Abstract
This paper argues that research in intercultural communication should be taken into account when we want to define what language is, what its nature is like, and how it functions. Standard linguistic and pragmatic theories based on L1 analysis assume that language use depends on there being commonalities, conventions, standards and norms between language users. These conventions of language and conventions of usage create a core common ground on which intention and cooperation-based communication is built. When, however, this core common ground is limited as is the case in intercultural communication interlocutors cannot take them for granted, there is reason to take up the question of how people go about formulating utterances and interpreting them when they have limited access to those conventions and frames, and in a sense, they are expected to create, co-construct them (at least a part of them) in the communicative process. The paper examines three important aspects of this issue: (1) definition of language, (2) changing role of context, and (3) a modified understanding of linguistic creativity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
What is in brackets is taken for granted. It is not needed to express explicitly.
References
Altenberg, B. (1998). On the phraseology of spoken English: The evidence of recurrent word-combinations. In A. P. Cowie (Ed.), Phraseology: Theory, analysis, and applications (pp. 101–122). Clarendon Press.
Bach, K. (2004). Minding the gap. In C. Bianchi (Ed.), The semantics/pragmatics distinction. CSLI Publications.
Bezuidenhout, A. (2004). Procedural meaning and the semantics/pragmatics interface. In B. Claudia (Ed.), The semantics - pragmatics distinction (pp. 101–131). CSLI Publications.
Bianchi, C. (2010). Contextualism. In Jan-Ola Östman and Jef Verschueren. Handbook of pragmatics. John Benjamins.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., & CONRAD, S., & FINEGAN, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Pearson Education.
Carter, R. (2004). Language and creativity. The art of common talk. Routledge.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. MIT Press.
Cieslicka, A. (2006). Literal salience in on-line processing of idiomatic expressions by second language learners. Second Language Research, 22(2), 115–144.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 313–335). Cambridge University Press.
Edmondson, W., & House, J. (1991). Do learners talk too much? The waffle phenomenon in interlanguage pragmatics. In R. Phillipson, E. Kellerman, L. Selinker, M. S. Smith, & M. Swain (Eds.), Foreign/second language pedagogy research: A commemorative volume for Claus Farch. Multilingual Matters. Pp.273–287.
Ellis, N. C., Simpson-Vlach, R., & Carson, M. (2008). Formulaic language in native and second language speakers: Psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, and TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 42, 375–396.
Fillmore, C. J. (1976). The need for a frame semantics within linguistics. Statistical Methods in Linguistics, 12, 5–29.
Firth, A., & Wagner, J. (1997). On discourse, communication and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. The Modern Language Journal, 81, 285–300.
Frege, G. (1884/1980). The foundations of arithmetic. (Austin John, L. Trans.) (2nd Rev. ed.). Northwestern University Press.
Gil, J. M. (2019). A relational account of communication on the basis of slips of the tongue. Intercultural Pragmatics, 16(2), 53–185.
Giora, R. (2003). On our mind: Salience, context and figurative language. University Press.
Haugen, E. (1972). The ecology of language. In A. S. Dil (Ed.), The ecology of language: Essays by Einar Haugen. Stanford University Press.
Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N., & Fitch, W. T. (2002). The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science, 298, 1569–1579.
House, J. (2003). Misunderstanding in intercultural university encounters. In J. House, G. Kasper, & S. Ross (Eds.), Misunderstanding in social life: Discourse approaches to problematic talk (pp. 22–56). Longman.
Howarth, P. (1998). Phraseology and second language proficiency. Applied Linguistics, 19, 24–44.
Idemaru, K., Winter, B., & Brown, L. (2019). Cross-cultural multimodal politeness: The phonetics of Japanese deferential speech in comparison to Korean. Intercultural Pragmatics, 16(5), 517–557.
Istvan, K. (2007). Formulaic language in English lingua franca. In K. Istvan & L. R. Horn (Eds.), Explorations in pragmatics: Linguistic, cognitive and intercultural aspects (pp. 191–219). Mouton de Gruyter.
Kecskes, I. (2008). Dueling context: A dynamic model of meaning. Journal of Pragmatics, 40(3), 385–406.
Kecskes, I. (2010). The paradox of communication: A socio-cognitive approach. Pragmatics and Society, 1(1), 50–73.
Kecskes, I. (2014a). Intercultural Pragmatics. Oxford University Press.
Kecskes, I. (2014b). A response to the paper “metaphor interpretation and motivation in relevance theory”. Journal of Pragmatics, 60(1), 274–279.
Kecskes, I. (2015). “Is the idiom principle blocked in bilingual L2 production?” chapter 2. In R. Heredia & A. Cieslicka (Eds.), Bilingual figurative language processing (pp. 28–53). Cambridge University Press.
Kecskes, I. (2016). Deliberate creativity and formulaic language use. In K. Allan, A. Capone, & I. Kecskes (Eds.), Pragmemes and theories of language use, perspectives in pragmatics, philosophy & psychology 9 (pp. 3–20). Springer.
Kecskes, I. (2019a). English as a lingua Franca: The pragmatic perspective. Cambridge University Press.
Kecskes, I. (2019b). Impoverished pragmatics? The semantics-pragmatics interface from an intercultural perspective. Intercultural Pragmatics, 16(5), 489–517.
Leibniz, G. W. (1976/1679). Philosophical papers and letters. A selection translated and edited, with an introduction by Leroy E. In Loemker (2nd ed.). D. Reidel.
Macagno, F., & Capone, A. (2016). Uncommon ground. Intercultural Pragmatics, 13(2), 151–180.
Miller, J., & Weinert, R. (1998). Spontaneous spoken language: Syntax and discourse. Clarendon Press.
Morgan, J. L. (1978). Two types of convention in indirect speech acts. In C. Peter (Ed.), Pragmatics (syntax and semantics 9) (pp. 261–280). Academic.
Ortactepe, D. (2012). The development of conceptual socialization in international students: A language socialization perspective on conceptual fluency and social identity (advances in pragmatics and discourse analysis). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Pinker, S., & Jackendoff, R. (2005). The faculty of language: What’s so special about it? Cognition, 95, 201–236.
Prodromou, L. (2008). English as a lingua franca: A corpus based analysis. Continuum.
Schieffelin, B. B., & Ochs, E. (Eds.). (1986). Language socialization across cultures. Cambridge University Press.
Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford University Press.
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford University Press.
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition (2nd ed.). Blackwell.
Warga, M. (2005). ‘Je serais très merciable’: Formulaic vs. creatively produced speech in learners' request closings. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8, 67–94.
Warner, R. (2019). Meaning, reasoning, and common knowledge. Intercultural Pragmatics, 16(3), 289–305.
Wittgenstein, L. 1921/1922. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. (Ogden Charles, K., Trans.). : Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge University Press.
Acknowledgement
The paper was first published in 2021 in LANGAGES. 222. Pp. 25-42. Thanks to the publisher Armand Colin for permission to reuse a significant part of the text.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kecskes, I. (2023). Intercultural Communication and our Understanding of Language. In: The Socio-Cognitive Approach to Communication and Pragmatics. Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology, vol 33. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30160-5_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30160-5_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-30159-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-30160-5
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)