1887
Volume 12, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1878-9714
  • E-ISSN: 1878-9722
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper employs Kecskes’ socio-cognitive approach to analyze the varied speech styles and cognitive dynamics of the Chinese character (Lee) in John Steinbeck’s . The discussion of the novelistic dialogue segments has shown that the Chinese interlocutor’s verbal strategies vary from pidgin to English or a combination of the two, which are predominantly hearer-centered and marked by deliberate and conscious attempts on the part of the speaker to meet the cooperation principle. Lee’s movement between different communication modes is partly predetermined by the disparate power relations between the interlocutors and partly determined by his own communicative needs, thus producing a unique pattern that governs his language use in the given intercultural communicative process. In particular, pidgin is used as a self-protection mechanism, a buffer and a way of identification by the Chinese character, which informs the wider socio-historical context of Chinese immigrants’ victimization of racial discrimination in the American society at the turn of the twentieth century. Just like his shifting verbal strategies in intercultural communication, Lee’s cultural identity is also characterized by fluidity in the in-between space of two cultures.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ps.19071.zen
2021-03-02
2021-10-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bhabha, Homi K.
    1994The Location of Culture. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Blommaert, Jan
    1998 “Different approaches to intercultural communication: A critical survey.” Plenary lecture, Lernen und Arbeiten in einer international vernetzten und multikulturellen Gesellschaft, Expertentagung Universität Bremen, Institut für Projektmanagement und Wirtschaftsinformatik (IPMI), 27–28February.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bolton, Kingsley
    2000 “Language and Hybridization: Pidgin Tales from the China Coast.” Interventions2 (1): 35–52. 10.1080/136980100360788
    https://doi.org/10.1080/136980100360788 [Google Scholar]
  4. Buck, Pearl S.
    2012 [1946]Pavilion of Women. New York: Moyer Bell.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Burke, Thomas
    2012 [1916] “The Chink and the Child.” InLimehouse Nights, 15–37. London: Forgotten Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Dawson, Raymond
    1967The Chinese Chameleon: An Analysis of European Conceptions of Chinese Civilization. London: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Goldsmith, Oliver
    1904 [1794]Letters from a Citizen of the World to His Friends in the East. London: Wells Gardener, Darton & Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Gumperz, John J.
    1982Discourse Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511611834
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611834 [Google Scholar]
  9. Hymes, Dell
    1996Ethnography, Linguistics, Narrative Inequality: Toward an Understanding of Voice. London: Taylor and Francis.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Kecskes, Istvan
    2004 “Editorial: Lexical merging, conceptual blending, and cultural crossing.” Intercultural Pragmatics1 (1): 1–26. 10.1515/iprg.2004.005
    https://doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2004.005 [Google Scholar]
  11. 2010 “The paradox of communication: Socio-cognitive approach to pragmatics.” Pragmatics and Society1 (1): 50–73. 10.1075/ps.1.1.04kec
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.1.1.04kec [Google Scholar]
  12. 2012a “Intercultures, Encyclopaedic Knowledge, and Cultural Models.” Journal of Zhejiang University42 (4): 71–86.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 2012b “Is there anyone out there who really is interested in the speaker?” Language and Dialogue2 (2): 283–297. 10.1075/ld.2.2.06kec
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.2.2.06kec [Google Scholar]
  14. 2013aIntercultural Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199892655.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199892655.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  15. 2013b “Why do we say what we say the way we say it?” Journal of Pragmatics48: 71–83. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.11.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.11.010 [Google Scholar]
  16. Kuhn, Philip A.
    2008Chinese Among Others: Emigration in Modern Times. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Lynn, Shane
    2015 “‘A room of experience into which I cannot enter’: John Steinbeck on Race.” Steinbeck Review12 (2): 149–158. 10.5325/steinbeckreview.12.2.0149
    https://doi.org/10.5325/steinbeckreview.12.2.0149 [Google Scholar]
  18. Mildorf, Jarmila
    2013 “Reading Fictional Dialogue: Reflections on a Cognitive-Pragmatic Reception Theory.” Anglistik: International Journal of English Studies24 (2): 105–116.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Rohmer, Sax
    2009 [1933]Bride of Fu Manchu. Exeter, Cornwall: House of Stratus.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Shipman, Samuel and John B. Hymer
    1918East Is West: A Comedy in Three Acts and A Prologue by Samuel Shipman and John B. Hymer. New York: Samuel French.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Steinbeck, John
    1992 [1945]Cannery Row. New York: The Penguin Group.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. 1995 [1938] “Johnny Bear.” InThe Long Valley (With an Introduction and Notes by John H. Timmerman ), 101–120. London: The Penguin Group.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. 2000 [1952]East of Eden. London: The Penguin Group.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 2001 [1969]Journal of a Novel. London: The Penguin Group.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ps.19071.zen
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