
23 pages
Etimologias
No ratings yet
Etimologias
81 pages
Moats Ch05 Session 3
No ratings yet
Moats Ch05 Session 3
20 pages
Bleaman 2022
No ratings yet
Bleaman 2022
25 pages
Exercises Solutions
No ratings yet
Exercises Solutions
47 pages
A Paper On Stylometric Differences Between Authentic and Fabricated Ahadith
No ratings yet
A Paper On Stylometric Differences Between Authentic and Fabricated Ahadith
18 pages
theoretical grammar of english language (автовосстановление)
No ratings yet
theoretical grammar of english language (автовосстановление)
2 pages
Course Syllabus
No ratings yet
Course Syllabus
3 pages
Все лекции влавацкая
No ratings yet
Все лекции влавацкая
45 pages
South Caucasian
No ratings yet
South Caucasian
85 pages
Chap 1 Inclusiveness 23
No ratings yet
Chap 1 Inclusiveness 23
37 pages
Iso 4-1997
No ratings yet
Iso 4-1997
13 pages
English Lexicology Chapter 3
No ratings yet
English Lexicology Chapter 3
9 pages
Sample Descriptions of Speech Tests-4.11-3
100% (1)
Sample Descriptions of Speech Tests-4.11-3
19 pages
BAKER and STEWART A Serial Verb Construction Without Constructions
No ratings yet
BAKER and STEWART A Serial Verb Construction Without Constructions
59 pages
Urban Planning Terminology in Albanian and Foreign Languages
No ratings yet
Urban Planning Terminology in Albanian and Foreign Languages
14 pages
Shibatani - What Is Nominalization Towards The Theory
No ratings yet
Shibatani - What Is Nominalization Towards The Theory
345 pages
In-Game Social Interactions To Facilitate ESL Students Morpholog
No ratings yet
In-Game Social Interactions To Facilitate ESL Students Morpholog
26 pages
Sri Lankan English Morphology
100% (3)
Sri Lankan English Morphology
4 pages

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.