Research Article

Differences in Communication Between Chinese and American Cultures

Xuran LeiShandong University of Science and Technology*

* Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

With the development of globalization and cultural diversity, cross-cultural communication has become popular around the world. Though many scholars have formulated various principles for people to observe, to some extent people violate them in real settings. Therefore, there may exist misunderstandings and conflicts between people communication from different cultural backgrounds, which can destroy people’s friendship and cooperation. This paper listed four aspects: praise and response, request and response, refusal and response and task reception, which violated the cooperative principle between Chinese and American cultures, compared them and explored reasons mainly from Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s value-oriented model, theories of dimensions of cultural variability and high-context and low-context cultures. In cross-cultural communication, individuals tend to violate some maxims based on their social forms which are not observed by others. For appropriate communication, people should respect and learn more other cultures and social norms instead of languages only.

Keywords: cross-cultural communication; cultures differences; the cooperative principle; value-oriented model; cultural variability
Published: October 31, 2023
DOI: 10.54254/2753-7064/11/20231469
Volume: CHR Vol.11
pp. 282-287
Download PDF

References

  1. Laura Nowak, & D. Dong. (1997). Intercultural Differences Between Chinese and Americans in Business. Business Communication Quarterly, 60(1), 115-123.
  2. Grice, H. Paul. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole and Jerry Morgan (ed.) Syntax and Semantics. Volume 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, 41-102.
  3. Edward. T. Hall. (1959). The Silent Language. Doubleday & Company, Inc: New York. 23-42.
  4. Edward. T. Hall. (1976). Beyond Culture. Anchor Books: New York.
  5. Guifang Gao. (2023). On the cultivation of Chinese cultural awareness in foreign language education from the perspective of cross-cultural communication. Journal of Hebei Open University, (01), 61-65.
  6. Susan M. Ervin-Tripp. (1963). Variations in Value Orientation. The American Journal of Psychology,76(2), 342.
  7. Kluckhohn, F. R., & Strodtbeck, F. L. (1961). Variations in Value Orientation. Harper and Row: New York.
  8. Geert Hofstede. (1980). Culture and Organizations. International Studies of Management & Organization, 10(4), 15-41.
  9. Edward. T. Hall. (1990). Understanding cultural differences. Intercultural Press: Boston. 183-184.
  10. Lingli Wang. (2012). Cultural differences between China and the West from everyday conversation. Journal of Mudanjiang College of Education(05), 66-67.
  11. Jing Qian. (2020) The impacts of high-context and low-context cultures on Sino-American business communication and corresponding strategies. Journal of Wuhu Institute of Technology(04), 49-51.
  12. Fanglei Yu. (2013) Theory of cooperative principle in intercultural communication. Jinan, Shandong Normal University.
  13. Yelin Zhou. (2012). Cultural differences between China and the United States from cultural contexts and coping strategies. Journal of Nanchang College(01), 54-56.
  14. Lisheng Xu. (2020). Intercultural Communication in English. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press: Shanghai. 85-114.
  15. Li Chen. (2015). A study of making refusals by Chinese and Americans. Journal of Shaoxing University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition)(06), 90-95.
  16. Chunhua Lei. (2018). A study on conflicts of cultural differences in Chinese learning for western students. Nanchang, Jiangxi Normal University.
  17. Yingkai Liu. (1991) An English-Chinese contrastive analysis of the cooperation principle and cultural difference. Journal of Shenzhen University(Humanities & Social Sciences)(03), 1-13.
  18. Diana Stukan. (2018). Sociopragmatic failure: Struggling with cross-cultural differences in communication. Open Journal for Anthropological Studies, 21(1). 27-36.