-
Unit 3 Verbaland Non-verbal Communication
Unit overview
Both
Units
1
and
2
mention
a
key
word
“communication”.
As
Thomas
Payne points out in
Text B of Unit 2, most of us, linguists or
non-
linguists,
have
the
common-
sense
notion
that
“the
main
purpose
of
human
language
is
communication
”.
Thus
to
develop
a
deeper
understanding of the nature and
function of language, we need to take
a
close at human communication. This unit examines
this topic from a
cross-cultural
perspective,
illustrating
the
similarities
and
differences in verbal
and non-verbal communication between different
cultures,
which
lays
a
foundation
for
further
exploration
into
the
interface between
language and culture in the following units.
Text A
People in different
communities demonstrate different perceptions and
rules
of
both
verbal
and
non-
verbal
communication.
The
way
they
interact
is
culturally
relative
in
almost
every
aspect,
including
when
to
talk,
what
to
say,
pacing
and
pausing,
listenership,
intonation and prosody, formulaicity,
indirectness, and coherence and
cohesion.
Text B
Some non-
verbal behaviors are practically universal and
have the same
meaning wherever you are
., smiling and facial expressions of anger,
surprise, fear, sadness, and so on).
But for cultural and historical
reasons,
there
have
also
developed
great
differences
and
variations
in
such
aspects
as
eye
contact,
touch,
gestures,
and
territorial
space,
etc.
Without
an
awareness
of
respect
and
accommodation
for
people from a different background,
these differences
are likely to
cause misunderstandings in cross-
cultural communication.
The two texts supplement each other in
that Text A illustrates cross-
cultural
differences
in
both
verbal
and
non-verbal
communication
while
Text
B
focuses
on
non-
verbal
behaviors
and
addressesboth
differences
and similarities.
Teaching objectives
This unit is designed to help students
develop their reading skills,
communicative competence, critical
thinking, intercultural reflection
and
abilities of autonomous learning in the following
aspects.
Reading
skills:
Use context to
understand a new word
Identify cohesive devices
Predict the content of an upcoming
sentence/paragraph
Communicative competence:
Develop a coherent and cohesive
oral/written discourse
Use
topic sentences, supporting sentences and
concluding sentences in
presentations/essays
Communicate constructively in team
work
Critical
thinking:
Evaluate
the
strengths
and
weaknesses
of
personal
experience
as
evidence in
argumentation
Organize the
arguments using an outline
Note
and
reflect
on
the
differences
between
academic
writing
and
everyday
writing
Intercultural reflection
Identify
similarities
and
differences
in
non-verbal
communication
across
cultures
Be
aware
of
multiple
levels
of
differences
on
which
cross-cultural
communication can falter
Interpret
communication
behaviors
from
cultural
and
historical
perspectives
Teaching strategies
Non-verbal
communication
and
cross-cultural
communication
are
both
interesting topics in
linguistics. The teacher can introduce the two
texts
by
quoting
anecdotes
or
relating
to
students’
own
experiences
(question
5
in
Preparatory
work,
p.
59).
For
students
who
lack
experience of cross-
cultural communication, the topic can
be led in
by discussions
about inter-subcultural communication.
Text A is a research
articlefrom an academic journaland its structure
and
writing
style
are
quite
clear.
It
is
recommended
to
draw
students’
attention to
the
author’s
logic ., ways of
arguing) and
use
of
evidence
in
class.
If
well-
planned,
all
the
questions
in
Preparatory
Work
and
Critical
reading
can
be
dealt
with
in
some
detail
in
class.
The
teacher
can
follow
all
the
questions
in
Understanding the text
to check students’ comprehension of the
text,
while
the
tasks
in
Evaluation
and
exploration
can
be
divided
and
assigned
to
groups.
For
example,
in
Making
an
outline
(p.
62),
the
teacher can divide
the
students into three groups, each responsible
for one topic.
For classical works in intercultural
communication, please refer to:
Hall, Edward T. (1955). The
Anthropology of
American
,192: 85-89.
Hall, Edward T. (1959).
The
Silent Language
. New York: Doubleday.
For more updated
information, please find the following
journals:
Cross-
Cultural
Communication
published by Canadian
Academy of
Oriental and Occidental
Culture (CAOOC)
Across
Languages and Cultures
published
by
AkadémiaiKiadó
Language and Intercultural
Communication
published byRoutledge
Journals, Taylor & Francis
Ltd.
Preparatory
work
(1)
Academic
interests:
gender
and
language,
interactional
sociolinguistics,
conversational
interaction,
cross-cultural
communication,
frames
theory,
conversational
vs.
literary
discourse, and new media
discourse.
Main
publications:
You Just
Don't Understand: Women and Men in Conversation.
New York:
Morrow, 1990.
That's Not What I Meant!: How
Conversational Style Makes or Breaks
Relationships. NY: William Morrow,
1986.
Gender and Discourse.
NY & Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1994.
Note: Outside the
academic world Deborah Tannen is best known as the
author
of
a
number
of
books
on
the
New
York
Times
best
seller
and
she
is
also
a
frequent
guest
on
television
and
radio
news
and
information shows.
(2)
Edward Sapir
(1884
–
1939)
: an
American
anthropologist who
is
widely
regarded
as
one
of
the
most
important
figures
in
the
early
development of modern linguistics. His
main interests are in the ways
in
which
language
and
culture
influence
each
other,
the
relation
between
linguistic
differences,
and
differences
in
cultural
world
views.
His
most
important
contribution
is
what
is
known
as
the
principle of
linguistic
relativity
or the
John Joseph Gumperz(1922
–
2013): an American
linguist. His research
interests
include
the
languages
of
India,
code-switching,
and
conversational
interaction.
Well-known
for
his
contribution
in
interactional sociolinguistics and the
Gumperz’s
research
has
benefitted
such
fields
as
sociolinguistics,
discourse
analysis, and linguistic anthropology.
E. M. Forster (1879
–
1970): an English novelist,
short story writer,
essayist
and
librettist.
He
is
known
best
for
his
ironic
and
well-
plotted
novels
examining
class
difference
and
hypocrisy
in
early
20th-century British
society. He was nominated for the Nobel Prize in
Literature in 13 different
years.
Robert
Kaplan:An American
applied linguist.
His research area covers
applied
linguistics,
discourse
analysis,
language
policy,
language
planning,
and
ESL/EFL
Teaching.
He
is
most
famous
for
his
contribution in Contrastive Rhetoric, a
term he first coined in 1966.
Kaplan
has
authored
or
edited
32
books,
more
than
130
articles
in
scholarly
journals
and
chapters
in
books,
and
more
than
85
book
reviews and other ephemeral pieces in
various newsletters, as well as
9
special reports to the . government and to
governments elsewhere.
(3)
is
the
systematic
study
of
meaning
dependent
on
language
in
use.
Unlike semantics, which examines conventional
meaning
a given language, pragmatics
studies how the transmission of meaning
depends not only on structural and
linguistic knowledge ., grammar,
lexicon, etc.) of the speaker and the
hearer, but also on the context
of the
utterance, any pre-existing knowledge about those
participants
involved,
the
inferred
intent
of
the
speaker,
and
other
factors.
Central
topics
of
p
ragmatics
include
a
speaker’s
communicative
intentions,
the
use
of
language
that
requires
such
intentions,
context
of
use,
the
relation
between
the
user
of
a
linguistic
form
and
the
act
of
using
the
form,
and
the
strategies
an
addressee
employs to work
out what the intentions and acts are.
(4)
Cohesion refers to the use of various
phonological, grammatical,
and/or
lexical
means
to
link
sentences
or
utterances
into
a
well-
connected, larger
linguistic unit such as a paragraph or
a chapter.
In
other
words,
cohesion
achieves
well-connectedness
by
means
of
linguistic forms.
Example: Mary is a secretary.
She
works in a law firm. Yan
(2012)
Coherence
refers to the logical well-connectedness between
different
parts of a piece of spoken or
written language, which distinguishes
it from a random assemblage of
sentences or utterances. Yan (2012)
Formly
incohesive
discourse
may
be
coherent
through
common
se
nse,
cultural
background,
contextual
information,
imagination,
logical
assumption,
etc.
Husband:
That’s
the
telephone
.
Wife:
I’m
in
the
bath.
Husband:
OK.
(5)
Pause
is
a
temporary
and
brief
break
in
the
flow
of
speech,
which
is
often
classified
into
filled
pause
and
unfilled
or
silent
pause
. The
former is taken up or filled by a hesitation form
like
ah,
er,
and
um
.
In
contrast,
the
latter
is
not
filled
by
a
hesitation
form.
In
other
words,
a
silent
pause
is
one
where
there
is
no
vocalization.
Critical reading
I. Understanding the text
(1) The main purpose of this article is
to illustrate eight levels of
cross-
cultural differences in non-verbal aspects of
communication.
(2)
We
can
understand
the
nature
of
language
by
observing
it
in
communication and in contact with other
systems of communication.
(3)
Pacing
and
pausing,
listenership.
In
deciding
when
to
talk
and
what to say, the speaker usually takes
a conscious speech planning,
yet
in
pacing
and
pausing
and
in
showing
listenership
in
a
conversation, one does not need to stop
and think for a decision.
(4) Section starts with a direct
thesis statement. Then the author
explains
it
with
an
expert’s
(Scollon)
research
findings
and
section the author raises a number of
questions (in para 7, 9 and 11)
and
responds
to
them
with
relevant
research
findings
(Goody’s
as
well
as
hers)
and
her
own
personal
experience.
Section
is
also
organized
in
the
order
of
“questio
n
-
answer”.
Section
illustrates
cross-cultural
differences
in
listenership
with
two
examples,
gaze
(paras 21 and 22) and
loud responses (para 23), and then moves on to
the
conclusion
(para
24).
Section
:
example-discussion.
Section
:
personal experience and a
very brief interpretation. Section :
the
thesis
(para
30
“how
to
be
indirect
is
culturally
relative”)
and
discussion
about
the
cases
of
American-non-American
differences
(American men,
women, Greek and Japanese). Section :
definition and
illustration.
(5) The
experience ina dinner party in paragraph 12
indicates that (1)
people from
different cultures not only differ in whether
compliments
should
be
accepted,
rejected
or
deflected,
but
also
in
which
compliments
should
be
accepted/rejected/deflected;
and
(2)
every
culture
has
its
own
conventions
about
what
to
say
on
particular
occasions, and without knowledge of
these conventions, we can by no
means
appropriately
interpret
the
messages
in
cross-cultural
communication.
In Para. 29, Tannenrefers to her first
visit to Greece to exemplify