Cover not available
Part of
The Pragmatics of Adaptability
Edited by Daniel N. Silva and Jacob L. Mey
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 319] 2021
► pp. 191–212

Chapter 9
Face, conflict, and adaptability in mediated intercultural invitations

Young adults navigate complexities of ethnicity, gender, nationality and age

| Lesley University
| Northeastern University
| Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro

In a world of increasing national and international mobility, people are progressively more engaged in communication over multiple types of media. This paper discusses the question of adaptability in mediated intercultural communication, considering the perspectives of a group of international graduate students and their peers in a graduate program in a North American university. The paper explores the relational aspects of technologically mediated “invitations” as potential face threatening acts made more complex by the unequal social positions of the participants regarding ethnicity, gender, nationality, and age. It also problematizes the nature of mediated communication and choices of communicative tools, the contradictory assessments by users as to the value of specific semiotic information, and the chronotopes of mediated invitations that intensify facework.

Keywords: intercultural communication, mediated interaction, adaptability, invitation, face
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Invitations: Face orientation and negotiation
  • 3.The data
    • Case 1.Rebecca. Using preliminaries: Texting to generate a Skype conversation
    • Case 2.Winnie: An invitation via email
    • Case 3.Lara: Direct FTA with no face protection except for the medium
    • Case 4. Claire: Indirectness and side sequences to protect face among siblings
  • 4.Further discussion
  • 5.Chronotopes – intensifying tension?
  • 6.Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 17 March 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.319.09rib
References
Austin, John L.
1962 How to do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bateson, Gregory
1972 “A Theory of Play and Fantasy.” In Steps to an ecology of mind, 177–93. New York: Ballantine.Google Scholar
Blommaert, Jan
2010 The Sociolinguistics of Globalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017 “Durkheim and the Internet: On Sociolinguistics and the Sociological Imagination.” Working Papers in Urban Language & Literacies. Tilburg University.Google Scholar
2018 “Are Chronotopes Helpful?” CTRL+ALT+DEM 22-06-2018. [URL]
Blommaert, Jan, Laura Smits, Noura Yacoubi
2018 Context and its Complications (Tilburg Papers in Culture Studies. Paper 208). Tilburg University.Google Scholar
Blommaert, Jan, and Ben Rampton
2011 “Language and superdiversity.” Diversities 13 (2): 1–22.Google Scholar
Bourlai, Elli E.
2018 Gender and Language in Computer-Mediated Discourse: A Historical Analysis of USENET Newsgroups (Publication No. 13420750) [Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Briggs, Charles L.
1996 “Introduction.” In Disorderly discourse. Narrative, Conflict and Inequality, ed. by C. L. Briggs, 3–40. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson
1978 Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cowan, S., Blanca T. Ribeiro, and Lucy Bunning
2012 Complexity in Technologically-Mediated Communication: Do Cultural and Communication Norms Shift? Paper Presented at Society for Intercultural Education Training and Research, Minneapolis, Minn.
De Kadt, Elizabeth
1998 “The Concept of Face and its Applicability to the Zulu Language.” Journal of Pragmatics 29: 173–191. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dresner, Eli, and Susan C. Herring
2010 “Functions of the Nonverbal in CMC: Emoticons and Illocutionary Force.” Communication Theory 20: 249–268. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul
2018 “Equivocal invitations.” Journal of Pragmatics 125: 62–75. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold
1967 Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewoood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving
1959 The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
1961 Asylums. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
1967 Interactional Ritual. Essays on Face to Face Behavior. Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
1974 Frame Analysis. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Gumperz, John J.
1982 Discourse Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holtgraves, Thomas M.
2002 Language as Social Action. Social Psychology and Language Use. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hymes, Dell
1974 Foundations in Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Kendall, Shari and Deborah Tannen
2015 “Discourse and Gender.” In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, ed. by D. Tannen, H. E. Hamilton, and D. Schiffrin, 639–660. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kim, Min-Sun
2020 Non-Western Perspectives on Human Communication: Implications for Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Locher, Miriam A., Brook Bolander, and Nicole Höhn
2015 “Introducing Relational Work in Facebook and Discussion Boards.” Pragmatics 25 (1): 1–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Margutti, Piera, Liisa Tainio, Paul Drew, and Veronica Traverso
2018 “Invitations and Responses across Different Languages: Observations on the Feasibility and Relevance of a Cross-Linguistic Comparative Perspective on the Study of Actions.” Journal of Pragmatics 125: 52–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mey, Jacob L.
2006 “Adaptability in Human-Computer Interaction.” In Concise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics, ed. by Jacob L. Mey, 7–13. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Mey, Jacob L., and Barbara Gorayska
1994 “Integration in Computing: An Ecological Approach.” Third International Conference on Systems Integration, São Paulo, Brazil, July 30-August 6.
Ribeiro, Branca T., and Lucy Bunning
2011 Mediated intercultural Communication: The Analysis of Three Speech Events. Paper presented at Georgetown University Round Table on Language and Linguistics, Washington, D.C.
Ribeiro, Branca T., Liliana Cabral Bastos, and Lucy Bunning
2015 Interaction in Mediated Intercultural Contexts: Face and Conflict over Ethnicity, Gender and Nationality. Perspectives from Young Adults. Paper presented at International Pragmatics Association, Antwerp, Belgium.
Searle, John R.
1969 Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah
1990 Approaches to Discourse Analysis. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah
1984 Conversational Style. Analyzing Talk among Friends. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.Google Scholar
1985 “Silence: Anything but.” In Perspectives on Silence, D. Tannen and M. Saville-Troike, 93–112. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.Google Scholar
1986 That’s not what I meant! New York: Morrow.Google Scholar
2017 You’re the Only One I Can Tell. Inside the Language of Women’s Friendships. New York: Ballantine Books.Google Scholar
Ting-Toomey, Stella
2005 “The Matrix of Face: An Updated face Negotiation Theory.” In Theorizing about intercultural communication, ed. by W. B. Gudykunst, 71–92. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.Google Scholar
Ting-Toomey, Stella and John G. Oetzel
2001 Managing Intercultural Conflict Effectively. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage.Google Scholar
Vandergriff, Ilona
2013 “Emotive Communication Online: A Contextual Analysis of Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) Cues.” Journal of Pragmatics 51: 1–12. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yule, George
1996 Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar