Cover not available
Article published In:
Cultural Linguistic Contributions to World Englishes
Edited by Hans-Georg Wolf, Frank Polzenhagen and Arne Peters
[International Journal of Language and Culture 4:2] 2017
► pp. 254–272

Conceptualizations of respect in business negotiations

A research note

 | University of Potsdam
International business negotiations are prone to several difficulties, one of the most fundamental of which being differences in cultural conceptualizations (Sharifian 2011). In order to explore how Brazilians and Germans conceptualize respect in business negotiations, interviews in English with business negotiators were conducted and cultural conceptualizations analyzed. Following an ‘organic’ (Quinn 2005) and (mainly) qualitative approach to data, this paper presents: (a) the main conceptualizations found for both groups; (b) a cognitive-linguistic analysis of collocations of ‘respect’ found in the interviews; and (c) a preliminary sketch of group-level conceptualizations of respect in business negotiations for both groups. For Brazilians, the source domains location and vertical splitting were salient, which points to the relevance of hierarchy. For Germans, the source domain horizontal splitting and the sphere separation cultural schema were recurrent, which signals appreciation for the public-private sphere separation. These conceptual differences might have practical consequences in international negotiation scenarios.
Keywords: cultural conceptualizations, Cultural Linguistics, intercultural business communication, World Englishes, English as lingua franca, respect
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Respect in business negotiations
  • 3.Cultural conceptualizations and ‘conceptual scripts’
  • 4.Methodology
  • 5.Results
    • 5.1Common cultural conceptualizations in Brazilian and German responses
    • 5.2Cultural conceptualizations in Brazilian responses
    • 5.3Cultural conceptualizations in German responses
    • 5.4Collocations of ‘respect’
    • 5.5A conceptual script of a holistic scene
    • 5.6Group-level conceptualizations of respect in business negotiations
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 14 December 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ijolc.4.2.07oli
References (39)
References
Bargiela-Chiappini, F., Nickerson, C., & Planken, B. (2007). Business discourse. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2002). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
(2008). Rethinking metaphor. In R. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 53–66). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hofstede, G. (1991). Culture and organizations: Software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Holanda, S. B. (1936/1995). Raízes do Brasil. 26. ed. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras.Google Scholar
Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: Chicago University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kachru, B. B. (1985). Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. In R. Quirk & H. Widdowson (Eds.), English in the world (pp. 11–30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kimmel, M. (2004). Metaphor variation in cultural context: Perspectives from anthropology. European Journal of English Studies, 8(3), 275–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005). Culture regained: Situated and compound image schemas. In B. Hampe & J. Grady (Eds.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp. 285–312). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2005). Metaphor in culture: Universality and variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1997). The internal structure of the Self. In U. Neisser & D. Jopling (Eds.), The conceptual Self in context: culture, experience, self-understanding (pp. 92–113). Cambridge/New York/ Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lax, D. A., & Sebenius, J. K. (1986). The manager as negotiator. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Marra, M. (2008). Recording and analyzing talk across cultures. In H. Spencer-Oatey (Ed.), Culturally speaking: Managing rapport through talk across cultures (pp. 304–321). 2nd ed. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Mandler, J. M., & Cánovas, C. P. (2014). On defining image schemas. Language and Cognition, 6(04), 510–532. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mendes de Oliveira, M. (manuscript). Business negotiations between Brazilians and Germans: conceptualization and practice.
OED online = Oxford English Dictionary (2013 online). Oxford University Press. [URL].
Pearson, V. M., & Stephan, W. G. (1998). Preferences for styles of negotiation: A comparison of Brazil and the US. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22(1), 67–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Polzenhagen, F., & Wolf, H.-G. (2007). Culture-specific conceptualisations of corruption in African English. In F. Sharifian, & G. B. Palmer (Eds.), Applied cultural linguistics: Implications for second language learning and intercultural communication (pp. 125–168). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010). Investigating culture from a linguistic perspective: An exemplification with Hong Kong English. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 58(3), 281–303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quinn, N. (1991). The cultural basis of metaphor. In J. Fernandez (Ed.), Beyond metaphor. The theory of tropes in anthropology (pp. 56–93). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(2005). How to reconstruct schemas people share. In N. Quinn (Ed.), Finding culture in talk: A collection of methods (pp. 33–81). New York: Palgrave Miller. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schröder, U. (2009). A Construção Metafórica do Conceito ‘Sociedade’ em Perspectiva Comparativa [The metaphorical construal of the concept ‘society’ in a comparative perspective]. Pandaemonium Germanicum, 141, 105–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010). Mesclagens metafóricas e suas funções no discurso sobre a sociedade: um estudo comparativo [Conceptual blending and its functions in discourse about society]. Revista Brasileira de Linguística Aplicada, 10(3), 575–602. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schroll-Machl, S. (2013). Doing business with Germans: Their perception, our perception. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sharifian, F. (2011). Cultural conceptualisations and language. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Cultural linguistics and world Englishes. World Englishes, 34(4), 515–532. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017). Cultural linguistics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sørensen, H. E. (2012). Business development. In D. Teece & M. Augier (Eds.), The Palgrave encyclopedia of strategic management (pp. 1–2). Macmillan Publishers Ltd.Google Scholar
Stubbe, M. (2001). From office to production line: Collecting data for the Wellington Language in the Workplace Project. Language in the Workplace Project, School of Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, Victoria University of Wellington.Google Scholar
Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphoric and culture aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talmy, L. (2000). Force dynamics in language and cognition. In L. Talmy. (2000), Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol I1: Concept structuring systems (pp. 409–470). Cambridge: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2000a). Fictive motion in language and ception. In L. Talmy. (2000), Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol I1: Concept structuring systems (pp. 99–174). Cambridge: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Wagner, J. (1995). What makes a discourse a negotiation? In K. Ehlich & J. Wagner (Eds.), The discourse of business negotiation (pp. 9–36). New York, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolf, H. -G. (1994). A folk model of the ‘internal self’ in light of the contemporary view of metaphor: The self as subject and object. European University Studies, Series XIV Anglo-Saxon Language and Literature, vol. 2841. Frankfurt/M.: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
(2015). Language and culture in intercultural communication. In F. Sharifian (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of language and culture (pp. 445–459). Oxford/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Taiwo, Rotimi
2024. Otherness and cultural conceptualisations of Gender and Social Class in Nigerian English. World Englishes 43:3 ► pp. 456 ff. DOI logo
Mendes de Oliveira, Milene
2018. Cultural conceptualizations of business negotiations in the Expanding Circle. World Englishes 37:4 ► pp. 684 ff. DOI logo
Mendes de Oliveira, Milene
2020. Face and cultural conceptualizations in German-Brazilian business exchanges. International Journal of Language and Culture 7:1 ► pp. 63 ff. DOI logo
Mendes de Oliveira, Milene
2021. A Successful Business Negotiation is Resource Sharing: Investigating Brazilian and German Cultural Conceptualisations in ‘Conceptual Scripts’. In Cultural Linguistics and World Englishes [Cultural Linguistics, ], ► pp. 317 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.