7

What is Culture?Intercultural Communication andStereotyping
什么是文化？跨文化交际与刻板印象

Two men meet on a plane from Tokyo to Hong Kong. Chu Hon-fai is aHong Kong exporter who is returning from a business trip to Japan. AndrewRichardson is an American buy er on his first business trip to Hong Kong.It is a convenient meeting for them because Mr Chu's company sells some of the products Mr Richardson has come to Hong Kong to buy. After a bit of conversation they introduce themselves to each other.
两个男人在从东京飞往香港的飞机上相遇。朱汉辉是一名香港出口商，从日本出差归来。安德鲁·理查森（AndrewRichardson）是第一次到香港出差的美国买家，Kong.It 这对他们来说是一个方便的会面，因为朱先生的公司出售理查森先生来香港购买的一些产品。经过一番交谈后，他们互相介绍自己。

Mr Richardson: By the way, I'm Andrew Richardson. My friends call me Andy. This is my business card.
理查森先生：顺便问一下，我是安德鲁·理查森。我的朋友叫我安迪。这是我的名片。

Mr Chu: I'm David Chu. Pleased to meet you, Mr Richardson.This is my card.
朱先生：我是朱大卫。很高兴见到你，理查森先生，这是我的名片。

Mr Richardson: No, no. Call me Andy. I think we'll be doing a lot of business together.
理查森先生：不，不。叫我安迪。我想我们会一起做很多生意。

Mr Chu: Yes, I hope so.
朱先生：是的，但愿如此。

Mr Richardson (reading Mr Chu's card):“Chu, Hon-fai.”Hon-fai, I'll give you a call tomorrow as soon as I get settled at my hotel.
Richardson先生（读朱先生的名片）：“朱汉辉。Hon-fai，明天我一到酒店安顿下来就给你打电话。

Mr Chu (smiling): Yes. I'll expect your call.
朱先生（微笑）：是的。我期待你的电话。

When these two men separate, they leave each other with very different impressions of the situation. Mr Richardson is very pleased to have made the acquaintance of Mr Chu and feels they have gotten off to a very good start. They have established their relationship on a first-name basis andMr Chu's smile seemed to indicate that he will be friendly and easy to do business with. Mr Richardson is particularly pleased that he had treated MrChu with respect for his Chinese background by calling him Hon-fai rather than using the western name, David, which seemed to him an unnecessary imposition of western culture.
当这两个人分开时，他们给彼此留下了截然不同的印象。Richardson先生很高兴能认识朱先生，并认为他们有一个非常好的开端。他们以直呼其名的方式建立了关系，朱先生的笑容似乎表明他会很友好，很容易做生意。理查森先生特别高兴的是，他尊重朱先生的中国背景，称他为汉辉，而不是使用西方名字大卫，在他看来，这似乎是西方文化的不必要强加。

In contrast, Mr Chu feels quite uncomfortable with Mr Richardson. He feels it will be difficult to work with him, and that Mr Richardson might be
相比之下，朱先生对理查森先生感到相当不舒服。他觉得和他一起工作会很困难，而理查森先生可能会

136 What is Culture?
136 什么是文化？

rather insensitive to cultural differences. He is particularly bothered thatMr Richardson used his given name, Hon-fai, instead of either David orMr Chu. It was this embarrassment which caused him to smile.
对文化差异相当不敏感。令他特别烦恼的是，理查森先生用了他的名字“汉辉”，而不是大卫或朱先生。正是这种尴尬让他笑了。

This short dialogue is, unfortunately, not so unusual in meeting s between members of different cultures. There is a tendency in American business circles to prefer close, friendly, egalitarian relationships in business engage-ments. This system of symmetrical solidarity, which has its source in theUtilitarian discourse system, is often expressed in the use of given (or“first”) names in business encounters. Mr Richardson feels most comfort-able in being called Andy, and he would like to call Mr Chu by his first name. At the same time, he wishes to show consideration of the cultural differences between them by avoiding Mr Chu's western name, David. His solution to this cultural difference is to address Mr Chu by the given name he sees on the business card, Hon-fai.
不幸的是，这种简短的对话在不同文化的成员之间的会面中并不罕见。美国商界有一种倾向，在商业交往中更喜欢亲密、友好、平等的关系。这种对称团结的体系起源于功利主义话语系统，通常表现为在商业交往中使用给定（或“第一”）名称。理查森先生觉得被叫安迪最舒服，他想用他的名字来称呼朱先生。同时，他希望通过避免使用朱先生的西方名字David来表示对他们之间文化差异的考虑。他解决这种文化差异的办法是用他在名片上看到的名字Hon-fai来称呼朱先生。

Mr Chu, on the other hand, prefers an initial business relationship of symmetrical deference. He would feel more comfortable if they called each other Mr Chu and Mr Richardson. Nevertheless, when he was away at school in North America he learned that Americans feel awkward in a stable relationship of symmetrical deference. In other words, he found that they feel uncomfortable calling people Mr for any extended period of time. His solution was to adopt a western name. He chose David for use in such situations.
另一方面，朱先生更喜欢对称尊重的初始业务关系。如果他们互相称呼朱先生和理查森先生，他会感觉更舒服。然而，当他离开北美的学校时，他了解到美国人在对称尊重的稳定关系中感到尴尬。換句話說，他發現他們對於任何長時間的稱呼人員為先生都感到不舒服。他的解决方案是采用一个西方名字。他拣选大卫来对付这种情况。

When Mr Richardson insists on using Mr Chu's Chinese given name,Hon-fai, Mr Chu feels uncomfortable. That name is rarely used by anyone,in fact. What Mr Richardson does not know is that Chinese have a rather complex structure of names which depends upon situations and relation-ships, which includes school names, intimate and family baby names, and even western names, each of which is used just by the people with whom a person has a certain relationship. Isolating just the given name, Hon-fai,is relatively unusual and to hear himself called this by a stranger makes MrChu feel quite uncomfortable. His reaction, which is also culturally condi-tioned, is to smile.
当理查森坚持使用朱先生的中文名字Hon-fai时，朱先生感到不舒服。事实上，这个名字很少被任何人使用。理查森先生不知道的是，中国人的名字结构相当复杂，这取决于情况和关系，其中包括学校名称、亲密和家庭婴儿的名字，甚至西方名字，每个名字都只由与一个人有某种关系的人使用。只知道“Hon-fai”这个名字是比较不寻常的，听到陌生人这样称呼自己，朱先生感到很不舒服。他的反应，也是文化条件，是微笑。

In this case there are two issues of intercultural communication we want to use to introduce our discussion of intercultural professional communica-tion: one is the basic question of cultural differences, and the second is the problems which arise when people try to deal with cultural differences, but,like Mr Richardson, actually make matters worse in their attempts at cul-tural sensitivity.
在这种情况下，我们想用两个跨文化交际问题来介绍我们对跨文化专业交际的讨论：一个是文化差异的基本问题，第二个是当人们试图处理文化差异时出现的问题，但像理查森先生一样，实际上在他们试图提高文化敏感性时使事情变得更糟。

The first problem is that there is a cultural difference in each of the participants’ expectations of what face relationship should be used in such an initial business meeting. Mr Richardson prefers or expects symmetrical solidarity; he expects both of them to use involvement strategies of polite-ness, such as exchanging given names. The Hong Kong businessman,
第一个问题是，在这种最初的商务会议中，每个参与者对应该使用什么面子关系的期望都存在文化差异。理查森先生更喜欢或期待对称的团结;他希望他们俩都使用礼貌的参与策略，例如交换名字。香港商人，

What is Culture? 137
什么是文化？137

Mr Chu, prefers symmetrical deference; he prefers for them both to use independence strategies of politeness, which in this case would mean that they would both call each other by family names and the title,“Mr.”This is a cultural difference of considerable significance, because if Mr Richardson persists in using involvement strategies and Mr Chu persists in using inde-pendence strategies, a system of asymmetrical relationship will develop,with Mr Richardson in the superior position and Mr Chu in the subordin-ate position.
朱先生，更喜欢对称的尊重;他更喜欢他们俩都使用礼貌的独立策略，在这种情况下，这意味着他们都会用姓氏和头衔来称呼对方，“先生”这是一个具有相当重要的文化差异，因为如果理查森先生坚持使用参与策略，而朱先生坚持使用独立策略， 一个不对称的关系体系将会发展起来，理查森先生处于上级位置，朱先生处于从属地位。

The second problem, paradoxically, is that both Mr Chu and MrRichardson are concerned with being culturally sensitive. Mr Chu's experi-ence in North America has given him the solution of adopting a western first name, David, so that someone such as Mr Richardson will feel more comfortable in addressing him. This also fits within the Chinese pattern of adopting new names as situations change, and so Mr Chu can be comfortable with the use of this western name. On the other hand, Mr Richardson is not familiar with this practice. To him it seems that using Mr Chu's name, David,is forcing a western definition upon Mr Chu, and he wants to acknowledgeMr Chu’s Chinese cultural background. He imagines that a Chinese might feel a greater sense of cultural identity with his given name than he would with a name of convenience. He intends to show concern, friendliness, and at the same time respect for Mr Chu’s Chinese culture, and so chooses the quite inappropriate first name, Hon-fai, to address Mr Chu.
矛盾的是，第二个问题是，朱先生和理查森都关心文化敏感性。朱先生在北美的经历给了他一个解决方案，即采用西方名字大卫，这样像理查森这样的人在称呼他时会感到更舒服。这也符合中国人随着情况的变化而采用新名字的模式，因此朱先生可以对使用这个西方名字感到满意。另一方面，理查森先生并不熟悉这种做法。在他看来，使用朱先生的名字David，似乎是在强加给朱先生一个西方的定义，他想承认朱先生的中国文化背景。他想象，一个中国人对他的名字可能比用一个方便的名字更能感受到文化认同感。他打算对朱先生的中国文化表示关心、友好和尊重，因此选择了非常不恰当的名字“Hon-fai”来称呼朱先生。

The result of Mr Richardson's attempt at cultural sensitivity has actually made the situation worse than if he had just used the adopted western name, David. Unfortunately, Mr Richardson also is not aware that one means of expressing acute embarrassment for Mr Chu is to smile. While within North American culture there is consciousness of what might be called“nervous laughter,”there is a general expectation that a smile can be taken as a direct expression of pleasure or satisfaction. Mr Richardson misinterprets Mr Chu's embarrassment as agreement or even pleasure at their first encounter, and as a result, he goes away from the encounter with no awareness of the extent to which he has complicated their initial introduction.
理查森先生试图保持文化敏感性的结果实际上使情况比他刚刚使用采用的西方名字大卫更糟糕。不幸的是，理查森也不知道，表达朱先生极度尴尬的一种方式就是微笑。虽然在北美文化中，人们意识到所谓的“紧张的笑声”，但人们普遍认为微笑可以被视为快乐或满足的直接表达。理查森先生将朱先生的尴尬误解为他们第一次见面时的同意甚至快乐，因此，他离开了这次相遇，没有意识到他对他们最初的介绍有多复杂。

In the rest of this book, we will discuss the problems which arise when participants in a discourse are members of different cultures or discourse systems. We will also discuss problems which arise in trying to solve the first type of intercultural communication problem. As we have seen in the example above, it is often the case that one's attempts to be culturally sensitive actually produce a second level of problem, and in those cases it is often even more difficult to realize what sort of problem it is. It becomes hard to accept that one has tried one's best and ended up making things worse, and yet, this is what often happens. This is one of the reasons that very pragmatically oriented professionals sometimes go to the mistaken
在本书的其余部分，我们将讨论当话语参与者是不同文化或话语系统的成员时出现的问题。我们还将讨论在试图解决第一类跨文化交际问题时出现的问题。正如我们在上面的例子中看到的，通常情况下，一个人试图对文化敏感实际上会产生第二个层次的问题，在这些情况下，往往更难意识到它是什么样的问题。很难接受一个人已经尽力而为，最终让事情变得更糟，然而，这就是经常发生的事情。这是非常务实的专业人士有时会犯错误的原因之一

138 What is Culture?
138 什么是文化？

extreme of saying that intercultural communication studies make no real contribution in international negotiations.
极端的说法是，跨文化交际研究在国际谈判中没有真正的贡献。

How Do We Define“Culture”?
我们如何定义“文化”？

The subject of“intercultural communication”is beset by a major problem,since there is really very little agreement on what people mean by the idea of culture in the first place. The word“culture”often brings up more problems than it solves. On the one hand, we want to talk about large groups of people and what they have in common, from their history and worldview to their language or languages or geographical location. There is some meaning to such constructs as “the Chinese,” “the Japanese,”“Americans,”“British,”or“Koreans,”which is recognized by most, if not all, members of those groups. This common meaning often emphasizes what members of these groups have in common and at the same time plays down possible differences among members.
“跨文化交际”的主题被一个主要问题所困扰，因为人们首先对文化概念的含义几乎没有共识。“文化”这个词带来的问题往往多于它解决的问题。一方面，我们想谈谈一大群人以及他们的共同点，从他们的历史和世界观到他们的语言或语言或地理位置。“中国人”、“日本人”、“美国人”、“英国人”或“韩国人”等结构有一定的含义，这些群体的大多数成员（如果不是全部）都承认这一点。这种共同含义往往强调这些群体成员的共同点，同时淡化成员之间可能存在的差异。

On the other hand, when we talk about such large cultural groups we want to avoid the problem of overgeneralization by using the construct“culture”where it does not apply, especially in the discussion of discourse in intercultural communication. From an international sociolinguistic per-spective, discourse is communication between or among individuals. Cul-tures, however, are large, superordinate categories; they are not individuals.Cultures are a different level of logical analysis from the individual mem-bers of cultures. Cultures do not talk to each other; individuals do. In that sense, all communication is interpersonal communication and can never be intercultural communication.“Chinese culture”cannot talk to“Japanese culture”except through the discourse of individual Chinese and individualJapanese people.
另一方面，当我们谈论如此庞大的文化群体时，我们希望通过使用结构来避免过度概括的问题“文化”它不适用，尤其是在跨文化交际中的话语讨论中。从国际社会语言学的角度来看，话语是个人之间或个人之间的交流。然而，文化是大而高的类别;他们不是个人。文化是与文化的个体记忆不同层次的逻辑分析。文化之间不相互交流;个人会这样做。从这个意义上说，所有的交流都是人际交流，永远不可能是跨文化交流。中国文化“不能与”日本文化“对话，除非通过个别中国人和个别日本人的话语。

The Three Character Classic (San Zi Jing- Southern Song Dynasty, AD1127–1279; Xu Chuiyang, 1990) has been used in Confucian education inChina, Japan, Korea, and Vietnam for as long as eight hundred years as a primer for the learning of both classical Chinese writing and Chinese ethical philosophy. It is based on Confucian classics such as The Analects of Con-fucius and Mencius, and therefore it embodies the ethical position taken by that school of thought that all humans are born good. It begins with the following words:
《三字经》（三字经-南宋，公元1127年-1279年;徐楚阳，1990）在中国、日本、韩国和越南的儒家教育中被使用长达八百年之久，作为学习中国古典文字和中国伦理哲学的入门书。它以孔子和孟子等儒家经典为基础，因此它体现了该思想流派所采取的道德立场，即人人生而善良。它以以下单词开头：

Ren zhi chu, xing ben shanXing xiang jin, xi xiang yuan

Man, by nature, is good; people's inborn characters are similar, but learning makes them different.
人的本性是善良的;人们与生俱来的性格是相似的，但学习使他们与众不同。

What is Culture? 139
什么是文化？139

In contrast to this philosophical belief that humans are born with a naturally good character, we could cite a nineteenth-century New Englander who has been quoted by the historian Robert Sunley as saying that all children are born with an evil disposition:“No child has ever been known since the earliest period of the world, destitute of an evil disposition-however sweet it appears”(Sunley, 1955: 159).
与这种认为人类天生具有善良品格的哲学信念相反，我们可以引用一位19世纪的新英格兰人的话，历史学家罗伯特·桑利（Robert Sunley）曾引用他的话说，所有的孩子天生都有邪恶的性格：“自世界最早的时期以来，从来没有一个孩子被人知道，没有邪恶的性格——无论它看起来多么甜蜜”（桑利， 1955: 159).

In a book on professional communication, we are not directly concerned with trying to decide which of these positions on the nature of humankind is the correct one. We will leave that to philosophers and religious writers to discuss. We want to raise a different kind of question, which has two parts:to what extent do individual Chinese or Americans, Koreans or British,Australians or Singaporeans personally represent their culture's beliefs, and do those beliefs make any significant difference in their ability to communi-cate professionally? For our purposes the main concern is to see how the ideological positions of cultures or of discourse systems become a factor in the interpersonal communication of members of one group with members of other groups.
在一本关于专业沟通的书中，我们并不直接关心试图决定这些关于人类本质的立场中哪一个是正确的。我们将把这个问题留给哲学家和宗教作家来讨论。我们想提出一个不同类型的问题，它分为两部分：中国人或美国人、韩国人或英国人、澳大利亚人或新加坡人在多大程度上代表了他们文化的信仰，这些信仰是否对他们的专业沟通能力产生了重大影响？就我们的目的而言，主要关注的是了解文化或话语系统的意识形态立场如何成为一个群体成员与其他群体成员的人际交流的一个因素。

In other words, for our purposes in this book, we will try to restrict our attention to just those aspects of culture which research has shown to be of direct significance in discourse between groups and which impinge directly upon the four elements of a discourse system - ideology, face systems,forms of discourse, and socialization. This does not mean that other aspects of culture are not interesting or very important. In this presentation we have tried to focus on what we think are the most crucial few dimensions of culture and on aspects of intercultural communication which have proven to be recurring problems in professional communication.
换言之，就本书的目的而言，我们将尽量将注意力限制在文化的那些方面，这些方面研究表明，这些方面在群体之间的话语中具有直接意义，并且直接影响到话语系统的四个要素——意识形态、面子系统、话语形式和社会化。这并不意味着文化的其他方面不有趣或非常重要。在本次演讲中，我们试图关注我们认为最关键的几个文化维度，以及跨文化交际的各个方面，这些方面已被证明是专业交际中反复出现的问题。

Before moving on, however, we want to mention that there is an inter-cultural problem in using the word“culture”itself. In English there are two normal uses of this word: high culture, and anthropological culture. The first meaning, high culture, focuses on intellectual and artistic achievements.One might speak of a city as having a great deal of culture because there were many art exhibits, concert performances, and public lectures. Or we might speak of a particular period in history, such as the Elizabethan period(1558–1603) of England, as a high point in English culture because of the great number of musicians and poets of that time whose works we still revere. The Tang period (AD 618–907) in Chinese history is generally regarded as a period of high culture as well.
然而，在继续之前，我们想提一下，使用“文化”这个词本身存在跨文化问题。在英语中，这个词有两种正常用法：高雅文化和人类学文化。第一个含义，高雅文化，侧重于智力和艺术成就。人们可能会说一个城市拥有丰富的文化，因为那里有许多艺术展览、音乐会表演和公开讲座。或者我们可以说历史上的某个特定时期，例如英国的伊丽莎白时代（1558-1603），作为英国文化的高峰，因为当时有大量的音乐家和诗人，我们仍然崇敬他们的作品。中国历史上的唐代（公元618-907年）通常也被认为是一个高文化时期。

In studies of intercultural communication, our concern is not with high culture, but with anthropological culture. When we use the word“culture”in its anthropological sense, we mean to say that culture is any of the cus-toms, worldview, language, kinship system, social organization, and other taken-for-granted day-to-day practices of a people which set that group apart as a distinctive group. By using the anthropological sense of the word
在跨文化交际研究中，我们关注的不是高雅文化，而是人类学文化。当我们在人类学意义上使用“文化”这个词时，我们的意思是说，文化是一个民族的任何习俗、世界观、语言、亲属制度、社会组织和其他理所当然的日常实践，这些实践使该群体成为一个独特的群体。通过使用这个词的人类学意义

140 What is Culture?
140 什么是文化？

“culture,”we mean to consider any aspect of the ideas, communications, or behaviors of a group of people which gives to them a distinctive identity and which is used to organize their internal sense of cohesion and membership.
“文化”，我们的意思是考虑一群人的思想、交流或行为的任何方面，这些方面赋予他们独特的身份，并用于组织他们内部的凝聚力和成员感。

Of course, this book is not a work in anthropology as such, and so we will make no attempt to provide a formal definition of the idea of culture or to make complete or rigorous cultural descriptions. As we have said above, our purpose is to single out among all of the many aspects of cultural descrip-tion just those factors which have been clearly shown to affect intercultural communication. Among that research literature, which is in itself enormous and which continues to grow very rapidly in these days of increasingly frequent internationalization of world business and government, we have chosen to focus most directly on aspects of culture which our research has shown to affect communication between East Asians and westerners.
当然，这本书本身并不是人类学的著作，因此我们不会试图为文化的概念提供正式的定义，也不会做出完整或严格的文化描述。正如我们上面所说，我们的目的是在文化描述的众多方面中挑选出那些已经明确表明会影响跨文化交际的因素。在这些研究文献中，这些文献本身就很庞大，而且在世界商业和政府日益频繁国际化的今天继续迅速增长，我们选择最直接地关注文化方面，我们的研究表明，这些方面会影响东亚人和西方人之间的交流。

In the discussion which follows, then, we will be selecting out of the research literature on intercultural communication just those aspects of culture which we feel are most directly significant in order to understand how discourse systems are formed. In chapters 8–11 we will then turn to a discussion of several different discourse systems and the problems which arise in communication between members of those different systems.
因此，在接下来的讨论中，我们将从关于跨文化交际的研究文献中选择我们认为对理解话语系统如何形成最直接意义的文化方面。在第8-11章中，我们将讨论几种不同的话语系统，以及这些不同系统的成员之间在交流中出现的问题。

Culture and Discourse Systems
文化与话语系统

The aspects of culture which are most significant for the understanding of systems of discourse and which have been shown to be major factors in inter-cultural communication are as follows:
对于理解话语系统最重要且已被证明是跨文化交际的主要因素的文化方面如下：

1 Ideology: history and worldview, which includes:
1 意识形态：历史和世界观，包括：

(a) Beliefs, values, and religion
（a） 信仰、价值观和宗教

2 Socialization:

(a) Education, enculturation, acculturation
（a） 教育、文化融合、文化适应

(b) Primary and secondary socialization
（b） 初级和次级社会化

(c) Theories of the person and of learning
（c） 人与学的理论

3 Forms of discourse:

(a) Functions of language:
（a） 语言的功能：

– Information and relationship
– 信息和关系

- Negotiation and ratification
- 谈判和批准

-Group harmony and individual welfare
-群体和谐与个人福利

(b) Non-verbal communication:
（b） 非语言交流：

-Kinesics: the movement of our bodies
-运动学：我们身体的运动

-Proxemics: the use of space
-Proxemics：空间的利用

-Concept of time

What is Culture? 141
什么是文化？141

4 Face systems: social organization, which includes:
4.面子系统：社会组织，包括：

(a) Kinship

(b) The concept of the self
（b） 自我的概念

(c) Ingroup-outgroup relationships
（c） 内群体-外群体关系

(d) Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft
（d） 社区与社会

Ideology

The first major aspect of culture which we will consider is history and worldview. This is the most familiar way of looking at cultures, by studying their histories and the common worldview s which arise out of these his-tories. Perhaps the clearest difference between East Asian cultures (China,Korea, and Japan) and so-called western culture is that East Asians have a sense of having a long, continuous, and unified history, whereas westerners tend to emphasize the shorter-term political organizations which have arisen since the Renaissance. An American businessman visiting Korea for the first time, for example, is almost certain to be told that Koreans have a“5000-year history”and to be shown Namdaemun and Tongdaemun, the“new”gates to the city of Seoul, built before the United States was established as a country. The American, on the other hand, is likely to have little con-sciousness of his own cultural roots in the equally distant past of Mesopo-tamia. He is more likely to focus on the newness of his culture and theAmerican emphasis on rapid change and the idea of progress.
我们要考虑的文化的第一个主要方面是历史和世界观。这是看待文化的最熟悉的方式，通过研究它们的历史和从这些历史中产生的共同世界观。也许东亚文化（中国、韩国和日本）与所谓的西方文化之间最明显的区别是，东亚人有一种悠久、连续和统一的历史感，而西方人则倾向于强调文艺复兴以来出现的短期政治组织。例如，一位美国商人第一次访问韩国，几乎肯定会被告知韩国人有“5000年的历史”，并参观南大门和同大门，这是通往首尔市的“新”大门，在美国建国之前建造。另一方面，美国人很可能对自己的文化根源在同样遥远的 Mesopo-tamia 过去几乎没有意识。他更倾向于关注自己文化的新颖性，以及美国对快速变化和进步理念的强调。

Hong Kongers are likely to use their position on the boundary between the old culture of China and the newest technological aspects of interna-tional business culture as a convenient backdrop in taking pragmatic posi-tions. When it is convenient to take a conservative stance in a business negotiation, for example, a Hong Kong businessman is perhaps more likely to emphasize the Chinese aspects of his cultural heritage. On the other hand, where an impression of quick change and progress is called for, he would rather stress the special status of Hong Kong as a member of the most progressive leading edge of Asian internationalization.
香港人可能会利用他们在中国旧文化与国际商业文化的最新技术方面之间的边界上的地位，作为采取务实立场的便利背景。例如，当在商务谈判中采取保守立场时，香港商人可能更有可能强调其文化遗产中的中国方面。另一方面，如果需要快速变化和进步的印象，他宁愿强调香港作为亚洲国际化最先进前沿的一员的特殊地位。

In either case, the consciousness of long, continuous history forms part of the worldview of most Asians. This is sometimes called upon in discourse as explanation or justification for moving more slowly, for not rushing to conclusions, or for taking a longer perspective on future developments. In contrast, the westerner is more likely to de-emphasize his or her own ancient historical heritage dating from Ancient Greece or before. The westerner is more likely to emphasize the need for quickness in concluding negotiations,the need to bring about economic, political, or social change, and the need to“keep up”with world changes.
无论哪种情况，对漫长、连续历史的意识构成了大多数亚洲人世界观的一部分。这有时在论述中被要求作为解释或理由，以放慢行动速度，不急于下结论，或对未来的发展采取更长远的视角。相比之下，西方人更有可能淡化他或她自己可追溯到古希腊或更早的古代历史遗产。西方人更倾向于强调快速完成谈判的必要性，需要实现经济、政治或社会变革，以及需要“跟上”世界变化。

142 What is Culture?
142 什么是文化？

Beliefs, values, and religion
信仰、价值观和宗教

We want to briefly comment on beliefs, values, and religion, because these aspects of culture have played a very significant role in the communications between Asians and westerners over the past few centuries. At the same time we want to caution against making too direct an application of our ideas about cultural values and, especially, religion in discussions of inter-cultural communication. In such discussions it is common enough to outline the basic principles of, say, Buddhism, Taoism, and Confucianism on the one hand and Christianity on the other, and then to hastily assume that these religious and ethical systems have led to or will lead to major differences in interpretation in intercultural communication.
我们想简要地评论一下信仰、价值观和宗教，因为在过去的几个世纪里，文化的这些方面在亚洲人和西方人之间的交流中发挥了非常重要的作用。同时，我们要告诫大家，在讨论跨文化交际时，不要过于直接地应用我们对文化价值观，特别是宗教的看法。在这样的讨论中，人们通常会勾勒出佛教、道教和儒家以及基督教的基本原则，然后匆忙假设这些宗教和伦理体系已经或将导致跨文化交际中解释的重大差异。

In many cases, a person's religious beliefs will be quite consonant with those of his or her culture in general. We still need to ask to what extent these beliefs directly affect his or her communication, especially in inter-cultural situations. Unfortunately, it is well known that the trade in drugs which ultimately resulted in present-day Hong Kong was carried out by people who professed the most Christian beliefs. Whether we are speaking of the general belief structure of Christianity, Buddhism, Taoism, or Con-fucianism we have to acknowledge, sadly, that many scoundrels have openly espoused beliefs in these religious systems, supported their churches, temples,or monasteries, and used the cloak of these moral and ethical systems to cover their own illegal or immoral activities.
在许多情况下，一个人的宗教信仰与他或她的文化信仰非常一致。我们仍然需要问，这些信念在多大程度上直接影响了他或她的交流，尤其是在跨文化的情况下。不幸的是，众所周知，最终导致今天香港的毒品交易是由自称最信奉基督教信仰的人进行的。无论我们说的是基督教、佛教、道教还是儒家的一般信仰结构，我们都必须承认，可悲的是，许多流氓公开支持这些宗教体系的信仰，支持他们的教堂、寺庙或寺院，并利用这些道德和伦理体系的外衣来掩盖他们自己的非法或不道德活动。

Face systems

The second aspect of culture we are considering, social organization, is one of the most important in that it refers to the way a cultural group organizes relationships among members of the group. For many scholars the word“culture”is very nearly synonymous with the concept of social organization.We will take up just four aspects of this organization: kinship, the concept of the self, ingroup-outgroup relationships, and what sociologists have sometimes called Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft.
我们正在考虑的文化的第二个方面，社会组织，是最重要的方面之一，因为它指的是文化群体组织群体成员之间关系的方式。对于许多学者来说，“文化”一词几乎是社会组织概念的同义词。我们将只讨论这个组织的四个方面：亲属关系、自我概念、内群体与外群体的关系，以及社会学家有时称之为Gemeinschaft和Gesellschaft的东西。

Kinship

In Korea, mothers set up temporary shrines outside the university and pray all day while their children inside write their examinations. In the fervor of the Cultural Revolution in China, children were encouraged to criticize their parents. Throughout Asia these and many similar examples indicate that the ancient Confucian kinship relationships are an extremely powerful force in Asian cultural relationships. On the one hand, such relationships
在韩国，母亲们在大学外设立临时神社，整天祈祷，而她们的孩子则在里面写考试。在中国文化大革命的狂热中，孩子们被鼓励批评他们的父母。在整个亚洲，这些例子和许多类似的例子表明，古代儒家的亲属关系是亚洲文化关系中一股极其强大的力量。一方面，这种关系

What is Culture? 143
什么是文化？143

may be seen as the major magnetism holding together these ancient cul-tures. On the other hand, such relationships may be seen as the great barrier to modernization and development. Our point is that either position indi-cates the centrality of kinship in the thinking of most East Asians.
可以看作是将这些古老的文化结合在一起的主要磁力。另一方面，这种关系可能被视为现代化和发展的巨大障碍。我们的观点是，任何一种立场都表明了亲属关系在大多数东亚人思想中的中心地位。

In contrast to this, a recent United States census accepted fourteen different family types, from the traditional extended family to the single parent with adopted child. Almost any current newspaper from Europe,North America, or Australia will show that for most westerners, kinship is far from being felt as a significant tie among members of society. In many cases, kinship relationships are seen as significant barriers to individual self-realization and progress. The increasingly popular American practice of children calling their parents by first names, for example, would be quite unpleasantly surprising to most Asians.
与此形成鲜明对比的是，最近的美国人口普查接受了14种不同的家庭类型，从传统的大家庭到有收养子女的单亲家庭。几乎所有来自欧洲、北美或澳大利亚的报纸都会表明，对于大多数西方人来说，亲属关系远未被视为社会成员之间的重要纽带。在许多情况下，亲属关系被视为个人自我实现和进步的重大障碍。例如，美国越来越流行的孩子直呼父母的名字，这对大多数亚洲人来说会感到非常不愉快。

There are two aspects of kinship which are of direct importance to intercultural discourse: hierarchy and collectivistic relationship. Kinship relationships emphasize that people are connected to each other by having descended from common ancestors. In doing so, kinship relationships em-phasize, first of all, that ascending generations are before, prior to, and even superior to descending generations. This hierarchy of relationship is em-phasized by Confucius and reiterated in such teaching materials as the SanZi Jing (Xu Chuiyang, 1990) or even the public school workbooks used today in Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, and Korea, and throughout the rest of East Asia. The primary relationships are not lateral relationships, those between brothers and sisters, for example, but hierarchical, those between fathers and sons, mothers and daughters.
亲属关系有两个方面对跨文化话语具有直接重要性：等级制度和集体关系。亲属关系强调人们通过共同祖先的后裔相互联系。在这样做的过程中，亲属关系首先强调，上升的世代先于后代，甚至优于后代。孔子强调这种关系的等级制度，并在《三字经》（徐叙阳，1990年）等教材中，甚至在今天香港、台湾、日本和韩国以及整个东亚其他地区使用的公立学校练习册中得到重申。主要关系不是横向关系，例如兄弟姐妹之间的关系，而是等级关系，即父亲和儿子之间、母亲和女儿之间的关系。

In Asia, as in any other society in which such traditional kinship relation-ships are emphasized, any individual is acutely aware of his or her obliga-tions and responsibilities to those who have come before as well as to those who come after. From birth one is made conscious of the debt owed to one's own parents, which is largely carried out in the form of duty and obedience.But western readers should also be aware that one is also made acutely con-scious of the debt owed to one's own children and other descendants, which is largely carried out through nurture, responsibility, and benevolence.
在亚洲，就像在强调这种传统亲属关系的任何其他社会中一样，任何人都敏锐地意识到他或她对前人和后人的义务和责任。从出生开始，人们就意识到对自己父母的债务，这主要是以责任和服从的形式进行的。但西方读者也应该意识到，人们也会敏锐地意识到对自己孩子和其他后代的债务，这主要是通过养育、责任和仁慈来实现的。

This emphasis on hierarchical relationship has a twofold consequence for discourse: from very early in life one becomes subtly practiced in the dis-course forms of hierarchical relationship. One learns first to show respect to those above, then, in due time, one learns the forms of guidance and leader-ship of those who come after. The second consequence is that one comes to expect all relationships to be hierarchical to some extent. If hierarchy is not based on kinship relationship, then it is seen to be based on age, experience,education, gender, geographical region, political affiliation, or one of the many other dimensions of social organization within a culture.
这种对等级关系的强调对话语具有双重影响：从生命的早期开始，人们就被巧妙地实践在等级关系的话语形式中。一个人首先学会尊重上层的人，然后，在适当的时候，一个人学会后人的指导和领导形式。第二个结果是，人们开始期望所有关系在某种程度上都是等级的。如果等级制度不是基于亲属关系，那么它被认为是基于年龄、经验、教育、性别、地理区域、政治派别或文化中社会组织的许多其他维度之一。

The second aspect of kinship which is significant for discourse is that
亲属关系的第二个方面对话语具有重要意义，是

144 What is Culture?
144 什么是文化？

individual members of a culture are not perceived as independently acting individuals but, rather, they are seen as acting within hierarchies of kinship and other such relationships. A son's primary motivation for action is thought to be to bring credit to his parents and to provide security for his own descendants. He is not thought of as acting on his own behalf or for his own purposes. Indeed, such individual action is seen as an aberrant or possibly pathological form.
一种文化的个体成员不被视为独立行动的个体，而是被视为在亲属关系和其他此类关系的等级制度中行事。人们认为儿子行动的主要动机是给父母带来荣誉，并为自己的后代提供安全感。他不被认为是代表他自己或为了他自己的目的而行事。事实上，这种个人行为被视为一种反常或可能是病态的形式。

This emphasis on kinship relationships, which is still characteristic ofEast Asians to some extent, even in contemporary and“westernized”Asian centers such as Hong Kong, is sharply contrasted with the western empha-sis on individualism and egalitarianism. This assertion of individualism and egalitarianism may reach its extreme in North America, but it has been at the center of political values since the eighteenth century in European political philosophy. Contemporary Americans, as we will see in chapter 10in our discussion of generational systems of discourse, assert an extreme of independence from kinship or other hierarchical relationships.
这种对亲属关系的强调，在某种程度上仍然是东亚人的特征，即使在当代和“西化”的亚洲中心，如香港，与西方强调个人主义和平等主义形成鲜明对比。这种个人主义和平等主义的主张在北美可能达到极端，但自18世纪以来，它一直是欧洲政治哲学政治价值观的中心。正如我们将在第10章中看到的那样，当代美国人在讨论代际话语系统时，主张一种极端的独立性，即独立于亲属关系或其他等级关系。

This difference in egalitarianism and hierarchy will, then, most likely play out in the choice of strategies of interpersonal politeness, with the westerner using strategies of involvement as a way of emphasizing egalitari-anism and the Asian using strategies of independence as a way of showing deference. In the short dialogue above between Mr Chu and Mr Richardson,Mr Richardson tried to establish the use of his given name, Andy, and MrChu's given name, Hon-fai. Such a difference in approaches and the embar-rassment which occurs are a direct result of this difference in emphasis on hierarchy and egalitarianism. The Asian is more likely to be conscious of kinship relationships, which will, in turn, lead to his assumptions of hier-archy. The American on the other hand is likely to have de-emphasized such relationships, and therefore, to assume more egalitarian relationships.
因此，这种平等主义和等级制度的差异很可能会体现在人际礼貌策略的选择上，西方人使用参与策略作为强调平等主义的一种方式，而亚洲人则使用独立策略作为表示尊重的一种方式。在上面朱先生和理查森先生的简短对话中，理查森先生试图确定他的名字Andy和朱先生的名字Hon-fai的使用。这种方法上的差异和由此产生的尴尬是这种强调等级制度和平等主义的差异的直接结果。亚洲人更有可能意识到亲属关系，这反过来又会导致他对等级制度的假设。另一方面，美国人可能已经不再强调这种关系，因此，他们承担了更平等的关系。

The concept of the self
自我的概念

A second aspect of social organization concerns the concept of the person or of the self as a unit within that group's organization. Individualism, of course, is not something unique to the American continent. It has its roots in the western tradition going back to Socrates or to Jesus. One thing is clear: there is a long tradition of emphasizing the separation of the indi-vidual from any other social commitments, especially in the pursuit of social or political goals. The Chinese psychological anthropologist Francis L. K.Hsu believes that the excessive individualism of the western sense of the self has led to a general inability or unwillingness among the psychological sciences to consider the social aspects of the development of human behavior.He goes on to say that even in the anthropological and sociological sciences,culture and society are seen as being built up out of the association of
社会组织的第二个方面涉及个人或自我作为该群体组织内一个单位的概念。当然，个人主义并不是美洲大陆独有的。它起源于西方传统，可以追溯到苏格拉底或耶稣。有一点是清楚的：强调将个人与任何其他社会承诺分开的传统由来已久，特别是在追求社会或政治目标时。中国心理人类学家弗朗西斯·徐（Francis L. K.Hsu）认为，西方自我意识的过度个人主义导致心理科学普遍无法或不愿考虑人类行为发展的社会方面。他接着说，即使在人类学和社会学科学中，文化和社会也被视为建立在

What is Culture? 145
什么是文化？145

Key

6 Wider material culture

5 Intimate society and culture
5 亲密的社会和文化

4 Expressible conscious
4 可表达的意识

3 Inexpressible conscious

2 Pre-conscious (“Freudian”)
2 前意识（“弗洛伊德”）

1 Interior unconscious

Figure 7.1 The Chinese concept of the person (based on Hsu, 1985).
图 7.1 中国人的概念（基于 Hsu， 1985）。

individuals, not as primary realities in themselves. In an essay on intercultural understanding in his collection of essays entitled Rugged Individualism Re-considered (Hsu, 1983), he says,“The major key(though never the only key)as to why we behave like human beings as well as to why we behave likeAmericans or Japanese is to be found in our relationships with our fellow human beings”(p.414). Hsu considers human relationships to be the fun-damental unit of analysis, not a secondary, constructed category. He argues that,“the concept of personality is an expression of the western ideal of individualism. It does not correspond even to the reality of how the western man lives in western culture, far less any man in any other culture”(Hsu1985: 24).
个人，而不是作为其本身的主要现实。在他题为《重新考虑粗犷的个人主义》（Hsu， 1983）的论文集《重新考虑粗犷的个人主义》（Hsu， 1983）中，他写了一篇关于跨文化理解的文章，他说：“关于我们为什么表现得像人类，以及为什么我们表现得像美国人或日本人，主要的关键（尽管不是唯一的关键）可以在我们与人类同胞的关系中找到”（第414页）。徐认为人际关系是有趣的分析单位，而不是次要的、建构的范畴。他认为，“人格概念是西方个人主义理想的表达。它甚至不符合西方人在西方文化中生活的现实，更不用说任何其他文化中的任何一个人了“（Hsu1985：24）。

In place of the idea of the individual self, Hsu suggests a concept based on the Chinese concept of person (ren or jen), which includes in his analysis not only interior unconscious or pre-conscious (“Freudian”) levels and inexpressible and expressible conscious levels of the person but also one's intimate society and culture. In this analysis of the self, such relationships as those with one's parents and children are considered inseparable aspects of the self. Where a western conception of the self places the major bound-ary which defines the self between the biological individual and that indi-vidual's intimates, Hsu argues that the Chinese concept of person(ren or jen)places the major boundary of the person on the outside of those intimate relationships, as we show in figure 7.1, which is based on Hsu's original diagram. The western concept of the biological self can be diagrammed
代替个体自我的概念，徐提出了一个基于中国人（任或仁）概念的概念，在他的分析中不仅包括人的内在无意识或前意识（“弗洛伊德”）水平以及无法表达和可表达的意识水平，还包括一个人的亲密社会和文化。在这种对自我的分析中，与父母和孩子的关系被认为是自我不可分割的方面。西方的自我概念在生物个体和个体的亲密关系之间设置了定义自我的主要界限，而徐认为，中国的人（任或仁）概念将人的主要边界置于这些亲密关系的外部，如图7.1所示，这是基于徐的原始图表。西方的生物自我概念可以用图表来描述

146 What is Culture?
146 什么是文化？

Key

6 Wider material culture

5 Intimate society and culture
5 亲密的社会和文化

4 Expressible conscious
4 可表达的意识

3 Inexpressible conscious

2 Pre-conscious (“Freudian”)
2 前意识（“弗洛伊德”）

1 Interior unconscious

Figure 7.2 The western concept of the person (based on Hsu, 1985).
图 7.2 西方人的概念（基于 Hsu，1985）。

using Hsu's categories as indicated in figure 7.2, also based upon Hsu's diagram.
使用图 7.2 所示的 Hsu 类别，也基于 Hsu 的图表。

Hsu's point in making this analysis is not just to propose an alternative to the individualistic concept of the self. He argues that the biologically iso-lated individual is neither culturally nor, in fact, biologically viable. Because intimate human relationships are“literally as important as [a person's]requirement for food, water, and air”(1985: 34), it is a dangerous analytical fiction to believe that the individual is the source of all social reality.
徐志摩进行这一分析的目的不仅仅是提出一种替代个人主义的自我概念。他认为，生物学上孤立的个体在文化上和事实上都不可行。因为亲密的人际关系“实际上与[一个人]对食物、水和空气的需求一样重要”（1985：34），所以相信个人是所有社会现实的源泉是一种危险的分析虚构。

We believe that in any society human individuals must have close rela-tionships with other humans as well as the freedom to operate independ-ently. It is hard to imagine a human society in which either one of these extremes was practiced to the exclusion of the other. What is important in studying cultural differences is not whether a society is individualistic or collectivistic in itself, but what that society upholds as its ideal, even when we all recognize that we must all have some independence as well as some place in society.
我们相信，在任何社会中，人类个体都必须与他人保持密切的联系，并享有独立运作的自由。很难想象在人类社会中，这些极端中的任何一个都被排除在外。在研究文化差异时，重要的不在于一个社会本身是个人主义的还是集体主义的，而是这个社会所坚持的理想是什么，即使我们都认识到我们都必须有一定的独立性，并在社会中占有一席之地。

For professional discourse, the question we want to consider is the relative difference between two people in their concept of the self as an individual or as part of a larger social group. We believe that on this dimension Asians tend to be more aware of the connections they have as members of their social groups, and therefore, they tend to be more conscious of the consequences of their actions on other members of their groups. In contrast to this, westerners,and especially Americans, tend to emphasize their independence. This leads
对于专业话语，我们要考虑的问题是两个人在自我概念上的相对差异，即作为个体或更大社会群体的一部分。我们认为，在这个维度上，亚洲人往往更了解他们作为社会群体成员的联系，因此，他们往往更意识到他们的行为对群体其他成员的影响。与此相反，西方人，尤其是美国人，倾向于强调他们的独立性。这导致

What is Culture? 147
什么是文化？147

them to be more concerned about their own freedom of activity than with their connections to other members of their group.
他们更关心自己的活动自由，而不是他们与群体其他成员的联系。

Each group is also likely to make false assumptions about members of the other group. Asians will possibly overestimate a westerner's concern about his group's response to an issue, while a westerner is likely to assume a greater degree of independence on the part of an Asian with whom he or she is negotiating.
每个群体也可能对另一个群体的成员做出错误的假设。亚洲人可能会高估西方人对他的群体对某个问题的反应的担忧，而西方人可能会认为他或她正在谈判的亚洲人具有更大程度的独立性。

When we first introduced the concept of face relationships in chapter 3,we discussed face as having to do with a relationship between or among two or more participants in a discourse. Now we can see that it is actually somewhat more complex than this. From an individualistic point of view,face relationships are very much a matter of individual face. From a collectivistic point of view, however, one's face is really the face of one's group, whether that group is thought of as one's family, one's cultural group, or one's corporation. It is quite likely that in intercultural commu-nication, a person from a highly individualistic culture would pay more attention to his or her own personal face needs, whereas a person from a more collectivistic culture would always have the face of others foremost in his or her mind.
当我们在第3章中首次引入面子关系的概念时，我们讨论了面子与话语中两个或多个参与者之间的关系有关。现在我们可以看到它实际上比这更复杂一些。从个人主义的角度来看，面子关系很大程度上是个人面子的问题。然而，从集体主义的角度来看，一个人的面孔实际上是一个群体的面孔，无论这个群体被认为是一个人的家庭、一个文化群体还是一个人的公司。很有可能，在跨文化交流中，一个来自高度个人主义文化的人会更关注他或她自己的个人面子需求，而一个来自更集体主义文化的人总是会把别人的面子放在首位。

Ingroup-outgroup relationships
内组-外组关系

The third aspect of social organization we want to consider is the problem of establishing relationships between members of the group and members of other groups. One consequence of the cultural difference between individu-alism and collectivism has to do with the difference between speaking to members of one's own group and speaking to others. In an individualistic society, groups do not form with the same degree of permanence as they do in a collectivist society. As a result, the ways of speaking to others are much more similar from situation to situation, since in each case the relationships are being negotiated and developed right within the situation of the discourse.
我们要考虑的社会组织的第三个方面是在群体成员和其他群体成员之间建立关系的问题。个人主义和集体主义之间文化差异的一个后果与与自己群体的成员交谈和与他人交谈之间的区别有关。在个人主义社会中，群体的形成与集体主义社会的持久性不同。因此，与他人交谈的方式在不同情况下更加相似，因为在每种情况下，关系都是在话语的情境中协商和发展的。

On the other hand, in a collectivist society, many relationships are estab-lished from one's birth into a particular family in a particular segment of society in a particular place. These memberships in particular groups tend to take on a permanent, ingroup character along with special forms of discourse which carefully preserve the boundaries between those who are inside mem-bers of the group and all others who are not members of the group.
另一方面，在集体主义社会中，许多关系是从一个人出生到特定社会阶层、特定地点的特定家庭建立的。特定群体中的这些成员往往具有永久的、内群体的特征，以及特殊的话语形式，这些话语形式小心翼翼地保留了群体内部成员与所有非群体成员之间的界限。

In the dialogue between Mr Chu and Mr Richardson, Mr Chu was embarrassed when Mr Richardson called him by his given name, Hon-fai.Actually a person's Chinese given name alone is rarely used at all, but if it is used, it is generally only within ingroup communication. When MrRichardson calls him Hon-fai, not only has he suggested a relationship of symmetrical solidarity, but he has also crossed over a line between family
在朱先生和理查森先生的对话中，当理查森先生直呼他的名字“汉辉”时，朱先生感到很尴尬。当理查森先生称他为Hon-fai时，他不仅暗示了一种对称的团结关系，而且还跨越了家庭之间的界限

148 What is Culture?
148 什么是文化？

and intimate communications and those used with strangers or others out-side of Mr Chu’s immediate social group.
以及与陌生人或朱先生直接社交群体之外的其他人使用的亲密交流。

Readers should not think that this is entirely a matter of Asian and western cultural differences, however. Many people, east and west, have names or variants of their names which are used only within the intimate circle of their friends or family, and it feels quite embarrassing when some-one from outside of that group uses that name.
然而，讀者不應該認為這完全是亞洲和西方文化差異的問題。许多人，无论是东方还是西方，都有他们的名字或名字的变体，这些名字只在他们的朋友或家人的亲密圈子中使用，当来自该群体以外的人使用这个名字时，感觉很尴尬。

The cultural difference we are talking about in this case, as in so many others, is one of degree only. What is important in the analysis of discourse is to understand first whether the distinction between ingroup and outgroup communication is significant in any particular case, and then to determine whether a term or a form of speech is used for ingroup or outgroup com-munication.
我们在这种情况下谈论的文化差异，就像在许多其他情况下一样，只是程度上的差异。在话语分析中，重要的是首先要了解内群体和外群体交流之间的区别在任何特定情况下是否重要，然后确定一个术语或一种言语形式是否用于内群体或外群体交流。

In some cases even the language or the register within that language will be associated with the distinction between ingroup and outgroup communi-cation. Recently a study was made of the Japanese used for speaking toJapanese as compared to the Japanese used for speaking to foreigners. Even when speaking to foreigners with a very high level of competence in theJapanese language, Japanese considered it more appropriate to use a simpli-fied“foreigner talk”register when speaking outside of their own group.Those who used a complex register of Japanese when speaking to foreigners were given more negative ratings by other Japanese.
在某些情况下，甚至该语言中的语言或寄存器也会与内群体和外群体交流之间的区别有关。最近，对用于与日语交谈的日语与用于与外国人交谈的日语进行了研究。即使与日语水平非常高的外国人交谈时，日本人也认为在自己的群体之外发言时使用简化的“外国人谈话”更合适。那些在与外国人交谈时使用复杂日语的人被其他日本人给予了更多的负面评价。

In this case, as in others, members of an ingroup feel that it is a kind of ingroup betrayal to use ingroup forms of language to non-members. In cultures where the distinction between ingroup and outgroup is a significant distinction, this is often paralleled by the use of different forms of discourse such as a special set of personal names or the use of particular registers for ingroup and outgroup communication.
在这种情况下，就像在其他情况下一样，内群体的成员认为对非成员使用内群体语言形式是一种内群体背叛。在内群体和外群体之间的区别是一个显着区别的文化中，这通常与使用不同形式的话语并行，例如一组特殊的人名或使用特定的登记册进行内群体和外群体交流。

Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft
社区与社会

One of the major and foundational insights of the field of soc iology was that there are two very different ways in which society can be organized.In 1887, in a book called Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft (Community andSociety) the German Ferdinand Tönnies(1971), argued that the problems of modern society have arisen because of a split with the traditional, community-based social organization of the Middle Ages. He argued that such an organic, community form of social solidarity, which he called Gemeinschaft,was based on the fact that individuals shared a common history and com-mon traditions.
社会学领域的主要和基本见解之一是，社会组织有两种截然不同的方式。1887年，德国人费迪南德·托尼斯（Ferdinand Tönnies，1971）在一本名为《共同体与社会》的书中指出，现代社会的问题是由于与中世纪传统的、以社区为基础的社会组织的分裂而产生的。他认为，这种有机的、社区形式的社会团结，他称之为Gemeinschaft，是基于这样一个事实，即个人拥有共同的历史和社区传统。

In contrast to the Gemeinschaft or community organization of social rela-tionships, in modern society relationships are more contractual, rational,or instrumental. This form of society by mutual agreement and to protect
与社会关系的社区组织相比，在现代社会中，关系更具契约性、理性性或工具性。这种社会形式通过相互协议和保护

What is Culture? 149
什么是文化？149

mutual interests - one might say corporate society --which developed as part of the industrialization of Europe, Tönnies called Gesellschaft. Soci-ologists such as Emile Durkheim, Max Weber, and Geor g Simmel develop this concept in their own foundational works.
共同利益 - 可以说是企业社会 - 作为欧洲工业化的一部分而发展起来，Tönnies称为Gesellschaft。埃米尔·涂尔干（Emile Durkheim）、马克斯·韦伯（Max Weber）和乔尔·西梅尔（Geor g Simmel）等社会学家在他们自己的基础著作中发展了这一概念。

In intercultural professional contexts, this distinction has been observed by analysts of the structure of businesses in Asia. In Taiwan and HongKong, for example, there is a tendency for businesses to be small, family-owned and controlled structures, which operate very much along traditional lines more closely associated with k inship than more western corporate structures. In such a case we might want to say that such businesses dem-onstrate a social structure of a Gemeinschaft nature. On the other hand, the large, impersonal, utilitarian international corporations show a Gesellschaft structure.
在跨文化专业背景下，亚洲企业结构的分析家已经观察到了这种区别。例如，在台湾和香港，企业倾向于小型、家族拥有和控制的结构，这些结构的运作方式与西方公司结构相比，与k业务更密切相关。在这种情况下，我们可能想说，这种企业构成了一种具有Gemeinschaft性质的社会结构。另一方面，大型的、非个人的、功利主义的国际公司表现出一种Gesellschaft结构。

There are two major types of discourse system: those into which one becomes a member through the natural processes of birth and growth within a family and a community (one's gender and one's generation, for example), and those into which one chooses to enter for utilitarian purposes such as one's professional specialization or the company for which one works. The social structure of the first kind of discourse system is more like what the sociologists would call Gemeinschaft, and the goal-directed dis-course systems such as corporations are rather strong examples of theGesellschaft form of social organization.
话语系统主要有两种类型：一种是通过家庭和社区内的自然出生和成长过程（例如，一个人的性别和一代人）而成为成员的话语系统，另一种是出于功利目的而选择进入的话语系统，例如一个人的专业化或他工作的公司。第一种话语系统的社会结构更像是社会学家所说的Gemeinschaft，而以目标为导向的话语系统，如公司，是Gesellschaft社会组织形式的有力例子。

This distinction between Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft is also useful for talking about how people learn to be members of their discourse systems.One learns one's community, one's gender, and one's ge nerational place in life through processes of socialization or enculturation; that is, one learns to be a member largely through naturally occurring, non-institutional forms of learning. On the other hand, membership in goal-directed discourse sys-tems such as the academic discourse system or a corporate structure comes more often through formal education, training, and institutionalized learning.
Gemeinschaft 和 Gesellschaft 之间的这种区别对于谈论人们如何学习成为他们话语系统的成员也很有用。一个人通过社会化或文化化的过程来了解自己的社区、性别和自己在生活中的非理性位置;也就是说，一个人主要通过自然发生的、非制度化的学习形式来学习成为成员。另一方面，以目标为导向的话语系统（如学术话语系统或公司结构）的成员资格更多地来自正规教育、培训和制度化学习。

In intercultural communication many problems arise, particularly in pro-fessional contexts, when people make different assumptions about whetherGemeinschaft or Gesellschaft forms of organization are most appropriate. Awestern company doing business in an Asian country, for example, might want to set up a subsidiary production facility. From their point of view the most important issue would be to produce the product efficiently, with the lowest possible cost at a predictable flow of production and with a small range of variability in the quality. To do this they would most likely empha-size finding“the right person”for each job. They would be concerned about selecting individual employees on the basis of their training and experience.In other words, they would be most likely to create a social structure alongGesellschaft lines of rational, utilitarian purpose.
在跨文化交际中，当人们对Gemeinschaft或Gesellschaft的组织形式是否最合适做出不同的假设时，就会出现许多问题，特别是在专业环境中。例如，在亚洲国家开展业务的西方公司可能希望建立子公司生产设施。从他们的角度来看，最重要的问题是以可预测的生产流程以尽可能低的成本和小范围的质量变化有效地生产产品。要做到这一点，他们很可能会强调为每项工作找到“合适的人”。他们会关注根据个别雇员的培训和经验来选择他们。换言之，他们最有可能按照理性、功利主义目的的Gesellschaft路线创造一种社会结构。

In contrast to the owners of such a project, the local Asian counterparts
与此类项目的所有者相比，当地的亚洲同行

150 What is Culture?
150 什么是文化？

might well have in mind major aspects of Gemeinschaft or community which they would want to emphasize. It might well be important that the new project would employ certain persons who were well placed in the local community structure, even where they might not have the initial training and experience. From the point of view of Gemeinschaft, these would be the best people, because employing them would enhance the community social structure.
很可能想到他们想要强调的Gemeinschaft或社区的主要方面。新项目将雇用某些在当地社区结构中处于有利地位的人，即使他们可能没有初步培训和经验，这一点可能很重要。从Gemeinschaft的角度来看，这些人将是最好的人，因为雇用他们将增强社区社会结构。

No modern culture or discourse system, of course, is purely organized as either Gemeinschaft or Gesellschaft alone. In any social structure we will see a mixture of elements of both forms of organization. What is important in understanding intercultural communication is to understand in which con-texts one of these forms of organization is preferred over the other. It is also important to understand that conflicts and misinterpretations may arise where participants in a discourse do not come to agreement over which mode of organization should predominate.
当然，没有一个现代文化或话语体系是纯粹地组织起来的，要么是Gemeinschaft，要么是Gesellschaft。在任何社会结构中，我们都会看到两种组织形式元素的混合。理解跨文化交际的重要一点是要了解其中一种组织形式比另一种更受欢迎。同样重要的是要明白，如果话语参与者对哪种组织模式应该占主导地位没有达成一致，就可能出现冲突和误解。

Forms of discourse

Functions of language
语言的功能

History, worldview, beliefs, values, religions, and social organization may all be reflected through different languages and linguistic varieties in a culture.At the same time, language may be a directly defining aspect of culture,rather than simply a reflection of other, more basic structures. A cultural group may have quite distinctive ways of understanding the basic functions of language, and therefore we will take up the question of the functions of language as the third major aspect of culture which plays a role in intercultural communication.
历史、世界观、信仰、价值观、宗教和社会组织都可能通过文化中的不同语言和语言变体来反映。同时，语言可能是文化的一个直接定义方面，而不仅仅是其他更基本结构的反映。一个文化群体对语言基本功能的理解可能具有相当独特的方式，因此，我们将讨论语言的功能问题，作为文化的第三个主要方面，它在跨文化交际中发挥作用。

To give an example of the functional role language itself may play,Chinese in its many forms is a major aspect (but, of course, not the only one) of the definition of Chinese culture. When Chinese are asked to defineChinese culture, they will frequently point to the common use of Chinese writing, both in the present and historically back for several millennia, as the defining core.
举例来说，语言本身可能发挥的功能作用，多种形式的汉语是中国文化定义的一个主要方面（当然，不是唯一的方面）。当中国人被要求定义中国文化时，他们经常会指出，无论是现在还是几千年来，中国文字的普遍使用都是定义的核心。

Such a definition of culture would be very unlikely in the west. English is the principal language of the United Kingdom, Australia, the UnitedStates, and New Zealand, one of the principal languages of Canada andSouth Africa, and an official or major language in quite a number of other countries. Nevertheless, people who live in those countries may make a strong claim for having a culture quite distinctive from other speakers ofEnglish in other English-speaking countries.
在西方，这种文化定义是不太可能的。英语是英国、澳大利亚、美国和新西兰的主要语言，是加拿大和南非的主要语言之一，也是许多其他国家的官方或主要语言。然而，生活在这些国家的人可能会强烈声称拥有与其他英语国家的其他英语使用者截然不同的文化。

It is true that since the Renaissance in Europe, countries have tried to use languages such as German, French, and English as a defining criterion of
诚然，自欧洲文艺复兴以来，各国都试图使用德语、法语和英语等语言作为定义标准。

What is Culture? 151
什么是文化？151

national and cultural distinctiveness. Nevertheless, Europeans tend to use language more to divide than to unify. One does not often hear of Euro-peans saying that they share a common culture with everyone who uses theRoman alphabet to write, for example. Nor is there a common sense of cul-ture among the speakers of the Indo-European language family. Not even such relatively close language families as that of Romance languages, which includes French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Italian, are thought to unify a group culturally.
民族和文化特色。然而，欧洲人倾向于使用语言来分裂而不是统一。例如，人们并不经常听到欧洲人说他们与使用罗马字母书写的每个人共享共同的文化。印欧语系的使用者之间也没有共同的文化意识。即使是像罗曼语这样相对接近的语言家族，包括法语、西班牙语、葡萄牙语和意大利语，也不被认为在文化上统一了一个群体。

For our purposes, however, the most important aspect of language from a cultural point of view is how a particular culture conceives of the function(s)of language.
然而，就我们的目的而言，从文化的角度来看，语言最重要的方面是特定文化如何看待语言的功能。

Information and relationshipCommunication theorists, linguists, psy-chologists, and anthropologists all agree that language has many functions.In chapter 3 we showed how all language must be used simultaneously in a communicative function as well as in a metacommunicative function. Of course, there is much discussion among researchers about how many func-tions there are and just which functions take priority in any particular case.One dimension on which there is complete agreement, however, is that virtually any communication will have both an information function and a relationship function. In other words, when we communicate with others we simultaneously communicate some amount of information and indicate our current expectations about the relationship between or among participants.
信息与关系传播理论家、语言学家、心理学家和人类学家都认为语言具有许多功能。在第3章中，我们展示了所有语言在交际功能和元交际功能中必须同时使用。当然，研究人员之间有很多关于有多少功能以及哪些功能在任何特定情况下具有优先权的讨论。然而，人们完全同意的一个方面是，几乎任何通信都具有信息功能和关系功能。换句话说，当我们与他人交流时，我们同时传达了一定数量的信息，并表明了我们当前对参与者之间或参与者之间关系的期望。

At the two extremes of information and relationship, there are often cases in which one or the other function appears to be minimized. For example,in those daily greetings such as,“How are you? I'm just fine,”there is often a minimum of actual information. After all, we do not really expect the other person in most cases to answer about how they actually are. Nor do we expect them to believe that we are literally“fine.”Such exchanges are nearly, but not quite exclusively, relational. The meaning of such exchanges is simply to acknowledge recognition and to affirm that the relationship you have established remains in effect. At the other extreme, such discourses as weather reports may seem almost completely devoid of relationship, focus-ing only on information about the weather.
在信息和关系的两个极端，经常有一种或另一种功能似乎被最小化的情况。例如，在那些日常问候语中，例如“你好吗？我很好，“通常只有最少的实际信息。毕竟，在大多数情况下，我们并不真正期望对方回答他们的实际情况。我们也不指望他们相信我们真的“很好”。这种交流几乎是关系性的，但并不完全是关系性的。这种交流的意义只是承认承认并确认你们所建立的关系仍然有效。在另一个极端，像天气预报这样的话语似乎几乎完全没有关系，只关注有关天气的信息。

What is of concern for us is not to establish whether or not the purpose of language is to convey information or relationship; the use of language always accomplishes both functions to some extent. From an intercultural point of view, we can see that cultures often are different from each other in how much importance they give to one function of language over the other.For example, Japanese culture places a very high value on the communication of subtle aspects of feeling and relationship and a much lower value on the communication of information. International business culture, especially since the introduction of nearly instant global computer communications, places
我们关心的不是确定语言的目的是传达信息还是关系;语言的使用总是在某种程度上实现这两个功能。从跨文化的角度来看，我们可以看到，不同文化往往在对语言的一种功能的重视程度上彼此不同。例如，日本文化非常重视情感和关系的微妙方面的交流，而对信息交流的重视程度要低得多。国际商业文化，特别是自从引入几乎即时的全球计算机通信以来，将

152 What is Culture?
152 什么是文化？

a very high value on the communication of information and very little value on the communication of relationship.
对信息交流的价值非常高，而对关系的交流价值很小。

The tradition of communication without language which the Japanese call ishin denshin might be translated as“direct transmission”and has been strongly influenced by Zen Buddhism. This influence originated in China in the early Tang period (AD 618–907) and has had a major impact onChinese, Korean, and Japanese cultures, even in the modern period. In this tradition of thinking about communication, it is believed that the most important things cannot be communicated in language, that language is only useful for somewhat secondary or trivial messages.
日本人称之为“ishin denshin”的无语言交流传统可以翻译为“直接传播”，并受到禅宗佛教的强烈影响。这种影响起源于唐初期（公元 618-907 年）的中国，对中国、韩国和日本文化产生了重大影响，即使在现代也是如此。在这种关于交流的思考传统中，人们认为最重要的事情不能用语言来交流，语言只对次要或琐碎的信息有用。

In contrast to this is the tradition of Utilitarian discourse, in which it is assumed that the ideal language use is to purge one's speech and one's writing of everything but the essential information. This very positivist position assumes that what cannot be communicated in this way is hardly worth paying attention to.
与此形成鲜明对比的是功利主义话语的传统，在这种传统中，人们认为理想的语言使用是清除一个人的言语和写作中除基本信息之外的所有内容。这种非常实证主义的立场认为，无法以这种方式传达的东西几乎不值得关注。

We do not suppose that normal international professional communication takes place very often between Japanese-speaking Zen Buddhist priests andEnglish-speaking computer scientists who might hold to the extremes of these two positions on the function of language . Nevertheless, we do know that throughout Asia, members of Chinese, Japanese, and Korean cultures have been strongly influenced in their thinking about language by such traditions. As a result, one might expect the average Asian to be somewhat more skeptical about the value of direct, information al communication, and to place a higher value on thinking deeply about a subject.
我们并不认为，在讲日语的禅宗僧侣和讲英语的计算机科学家之间经常发生正常的国际专业交流，他们可能会在语言功能上坚持这两种极端的立场。然而，我们确实知道，在整个亚洲，中国、日本和韩国文化的成员在思考语言时都受到这些传统的强烈影响。因此，人们可能会认为普通亚洲人对直接信息交流的价值持怀疑态度，并更重视对一个主题的深入思考。

An advertisement in a Korean newspaper for a Korean advertising com-pany says,
韩国一家报纸上刊登了一则韩国广告公司的广告，上面写着：

DONG BANG THINKS TWICE
董邦三思而后行

The deeper the thinking, the true r the action.Likewise, the deeper the thinking behind advertising,the more outstanding are the results.Deep thinking and sincere ideas produce advertising that is more persuasive than dazzling, more touching, and more exciting.By always“thinking twice,”the THINKING AGENCY, DONG BANG,creates advertising that is believable. DONG BANG's advertising,therefore, has the power to persuade consumers to buy your products.
思考越深刻，行动才是真正的。同样，广告背后的思考越深入，结果就越突出。深思熟虑，真心实意，产生比炫目更有说服力、更感人、更精彩的广告。通过始终“三思而后行”，THINKING AGENCY东邦创造了可信的广告。因此，东邦的广告具有说服消费者购买您的产品的力量。

In this context, thinking twice implies thinking about the consequences of one's actions on human relationships. It is hard to imagine that this appeal to deep thought would carry much weight in American advertising circles,in spite of the fact that this advertisement was published in English in anEnglish language newspaper, presumably in order to win over potential non-Korean clients.
在这种情况下，三思而后行意味着思考一个人的行为对人际关系的影响。很难想象，这种对深刻思考的诉求会在美国广告界占有重要地位，尽管这则广告是用英文在英文报纸上发表的，大概是为了赢得潜在的非韩国客户。

What is Culture? 153
什么是文化？153

In regular conditions of intercultural professional communication, this difference between a focus on information and a focus on relationship often leads to a misunderstanding of the purposes of specific communicative events. From the point of view of the functions of language, the westerner may well want to get to the bargaining table as quickly as possible because he or she believes that it is in direct talk that information is exchanged and that any other form of communication is quite beside the point. His or herAsian counterpart, on the other hand, may want to set up a series of social events in which the participants can more indirectly approach each other and begin to feel more subtle aspects of their relationship.
在跨文化专业交际的常规条件下，对信息的关注和对关系的关注之间的这种差异往往导致对特定交际活动目的的误解。从语言功能的角度来看，西方人很可能希望尽快回到谈判桌前，因为他或她认为信息是在直接交谈中交换的，而任何其他形式的交流都是无关紧要的。另一方面，他或她的亚洲同行可能希望建立一系列社交活动，让参与者可以更间接地接近对方，并开始感受到他们关系中更微妙的方面。

Negotiation and ratification Having said that there is often a cultural differ-ence in the belief about whether language is primarily used for the purposes of conveying information or expressing relationships, we now need to com-plicate the picture somewhat further. There is also a difference among cultures in the extent to which relationships are thought to be freely negotiated on the one hand, or given by society in a fixed form on the other. This is the second aspect of the functions of language we will need to consider.
谈判和批准 话虽如此，关于语言是否主要用于传达信息或表达关系的信念往往存在文化差异，我们现在需要进一步复杂化情况。不同文化之间也存在差异，一方面认为关系是自由协商的，另一方面是社会以固定形式给予的。这是我们需要考虑的语言功能的第二个方面。

In recent years, for example, there has been a growing cultural reaction in North America and elsewhere to the excessive emphasis on information in human relationships. Psychologists who have specialized in the treatment of stress have pointed out that the American narrow emphasis on informa-tion and control in communication is part of what has been called the Type-A Behavior syndrome. This syndrome, which is closely associated with heart disease, has been observed to emphasize an excessive attention to numbers,quantities, and direct communication on the one hand, and to downplay or minimize human relationships on the other.
例如，近年来，北美和其他地方对人际关系中过分强调信息的文化反应越来越大。专门研究压力治疗的心理学家指出，美国人狭隘地强调沟通中的信息和控制是所谓的A型行为综合症的一部分。这种与心脏病密切相关的综合症一方面强调对数字、数量和直接沟通的过度关注，另一方面强调或最小化人际关系。

At the same time, as we will discuss below in chapter 11, scholars such as Deborah Tannen have observed a contrast between women and men inAmerican society in their attention to information over relationship. We will also discuss the major generation gap between the generations born before and after World War II. One of the characteristics of this younger generation is its greater emphasis on human relationships.
与此同时，正如我们将在下面的第11章中讨论的那样，黛博拉·坦南（Deborah Tannen）等学者观察到，美国社会中女性和男性在关注信息而不是关系方面存在差异。我们还将讨论二战前后出生的几代人之间的主要代沟。年轻一代的特点之一是更加强调人际关系。

Taking these together, we can see that there is a clear movement within contemporary western society toward recognizing that successful (and healthy)communication cannot ignore human relationships. Nevertheless, we be-lieve there remains a major distinction between the way human relationships are understood in Asia (and in other traditional societies) and the way they are understood in contemporary western society. The difference, we believe,lies in whether human relationships are thought of as given by society or, on the other hand, as being spontaneously created between individuals.
综上所述，我们可以看到，当代西方社会有一个明显的运动，即认识到成功（和健康）的沟通不能忽视人际关系。然而，我们发现，亚洲（和其他传统社会）对人际关系的理解方式与当代西方社会对人际关系的理解方式之间仍然存在重大差异。我们认为，区别在于人际关系是被认为是社会给予的，还是被认为是个人之间自发创造的。

As we have said above, kinship is a major source of structure within most cultures, including Asian cultures. In such societies, human relationships
正如我们上面所说，在大多数文化中，亲属关系是结构的主要来源，包括亚洲文化。在这样的社会中，人际关系

154 What is Culture?
154 什么是文化？

are thought of as being largely vertical relationships between preceding and following generations. Whether it is family relationships such as those be-tween parents and their children or relationships outside of the family such as those between a teacher and a student, the significant point is that most of the relationships are understood to be given by the society, not newly negotiated by the participants in the situation. One is born the son or daughter of particular parents, the descendant of particular ancestors, a member of a particular village. These characteristics of one's personal iden-tity are not negotiable; they are given by the situations into which one is born.
被认为是前几代人和后代之间的主要垂直关系。无论是家庭关系，如父母和他们的孩子，还是家庭之外的关系，如老师和学生之间的关系，重要的一点是，大多数关系被理解为由社会给予，而不是由情境中的参与者新协商。一个人是特定父母的儿子或女儿，特定祖先的后代，特定村庄的成员。个人身份的这些特征是不可谈判的;它们是由一个人出生的情境赋予的。

In contrast to this, in contemporary western society the word“relation-ship”has come to mean almost exclusively horizontal or lateral and, in fact,sexual, relationships made between people who freely choose to enter into them. Because of the social and semantic strength of this use of the term,most other uses have been crowded out of the common lexicon. The prim-ary concern in what are called relationships is with the establishment of equality and freedom. In fact, one could safely say that one of the greatest concerns one finds in the popular press about such relationships, as well as any other human relationships, is over how to keep any relationship from taking on hierarchical characteristics.
与此相反，在当代西方社会中，“关系船”一词几乎完全是指自由选择进入关系的人之间的横向或横向关系，实际上是性关系。由于该术语的使用具有社会和语义强度，大多数其他用法已被挤出通用词典。在所谓的关系中，首要关注的是平等和自由的建立。事实上，人们可以肯定地说，人们在大众媒体中发现的关于这种关系以及任何其他人际关系的最大担忧之一，是如何防止任何关系具有等级特征。

If we return, then, to the question of intercultural communication, we can see that a major difference between these two points of view lies in the question of negotiation or ratification. Within a traditional concept of ver-tical and generational relationships, language is thought of as being used for the purposes of ratifying or affirming relationships which have already been given. On the other hand, in the contemporary western concept of relation-ships, language is seen as a major aspect of the ongoing negotiation of the relationship. Particular care is taken not to ratify existing relationships, but to seek continual change, or as it is more favorably put, growth.
那么，如果我们回到跨文化交际的问题，我们可以看到这两种观点之间的主要区别在于谈判或批准的问题。在传统的世代关系和代际关系概念中，语言被认为是用于批准或肯定已经给出的关系的目的。另一方面，在当代西方的关系概念中，语言被视为正在进行的关系谈判的一个主要方面。特别注意不要批准现有的关系，而是寻求持续的变化，或者更有利的说法，增长。

The difference in these two views of language is that in one view the stable condition is seen as the favorable condition and in the other it is the changing condition that is thought of as being favorable. We know of manyAsians, for example, who have known each other for many years and who have engaged in mutually profitable business arrangements, but who con-tinue to call each other quite formally by their last names and titles. On the other hand, we know of American business people who have felt that their attempts to develop a better business relationship with Asians have not succeeded because after a long series of encounters with them they have not been able to establish themselves on a first-name“friendly”basis.
这两种语言观点的区别在于，在一种观点中，稳定条件被视为有利条件，而在另一种观点中，变化条件被认为是有利的。例如，我们知道许多亚洲人，他们彼此相识多年，并从事互惠互利的商业安排，但他们总是用他们的姓氏和头衔来正式称呼对方。另一方面，我们知道一些美国商人认为，他们与亚洲人建立更好的商业关系的尝试没有成功，因为在与他们进行了长时间的接触之后，他们无法在“友好”的基础上建立自己的地位。

Group harmony and individual welfare The third way in which we can see that cultures differ in the focus on information or on relationship in lan-guage use is to mention the research of a Japanese psychologist who studied
群体和谐与个人福利 我们可以看到文化在语言使用中对信息或关系的关注方面存在差异的第三种方式是提到一位日本心理学家的研究

What is Culture? 155
什么是文化？155

group processes in solving problems. In this research project, subjects were given individual problems to solve in some cases and in other cases they were asked to so lve the problems in groups. He found that when there was a conflict within the group about how to solve a problem, group harmony was always the greatest consideration, even if it meant that the group had to select a worse solution. In other words, his conclusion was that members of a group much preferred to say they would go along with the group than to express their own, individual solutions, if those solutions would produce disharmony in the group.
解决问题的过程。在这个研究项目中，受试者在某些情况下被赋予了要解决的个人问题，而在其他情况下，他们被要求分组解决问题。他发现，当小组内部就如何解决问题发生冲突时，小组和谐始终是最重要的考虑因素，即使这意味着小组必须选择更糟糕的解决方案。换言之，他的结论是，如果一个小组的成员在小组中产生不和谐，他们更愿意说他们会与小组一起行动，而不是表达他们自己的个人解决方案。

Other scholars have pointed out that one major difference between An-cient Chinese and Ancient Greek rhetoric was on this dimension of group harmony versus individual welfare. Ancient Chinese rhetoric emphasized the means by which one could phrase one's position without causing any feeling of disruption or disharmony. Ancient Greek rhetoric, on the other hand, emphasized the means of winning one's point through skillful argu-ment, short of, Aristotle says, the use of torture.
其他学者指出，古汉语和古希腊修辞学之间的一个主要区别在于群体和谐与个人福利的维度。中国古代修辞学强调一个人可以表达自己的立场而不引起任何破坏或不和谐的感觉。另一方面，古希腊的修辞学强调通过巧妙的辩论来赢得自己的观点，亚里士多德说，不包括使用酷刑。

We do not suppose that contemporary international business circles would approve of the use of torture to achieve a good contract on the western side,and we also do not suppose that Asians would scuttle the possibility of a good contract just for the sake of a harmonious group feeling. Nevertheless,we do believe that this cultural difference in assumptions made about the functions of language will have some effect in intercultural discourse in-volving Asians and westerners. We know that Asians will tend to state their positions somewhat less extremely if they feel that not to do so would disrupt the harmony of the negotiations. We also know that westerners will tend to assume that each party has only in mind achieving their own best advantage in negotiations, and that they will do so, even if it should cause a feeling of disharmony. This difference in assumptions about what is actually going on can easily lead to more complex misinterpretations in the discourse.
我们不认为当代国际商界会赞成使用酷刑来达成西方的良好契约，我们也不认为亚洲人会仅仅为了和谐的群体感情而破坏良好契约的可能性。尽管如此，我们确实相信，这种对语言功能假设的文化差异将对涉及亚洲人和西方人的跨文化话语产生一些影响。我们知道，如果亚洲人认为不这样做会破坏谈判的和谐，他们的立场就会不那么极端。我们也知道，西方人倾向于认为，每一方都只想在谈判中取得自己的最大优势，并且他们会这样做，即使这会造成不和谐的感觉。这种对实际情况的假设差异很容易导致话语中更复杂的误解。

Non-verbal communication
非语言交流

Non-verbal communication might be thought of as any form of communi-cation which is not directly dependent on the use of language. Generally speaking, however, it is very difficult to know where to separate verbal and non-verbal forms of communication. Such non-verbal aspects of communi-cation as nodding the head most often accompany sp eech and are part and parcel of the verbal system of language use. On the other hand such forms of communication as dance and music often have no verbal component at all. Our interest here is not in providing a theoretically rigorous definition of the difference between verbal and non-verbal communication. Our purpose in using this category is simply to call attention to the fact that many aspects
非语言交流可以被认为是不直接依赖于语言使用的任何形式的交流。然而，一般来说，很难知道在哪里区分语言和非语言形式的交流。点头等交际的非语言方面最常伴随着 sp eech，并且是语言使用语言系统的重要组成部分。另一方面，舞蹈和音乐等交流形式通常根本没有语言成分。我们在这里的兴趣不是为语言和非语言交流之间的区别提供理论上的严格定义。我们使用此类别的目的只是为了引起人们对许多方面的注意

156 What is Culture?
156 什么是文化？

of discourse depend upon forms of communication which cannot be easily transcribed into words and yet are crucial to our understanding of discourse.
话语依赖于交流形式，这些形式不能轻易地转录成文字，但对我们理解话语至关重要。

Throughout this book we have emphasized communication in speaking and in writing, and yet we realize that much communication also takes place without the use of words. The way a person dresses for a meeting may suggest to other participants how he or she is prepared to participate in it.In fact, we can use virtually any aspect of our behavior or our presentation which others can perceive as a means of communication. This would in-clude our posture, our movements, our attire, our use of space, and our use of time. All of these have been considered by researchers in their studies of non-verbal communication.
在整本书中，我们强调口语和书面交流，但我们意识到许多交流也是在不使用语言的情况下进行的。一个人参加会议的着装方式可能会向其他参与者暗示他或她准备如何参加会议。事实上，我们几乎可以将我们行为或演示的任何方面用于其他人可以将其视为一种交流手段。这将包括我们的姿势、我们的动作、我们的着装、我们对空间的使用和我们对时间的使用。研究人员在研究非语言交流时都考虑了所有这些因素。

While there are many kinds of non-verbal communication, here we will focus on just three aspects of human behavior which are relevant to inter-cultural communication: the movements of our bodies (called kinesics), our use of space (called proxemics), and our use of time.
虽然非语言交流有很多种，但在这里我们将只关注与跨文化交流相关的人类行为的三个方面：我们身体的运动（称为运动学）、我们对空间的使用（称为近似学）和我们对时间的使用。

Kinesics: the movement of our bodies At the beginning of this chapter, the incident involving Mr Chu and Mr Richardson ended with Mr Chu smiling,which Mr Richardson interpreted as meaning they had achieved a good interpersonal relationship. One aspect of intercultural communication which is often open to misinterpretation is this one of smiling or laughing. Many researchers have argued that smiles or laughing are universal human char-acteristics which we all immediately understand. This is, of course, true.There is little doubt that any human being would know when some other human was smiling.
运动学：我们身体的运动 在本章的开头，涉及朱先生和理查森先生的事件以朱先生的微笑结束，理查森先生将其解释为他们建立了良好的人际关系。跨文化交际的一个方面经常被误解，那就是微笑或大笑。许多研究人员认为，微笑或大笑是人类的普遍特征，我们都立即理解。这当然是真的。毫无疑问，任何人都会知道其他人何时在微笑。

Unfortunately, from one cultural group to another there is a great deal of variability about when one smiles or laughs and what it should be taken to mean. The most obvious and the most often misinterpreted form of this is what in the west might be called“nervous laughter.”Perhaps it is only a difference in the amount of smiling or laughter under such conditions, but it has been widely observed that Asians in general tend to smile or laugh more easily than westerners when they feel difficulty or embarrassment in the discourse. This is, then, misinterpreted by westerners as normal pleas-ure or agreement, and the sources of difficulty are obscured or missed.
不幸的是，从一个文化群体到另一个文化群体，关于一个人何时微笑或大笑以及它应该被理解为什么，存在很大的差异。最明显也是最常被误解的形式就是在西方可能被称为“紧张的笑声”。也许这只是在这种情况下微笑或大笑的数量不同，但人们普遍观察到，当亚洲人在话语中感到困难或尴尬时，他们通常比西方人更容易微笑或大笑。因此，这被西方人误解为正常的恳求或协议，困难的根源被掩盖或遗漏了。

We believe that there is a connection between this non-verbal behavior and the tendency for Asians to use communication to promote interpersonal or group harmony. If we think of the smile as a natural means for humans to encourage interpersonal harmony, then we can understand that it is likely to occur when an Asian feels there is some disruption of this harmony. On the other hand, if someone feels that the purpose of speaking is to promote individual welfare or the transfer of information, he or she is likely to assume that a smile means that the individual is pleased and is, therefore,feeling that he or she is succeeding in his or her own personal ends.
我们认为，这种非语言行为与亚洲人利用沟通来促进人际或群体和谐的倾向之间存在联系。如果我们认为微笑是人类鼓励人际和谐的一种自然方式，那么我们就可以理解，当亚洲人觉得这种和谐受到某种破坏时，它很可能会发生。另一方面，如果某人觉得说话的目的是促进个人福利或信息传递，他或她可能会认为微笑意味着个人很高兴，因此，他或她觉得他或她正在成功地实现他或她的个人目的。

What is Culture? 157
什么是文化？157

From this point of view, we would not want to say that the difference which has caused misinterpretation is attributable to smiles, which are so different from one culture to another. Instead we would want to say that it is the discourse and its purposes which are different. The smile in one case is being used to cover over what is felt as a potential problem; in the other case it is used to directly register satisfaction. If two participants in a discourse have different goals, they are likely to interpret the smile within the purview of their own particular goals and, therefore, miss the fact that the other participant sees that something has gone wrong.
从这个角度来看，我们不想说造成误解的差异归因于微笑，而微笑在一种文化与另一种文化之间是如此不同。相反，我们想说的是，话语及其目的不同。在一种情况下，微笑被用来掩盖潜在的问题;在另一种情况下，它用于直接注册满意度。如果话语中的两个参与者有不同的目标，他们很可能会根据自己的特定目标来解释微笑，因此，他们错过了另一个参与者看到出了问题的事实。

A second aspect of kinesi c behavior or body movement that is immedi-ately noticed when one travels between Asia and western countries is bow-ing. Most of the readers of this book will be quite aware of the fact that shaking hands in the west is the most common form of greeting, especially when being introduced to someone or when seeing someone whom one has not seen for a long time. In Asia there is considerable variability in practices,which include bowing as the main form in Japan and Korea, but also sometimes including shaking hands when westerners are involved. The traditional Chinese practice of clasping one's hands before the chest while making a short bo w is now rarely seen outside of movies depicting an earlier time.
当一个人在亚洲和西方国家之间旅行时，立即注意到的运动行为或身体运动的第二个方面是鞠躬。本书的大多数读者都会非常清楚这样一个事实，即在西方握手是最常见的问候形式，尤其是在被介绍给某人或见到许久未见的人时。在亚洲，习俗有相当大的差异，包括日本和韩国以鞠躬为主要形式，但有时也包括西方人参与时的握手。中国人将双手抱在胸前，同时做一个简短的 bow 的传统做法现在很少见，除了描绘更早时代的电影之外。

There are several problems which arise with these practices. Such greet-ings are distributed differently in different Asian countries (Japanese andKoreans bow more frequently and more deeply than Chinese), and cultural changes are bringing about changes in these practices. Furthermore, in western countries changes are taking place in handshaking practices. For example, it is now generally assumed that when a woman and a man are introduced they will shake hands in acknowledgement of the introduction,especially, of course, in professional or business circles. It has only been relatively recently, however, that this practice has been widely accepted.Even just a few years ago, it was somewhat unusual for men and women to shake hands. They would generally have nodded to each other.
这些做法会出现几个问题。这种问候在不同的亚洲国家分布不同（日本人和韩国人比中国人更频繁、更深地鞠躬），文化的变化正在带来这些习俗的变化。此外，在西方国家，握手习俗正在发生变化。例如，现在人们普遍认为，当一个女人和一个男人被介绍时，他们会握手以确认介绍，特别是在专业或商业圈子里。然而，这种做法直到最近才被广泛接受。即使在几年前，男人和女人握手也有些不寻常。他们通常会互相点头致意。

There are many books on intercultural non-verbal communication which the reader may consult for details of what might be appropriate or inappro-priate in any particular social context. Our purpose here is not to go into non-verbal communication in detail. We only want to make the reader aware that we do not intend to ignore the question of it. We are primarily concerned with verbal discourse; as a result, we are only briefly taking up the question of modes of communication which lie outside of this domain of study. Kinesics may not be a major aspect of discourse. Nevertheless, as part of the contextual background within which our discourses take place,it is extremely important to remember that as humans we simply cannot ignore the interpretations and misinterpretations we are making in reading the non-verbal signals of other participants in the discourse.
有许多关于跨文化非语言交流的书籍，读者可以查阅这些书籍，以了解在任何特定社会背景下可能合适或不合适的细节。我们在这里的目的不是详细讨论非语言交流。我们只是想让读者意识到，我们并不打算忽视它的问题。我们主要关注口头话语;因此，我们只是简单地讨论这个研究领域之外的沟通方式问题。运动学可能不是话语的主要方面。然而，作为我们话语发生的语境背景的一部分，记住这一点非常重要，作为人类，我们根本不能忽视我们在阅读话语中其他参与者的非语言信号时所做的解释和误解。

158 What is Culture?
158 什么是文化？

Proxemics: the use of space The second aspect of non-verbal communi-cation which is important in intercultural communication is in our use of space. Cultural differences in the use of space are a constant source of mis-understanding and confusion in preparing the settings for discourse. In traditional Japanese and Korean rooms, one leaves shoes at the door and sits on the floor at small, low tables. Chinese rooms use chairs and higher tables.Japanese and Korean rooms seem almost empty. This is because objects such as tables, cushions, or bedding not currently in use will be stored behind cupboard doors out of sight. Chinese rooms seem much fuller. In this comparison, Chinese rooms will seem more familiar to westerners, who are also accustomed to sitting in chairs at higher tables.
近似：空间的使用 非语言交际的第二个方面，在跨文化交际中很重要，是我们对空间的使用。空间使用的文化差异是准备话语环境时误解和混乱的持续根源。在传统的日式和韩式房间里，人们把鞋子放在门口，坐在地板上的小矮桌旁。中式房间使用椅子和较高的桌子。日本和韩国的房间似乎几乎是空的。这是因为当前未使用的桌子、靠垫或床上用品等物品将存放在橱柜门后面，看不见。中式房间似乎更满。在这种比较中，西方人似乎更熟悉中国房间，他们也习惯于坐在更高桌子的椅子上。

Differences will, nevertheless, be found between the western placement of furniture such as chairs and tables and the corresponding Chinese place-ment. A Chinese room will often have two chairs placed side by side with a small table between them. Two people who are to talk to each other will thus sit side by side rather than across from each other, as would be more commonly practiced in a western conversation. It is an interesting twist of contemporary technology and social practice that because of television many westerners are now adopting a pattern which in some ways is similar to theChinese practice. Because television now often forms a f ocal point for western casual conversation, conversationalists often sit side by side looking at or toward the television set when they talk.
然而，在西方摆放的家具（如椅子和桌子）和相应的中国摆放之间会发现差异。中国房间通常会并排放置两把椅子，中间有一张小桌子。因此，两个要互相交谈的人将并排坐着，而不是彼此对面坐着，这在西方谈话中更常见。当代技术和社会实践的一个有趣的转折是，由于电视的出现，许多西方人现在采用了一种在某些方面与中国实践相似的模式。由于电视现在经常成为西方休闲谈话的焦点，谈话者在谈话时经常并排坐着看着或朝向电视机。

There are, of course, many other aspects of proxemics which might be considered in intercultural communication. One of these, however, is of recurring importance in preparing settings for intercultural communication,and that is the concept of personal space. It was clearly demonstrated some years ago(Hall 1959) that each person has a“bubble”of space in which he or she moves and in which he or she feels comfortable. Intrusions into that space are acceptable only under circumstances of intimate contact. Outside of that space is a second“bubble”of space in which normal interpersonal contacts take place. Then outside of that is a third“bubble”of public space.
当然，在跨文化交际中，还有许多其他方面可以考虑近似学。然而，其中之一在为跨文化交际做准备方面具有反复出现的重要性，那就是个人空间的概念。几年前（Hall 1959）清楚地表明，每个人都有一个空间的“气泡”，他或她在其中移动，他或她在其中感到舒适。只有在亲密接触的情况下，才可以侵入该空间。在那个空间之外，是第二个“泡泡”的空间，在这个空间中，正常的人际交往发生。然后，在它之外是公共空间的第三个“泡沫”。

Edward T. Hall, who first described these spaces(1959, 1969), points out that these spheres of space are one aspect of culture which comes into play in intercultural communication. One culture, that of Mexicans for example,will have a slightly smaller sphere of intimate space than another culture,such as that of North Americans. The result of this difference, which can be measured in just a few inches, is that when a North American and a Mexican stand together to converse, the Mexican will nudge slightly closer to the NorthAmerican in order to get at the right distance for comfortable interpersonal discourse. The North American, who has a slightly larger intimate sphere, will feel that the Mexican is invading his or her intimate space and will, therefore,step back an inch or two. This will make the Mexican feel uncomfortable be-cause he or she will feel too distant and, therefore, he or she will move closer.
爱德华·霍尔（Edward T. Hall）首先描述了这些空间（1959,1969），他指出，这些空间领域是文化的一个方面，在跨文化交际中发挥作用。一种文化，例如墨西哥人的文化，将比另一种文化（例如北美文化）具有略小的私密空间范围。这种差异的结果是，当北美人和墨西哥人站在一起交谈时，墨西哥人会稍微靠近北美人，以便与舒适的人际交往保持适当的距离。北美人的私密范围稍大，会觉得墨西哥人正在入侵他或她的私密空间，因此会后退一两英寸。这会让墨西哥人感到不舒服，因为他或她会觉得太遥远，因此，他或她会走得更近。

What is Culture? 159
什么是文化？159

The net result of these cultural differences in intimate and personal spaces is that, where norms are different, you will find the person with the smaller sphere constantly moving closer to the other, and that other person constantly moving back a bit to increase the space. These two conversation-alists will create a kind of dance in which they will move across a consid-erable amount of space in the course of a brief conversation. If the space is crowded with other people, they will end up moving around and around in a circle while each person tries to find a comfortable position.
在亲密空间和个人空间中，这些文化差异的最终结果是，在规范不同的地方，你会发现拥有较小领域的人不断靠近对方，而另一个人不断地向后移动一点以增加空间。这两位对话者将创造一种舞蹈，在简短的对话过程中，他们将在可观的空间中移动。如果空间里挤满了其他人，他们最终会围成一圈又一圈，而每个人都试图找到一个舒适的位置。

Westerners visiting Asia for the first time often notice this sort of proxemic problem. Generally speaking, Asians have a smaller sphere of personal space than westerners, with Americans at one extreme and Mediterraneans coming much closer to the Asian norm. Asians in North America will experience the opposite feeling, of people being quite distant from them.
第一次访问亚洲的西方人经常注意到这种近似问题。一般来说，亚洲人的个人空间比西方人小，美国人处于一个极端，地中海人更接近亚洲人的标准。北美的亚洲人会体验到相反的感觉，人们与他们相距甚远。

This difference leads quite naturally to westerners having a very different experience of Asian city life than Asians themselves have. While such places as central Taipei, the Mongkok district of Hong Kong, or NamdaemunMarket in Seoul are among the most densely packed places on earth, the physical crowding is not experienced in the same way by everyone. It depends on the person's expectations of personal space, and those expecta-tions depend, in part, on how space is used in that person's culture.
这种差异很自然地导致西方人对亚洲城市生活的体验与亚洲人截然不同。虽然台北市中心、香港旺角区或首尔南大门市场等地方是地球上人口最稠密的地方之一，但每个人对物理拥挤的体验并不相同。这取决于个人对个人空间的期望，而这些期望在一定程度上取决于空间在个人文化中的使用方式。

Concept of time The authors received a letter recently from a former student in Taiwan who said about Hong Kong,“I presume Hong Kong is a busy area, where people walk fast, talk fast, and overwork to death.”One aspect of the concept of time which will be all too obvious to most readers of this text is that there seems to be too little time in which to do too many things. This sense of time might be called time urgency, a term taken from descriptions by researchers into stress and Type-A behavior. As they have described this“hurry sickness,”it is a syndrome of behavior in which the person continually tries to accomplish more than can be humanly accom-plished. Until very recently, time urgency was thought to be a characteristic of Americans, particularly American males in the generation born in the period from the Great Depression through to the end of World War II(1929-45).
时间概念 笔者最近收到一封来自台湾前学生的来信，信中谈到香港时说：“我认为香港是一个繁忙的地区，人们走得很快，说话很快，过度劳累得要死。对于本文的大多数读者来说，时间概念的一个方面是显而易见的，那就是似乎时间太少，无法做太多的事情。这种时间感可能被称为时间紧迫感，这个术语取自研究人员对压力和A型行为的描述。正如他们所描述的那样，“匆忙病”是一种行为综合症，在这种综合症中，人们不断试图完成超出人类所能承受的范围。直到最近，人们还认为时间紧迫是美国人的特征，尤其是从大萧条到第二次世界大战结束（1929-45）出生的一代美国男性。

It should be obvious to most of our readers that this sense of time urgency is no longer a cultural characteristic of just this one generation ofAmerican males. It is a characteristic of the Asian “salaryman,”and is spreading throughout the world rapidly as one aspect of the internation-alization of business and government. It does not take much imagination to see that this time urgency fits very nicely within the Utilitarian discourse system which we described in chapter 6. As that discourse system spreads together with international business communications, this sense of time urgency also appears to be spreading.
对于我们的大多数读者来说，这种时间紧迫感不再是这一代美国男性的文化特征。这是亚洲“工薪族”的特征，并作为商业和政府国际化的一个方面迅速传播到世界各地。不需要太多的想象力就可以看出，这种时间紧迫性非常符合我们在第6章中描述的功利主义话语体系。随着这种话语体系与国际商业交流的传播，这种时间紧迫感似乎也在蔓延。

160 What is Culture?
160 什么是文化？

The most important aspect of this sense of time is that in discourse it will almost always produce a negative evaluation of the slower participants by the faster participants in a communicative situation. Those who share in this concept of time urgency will come to see anyone who moves more slowly than they do as conservative, as uncooperative, as resistant to change,and as opposing progress. Behind the concept of time urgency is the idea that what lies ahead in the future is always better than what lies behind in the past; it is based solidly on the belief in progress.
这种时间感最重要的方面是，在话语中，在交际情境中，它几乎总是会产生较慢的参与者对较慢的参与者的负面评价。那些认同这种时间紧迫性概念的人将把任何行动比他们慢的人看作是保守的、不合作的、抵制变革的、反对进步的。时间紧迫性概念的背后是这样一种观念，即未来总是比过去更好;它坚实地建立在对进步的信念之上。

This belief in progress puts human life and human culture on a Utopian time line from the distant past into the distant future. It is believed that we have yet to reach our greatest accomplishments. It is felt that it is only natural to want to arrive at that future Utopia as soon as possible.
这种对进步的信念将人类生活和人类文化置于从遥远的过去到遥远的未来的乌托邦时间线上。人们认为，我们尚未取得最大的成就。人们认为，希望尽快到达未来的乌托邦是很自然的。

In contrast to this belief in human progress is the concept of the GoldenAge. In the China of Confucius, and continuing down to very recently, it was felt that the present time was worse than the times of the past, in which human society was more reasonably ordered, justice and benevolence pre-vailed, and benevolent rulers concerned themselves with the good of their subjects. Changes in society were justified from the point of view of restor-ing the better conditions of the past, not with moving toward new conditions in the future.
与这种对人类进步的信念形成鲜明对比的是黄金时代的概念。在孔子的中国，一直延续到最近，人们认为现在的时代比过去的时代更糟糕，在那个时代，人类社会的秩序更加合理，正义和仁慈得到了预先确立，仁慈的统治者关心臣民的利益。从恢复过去更好的条件的角度来看，社会的变化是合理的，而不是在未来走向新的条件。

This same Golden-Age concept of the past was held in Europe up until and through the Renaissance. The thinkers of the Renaissance looked back at their immediate predecessors and considered them to have degenerated from the much higher state of culture of the Roman and Greek ancients,and it was their goal to restore Europe to this former condition.
过去的黄金时代概念在欧洲一直存在，直到文艺复兴时期。文艺复兴时期的思想家们回顾了他们的前辈，认为他们已经从罗马和希腊古人的更高文化状态中堕落了，他们的目标是将欧洲恢复到以前的状态。

It is not our purpose to debate the relative merits of these two arrows of time. One arrow, the Utopian arrow of progress, point s toward a better and better future; the other arrow, the arrow of the Golden Age, points toward the past and considers the present time to be a degenerate period. From the point of view of intercultural communication, the main point we want to consider is that if two people differ in their concept of time between theUtopian and the Golden Age, they will find it very difficult to come to agreement in many areas of their discourse.
我们的目的不是辩论这两支时间之箭的相对优点。一支箭，乌托邦式的进步之箭，指向越来越美好的未来;另一支箭头，黄金时代的箭头，指向过去，认为现在是一个堕落的时期。从跨文化交际的角度来看，我们要考虑的主要观点是，如果两个人在乌托邦和黄金时代之间的时间概念不同，他们会发现很难在他们话语的许多领域达成一致。

The main point of disagreement, however, will have to do with the concept of time urgency. Those who hold a Utopian concept of time will push for the quicker realization of their goals. Those who hold a Golden-Age concept of time will not be in any hurry to rush forward, because to them most movements forward are actually just getting away from the better conditions of the past. Utopianists will justify taking actions just because they bring about change, and from their point of view change in itself will bring them closer to their goal. In contrast to this, Golden Ageists will resist change on the belief that any change is likely to further deterior-ate conditions.
然而，主要的分歧点将与时间紧迫性的概念有关。那些持有乌托邦时间概念的人将推动更快地实现他们的目标。那些持有黄金时代时间概念的人不会急于向前冲，因为对他们来说，大多数前进的运动实际上只是在摆脱过去的更好条件。乌托邦主义者会仅仅因为行动带来变化而证明采取行动是合理的，从他们的角度来看，改变本身将使他们更接近他们的目标。与此相反，黄金时代主义者会抵制变革，因为他们相信任何变革都可能进一步恶化条件。

What is Culture? 161
什么是文化？161

As a result of this difference in point of view, the same facts will be brought into the discussion, these facts may also be widely agreed upon, but then, the conclusions from these agreed upon facts will point toward oppo-site solutions. At this point participants will become confused, because they believed that all they had to do was to come to agreement on the facts under discussion. What they had never considered was their differences in the concept of time.
由于这种观点的差异，相同的事实将被带入讨论，这些事实也可能被广泛同意，但是，从这些商定的事实中得出的结论将指向相反的解决方案。在这一点上，参与者会感到困惑，因为他们认为他们所要做的就是就所讨论的事实达成一致。他们从未考虑过的是他们在时间概念上的差异。

In considering these two concepts of time, it should be clear that theUtopian concept of time is most often associated with the Utilitarian dis-course system, with modernization, with internationalization, with technolog-ization, and with political change. The Golden-Age concept of time is most often associated with more traditional cultural interests. Throughout Asia,for example, this cultural conflict in the sense of time is being debated not only across cultures (interculturally) but within cultures (intraculturally).In many cases, the Utopian sense of time is thought of as westernization and the Golden-Age sense of time is thought of as traditionally Chinese orJapanese or Korean. We think it is important to realize that this conflict between a progressive and a restorative sense of time is also widely debated within western culture.
在考虑这两种时间概念时，应该清楚的是，乌托邦式的时间概念最常与功利主义话语体系、现代化、国际化、技术化和政治变革联系在一起。黄金时代的时间概念通常与更传统的文化利益联系在一起。例如，在整个亚洲，这种时间意义上的文化冲突不仅在跨文化（跨文化）而且在文化内部（文化内）都在争论。在许多情况下，乌托邦的时间感被认为是西方化的，而黄金时代的时间感被认为是传统的中国或日本或韩国。我们认为重要的是要认识到，在西方文化中，进步和恢复时间感之间的这种冲突也受到广泛争论。

Socialization

It is an oversimplification to say that whereas animals have instinct, human beings have culture. Nevertheless, while the exact proportion of inborn,innate behavior to learned, cultural behavior will probably always be de-bated, most scholars would agree that human beings are born with fewer preset patterns than other animals. What this means is that human beings must begin at birth what is a life-long process of learning how to be human beings. We have used the word“culture”to refer to this complex pattern of knowledge and behavior, and we will use the general term“socialization”to refer to the process of learning culture.
说动物有本能，而人类有文化，这种说法过于简单化了。然而，虽然先天的、先天的行为与后天习得的文化行为的确切比例可能总是有争议的，但大多数学者都会同意，人类天生的预设模式比其他动物少。这意味着人类必须从出生开始，这是一个终生学习如何成为人类的过程。我们用了“文化”这个词来指代这种复杂的知识和行为模式，我们将用“社会化”这个总称来指代学习文化的过程。

Technical definitions of all of the terms relating to culture learning are difficult to establish, since in different fields, such as psychology, sociology,anthropology, they are used somewhat differently. For our purposes, three terms in addition to“socialization”will be sufficient for a general under-standing of how we learn to be members of our cultures and how we learn our systems of discourse: education, enculturation, and acculturation.
所有与文化学习有关的术语的技术定义都很难建立，因为在心理学、社会学、人类学等不同领域，它们的使用方式略有不同。就我们的目的而言，除了“社会化”之外，还有三个术语就足以普遍理解我们如何学习成为我们文化的成员以及我们如何学习我们的话语系统：教育、文化融合和文化适应。

Education, enculturation, acculturation
教育、文化融合、文化适应

The most important distinction to be made is between what we might call formal and informal means of teaching and learning. While both education and socialization have been used for both forms of learning, we will use
最重要的区别是我们可以称之为正式和非正式的教学手段。虽然教育和社会化都用于这两种形式的学习，但我们将使用

162 What is Culture?
162 什么是文化？

the word“education”for formal teaching and learning, and“socialization”(or“enculturation”) for informal teaching and learning.
“教育”一词用于正式的教学和学习，“社会化”（或“文化化”）用于非正式的教学和学习。

When a person takes up employment in a new company, he or she might be in doubt about the way employees are supposed to dress for work in the office. It is possible that the company would have a handbook in which such things as a code of dress would be specified. In that case we would call that formal education. In the business context it would normally be called train-ing and would probably consist of a formal orientation session, in which the handbook would be introduced, new employees would be guided through the main points, and questions they might have would be answered.
当一个人在一家新公司工作时，他或她可能会对员工在办公室上班时应该如何着装感到疑问。公司可能会有一本手册，其中会指定着装规范等内容。在这种情况下，我们称之为正规教育。在商业环境中，它通常被称为培训，可能包括一个正式的入职培训会议，在培训中将介绍手册，指导新员工了解要点，并回答他们可能遇到的问题。

On the other hand, the issue of dress might not be mentioned at all, but when the new employee arrives in the office for the first day of work he or she might notice that there is some difference in the way he or she is dressed and the way others in the office are dressed. It is quite likely that this new employee will take this into consideration and make some changes for the next day at work. Such a process of just looking around to see what others are doing and then trying to match their behavior we would want to call socialization.
另一方面，着装问题可能根本没有提到，但是当新员工第一天上班时，他或她可能会注意到他或她的着装方式与办公室里其他人的着装方式存在一些差异。这位新员工很可能会考虑到这一点，并在第二天的工作中做出一些改变。这样的过程只是环顾四周，看看别人在做什么，然后试图匹配他们的行为，我们想称之为社会化。

It should be obvious that in most cultures the first learning of children is socialization, not education. That is, they are not given explicit training in behavior through rules, guided practice, testing, and other forms of formal assessment. They look around at what others are doing, and others make comments which indicate whether or not they approve.
很明显，在大多数文化中，儿童的第一次学习是社会化，而不是教育。也就是说，他们没有通过规则、指导练习、测试和其他形式的正式评估来接受明确的行为培训。他们环顾四周，看看别人在做什么，其他人发表评论，表明他们是否赞成。

While in the case of infants there is little to distinguish between the words“socialization”and“enculturation,”in most cases the word“enculturation”is restricted just to the early learning of culture. It is what in the next section we will call“primary socialization.”When a person learns a new job through observation of the actions of others and through their informal approval or disapproval, it would be best to call that sort of learning sociali-zation rather than enculturation, as it applies largely to adult behavior.
虽然在婴儿的情况下，“社会化”和“文化化”这两个词几乎没有区别，但在大多数情况下，“文化化”这个词仅限于文化的早期学习。在下一节中，我们将称之为“初级社会化”。当一个人通过观察他人的行为以及他们的非正式认可或不认可来学习一份新工作时，最好将这种学习称为社会化而不是文化化，因为它主要适用于成年人的行为。

The distinction between education and socialization, then, is based upon whether or not the procedures for teaching and learning are formally worked out by the group or the society and systematically applied to new members(whether those new members are just born into the society or come in as immigrants). The concept of education is most often associated with what sociologists have called Gesellschaft, whereas socialization is more often associated with Gemeinschaft. This is not a hard and fast distinction; many societies which sociologists consider traditional communities have clearly formal practices of education. Nevertheless, historically from eighteenth-century Europe on there has been a clear association of the rapidly increas-ing Gesellschaft structures of the Utilitarian discourse system and the rapid rise of universal formal public education in those societies which have embraced Utilitarian forms of discourse.
因此，教育与社会化的区别取决于教与学的程序是否由团体或社会正式制定，并系统地应用于新成员（无论这些新成员是刚出生还是作为移民进入社会）。教育的概念通常与社会学家所说的Gesellschaft联系在一起，而社会化则更多地与Gemeinschaft联系在一起。这不是一个硬性区分;社会学家认为传统社区的许多社会都有明确的正式教育实践。然而，从历史上看，从18世纪的欧洲开始，功利主义话语体系的迅速增长的Gesellschaft结构与那些接受功利主义话语形式的社会中普遍的正规公共教育的迅速兴起之间存在着明显的联系。

What is Culture? 163
什么是文化？163

Another aspect of the distinction between education and socialization is that education tends to be periodic or formally structured into units of instruc-tion, whereas socialization tends to be continuous. The units of instruction in education tend to have entrance or admission procedures and requirements as well as exit requirements and ceremonies, along with completion cred-entials. On the other hand, it would be difficult to say in the process of socialization just when one is actually engaged in learning. As a result, there is often a corresponding devaluation of the learning one acquires through socialization and an exaggerated valuation of learning acquired through formal education.
教育与社会化区别的另一个方面是，教育往往是周期性的或正式地被组织成教育单位，而社会化往往是连续的。教育教学单元往往有入学或入学程序和要求，以及毕业要求和仪式，以及结业证书。另一方面，在社会化过程中，很难说一个人何时真正从事学习。因此，人们通过社会化获得的学习往往会相应贬值，而通过正规教育获得的学习则被夸大了。

A third point is that education and socialization are often, perhaps nearly always, mixed. For example, in entering a new position, a person might receive specific training as we have mentioned above through handbooks and manuals of company procedures, while at the same time being expected to observe the general practices of older and more experienced employees and to follow their behavior.
第三点是，教育和社会化经常，也许几乎总是混合在一起的。例如，在进入一个新职位时，一个人可能会通过公司程序手册和手册接受我们上面提到的特定培训，同时被期望观察年长和更有经验的员工的一般做法并遵循他们的行为。

Finally, to close out these first definitions, we want to briefly comment on the term“acculturation.”Anthropologists and sociologists have used this term to talk about situations in which two different cultural or social groups come into contact. When one group is more powerful than the other and therefore produces a strong influence on that second group to forget or put aside its own culture and to adopt that of the more powerful group, that process of enforced culture learning is called acculturation. Generally speaking, acculturation is used as a negative term, since the process of cultural loss is considered by analysts to be an unfortunate one.
最后，为了结束这些最初的定义，我们想简要地评论一下“文化适应”一词。人类学家和社会学家用这个术语来谈论两个不同文化或社会群体接触的情况。当一个群体比另一个群体更强大，因此对第二个群体产生强烈影响，使其忘记或搁置自己的文化并采用更强大的群体的文化时，这种强制文化学习的过程称为文化适应。一般来说，文化适应被用作一个负面术语，因为分析家认为文化丧失的过程是一个不幸的过程。

Primary and secondary socialization
初级和次级社会化

We have one further terminological complication to add to this picture.Social psychologists have widely used the term“primary socialization”to refer to what anthropologists would be more likely to call“enculturation”;that is, primary socialization consists of the processes through which a child goes in the earliest stages of becoming a member of his or her culture or society. Generally speaking, this learning takes place within the family and among close intimates. In this same framework, then, secondary socialization refers to those processes of socialization which take place when the child begins to move outside the family, such as when the child first goes to school and begins to interact with other, non-fa milial children.
我们还有一个术语的复杂性要添加到这张图片中。社会心理学家广泛使用“初级社会化”一词来指代人类学家更可能称之为“文化化”的东西;也就是说，初级社会化包括儿童在成为其文化或社会成员的最初阶段所经历的过程。一般来说，这种学习发生在家庭内部和亲密关系之间。因此，在同一框架中，次级社会化是指当儿童开始走出家庭时发生的社会化过程，例如当儿童第一次上学并开始与其他非家庭儿童互动时。

One might think it pointless to talk about secondary socialization instead of just calling it education when a child goes to school, but the point being made with these terms is that there are really quite complex processes of learning taking place. Education remains the best term for the formal pro-cesses of school learning-the curriculum, if you like; secondary socialization
人们可能认为，当孩子上学时，谈论二次社会化而不是仅仅称其为教育是没有意义的，但这些术语所表达的观点是，确实有相当复杂的学习过程正在发生。教育仍然是学校学习的正式程序的最佳术语——课程，如果你愿意的话;二次社会化

164 What is Culture?
164 什么是文化？

refers to those informal processes of learning which take place in and around or even during the other, more formal processes.
指那些发生在其他更正式的学习过程中和周围甚至期间的非正式学习过程。

While it goes beyond the purposes of this book to go into primary socialization in detail, it is important to bear in mind what sorts of thing a child learns as part of this process. For our purposes, language and social behaviors are the most important. Linguists are in agreement that the great majority of the basic syntactic and phonological structures of one's language are learned (or acquired) as part of one's primary socialization (or during the period of one's primary socialization). For many, probably most humans,the ways one learns to speak during this period of early learning among the family and close intimate relatives places an indelible stamp on one's dis-course for the rest of life. This is when one picks up the“accent”one will carry, with relatively few modifications, throughout life. This is when one becomes handy at using the basic syntact ic structures and functions commonly used in one's community. Whatever other forms of discourse one might learn later on, for most of us they are largely learned against the background of the language acquired during this period of primary socialization.
虽然详细介绍初级社会化超出了本书的目的，但重要的是要记住，作为这个过程的一部分，孩子会学到什么样的东西。就我们的目的而言，语言和社会行为是最重要的。语言学家一致认为，一个人语言的绝大多数基本句法和语音结构都是作为一个人的主要社会化的一部分（或在一个人的主要社会化期间）学习（或获得）的。对于许多人来说，可能是大多数人，在家庭和近亲之间学习早期学习的这段时间里，一个人学习说话的方式在一个人的余生的话语中留下了不可磨灭的印记。这是当一个人捡起“口音”一个人一生中都会携带的，修改相对较少。这时，人们就能够得心应手地使用社区中常用的基本语法结构和功能。无论人们以后可能学习到其他形式的话语，对于我们大多数人来说，它们在很大程度上都是在初级社会化时期获得的语言背景下学习的。

Patterns of social behavior are also given a fi rm cast during the period of primary socialization. The child learns and develops patterns for relating to those of higher and lower status, older and younger and same age, boys and girls, and he or she learns how to be a boy or girl as well. Beyond these general forms of learning, the child also receives toilet training, and learns how to dress, how to eat, and how to play with others. All of these very fundamental aspects of human behavior are first learned during this period,and while they may undergo changes later in life, those changes are set up against this early learning as modifications and revisions more than simply taking on entirely different behavior patterns. Whatever discourse systems we may become members of later in life, the discourse systems which we enter through primary socialization have a weighted advantage over any we enter into later on.
在初级社会化期间，社会行为模式也被赋予了固定的铸件。孩子学习并发展与地位较高和较低、年长和年轻、同龄、男孩和女孩相处的模式，他或她也学会了如何成为男孩或女孩。除了这些一般的学习形式外，孩子还接受如厕训练，并学习如何穿衣、如何吃饭以及如何与他人玩耍。人类行为的所有这些非常基本的方面都是在这个时期首先学习的，虽然它们可能会在以后的生活中发生变化，但这些变化是针对这种早期学习而建立的，而不仅仅是采取完全不同的行为模式。无论我们以后可能成为何种话语系统的成员，我们通过初级社会化进入的话语系统都比我们后来进入的任何话语系统具有更大的优势。

Figure 7.3 summarizes our usage of these various terms. Socialization is being used both as the term covering all forms of cultural learning and as the more specific term to cover informal aspects of cultural learning. In the text which follows, we will try to make it clear in the context which meaning is to be understood.
图 7.3 总结了我们对这些不同术语的用法。社会化既被用作涵盖所有形式的文化学习的术语，也被用作涵盖文化学习的非正式方面的更具体的术语。在下面的经文中，我们将尝试在上下文中明确理解哪个含义。

Theories of the person and of learning
人与学的理论

It is comfortable to think that all humans are alike in basic human processes,and that is certainly true to a considerable extent. Unfortunately, every culture has quite specific ideas about the nature of the human person and of human society, which it simply takes for granted as the obvious truth and yet which another cultural group would find quite surprising or with which
认为所有人类在基本的人类过程中都是相似的，这在相当大的程度上是正确的。不幸的是，每一种文化对人类和人类社会的本质都有非常具体的观念，它只是理所当然地认为这是显而易见的事实，但另一个文化群体会对此感到非常惊讶，或者对

What is Culture? 165
什么是文化？165

Figure 7.3 Terms for socialization.
图 7.3 社会化术语。

they would strongly disagree. We will only consider three of the ways in which cultural groups may differ in their understanding of the nature of humans: their assumptions about whether humans are good or evil, their views about whether the group or the individual is the basic unit, and their understanding of the human life cycle.
他们会强烈反对。我们只考虑文化群体对人类本质的理解可能不同的三种方式：他们对人类是善还是恶的假设，他们对群体还是个人是基本单位的看法，以及他们对人类生命周期的理解。

We have quoted the San Zi Jing (Xu Chuiyang, 1990) as saying that we are all born good. This view that human nature is basically good has been held in Confucian ideology from at least the time of Mencius to the present.In contrast to this, in Christian ideology it has been believed that humans are basically evil or sinful. Of course within Chinese history there have been many arguments put forward for why it would be better to consider humans not to be basically good, and in western history many arguments have been put forward that humans are really good.
我们引用《三子经》（徐叙阳，1990）的话说，我们都是生来善良的。这种人性基本上是善的观点，至少从孟子时代到现在，一直存在于儒家思想中。与此相反，在基督教意识形态中，人们认为人类基本上是邪恶的或有罪的。当然，在中国历史上，有很多人认为人类不是好人，在西方历史上，也有很多人认为人类是真正的好人。

The important issue for us is not to try to decide whether or not humans are good or bad; we are more interested in what this issue means for socialization into a culture or a discourse system. If you assume humans are basically good, in trying to teach them you will assume that they are trying to do what is right and that what is needed is to show them the right thing to do. Motivation will be based on the learner's own intrinsic desire to do what is right.
对我们来说，重要的问题不是试图决定人类是好是坏;我们更感兴趣的是这个问题对社会化为一种文化或话语系统意味着什么。如果你假设人类基本上是善良的，那么在试图教他们时，你会假设他们正在努力做正确的事情，并且需要的是向他们展示正确的事情。动机将基于学习者自己做正确事情的内在愿望。

On the other hand, if you assume humans are basically evil, in trying to tea ch them you will assume that they will do everything they can to distort your teaching, to turn it to their own mischievous purposes, or to refuse to cooperate. Motivation of such learners is more likely to be based on punish-ment and threats than rewards and promises. In other words, the theory of education and socialization which is held by a society or within a discourse system will be based on the more general concept of the good or evil nature of its members.
另一方面，如果你假设人类基本上是邪恶的，那么在试图嘲笑他们时，你会认为他们会尽其所能地歪曲你的教导，把它变成他们自己的恶作剧目的，或者拒绝合作。这些学习者的动机更可能是基于惩罚和威胁，而不是奖励和承诺。换言之，一个社会或一个话语体系所持有的教育和社会化理论将建立在其成员的善恶本质的更一般概念之上。

A second factor which will be important is whether the group believes that individuals or collectivities are the basic units of society. As we have discussed above, the anthropologist Francis Hsu and many others have argued that Asian society is primarily founded upon a“self”which is larger in scope than the“self”predicated in western society. This Asian self
第二个重要的因素是群体是否认为个人或集体是社会的基本单位。正如我们上面所讨论的，人类学家弗朗西斯·许（Francis Hsu）和许多其他人认为，亚洲社会主要建立在“自我”之上，其范围比西方社会所预设的“自我”更大。这个亚洲的自己

166 What is Culture?
166 什么是文化？

includes intimates of the immediate family, whereas the western self does not include such intimates.
包括直系亲属的亲密关系，而西方自我不包括这种亲密关系。

A society which emphasizes the individual as its basic unit will adopt forms of education and socialization which focus on individual learning and individual success, even where those individuals become competitive with each other and destroy group harmony. On the other hand a society which emphasizes a broader concept of the person that includes fa milial intimates,such as traditional Confucian Asian society, will focus education and socialization on the development of that broader unit. The activities and the successes at learning of the individual unit will be seen as part of the activities of the larger units of society, and their successes will be gauged against their contribution to those larger units.
一个以个人为基本单位的社会将采取注重个人学习和个人成功的教育和社会化形式，即使这些个人相互竞争并破坏群体和谐。另一方面，一个强调包括军事亲密关系在内的更广泛人的概念的社会，如传统的儒家亚洲社会，将把教育和社会化集中在这个更广泛的单位的发展上。各个单位的活动和学习成功将被视为社会较大单位活动的一部分，其成功将根据它们对这些较大单位的贡献来衡量。

It is now well known that the children of Asian immigrants to the UnitedKingdom and to North America tend to do very well in schools, sometimes even against the odds of having to learn the new language, English, into the bargain. While this mystifies some educational observers, who focus on the individual students, it is clear that the social practices of the group are strongly supporting this learning. One sees even in very crowded living conditions that after dinner the table is cleared and the children settle down to doing homework, with each child helping the other so that all of them succeed in completing their tasks. This social behavior forms a strong contrast with the more typical American pattern, for example; of each child going to separate rooms to listen to music or to watch television while making half-hearted attempts at getting the homework finished.
现在众所周知，移民到英国和北美的亚洲移民的孩子往往在学校表现很好，有时甚至不得不学习新语言英语。虽然这让一些关注个别学生的教育观察家感到困惑，但很明显，该群体的社会实践强烈支持这种学习。即使在非常拥挤的生活条件下，人们也能看到晚餐后桌子被清理干净，孩子们安顿下来做作业，每个孩子都帮助另一个孩子，以便他们都成功地完成了他们的任务。例如，这种社会行为与更典型的美国模式形成了强烈的对比;每个孩子去不同的房间听音乐或看电视，同时半心半意地尝试完成家庭作业。

Finally, a third factor in understanding the concept of the person and of learning for a particular group is that group's conception of the human life cycle. In western popular thought the terms and concepts of the social psychology of the past century have become well established. It is taken as common knowledge that the human life cycle can be divided into such phases as infancy, childhood, adolescence, early adulthood, the midlife tran-sition, and so forth. Such terms are so widely used that they are taken as the only imaginable division of the human life span into developmental periods.Nevertheless, many cultures make rather different divisions of the human life cycle.
最后，理解特定群体的人和学习概念的第三个因素是该群体对人类生命周期的概念。在西方流行思想中，上个世纪社会心理学的术语和概念已经确立。众所周知，人类的生命周期可以分为婴儿期、童年期、青春期、成年早期、中年过渡期等阶段。这些术语被广泛使用，以至于它们被认为是人类寿命发展时期的唯一可以想象的划分。然而，许多文化对人类生命周期的划分却截然不同。

If we take only Europe in contrast, we can see that in earlier historical periods there was little recognition of the major divisions between child-hood and adulthood we now consider to be so important. Furthermore, we tend to forget in these days of longer life expectancies that for many people now on earth as well as for much of our own earlier history, when an expected life span was closer to fifty years, an“old”person might well have been a person in his or her late forties or early fifties. When child bearing is expected to begin shortly after puberty, a person of the generation of mothers might be in her teens, a grandmother in her thirties. If we compare
如果我们只以欧洲为例，我们可以看到，在早期的历史时期，人们很少认识到我们现在认为如此重要的儿童期和成年期之间的主要分歧。此外，在预期寿命更长的今天，我们往往会忘记，对于现在地球上的许多人来说，以及我们自己早期的大部分历史，当预期寿命接近五十岁时，一个“老人”很可能是一个四十多岁或五十多岁的人。当预计在青春期后不久开始生育时，一代母亲可能在十几岁，祖母在三十多岁。如果我们比较

What is Culture? 167
什么是文化？167

this to the rather late child bearing of some contemporary mothers who are having their first children even in their forties, we can see that it becomes very difficult to make direct translations of the experience of motherhood and the practices of primary socialization between mothers in such different periods in their lives. A contemporary mother who is a professional woman in her forties approaches the problems of primary socialization very differ-ently from a mother who is in her early teens, whatever else these two women might have in common.
对于一些四十多岁才生第一个孩子的当代母亲来说，我们可以看到，要直接翻译母亲的经历和母亲在生命中不同时期的主要社会化实践变得非常困难。一个四十多岁的职业女性的当代母亲处理初级社会化问题的方式与一个十几岁的母亲截然不同，无论这两个女人还有什么共同点。

Seen from the point of view of the individual, differences in the society's conception of the life cycle include major differences in the importance ascribed to various periods as well. The prolonged adolescent period which contemporary westerners experience - we do not necessarily want to say enjoy-is in sharp contrast to the plunge into a short lifetime of hard work experienced by the children of the early Industrial Revolution. As lifetimes have increased under industrial development and as the overall complexity of society and its technologies have increased, more and more of the per-son's total lifespan is given over to educational preparation. In some soci-eties, direct socialization through apprenticeship into the adulthood tasks is sufficient for most members of the society. In modernized contemporary society or in what some have called post-modern society, much of one's life is spent in preparation for fully legitimate“adult”activity.
从个人的角度来看，社会对生命周期概念的差异也包括对不同时期重要性的重大差异。当代西方人所经历的漫长的青春期——我们不一定想说是享受——与工业革命早期儿童所经历的短暂的一生艰苦工作形成了鲜明的对比。随着工业发展下寿命的增加，随着社会及其技术的整体复杂性的增加，越来越多的人的总寿命被用于教育准备。在一些社会中，通过学徒制直接社会化到成年任务中，对大多数社会成员来说就足够了。在现代化的当代社会中，或者在一些人所谓的后现代社会中，一个人一生中的大部分时间都花在为完全合法的“成人”活动做准备上。

A childhood friend of one of the authors is now a brain surgeon. In a real sense his period of education and training lasted nearly forty years; he was in his forties before he was sufficiently well prepared to stand on his own feet as a fully legitimated practicing brain surgeon. His life experience may be compared to an Athabaska n hunter also known by the authors who entered into his full adulthood occupation when he was fifteen years old.While there is much to separate the experiences of these two men, the point we wish to make here is that if we want to understand their membership within their cultures and within their discourse systems, it will be important to see that the processes of socialization for each of them are strikingly different.
其中一位作者的儿时朋友现在是一名脑外科医生。从真正意义上讲，他的教育和培训持续了近四十年;在他四十多岁的时候，他还没有做好充分的准备，成为一名完全合法的执业脑外科医生。他的生活经历可以与作者所熟知的阿萨巴斯卡猎人相提并论，他在十五岁时就开始了他的成年职业。虽然这两个人的经历有很多不同之处，但我们在这里想说的一点是，如果我们想了解他们在他们的文化和话语体系中的成员身份，重要的是要看到他们每个人的社会化过程是截然不同的。

Cultural Ideology and Stereotyping
文化意识形态和刻板印象

Now that we have introduced a number of dimensions which should be con-sidered in analyzing intercultural discourse between Asians and westerners,we think it is important to take up the question of cultural ideology and stereotyping. We have said above that a balanced cultural description must take into consideration the full complexity of cultural themes. When one of those themes is singled out for emphasis and given a positive or negative
既然我们已经介绍了一些在分析亚洲人和西方人之间的跨文化话语时应该考虑的维度，我们认为处理文化意识形态和刻板印象的问题是很重要的。我们在上面已经说过，平衡的文化描述必须考虑到文化主题的全部复杂性。当其中一个主题被挑出来强调并给予积极或消极的评价时

168 What is Culture?
168 什么是文化？

value or is treated as the full description, then we would want to call that ideology rather than cultural description. A much more common term for such cultural ideological statements is“stereotyping.”
价值或被视为完整的描述，那么我们想称之为意识形态而不是文化描述。这种文化意识形态声明的一个更常见的术语是“刻板印象”。

Ideological statement or stereotyping often arises when someone comes to believe that any two cultures or social groups, or, as we prefer to call them, two discourse systems, can be treated as if they were polar opposites.For example, in chapter 5 we introduced the concept of two different rhe-torical strategies, the inductive and the deductive strategies, for the introduc-tion of main topics in a discourse. There is a danger in such a concept when someone comes to consider Asians to be inductive and westerners to be deductive. That would constitute an ideological statement, by trying to make a clear division between Asians and westerners on the dimension of rhetorical strategies. As we argued in chapter 5, both strategies are used in all cultures that we know of. What might be different is the way com-municative situations are established in different cultures, and especially the relationships among participants.
当有人开始相信任何两种文化或社会群体，或者我们更愿意称之为两种话语体系时，就会出现意识形态陈述或刻板印象，就好像它们是两极对立的一样。例如，在第5章中，我们引入了两种不同的修辞策略的概念，即归纳策略和演绎策略，用于在话语中引入主要主题。当有人认为亚洲人是归纳法的，而西方人是演绎法时，这种概念就存在危险。这将构成一种意识形态声明，试图在修辞策略的维度上明确区分亚洲人和西方人。正如我们在第5章中所论述的，这两种策略都用于我们所知道的所有文化中。可能不同的是，在不同文化中建立公共情境的方式，尤其是参与者之间的关系。

In the preceding section on cultural differences in time, we argued that the Utopian sense of time urgency is often thought of as western, and opposed to the Asian Golden-Age concept of time. This binary contrast is obviously too simplistic, since we see so many cases of the Utopian sense of time in Asia as well as cases of the Golden-Age sense of time in the west.Cultural ideologies in intercultural comparison are the fa llacy of opposing two large cultural groups upon the basis of some single dimension, such as the introduction of topics in discourse or the sense of time.
在上一节关于时间文化差异的章节中，我们认为乌托邦式的时间紧迫感通常被认为是西方的，与亚洲黄金时代的时间概念相对立。这种二元对比显然过于简单化，因为我们在亚洲看到了许多乌托邦时间感的案例，在西方也看到了黄金时代时间感的案例。跨文化比较中的文化意识形态是两个大文化群体在某种单一维度的基础上对立的，例如话语中主题的引入或时间感。

Such general cultural ideological statements, then, focus on simplistic contrasts between cultural groups. Stereotyping arises from such ideologies by focusing upon individual members of cultural groups. It is the process by which all members of a group are asserted to have the characteristics attributed to the whole group.
因此，这种一般的文化意识形态陈述侧重于文化群体之间的简单对比。这种意识形态产生了定型观念，把重点放在文化群体的个别成员身上。这是一个过程，通过该过程，一个组的所有成员都被断言具有归因于整个组的特征。

Stereotyping is simply another word for overgeneralization. The differ-ence, however, is that stereotyping carries with it an ideological position.Characteristics of the group are not only overgeneralized to apply to each member of the group, but they are also taken to have some exaggerated nega-tive or positive value. These values are then taken as argument s to support social or political relationships in regard to members of those groups.
刻板印象只是过度概括的另一种说法。然而，不同的是，定型观念带有意识形态立场。该群体的特征不仅被过度概括以适用于该群体的每个成员，而且还被认为具有一些夸大的消极或积极价值。然后，这些价值观被作为论据，以支持与这些群体成员有关的社会或政治关系。

For example, it is clear that the sense of time urgency is characteristic of many of the residents of Asia's urban capitals, such as Tokyo, Taipei, HongKong, Seoul, or Singapore. It would become an overgeneralization to simply assume that, because someone was a resident of one of these cities,he or she would show a constant sense of time urgency. It becomes stereo-typing to assume that this is a particularly good or bad quality of that person upon the basis of his or her membership in the group of residents of that city.
例如，很明显，时间紧迫感是东京、台北、香港、首尔或新加坡等亚洲城市首都许多居民的特征。简单地假设，因为某人是这些城市之一的居民，他或她会表现出持续的时间紧迫感，那就太过笼统了。根据他或她在该城市居民群体中的成员身份，假设这是该人的特别好或坏的品质，这成为一种刻板印象。

What is Culture? 169
什么是文化？169

Stereotyping is a way of thinking that does not acknowledge internal dif-ferences within a group, and does not acknowledge exceptions to its general rules or principles. Ideologies are largely based on stereotypical thinking, or,to put it the other way around, stereotypes are largely ideological. There is usually a good bit of accurate cultural observation which underlies stereo-types; it is not the truth of those observations which is the problem. The problem is that stereotypes blind us to other, equally important aspects of a person's character or behavior. Stereotypes limit our understanding of human behavior and of intercultural discourse because they limit our view of human activity to just one or two salient dimensions and consider those to be the whole picture. Furthermore, they go on ideologically to use that limited view of individuals and of groups to justify preferential or discrim-inatory treatment by others who hold greater political power.
刻板印象是一种思维方式，它不承认一个群体内部的差异，也不承认其一般规则或原则的例外情况。意识形态很大程度上是基于刻板印象的思维，或者反过来说，刻板印象在很大程度上是意识形态的。刻板印象的基础通常有大量准确的文化观察;问题不在于这些观察的真实性。问题在于，刻板印象使我们看不到一个人的性格或行为的其他同样重要的方面。刻板印象限制了我们对人类行为和跨文化话语的理解，因为它们将我们对人类活动的看法限制在一两个突出的维度上，并认为这些是全貌。此外，他们在意识形态上继续利用对个人和群体的有限看法来证明其他拥有更大政治权力的人的优惠或歧视性待遇是正当的。

Researchers and consultants who are concerned with the analysis of intercultural communication range from anthropologists and sociolinguists to speech communication analysts and teachers of English. While their theoretical interests are often quite different, these researchers share a basic set of common assumptions in their work. Among these are four:
关注跨文化交际分析的研究人员和顾问包括人类学家和社会语言学家、言语交流分析师和英语教师。虽然他们的理论兴趣往往大相径庭，但这些研究人员在他们的工作中有着一套基本的共同假设。其中有四个：

1 Humans are not all the same.
1 人类并不都是一样的。

2 At least some of the differences among them show culturally or socially predictable patterns.
2 它们之间的一些差异至少显示出文化或社会上可预测的模式。

3 At least some of those patterns are reflected in patterns of discourse.
3 这些模式中至少有一些反映在话语模式中。

4Some of those differences in discourse patterns lead directly to un-wanted social problems such as intergroup hostility, stereotyping, pref-erential treatment, and discrimination.
4其中一些话语模式的差异直接导致了不受欢迎的社会问题，如群体间的敌意、陈规定型观念、优先待遇和歧视。

We want to focus now on the problem of oversimplification of intercultural(or intergroup) analyses, which arises when people accept an ideological con-ceptual division of humanity. This is, of course, a very common situation.We will give one quite innocuous example.
我们现在要关注的是跨文化（或跨群体）分析的过度简化问题，当人们接受人类的意识形态-知觉划分时，就会出现这个问题。当然，这是一种非常普遍的情况。我们将举一个相当无害的例子。

Recently one of us was lecturing in America to a group of teachers fromTaiwan who were in America on a cultural exchange program. The purpose of the lecture was to discuss some of the aspects of intercultural communi-cation between Chinese and Americans. When we took a break for lunch,one of the American women present said that she was struck by how much the differences between Chinese and Americans were“just like the differ-ences between women and men as Tannen had outlined in her book.”She was referring to the book You Just Don't Understand: women and men in conversation by Deborah Tannen (1990a).
最近，我们中的一个人在美国给一群来自台湾的老师讲课，他们在美国参加一个文化交流项目。讲座的目的是讨论中美跨文化交际的一些方面。当我们休息吃午饭时，在场的一位美国女性说，她对中国人和美国人之间的差异感到震惊，“就像坦宁在她的书中概述的那样，女性和男性之间的差异”。她指的是黛博拉·坦南（Deborah Tannen）的《你只是不明白：对话中的女人和男人》（You Just Don't Understand： Women and Men in Conversation，1990a）一书。

Even though we were carefully trying to avoid the fallacies of ideological and stereotyping statements-in fact, that was the point of the whole lecture—the form of analysis, contrastive analysis, provided the basis for one of the
尽管我们小心翼翼地试图避免意识形态和刻板印象的谬误——事实上，这就是整个讲座的重点——分析的形式，对比分析，为其中之一提供了基础。

170 What is Culture?
170 什么是文化？

people there to make such an intuitive leap. This woman went on further to ask if it was not the case that the“American”in our analysis was not really better described as“an American man,”since she felt the characteristics we had described for the“American”really did not seem to apply to American women, while at the same time the characteristics given for the Chinese did seem to fit better.
人们在那里做出如此直观的飞跃。这位女士进一步问道，在我们的分析中，“美国人”是否真的被描述为“美国男人”更好，因为她觉得我们为“美国人”描述的特征似乎真的不适用于美国女性，而与此同时，中国人的特征似乎更适合。

In a sense this is correct. As we will describe in chapter 11, there was actually a legitimate basis in the research literature for this woman's insight.At the same time, it is patently absurd to suggest that all Chinese, men and women, are“just like”American women. The problem we had run into was that of ideological oversimplification, or what we might call“binarism.”The lecture had presented binary contrasts as the most graphic way of showing areas where miscommunication might arise. The woman, who was one of the teachers of this group of Chinese, was rather concerned to develop common grounds of solidarity with her Taiwanese students.
从某种意义上说，这是正确的。正如我们将在第11章中描述的那样，在研究文献中，这位女性的见解实际上是有合法依据的。同时，认为所有中国人，无论男女，都“就像”美国女人一样，这显然是荒谬的。我们遇到的问题是意识形态的过度简化，或者我们可以称之为“二元论”。讲座将二元对比作为显示可能出现沟通不畅领域的最生动的方式。这位女士是这群华人的老师之一，她非常关心与台湾学生建立团结的共同点。

In discussing the differences between Chinese and Americans in that particular situation, there was little direct cause to wander further afield into other intercultural and intergroup comparisons. The audience consisted ofChinese English teachers who were in the United States for the purposes of learning more about English and about American culture. Their primary concern was not with gender differences as such, nor was it with other such differences as communication between Athabaskans and Anglo-Americans,or Chinese and Japanese. As a result, the framework which had been set around this presentation was that of a binary comparison.
在讨论中国人和美国人在那种特殊情况下的差异时，几乎没有直接的理由去进一步探讨其他跨文化和群体的比较。听众包括来美国的中文教师，他们是为了更多地了解英语和美国文化。他们主要关心的不是性别差异本身，也不是阿萨巴斯卡人和英美人或中国人和日本人之间的交流等其他差异。因此，围绕这一演示文稿设定的框架是二元比较的框架。

At the same time, the American woman had just recently read Tannen's book. The framework set on that analysis by the subtit le on the cover is“women and men in conversation.”As a perfect case in point, Tannen is very careful throughout her text to include many other intercultural com-parisons, and yet Tannen's scrupulous presentation of her gender analysis within the context of much broader sociolinguistic comparative work was swept aside by her reader, whose own interpretive framework had settled into the ideological binarism of a polarized difference between American men and American women.
与此同时，这位美国女士最近刚刚读了坦宁的书。封面上的微妙 le 所设定的分析框架是“对话中的女人和男人”。作为一个完美的例子，坦南在她的整个文本中非常谨慎地包括许多其他跨文化比较，然而坦南在更广泛的社会语言学比较工作的背景下对她的性别分析的谨慎呈现被她的读者扫地出门，他们自己的解释框架已经陷入了美国男性和美国女性之间两极分化差异的意识形态二元论。

The solution to the problem of oversimplification or binarism and stereo-typing is twofold: comparisons between groups should always consider both likenesses and differences, that is, they should be based upon more than a single dimension of contrast, and it must be remembered that no individual member of a group embodies all of his or her group's characteristics. As we will discuss in de tail in chapters 8–11, we all are simultaneously members of multiple groups, or, as we call them,“discourse systems.”None of us is fully defined by our membership in any single group. One is simultaneously a son or a daughter, a father or a mother, a member of a particular company,a member of a particular generation, and so forth in an indefinite number of
解决过度简化或二元论和定型问题的方法有两个方面：群体之间的比较应始终考虑相似性和差异性，也就是说，它们应该基于不止一个维度的对比，并且必须记住，一个群体中没有一个成员体现他或她群体的所有特征。正如我们将在第8-11章中讨论的那样，我们都同时是多个群体的成员，或者我们称之为“话语系统”。我们中没有人完全由我们在任何一个群体中的成员身份来定义。一个人同时是儿子或女儿，父亲或母亲，特定公司的成员，特定世代的成员，等等，数量不定

What is Culture? 171
什么是文化？171

discourse systems. One's sense of identity and group membership is a com-posite of all of these identities and a complex and sometimes difficult inter-action among them.
话语系统。一个人的认同感和群体成员感是所有这些身份的组成部分，也是它们之间复杂且有时难以的相互作用。

Negative Stereotypes
负面刻板印象

Any form of stereotyping is potentially an obstruction to successful inter-cultural communication, because it will blind us to real differences that exist between the participants in a discourse. The most obstructive form of stereo-typing, however, is also sometimes called negative stereotyping. In such a case, the first step is to contrast two cultures or two groups on the basis of some single dimension. For example, someone might say that all Asians are inductive and all westerners are deductive in their introduction of topics.Such a statement may have some basis in observation, but it ignores the fact that in many cases Asians also use deductive strategies on the one hand, and on the other inductive strategies are frequently used by westerners.
任何形式的刻板印象都可能阻碍成功的跨文化交流，因为它会使我们看不到话语参与者之间存在的真正差异。然而，最阻碍性的刻板印象有时也被称为消极刻板印象。在这种情况下，第一步是在某个单一维度的基础上对比两种文化或两个群体。例如，有人可能会说，所有亚洲人都是归纳的，所有西方人在介绍主题时都是演绎的。这种说法在观察上可能有一定的依据，但它忽略了这样一个事实，即在许多情况下，亚洲人一方面也使用演绎策略，另一方面西方人经常使用归纳策略。

The second step in negative stereotyping is to focus on this artificial and ideological difference as a problem for communication. Unfortunately, this step is essential for any analysis of intercultural discourse, and as a result, it requires a great deal of care in such analysis to forestall stereotyping. We might say, for example, that because Asians are inductive and westerners are deductive, it is difficult for them to communicate with each other easily or successfully.
消极刻板印象的第二步是将这种人为的和意识形态的差异作为沟通的问题。不幸的是，这一步对于任何跨文化话语的分析都是必不可少的，因此，在这种分析中需要非常小心，以防止刻板印象。例如，我们可以说，因为亚洲人是归纳的，而西方人是演绎的，所以他们很难轻松或成功地相互交流。

If we have already forgotten that our first premise was somewhat over-simplified, that is, if we have already forgotten that both inductive strategies and deductive strategies are used in both cultures, and if we have forgotten that we can never classify all Asians together and all westerners together,it becomes natural at this step to jump to the conclusion that Asians and westerners can never successfully communicate with each other. This is false,of course, but at this step in the process it can easily be forgotten.
如果我们已经忘记了我们的第一个前提有些过于简单化，也就是说，如果我们已经忘记了归纳策略和演绎策略在两种文化中都使用，如果我们忘记了我们永远无法将所有亚洲人归类，将所有西方人归类在一起，那么在这一步中，很自然地会得出亚洲人和西方人永远无法成功相互交流的结论。当然，这是错误的，但是在这个过程的这一步，它很容易被遗忘。

The third step, then, is to assign a positive value to one strategy or one group and a negative value to the other strategy or group. At this step, for example, a westerner might say the problem with intercultural communica-tion between Asians and westerners is that they refuse to introduce their topics so that we can understand them. The simple descriptive difference leads to the idea that somehow members of the other group are actively trying to make it difficult to understand them.
然后，第三步是为一个策略或一个组分配一个正值，为另一个策略或组分配一个负值。例如，在这一步，西方人可能会说，亚洲人和西方人之间的跨文化交流的问题在于，他们拒绝介绍他们的话题，以便我们能够理解他们。简单的描述性差异导致了这样一种想法，即另一组的成员以某种方式积极地试图使其难以理解。

The fourth and final step is to regeneralize this process to the entire group. One reasserts the original binaristic contrast as a negative group con-trast. One might say, for example, that all Asians or all westerners are like this; they always try to obstruct communication. Often one final step is taken;these characteristics are assumed to be genetic or racial characteristics.
第四步也是最后一步是将这个过程重新推广到整个小组。有人重申原来的二元对比是负面的群体对比。例如，有人可能会说，所有亚洲人或所有西方人都是这样;他们总是试图阻碍沟通。通常采取最后一步;这些特征被认为是遗传或种族特征。

172 What is Culture?
172 什么是文化？

Negative stereotyping is a perennial problem in intercultural communi-cation. This is because these stereotypes are usually based on some accurate observation. It is accurate to say that in many instances there will be some difference in topic introduction between an Asian and a westerner. As we have argued above, in chapter 5, this difference does not result from Asians trying to be indirect or westerners trying to be direct. This is based on deeper assumptions being made about the face relationships one can adopt in certain communicative situations. It would be quite correct to say that in a communication between strangers, most Asians would be careful to use strategies of independence out of deference and respect for the other per-son. One of those strategies would be the rhetorical strategy of inductively introducing one's own topics.
负面的刻板印象是跨文化交际中长期存在的问题。这是因为这些刻板印象通常是基于一些准确的观察。准确地说，在许多情况下，亚洲人和西方人之间的主题介绍会有一些差异。正如我们在上面第5章中所论述的，这种差异不是由于亚洲人试图成为间接的，也不是西方人试图成为直接的。这是基于对在某些交际情况下可以采用的面部关系做出的更深层次的假设。可以说，在陌生人之间的交流中，大多数亚洲人出于对对方的尊重和尊重，会小心翼翼地使用独立策略。其中一种策略是归纳引入自己主题的修辞策略。

It would also be correct to say that in communication between strangers,most westerners would try to bring the situation around to one of symmet-rical solidarity. This would be because of the value placed in most western societies on egalitarianism and individualism. One strategy which would be used to do this would be to use a deductive rhetorical pattern for the intro-duction of topics.
同样可以说，在陌生人之间的交流中，大多数西方人会试图将情况带到对称团结的状态。这是因为大多数西方社会都重视平等主义和个人主义。用于做到这一点的一种策略是使用演绎修辞模式来介绍主题。

If we forget the deeper reasons why these rhetorical strategies are used,we can easily move into negatively stereotyping members of other groups who are working from different basic assumptions about the most respect-fu l way to treat strangers. The result is an overall negative impression of members of the other group.
如果我们忘记了使用这些修辞策略的更深层次原因，我们很容易对其他群体的成员产生负面的刻板印象，这些群体对对待陌生人的方式有着不同的基本假设。结果是对另一组成员的整体负面印象。

Positive Stereotypes, the Lumping Fallacy, and the Solidarity Fallacy
积极的刻板印象、集总谬误和团结谬误

We have mentioned above the woman who thought that our description of“Chinese”characteristics was just the same as Deborah Tannen's descrip-tion of those for American women. Now we can go back and look at just what led this woman to this conclusion. The point we were discussing which led her to it had to do with the function of language. As we have said above, language has both the function of conveying information and the function of maintaining relationships among participants in speech events.We said that generally speaking, if we contrasted Chinese and Americans,we would see that Chinese would be on the relationship end of this con-tinuum and Americans would be on the information end of the same con-tinuum. In other words, Chinese tend to be concerned that good relationships are maintained, even if this means that less information may be exchanged,while Americans and Europeans in general will tend to emphasize the exchange of information, even if relationships cannot be easily maintained.
我们在上面提到了一位女士，她认为我们对“中国”特征的描述与黛博拉·坦宁（Deborah Tannen）对美国女性特征的描述相同。现在我们可以回过头来看看是什么让这个女人得出了这个结论。我们讨论的那一点是，她想到了这一点，这与语言的功能有关。正如我们上面所说，语言既具有传达信息的功能，又具有维持言语事件参与者之间关系的功能。我们说过，一般来说，如果我们对比中国人和美国人，我们会看到中国人将处于这种连续体的关系端，而美国人将处于同一连续体的信息端。換句話說，中國人傾向於關注保持良好的關係，即使這意味著可以減少信息的交換，而美國人和歐洲人一般會傾向於強調信息的交換，即使關係不容易維持。

What is Culture? 173
什么是文化？173

Tannen has observed that in communication between American men andAmerican women, there is a tendency for men to emphasize information over relationship and for women to emphasize relationship over informa-tion. She characterizes this difference as that between report and rapport,with men emphasizing report and women emphasizing rapport.
Tannen观察到，在美国男性和美国女性之间的交流中，男性倾向于强调信息而不是关系，而女性则倾向于强调关系而不是信息。她将这种差异描述为报告和融洽关系之间的差异，男性强调报告，女性强调融洽关系。

Both of these characterizations, that of American women in comparison to American men and that of Americans to Chinese in general, have a basis in actual observations. The solidarity fa llacy comes into play here when this woman tries to group together American women and all Chinese on this single dimension of information and relationship. There is no reason to deny that on this single dimension one would expect to find better under-standing between American women and Chinese in general. The mistake-the solidarity fallacy-is to proceed from there and conclude that because there is common ground on this single dimension, there will be commonality across all of the cultural characteristics of these two groups.
这两种特征，即美国女性与美国男性的比较，以及美国人与中国人的比较，都有实际观察的基础。当这位女性试图将美国女性和所有中国人聚集在信息和关系的单一维度上时，团结就在这里发挥作用了。没有理由否认，在这个单一的维度上，人们会期望在美国女性和中国人之间找到更好的地位。错误——团结谬误——是从那里出发，得出结论说，因为在这个单一的维度上有共同点，所以这两个群体的所有文化特征都会有共同点。

If we look at just one other dimension, that of egalitarian and hierarchical relationships, it will become clear that while all Chinese, both men and women, and American women may have some common ground on the question of their perceptions of the function of language, when it comes to the question of relative status, there is little or no agreement at all. Particu-larly in contemporary times, American women tend to emphasize egalitarian relationships throughout society. In contrast to this, throughout the history of China up to the present day, Chinese in general have always emphasized clear hierarchical relationships. Ideologically, of course, this has been some-what more to the advantage of Asian men then Asian women. To bring this statement up to date it should be noted that throughout Asia many women are now urging or hoping for greater equality in their relationships withAsian men.
如果我们只看另一个维度，即平等主义和等级关系，就会清楚地看到，尽管所有中国人，包括男性和女性，以及美国女性，在他们对语言功能的看法问题上可能有一些共同点，但在相对地位问题上，几乎没有或根本没有达成一致意见。在当代，美国女性倾向于强调整个社会的平等关系。与此相反，纵观中国历史至今，中国人总体上一直强调明确的等级关系。当然，从意识形态上讲，这在某种程度上对亚洲男性比对亚洲女性更有利。为了使这一说法与时俱进，应该指出的是，在整个亚洲，许多女性现在都在敦促或希望在与亚洲男性的关系中实现更大的平等。

The solidarity fallacy of putting American women together in a single conceptual group with Chinese is shown to be impossibly wrong when the question of hierarchy comes up. On that dimension one might see them as polar opposites. Of course, no two groups are either polar opposites or exactly identical. The problem of negative stereotyping is one of seeing mem-bers of different groups as being polar opposites. The problem of positive stereotyping is one of seeing members of different groups as being identical.In either case, it is a problem of stereotyping which arises from making a comparison on the basis of a single, bin ary dimension of analysis.
当等级问题出现时，将美国女性与中国人放在一个概念群体中的团结谬误被证明是不可能错误的。在这个维度上，人们可能会将它们视为截然相反的对立面。当然，没有两个群体是截然相反或完全相同的。消极的刻板印象的问题在于将不同群体的记忆者视为两极对立。积极的定型观念的问题是将不同群体的成员视为相同的问题之一。无论哪种情况，这都是一个定型观念问题，它源于在单一的、单一的分析维度的基础上进行比较。

When the grouping is based on falsely combining one's own group and some other group, we would call it the solidarity fallacy. In the case we have just described, the American woman falsely included her group, American women, with Chinese on the belief that they had the emphasis on relation-ship in common, while ignoring the major differences between their groups.When the person making the false grouping is doing so in reference to two
当分组是基于错误地将自己的群体与其他群体结合起来时，我们称之为团结谬误。在我们刚才描述的案例中，美国妇女错误地将她的群体“美国女性”与中国人包括在内，认为她们共同强调关系，而忽略了她们群体之间的主要差异。当进行错误分组的人参考两个

174 What is Culture?
174 什么是文化？

other groups, we would call that the lumping fallacy. For example, when westerners consider all Asians to be members of the same group without taking into consideration the major differences among these groups, this would be called the lumping fallacy. In the same way, grouping together all westerners would also be the lumping fallacy. In both cases, positive stereo-typing occurs when the person making the categorization takes the charac-teristics he or she used to make the stereotyping as positive, while negative stereotyping results when the basis of comparison was considered to be negative.
其他群体，我们称之为集总谬误。例如，当西方人认为所有亚洲人都是同一群体的成员，而不考虑这些群体之间的主要差异时，这将被称为归纳谬误。同样，将所有西方人归为一类也是混为一谈的谬误。在这两种情况下，当进行分类的人将他或她用来进行刻板印象的特征视为积极时，就会发生积极的刻板印象，而当比较的基础被认为是消极的时，就会产生消极的刻板印象。

Whether the stereotyping is positive or negative in intent, it should be clear that it stands in the way of successful communication because it blinds the analyst to major areas of difference. As we have said at the very begin-ning of this book, communication is inherently ambiguous. Effective com-munication depends on finding and clarifying sources of ambiguity as well as learning to deal with places where miscommunication occurs. Such clari-fi cation is impossible when the analyst does not recognize areas of difference among participants, because he or she will assume common ground and mutual understanding. The perennial paradoxical situation of the analyst of intercultural communication is that he or she must constantly look for areas of difference between people which will potentially lead to miscommunication,but at the same time he or she must constantly guard against both positive and negative stereotyping.
无论这种刻板印象的意图是积极的还是消极的，都应该清楚的是，它阻碍了成功的沟通，因为它使分析师对主要差异领域视而不见。正如我们在本书开头所说的那样，沟通本质上是模棱两可的。有效的沟通取决于找到和澄清歧义的来源，以及学会处理发生沟通不畅的地方。当分析人员不认识到参与者之间的差异领域时，这种澄清是不可能的，因为他或她将假设共同点和相互理解。跨文化交际分析者长期存在的悖论情况是，他或她必须不断寻找人与人之间的差异，这可能会导致沟通不畅，但同时他或她必须不断防范积极和消极的刻板印象。

Differences Which Make a Difference:Discourse Systems
差异：话语系统

In this chapter, we have reviewed several areas in which researchers have demonstrated that cultures may differ significantly from each other. While we have only touched upon each of these areas with a few examples, we hope it is clear that the potential for intercultural misunderstanding is great.At the same time, now that we have reviewed these many areas of potential difference, we want to point out that not all cultural differences are equally problematical in intercultural communication. In fact, some cultural differ-ences do not make any major difference from the point of view of discourse analysis. The reason for this is that cultures tend to be very large groupings with many internal sub-groupings. There is hardly any dimension on which you could compare cultures and with which one culture could be clearly and unambiguously distinguished from another.
在本章中，我们回顾了研究人员已经证明文化可能彼此之间存在显着差异的几个领域。虽然我们只用几个例子来触及这些领域，但我们希望很明显，跨文化误解的可能性很大。同时，既然我们已经回顾了这些潜在差异的领域，我们想指出的是，并非所有的文化差异在跨文化交际中都同样存在问题。事实上，从话语分析的角度来看，一些文化差异并没有产生任何重大差异。其原因是，文化往往是非常大的群体，有许多内部子群体。几乎没有任何维度可以比较文化，也没有任何维度可以清晰、毫不含糊地将一种文化与另一种文化区分开来。

To give just a few examples, we have observed earlier that the inductive and the deductive rhetorical strategies are not sufficient to distinguish be-tween cultures because both strategies may be used in virtually any culture.
仅举几个例子，我们前面已经观察到，归纳和演绎修辞策略不足以区分补间文化，因为这两种策略几乎可以用于任何文化。

What is Culture? 175
什么是文化？175

If one tries to distinguish between cultures on the basis of egalitarianism or hierarchy, one will always find contexts in any culture in which one or the other structure will predominate. If we classify on the basis of the functions of language, again, one will find that while Americans and Chinese are different on the dimension overall, with Americans tending toward the function of information and Chinese tendi ng toward the function of rela-tionship, yet American women will tend to be more like the so-called“Chinese”value. And, of course, one will find within Chinese culture many areas in which the emphasis is, in fact, on information, not relationship.
如果一个人试图在平等主义或等级制度的基础上区分不同文化，那么在任何文化中，总会发现一种或另一种结构占主导地位的背景。如果我们根据语言的功能进行分类，我们会发现，虽然美国人和中国人在整体上是不同的，美国人倾向于信息的功能，而中国人倾向于关系的功能，但美国女性更倾向于所谓的“中国”价值。当然，在中国文化中，人们会发现许多领域实际上强调的是信息，而不是关系。

One strategy which has been used, of course, is to use multiple dimensions to contrast cultures. While it is more accurate, still it is difficult to draw very direct connections between aspects of culture and actual situations of discourse.
当然，已经使用的一种策略是使用多个维度来对比文化。虽然它更准确，但仍然很难在文化的各个方面和实际的话语情境之间建立非常直接的联系。

In chapter 6, we described the nature of discourse systems. Such systems are smaller than whole cultures and tend to take on somewhat more homo-geneous characteristics, if not ideological unity. For example, it would be impossible to talk about western culture in any clear and unambiguous way.On the other hand, it is possible to describe quite clearly the Utilitarian discourse system, its practices of socialization, its assumptions about face politeness, and the forms of discourse that are used as a result of this face politeness system of symmetrical solidarity. This is because, on the whole,the Utilitarian discourse system is an ideological system which quite self-consciously seeks ideological unity.
在第6章中，我们描述了话语系统的本质。这样的系统比整个文化都要小，并且往往具有更同质的特征，如果不是意识形态的统一的话。例如，不可能以任何清晰和明确的方式谈论西方文化。另一方面，可以非常清楚地描述功利主义话语系统，其社会化实践，其对面礼貌的假设，以及由于这种对称团结的面子礼貌系统而使用的话语形式。这是因为，从总体上看，功利主义话语体系是一种相当自觉地寻求意识形态统一的思想体系。

As we have shown in this chapter, there are many characteristics of culture which may influence discourse as long as it is possible to clearly show that the participants in a particular discourse are different from each other on that dimension or factor. For example, if two participants in a discourse are different from each other in their choice of deductive or inductive strategies for the introduction of topics, whether or not they are from different cultures, they will find themselves confused as to how to interpret what is being said by the other person. What is significant is not the difference in culture; it is the difference in that particular rhetorical strategy.
正如我们在本章中所展示的，文化的许多特征可能会影响话语，只要有可能清楚地表明特定话语的参与者在该维度或因素上彼此不同。例如，如果话语中的两个参与者在选择演绎或归纳策略来介绍主题时彼此不同，无论他们是否来自不同的文化，他们都会发现自己对如何解释对方所说的话感到困惑。重要的不是文化的差异;这是特定修辞策略的区别。

The same argument can be made for differences between any two partici-pants in a discourse on the basis of any of the factors we have just discussed.They could find difficulties in communicating based upon their belief about whether humans were essentially good or evil, their religion, their kinship relationships, their sense of ingroup loyalty, their understanding of egali-tarianism and hierarchy, their emphasis on individualism or collectivism,whether they conceive of language as being used primarily for information or relationship, whether negotiation or ratification of those relationships is thought to be primary, or the assumptions they make about the most effective ways of socializing either their children or new members to the group.
根据我们刚才讨论的任何因素，可以对话语中任何两个参与者之间的差异提出同样的论点。他们可能会发现沟通的困难，因为他们相信人类本质上是善还是恶，他们的宗教，他们的亲属关系，他们的内群体忠诚感，他们对egali-tarianism和等级制度的理解，他们对个人主义或集体主义的强调，他们是否认为语言主要用于信息或关系，是否认为这些关系的谈判或批准是主要的， 或者他们对他们的孩子或小组新成员社交的最有效方式所做的假设。

176 What is Culture?
176 什么是文化？

Their emphasis on group harmony or individual welfare could lead to a different interpretation of such non-verbal aspects of communication as smiles or their use of space. Even a difference in such an abstract factor as their concept of Utopian or Golden-Age directions in the“arrow of time”could lead to major problems of interpretation in discourse.
他们对群体和谐或个人福利的强调可能会导致对微笑或空间使用等非语言交流方面的不同解释。即使是在“时间之箭”中对乌托邦或黄金时代方向的概念这样的抽象因素的差异，也可能导致话语中的重大解释问题。

We would be very unlikely to find any two cultures or members of any cultural groups who would differ completely from each other on all of these dimensions. As a result, we believe that in discussions of intercultural communication, we will be more effective by narrowing our focus to dis-course systems, which are sub-cultural systems where contrasts between one system and another are somewhat more strongly made. In chapters8-11 we will focus on communication which takes place across boundaries between groups which are defined as discourse systems. From this point of view, intercultural communication might better be analyzed as interdiscourse system communication.
我们不太可能找到任何两种文化或任何文化群体的成员在所有这些方面都完全不同。因此，我们相信，在跨文化交际的讨论中，我们将注意力集中在话语系统上会更有效，话语系统是亚文化系统，其中一个系统与另一个系统之间的对比更加强烈。在第 8-11 章中，我们将重点关注跨边界发生的交流，这些交流被定义为话语系统。从这个角度来看，跨文化交际可以更好地分析为话语间系统交际。