POSSIBLE CAUSES OF COMMUNICATIVE DISCOMFORT IN INTERCULTURAL BUSINESS COMMUNICATION

ВЕРОЯТНЫЕ ПРИЧИНЫ ВОЗНИКНОВЕНИЯ КОММУНИКАТИВНОГО ДИСКОМФОРТА В МЕЖКУЛЬТУРНОМ ОБЩЕНИИ

Куценко Надежда Станиславовна

магистрант, Институт международного образования, Московский педагогический государственный университет,

РФ, г. Москва

ABSTRACT

The article deals with the concept ‘communicative discomfort’ (CD), which is studied as a phenomenon in the framework of unsuccessful communication. The aim of the article is to describe distinct characteristics of the CD and introduce possible causes of its occurrence in intercultural business communication. The methods used are the descriptive method, theoretical analysis and synthesis. The results suggest that CD can emerge in intercultural interaction due to cultural differences that include distinctive communicative ethnostyles, communicative cultures, and business cultures, which can co-occur in a communicative situation and can interfere with the effective process of intercultural business communication.

АННОТАЦИЯ

В статье рассматривается понятие «коммуникативный дискомфорт» (КД), который изучается как явление неуспешного общения. Цель статьи – описать отличительные характеристики КД и представить возможные причины его возникновения в межкультурном деловом общении. Используемые методы представляют описательный метод, теоретический анализ и синтез. Полученные результаты позволяют предположить, что КД может возникать в межкультурном взаимодействии из-за культурных различий, к которым относятся различающиеся коммуникативные этностили, коммуникативные культуры и деловые культуры, и которые могут одновременно присутствовать в одной коммуникативной ситуации и препятствовать эффективному процессу межкультурной деловой коммуникации.

Keywords: communicative discomfort (CD); intercultural communication; causes of CD.

Ключевые слова: коммуникативный дискомфорт (КД); межкультурное общение; причины КД.

The exploration of unsuccessful communication is a significant topic in contemporary linguistics. It is characterized as unfavorable or anomalous communicative situations where the progress of the dialogue fails to align with the expectations or intentions of either the speaker or their interlocutor [1, p. 4]. Communicative discomfort (CD) represents a phenomenon of such communication and can be caused not only by communication barriers, which encompass phonetic, semantic, stylistic, and logical factors but also by sociocultural barriers. They can be treated as possible causes of CD and attributed to cultural norms, values, and beliefs, different communication styles, communicative cultures, and business cultures.

There are different approaches to the interpretation of CD represented in modern linguistics. However, the researchers who examine this concept agree that CD constitutes an anomalous communicative phenomenon that occurs in an unfavorable communicative situation.

L.P. Semenko, who introduced this concept, defines CD as “a situation in which there are features complicating the speaker’s communicative expectations or/and intentions [5, p. 70]. The researcher also notes that CD may lead to the occurrence of another communicative phenomenon, communicative conflict, if it is not overcome by the speaker. Moreover, CD may result in a communicative failure, which is treated as a negative result in which the goal of communication is not achieved [4, p. 67].

N.M. Bolokhontseva adopts a similar perspective to L.P. Semeneko and specifies that CD can emerge in the communicative process when one of the communicative partners experiences difficulties, which result in a psychological state of uneasiness [1, p. 64].

E.V. Fadeeva examines CD and suggests that it can be identified in speech by specific verbal markers. She proposes to define it as a communicative situation where there are meta-communicative indicators that indicate strained communication [7, p. 70-71]. By observing these meta-communicative markers, the CD state of the interlocutor can be identified, as these markers are used by communicants to describe their CD or the CD of their interlocutors.

Moreover, CD is commonly associated with communicative failure and communicative conflict. E.M. Martynova notes that not all instances of CD are necessarily linked to these phenomena. She stresses that CD should be treated as a separate phenomenon that is not part of communicative failure. It can occur independently in a dialogue, regardless of whether communicative failure has occurred or will occur in the future [3, p. 63-65].

Thus, the concept of CD represents a communicative phenomenon of unsuccessful communication and is defined as a communicative situation in which communicants enter a state of uneasiness detected by verbal markers of strained communication.

CD being a communicative phenomenon can emerge in intercultural communication. It can be conditioned by sociocultural factors, in particular cultural disparities that contribute to the CD occurrence.

One of the causes refers to the unique characteristics of each culture that become apparent during communication, which create a communicative culture that includes communication norms, customs, and traditions that are ingrained in a particular community [6, p. 89]. The interlocutors, who have different communicative cultures, may experience CD due to mismatches or ignorance of one another’s peculiarities.

In addition, CD can be related to the differences in communicative cultures, which are characterized by the interdependence of national-cultural peculiarities and communicative behavior. E. Hall distinguishes two main groups of communicative cultures: high-context and low-context cultures.

According to E. Hall, low-context communicative cultures are characterized by explicit utterances that convey the meaning of the messages and the intentions of the interlocutors, whereas in high-context cultures, the meaning of messages and intentions is dependent on sociocultural context and nonverbal communication means [6, p. 92]. In other words, in low-context cultures, the preferred communication style consists of clear utterances and a direct communicative approach to conveying a message [6, p. 92], whereas in high-context cultures, one expects his or her partner to know what one has in mind. Communication style is indirect and requires the interlocutor to take into account non-verbal components when decoding a message [8, p. 113].

Also, the CD state of interlocutors can be conditioned by national characteristics of communicative behavior, defined as a communicative ethnostyle, which are fixed with the traditions in the minds of people and have become social norms, which “manifest themselves in the choice and preference of using one or another communicative strategy and means of communication (both verbal and non-verbal) in the process of interpersonal interaction” [2, p. 6-7]. Thus, unawareness or non-understanding of the differences in specific national-cultural features of communicative behavior or ignorance of its main features may be a source of the CD state.

Another reason for the occurrence of CD is different business cultures. Several cultural models were developed in order to describe the common features of cultures and their differences. For example, R. D. Lewis classifies business cultures on the basis of their relationship to time. He distinguishes three categories of cultures: linear-actives, multi-actives, and reactives.

Linear-active cultures are described as task-oriented cultures that prefer planning, organizing, and performing one task at a time within a scheduled period of time, as well as relying mostly on data. Multi-actives are represented by extraverted people who do several things simultaneously, often in an unplanned order, putting great importance on interrelators, face-to-face encounters, dialogues, and human transactions. Cultures characterized as reactive are respect-oriented, introverted, and prefer listening to their partners, not interrupting in order to establish one’s position first, then reacting carefully to the proposals of the interlocutors, and presenting their own [9, p. 29-35].

Hence, people from various business cultures have different perceptions of time, value orientations, national norms, negotiation styles, organization and planning of business interactions, building relationships between partners, resolving problems, and achieving results. All the distinct features can induce a sense of discomfort due to non-compliance or violation of the norms accepted in the given business cultures.

To conclude, CD represents a communicative phenomenon described as a communicant's psychological state of uneasiness. It can be experienced by speakers not only due to communication barriers but also sociocultural factors, which encompass factors such as communicative ethnostyles, communicative cultures, and business cultures. These factors can potentially cause problems in intercultural business communication and negatively influence the exchange of information in intercultural business interactions.

Список литературы:

1. Болохонцева Н.М. Скрытый коммуникативный дискомфорт как явление диалога: дис. … канд. фил. наук. – Орел, 2011. – С.4–64.
2. Ларина Т.В. Категория вежливости и стиль коммуникации: сопоставление английских и русских лингвокультурных традиций. – М.: Языки славянских культур, 2009. – С. 6–7.
3. Мартынова Е.М. Типология явлений коммуникативного дискомфорта в ситуациях диалога: дис. … канд. фил. наук. – Орел, 2000. – С.63–65.
4. Семененко Л.П. Аспекты лингвистической теории монолога.  –  Москва: МГЛУ, 1996. – С. 67–68.
5. Семененко Л.П. Монолог как тип общения: дис. … д. фил. наук. – Орел, 1998. – С.70–71.
6. Стеблецова А.О. К исследованию национальных деловых коммуникативных культур // Вестник воронежского государственного университета. Серия: Филология. Журналистика. – 2004. – 2. – С. 89–95.
7. Фадеева Е.В. Способы языкового выражения коммуникативного дискомфорта на разных уровнях лингвистического анализа // Вестник московского государственного областного университета. Серия: русская филология. – 2014. – 3. – С. 66-73.
8. Hall E.T. Beyond Culture. New York: Doubleday, 1976. – P. 105–117.
9. Lewis R.D. When cultures collide: Leading Across Cultures. – Boston, London: Nicholas Brealey International, 2006. – P. 29–35.