1887
Volume 31, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper analyses postings made by student applicants on Korean online communities about how best to handle interactions with potential future PhD supervisors at UK universities. The questions they posed reveal the lack of relevant contextual information they experienced, especially around the rights and obligations of supervisors. This paper thus analyses students’ metapragmatic comments and argues for greater attention to be paid within interpersonal and intercultural pragmatics to interactional goals and conceptions of role relations, especially the rights and obligations associated with them. The analysis has revealed that background information on role relations is of great importance for relational management and communication planning in high stakes intercultural interaction. This suggests that potential cultural variation in the perceived rights and obligations associated with a given role (in this case, PhD supervisor) and their implications for assessments of role relations are of central concern.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/prag.20004.kim
2020-11-30
2021-05-12
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Allwood, Jens
    2007 “Activity Based Studies of Linguistic Interaction. Gothenburg Papers in Theoretical Linguistics.” Available at: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/hprints-00460511/document [accessed26 May 2020].
  2. Arundale, Robert B.
    2010 “Relating.” InInterpersonal Pragmatics, ed. byMiriam A. Locher and Sage L. Graham, 137–165. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bae, Young Han, Michelle Hough, Jong Woo Jun, and Ilyoung Ju
    2018 “Cultural Differences among Young Adult Consumers in Hong Kong, Japan, and Korea.” Journal of Global Marketing31 (1): 18–30. 10.1080/08911762.2017.1377333
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08911762.2017.1377333 [Google Scholar]
  4. Berger, Charles R., and James Bradac
    1982Language and Social Knowledge: Uncertainty in Interpersonal Relations. London: Edward Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Berger, Charles R., and Richard J. Calabrese
    1975 “Some Explorations in Initial Interaction and Beyond: Toward a Developmental Theory of Interpersonal Communication.” Human Communication Research1 (2): 99–112. 10.1111/j.1468‑2958.1975.tb00258.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00258.x [Google Scholar]
  6. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana, Juliane House, and Gabrielle Kasper
    (eds) 1989Cross-Cultural Pragmatics. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Brandle, Gaspar
    2011 “Roles.” InThe Concise Encyclopedia of Sociology, ed. byGeorge Ritzer and J. Michael Ryan. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson
    1978 “Universals in Language Usage: Politeness Phenomena.” InQuestions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction, ed. byEsther N. Goody, 56–310. Cambridge: Cambridge Univesrity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 1987Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
  10. Chen, Rong, Lin He, and Chunmei Hu
    2013 “Chinese Requests: In Comparison to American and Japanese Requests and with Reference to the ‘East-West divide’.” Journal of Pragmatics55 (Sep): 140–161. 10.1016/j.pragma.2013.05.012
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.05.012 [Google Scholar]
  11. Clark, Herbert H.
    1996Using Language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620539
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620539 [Google Scholar]
  12. Cook, Haruko M.
    2006 “Japanese Politeness as an Interactional Achievement: Academic Consultation Sessions in Japanese Universities.” Multilingua25: 269–291. 10.1515/MULTI.2006.016
    https://doi.org/10.1515/MULTI.2006.016 [Google Scholar]
  13. Craig, Robert T., Karen Tracy, and Frances Spisak
    1986 “The Discourse of Requests: Assessment of a Politeness Approach.” Human Communication Research12 (4): 437–468. 10.1111/j.1468‑2958.1986.tb00087.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1986.tb00087.x [Google Scholar]
  14. Crane, Paul S.
    1968Korean Patterns. Seoul: Hollym.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Culpeper, Jonathan
    2011 “Politeness and Impoliteness.” InHandbooks of Pragmatics, Vol.5 Pragmatics of Society (General editors Wolfram Bublitz, Andreas H. Jucker and Klaus P. Schneider), ed. byKarin Aijmer and Gisle Andersen, 391–436. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Dewulf, Art, Barbara Gray, Linda Putnam, Roy J. Lewicki, Noelle Aarts, Rene Bouwen, and Cees van Woerkum
    2009 “Disentangling Approaches to Framing in Conflict and Negotiation Research: A Meta-Paradigmatic Perspective.” Human Relations62 (2): 155–193. 10.1177/0018726708100356
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726708100356 [Google Scholar]
  17. DuBois, Jill
    2004Cultures of the World: Korea. New York: Marshall Cavendish Benchmark Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Eelen, Gino
    2001A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester: St Jerome.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Enfield, Nick J.
    2009 “Relationship Thinking and Human Pragmatics.” Journal of Pragmatics41: 60–78. 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.007 [Google Scholar]
  20. Fischer, Ronald, and Shalom H. Schwartz
    2011 “Whence Differences in Value Priorities?: Individual, Cultural, or Artifactual Sources.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology42 (7): 1127–1144. doi:  10.1177/0022022110381429
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022110381429 [Google Scholar]
  21. Fraser, Bruce, and William Nolan
    1981 “The Association of Deference with Linguistic Form.” InThe Sociolinguistics of Deference & Politeness, ed. byJoel Walters, 93–111. Special issue (27) of theInternational Journal of the Sociology of Language. The Hague: Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. French, John R. P. Jr., and Bertram Raven
    1959 “The Bases of Social Power.” InStudies in Social Power, ed. byDorwin Cartwright, 150–167. Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michegan.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Gass, Susan M., and Joyce Neu
    (eds) 1995Speech Acts across Cultures. Challenges to Communication in a Second Language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Gelfand, Michele J.
    2018Rule Makers, Rule Breakers. London: Robinson.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Gelfand, Michele J., Jana L. Raver, Lisa H. Nishii, Lisa M. Leslie, Janetta Lun, Beng Chong Lim, Duan Lili,
    2011 “Differences Between Tight and Loose Cultures: A 33-Nation Study.” Science332: 1100–1104. doi:  10.1126/science.1197754
    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1197754 [Google Scholar]
  26. Goddard, Cliff
    2006 “Ethnopragmatics: A New Paradigm.” InEthnopragmatics: Understanding Discourse in Cultural Context, ed. byCliff Goddard, 1–30. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110911114.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110911114.1 [Google Scholar]
  27. Griffin, Em
    2012A First Look at Communication Theory. Eighth edition. New York: McGraw Hill.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Harris, Philip, Robert T. Moran, and Sarah V. Moran
    2004Managing Cultural Differences: Global Leadership Strategies for the 21st Century. 6th edition. Burlington, MA, USA: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Hatfield, Hunter, and Jee-Won Hahn
    2011 “What Korean Apologies Require of Politeness Theory.” Journal of Pragmatics43 (5): 1303–1317. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.028
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.028 [Google Scholar]
  30. Haugh, Michael, Bethan L. Davies, and Andrew John Merrison
    2011 “Situating Politeness.” InSituated Politeness, ed. byBethan L. Davies, Michael Haugh and Andrew John Merrison, 1–23. London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Hsieh, Hsiu-Fang, and Sarah E. Shannon
    2005 “Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis.” Qualitative Health Research15 (9): 1277–1288. 10.1177/1049732305276687
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687 [Google Scholar]
  32. Ide, Sachiko
    1989 “Formal Forms and Discernment: Two Neglected Aspects of Universals of Linguistic Politeness.” Multilingua8 (2/3): 223–248. 10.1515/mult.1989.8.2‑3.223
    https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.1989.8.2-3.223 [Google Scholar]
  33. Kádár, Dániel Z., and Michael Haugh
    2013Understanding Politeness. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9781139382717
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139382717 [Google Scholar]
  34. Kasper, Gabriele
    1990 “Linguistic Politeness – Current Research Issues.” Journal of Pragmatics14 (2): 193–218. 10.1016/0378‑2166(90)90080‑W
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90080-W [Google Scholar]
  35. Kecskes, Istvan
    2014Intercultural Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Lakoff, Robin
    1973 “The Logic of Politeness; or, Minding Your P’s and Q’s.” InPapers from the Ninth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 292–305. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Leary, Mark R.
    1995Self-Presentation. Impression Management and Interpersonal Behavior. Boulder: Westview Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Leary, Mark R., and Robin M. Kowalski
    1990 “Impression Management: A Literature Review and Two-Component Model.” Psychological Bulletin107 (1): 34–47. 10.1037/0033‑2909.107.1.34
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.1.34 [Google Scholar]
  39. Lee, Keun S., and Anil Mathur
    1997 “Formalization, Role Stress, Organizational Commitment, and Propensity-to-Leave.” Journal of Global Marketing11 (2): 23–42. 10.1300/J042v11n02_03
    https://doi.org/10.1300/J042v11n02_03 [Google Scholar]
  40. Leech, Geoffrey
    1983Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. 2014The Pragmatics of Politeness. Oxford: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341386.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341386.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  42. Lefringhausen, Katharina, Helen Spencer-Oatey, and Carolin Debray
    2019 “Culture, Norms and the Assessment of Communication Contexts: Multidisciplinary Perspectives.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology50 (10): 1098–1111. 10.1177/0022022119889162
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022119889162 [Google Scholar]
  43. Leung, Kwok, and Michael W. Morris
    2015 “Values, Schemas, and Norms in the Culture–Behavior Nexus: a Situated Dynamics Framework.” Journal of International Business Studies46: 1028–1050. 10.1057/jibs.2014.66
    https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2014.66 [Google Scholar]
  44. Locher, Miriam A.
    2006 “Polite Behavior within Relational Work: The Discursive Approach to Politeness.” Multilingua25: 249–267. 10.1515/MULTI.2006.015
    https://doi.org/10.1515/MULTI.2006.015 [Google Scholar]
  45. Locher, Miriam A., and Sage L. Graham
    (eds) 2010Interpersonal Pragmatics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110214338
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214338 [Google Scholar]
  46. Matsumoto, Yoshiko
    1988 “Reexamination of the Universality of Face: Politeness Phenomena in Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics12: 403–426. doi:  10.1016/0378‑2166(88)90003‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(88)90003-3 [Google Scholar]
  47. 1989 “Politeness and Conversational Universals – Observations from Japanese.” Multilingua8 (2/3): 207–221. 10.1515/mult.1989.8.2‑3.207
    https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.1989.8.2-3.207 [Google Scholar]
  48. Ramirez, Artemio, Joseph B. Walther, Judee K. Burgoon, and Michael Sunnafrank
    2002 “Information-Seeking Strategies, Uncertainty, and Computer-Mediated Communication: Toward a Conceptual Model.” Human Communication Research28 (2): 213–228.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Robertson, Seth
    2019 “Korean Nunchi and Well-being.” Science, Religion and Culture6 (1): 103–109. 10.17582/journal.src/2019.6.1.103.109
    https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.src/2019.6.1.103.109 [Google Scholar]
  50. Spencer-Oatey, Helen
    1996 “Reconsidering Power and Distance.” Journal of Pragmatics26 (1): 1–24. 10.1016/0378‑2166(95)00047‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00047-X [Google Scholar]
  51. 2008 “Face, (Im)politeness and Rapport.” InCulturally Speaking. Culture, Communication and Politeness Theory, ed. byHelen Spencer-Oatey, 11–47. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. 2011 “Conceptualising the ‘Relational’ in Pragmatics: Insights from Metapragmatic Emotion and (Im)politeness Comments.” Journal of Pragmatics43: 3565–3578. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.08.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.08.009 [Google Scholar]
  53. 2013 “Relating at Work: Facets, Dialectics and Face.” Journal of Pragmatics58: 121–137. 10.1016/j.pragma.2013.02.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.02.010 [Google Scholar]
  54. Spencer-Oatey, Helen, and Dániel Z. Kádár
    2020Intercultural Politeness: Managing Relations across Cultures. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316810071
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316810071 [Google Scholar]
  55. Spencer-Oatey, Helen, Katharina Lefringhausen, and Carolin Debray
    2019 “Culture, Norms, and the Assessment of Communication Contexts: Discussion and Pointers for the Future.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology50 (10): 1216–1220. 10.1177/0022022119889165
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022119889165 [Google Scholar]
  56. Turner, Ralph H.
    2002 “Role Theory.” InHandbook of Sociological Theory, ed. byJonathan H. Turner, 233–254. New York: Kluwer Academic / Plenum Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Watts, Richard J.
    2003Politeness. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511615184
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615184 [Google Scholar]
  58. Watts, Richard J., Sachiko Ide, and Konrad Ehlich
    1992 “Introduction.” InPoliteness in Language, ed. byRichard J. Watts, Sachiko Ide and Konrad Ehlich, 1–17. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/prag.20004.kim
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/prag.20004.kim
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error