Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Intercultural Communication
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Intercultural Communication
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- Part I Introducing Intercultural Communication
- Part II Theoretical Approaches
- 5 Critical Intercultural Communication and the Digital Environment
- 6 From Shared Values to Cultural Dimensions
- 7 Towards Integrative Intercultural Communication
- 8 The Power of Literature in Intercultural Communication
- 9 Psychoanalytic Approaches to Memory and Intercultural Communication
- 10 Sociological Approaches to Intercultural Communication
- 11 Introducing Intercultural Ethics
- Part III Methods
- Part IV Application
- Part V Assessment
- Index
- References
7 - Towards Integrative Intercultural Communication
from Part II - Theoretical Approaches
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 February 2020
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Intercultural Communication
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Intercultural Communication
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- Part I Introducing Intercultural Communication
- Part II Theoretical Approaches
- 5 Critical Intercultural Communication and the Digital Environment
- 6 From Shared Values to Cultural Dimensions
- 7 Towards Integrative Intercultural Communication
- 8 The Power of Literature in Intercultural Communication
- 9 Psychoanalytic Approaches to Memory and Intercultural Communication
- 10 Sociological Approaches to Intercultural Communication
- 11 Introducing Intercultural Ethics
- Part III Methods
- Part IV Application
- Part V Assessment
- Index
- References
Summary
Liisa Salo-Lee highlights the need to transform academic and professional work in intercultural communication, which is still largely shaped by the multidisciplinary coexistence of different approaches. Her chapter presents ‘integrative intercultural communication’ as a proposal for an interdisciplinary approach to research and practice, which places intercultural dialogue at its core and stresses intercultural communication as an ongoing process of learning in exchange. This approach aims to provide researchers with supporting concepts and tools, e.g. the use of the rhizome as a metaphor for culture and nexus analysis as a method for cultural analysis, to tackle the complexities of the field.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Intercultural Communication , pp. 120 - 135Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
Argyris, C. and Schön, D. A. (1974). Theories in Practice: Increasing Professional Effectiveness. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Berthoin Antal, A. and Friedman, V. (2008). Learning to negotiate reality: a strategy for teaching intercultural competencies. Journal of Management Education, 32(3), 363–86.Google Scholar
Busch, D. (2009). The notion of culture in linguistic research. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 10(1), art. 50, 1–24.Google Scholar
Carbaugh, D. and Berry, M. (2001). Communication history, Finnish and American discourses: an ethnographic contribution to intercultural communication inquiry. Communication Theory, 11(3), 352–66.Google Scholar
Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. (1987). A Thousand Plateaus. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Dervin, F. (2011). A plea for change in research on intercultural discourses: a ‘liquid’ approach to the study of the acculturation of Chinese students. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 6(1), 37–52.Google Scholar
Dervin, F. and Keihäs, L. (2013). Johdanto uuteen kulttuurienväliseen viestintään ja kasvatukseen [Introduction to new intercultural communication and education]. Helsinki: FERA.Google Scholar
Dervin, F. and Tournebise, C. (2013). Turbulence in intercultural education: does it affect higher education? Intercultural Education, 24(6), 532–43.Google Scholar
Frame, A. (2014). On cultures and interactions: theorizing the complexity of intercultural encounters. In Poutiainen, S., ed., Theoretical Turbulence in Intercultural Communication Studies. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 29–44.Google Scholar
Friedman, V. (2014). Negotiating reality: intercultural communication as constructing social space. In Poutiainen, S., ed., Theoretical Turbulence in Intercultural Communication Studies. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 9–27.Google Scholar
Friedman, V. and Berthoin Antal, A. (2005). Negotiating reality: an action science approach to intercultural competence. Management Learning, 36(1), 67–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halualani, R. T. ed. (2014). Online discussion forum: international and intercultural communication. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication, 7(1). DOI: 10.1080/17513057.2014.869524.Google Scholar
Hart, W. B. (1999). Interdisciplinary influences in the study of intercultural relations: a citation analysis of the International Journal of Intercultural Relations. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23(4), 575–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heller, M., Pietikäinen, S. and Pujolar, J. (2018). Critical Sociolinguistic Research Methods: Studying Language Issues That Matter. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values, Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Isotalus, E. and Kakkuri-Knuuttila, M.-L. (2017). Ethics and intercultural communication in diversity management. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 37(5), 450–69.Google Scholar
Jensen, I. and Andreasen, L. B. (2014). Methods for researching intercultural communication in globalized complex societies. In Poutiainen, S., ed., Theoretical Turbulence in Intercultural Communication Studies. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 45–61.Google Scholar
Kersten, A. (2000). Diversity management: dialogue, dialectics & diversion. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 13(3), 235–48. DOI: 10.1108/09534810010330887.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Lahti, M. (2015). Communicating Interculturality in the Workplace. Doctoral dissertation (Jyväskylä Studies in Humanities 262), Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.Google Scholar
Lane, P. (2014). Nexus analysis: an action oriented approach to discourse. In Östman, J.-O. and Verschueren, J., eds., Handbook of Pragmatics: 2014 Installment. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 1–18. DOI: 10.1075/hop.18.nex1.Google Scholar
Moulakis, A. (2003). The trouble with intercultural communication. Studies in Communication Sciences, 3(2), 11–40.Google Scholar
Niiniluoto, I. (2005). Tieteellisyyden haaste [The challenge of multidisciplinarity]. Lecture presented to the ‘Proact Annual Seminar’, 1 February, Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar
Pietikäinen, S. (2014). Circulation of indigenous Sámi resources across media spaces: a rhizomatic discourse approach. In Androutsopoulos, J., ed., Mediatization and Sociolinguistic Change. Berlin: De Gruyter, pp. 515–38.Google Scholar
Pietikäinen, S. (2015). Multilingual dynamics in Sámiland: rhizomatic discourses on changing language. International Journal of Bilingualism, 19(2), 206–25. DOI: 10.1177/1367006913489199.Google Scholar
Pietikäinen, S. (2016). Critical debates: discourse boundaries and social change. In Coupland, N., ed., Sociolinguistics: Theoretical Debates. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 263–81.Google Scholar
Pietikäinen, S., Compton, S. and Dlaske, K. (2015). Putting resources into practice: a nexus analysis of knowledge mobilisation activities in language research and multilingual communities. Current Issues in Language Planning, 16(3), 187–200. DOI: 10.1080/14664208.2015.972533.Google Scholar
Piller, I. (2012). Intercultural communication: an overview. In Bratt Paulson, C., Kiesling, S. F. and Rangel, E. S., eds., The Handbook of Intercultural Discourse and Communication. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 3–18.Google Scholar
Poutiainen, S., ed. (2014). Theoretical Turbulence in Intercultural Communication Studies. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Salo-Lee, L. (2003). Intercultural communication as intercultural dialogue: revisiting intercultural competence. In Kistler, P. and Konivuori, S., eds., From International Exchanges to Intercultural Communication: Combining Theory and Practice. Jyväskylä: EMICC and University of Jyväskylä, pp. 121–8.Google Scholar
Salo-Lee, L. (2007). Towards cultural literacy. In Kaivola, T. and Melén-Paaso, M., eds., Education for Global Responsibility: Finnish Perspectives. Helsinki: Ministry of Education, pp. 73–82.Google Scholar
Salo-Lee, L. (2015). Intercultural communication as intercultural dialogue: challenges and new paths. In Jiang, F., ed., China Intercultural Communication Annual. Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, pp. 174–215.Google Scholar
Salo-Lee, L. and Crawford, B. (2017). Intercultural communication study in Finland. In Kim, Y. Y., ed., The International Encyclopedia of Intercultural Communication. DOI: 10.1002/9781118783665.ieicc0081.Google Scholar
Scollon, R. (1997). Current trends in intercultural communication studies. Lecture presented to the School of English Language Communication, revised 3 April, Beijing Foreign Studies University, China.Google Scholar
Scollon, R. (2002). Intercultural communication as nexus analysis. Logos and Language: Journal of General Linguistics Theory, 3(2), 1–17.Google Scholar
Scollon, R. and Scollon, W. S. (2004). Nexus Analysis: Discourse and the Emerging Internet. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Scollon, R., Scollon, W. S. and Jones, R. H. (2012). Intercultural Communication: A Discourse Approach. 3rd ed. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, H. and Franklin, P. (2009). Intercultural Interaction: Multidisciplinary Approach to Intercultural Communication. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Törrönen, M. (2001). Tulkintoja dialogisuudesta projektijohtajuudessa [Interpretations about dialogicality in project leadership]. Master’s thesis, University of Jyväskylä.Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by