A vietnamese - american cross-cultural study of conversational distances nghiên cứu giao văn hóa việt mỹ về khoảng cách tham thoại

A vietnamese - american cross-cultural study of conversational distances nghiên cứu giao văn hóa việt mỹ về khoảng cách tham thoại

CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY OF STUDY PROJECT REPORT I certify my authority of the Study Project Report submitted entitled A VIETNAMESE - AMERICAN CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY OF CONVERSATIONAL DISTANCES In fulfilmentfulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts Le Thi Huyen Acknowledgements I owe my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, M.A Nguyen Thi Thanh Huong, without whose valuable comments and guidance, my thesis would not have been accomplished My special thanks go to my colleagues from Haiphong Water Supply Company, those who helped me fill in my survey questionairequestionnaire and give me constructive suggestions in completing this thesis And I am immensely grateful to my former teacher, Ms Stacy Thompson, who is living and working in the United States She has helped me conduct my survey in the United States I owe my family great attitude for theirMy family: my parents, my brother, my sister-in-law and my boyfriend have been a constant source of love, support and encouragement Finally, I should acknowledge my indebtedness to all my friends for their assistance during the process of preparing for this research Le Thi Huyen ABSTRACT Even the best verbal communication skills are not enough to create and sustain successful relationships Good relationships, both at home and at work, require the ability to communicate with emotional intelligence Part of our culture involves an unspoken rule that people should ignore nonverbal elements– as if the injunction were, "hear what I say, and don't notice the way I say it." These elements are often ignored in school or overridden by parents, so the task of incorporating conscious sensitivity to nonverbal communications is made more difficult Thus, this thesis is an attempt to provide a cross-cultural comparison of common conversational distances, their frequency used in American and Vietnamese cultures and factors affecting conversational distances Special emphasis is given to : - classification and usage of conversational distances as well as and their usage - factors affecting conversational distances The implications are suggested and recommendations provided for avoidance of culture shock and cross-cultural communication breakdown For instance, American people tend to use close phase of intimate distance when showing intimate emotion with mothers more than Vietnamese Besides, there is not much difference whether between brothers or sisters in keeping intimate distance when showing intimate emotion in American, whereas, Vietnamese people tend to keep closer distance with their sister than brother It is also concluded that if two Americans of opposite sex informants are conversing, they find close phase easier, freer and more conventional , however, it is applied for every case that if the communicative partners are of the same sex then closer distance is more popular with Vietnamese informants LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Figure 1: Percentage of verbal and nonverbal communication in common use Diagram 1: Classification of nonverbal communication Table 1: Further clarification of nonverbal communication Table 2: Sub-distances of intimate distance and their communicators Table 3: Sub-distances of personal distance and their communicators Table 4: Sub-distances of social distance and their communicators Table 5: Sub-distances of public distance and their communicators Table 6: Interactions among messages, tones of voice and distances between faces Table 7: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their mother Table 8: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their father Table 9: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their brother Table 10: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their sister Table 11: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their same-sex close friend (two male friends) Table 12: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their same-sex close friend (two female friends) Table 13: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their opposite-sex close friend Table 14: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their same-sex acquaintance Table 15: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their opposite-sex acquaintance Table 16: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their same-sex colleague Table 17: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their opposite-sex colleague Table 18: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with their boss Table 19: Figures on using conversational distances by informants between 20 and 40 years old Table 20: Figures on using conversational distances by informants above 40 years old Table 21: Figures on using conversational distances by male informants Table 22: Figures on using conversational distances by female informants Table 23: Figures on using conversational distances by informants living in rural areas Table 24: Figures on using conversational distances by informants living in urban areas Table 25: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with teamwork occupation Table 26: Figures on using conversational distances by informants with independent work occupation TABLE OF CONTENTS PART A: INTRODUCTION .1 I Rationale .1 II Aims of the study III Scope of the study IV Methodology V Design of the study PART B: DEVELOPMENT ChapterHAPTER 1: Literature reviewBACKGROUND CONCEPTS What is communication? 1.1 Definition of communication 1.2 Types of communication .7 What is nonverbal communication? 2.1 Definition of nonverbal communication .9 2.2 Significance of nonverbal communication .11 2.3 Main categories of nonverbal communication 12 CHAPTERhapter 2: Conversational distance as nonverbal communication CONVERSATIONAL DISTANCES AS NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION .17 17 Definition of conversational distances 17 Classification of conversational distances 19 2.1 Intimate distance 19 2.2 Personal distance .22 2.2 Personal distance .22 (Photo credits: dantri.com.vn) 23 2.3 Social distance 24 2.4 Public distance 26 Factors effecting conversational distances .27 3.1 High - low contact culture 27 3.2 Gender 28 3.3 Relationship .28 3.4 Age .29 3.5 Population density .30 3.6 Intended message .31 ChapterHAPTER 3: Data aAnalysis and dDiscussionATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION 32 Methodology 32 1.1 Participants 32 1.2 Instruments 32 1.3 Procedures of data collection 32 Data analysis and findings .34 23.1 Use of converstionalconversational distance as seen from communicative partnert’s role relationship 34 3.1.1 Data analysis 34 23.2 Use of conversational distance as seen from informants’ parameters 43 PART C: CONCLUSION 48 I Summary of main findings: 48 II Implications for avoidance of culture shock and cross-cultural communication breakdown 48 III Suggestion for further study 51 Appendices References??? Appendices??? PART A: INTRODUCTION I Rationale Stated briefly, how something is expressed may carry more significance and weight than what is said, the words themselves Accompanied by a smile or a frown, said with a loud, scolding voice or a gentle, easy one, the contents of our communications are framed by our holistic perceptions of their context Those sending the messages may learn to understand themselves better as well as learning to exert some greater consciousness about their manner of speech Those receiving the messages may learn to better understand their own intuitive responses–sometimes in contrast to what it seems "reasonable" to think The use of physical space by individuals in their interactions with others can be considered as one of the most critical signals of nonverbal communication as this use of physical space seems to be different from culture to culture; thus, ways of interpretation of the same space message are also various In the 1950's, American anthropologist Edward T Hall pioneered proxemics to describe set measurable distances between people as they interact Like gravity, the influence of two bodies on each other is inversely proportional not only to the square of their distance but possibly even the cube of the distance between them (Hall, 1966) Hall notes that different cultures maintain different standards of personal space In Latin cultures, for instance, those relative distances are smaller, and people tend to be more comfortable standing close to each other; in Nordic cultures the opposite is true Realizing and recognizing these cultural differences improves cross-cultural understanding, and helps eliminate discomfort people may feel if the interpersonal distance is too large ("standoffish") or too small (intrusive) Comfortable personal distances also depend on the culture, social situation, gender, and individual preference In this thesis, we will discuss conversational distances and its effects on human communication Additionally, we will compare and contrast the way Vietnamese and American informants apply conversational distances with certain subjects It is expected that the findings will, to a certain extent, raise readers’ awareness of the importance of nonverbal communication and provide useful recommendations to Vietnamese learners of English for avoidance of culture shock in conversational distances when conducting face-to-face interactions with their Anglophone partners II Aims of the study The aims of the study are:  To investigate types of conversational distances in human interactions  To compare and contrast types of conversational distances in human interactions and the influence of the informants’ parameters on conversational distances in the two cultures in order to clarify similarities and differences in the way the Vietnamese and the American apply conversational distances  To provide recommendations to the Vietnamese learners of English for avoidance of culture shock in conversational distances In order to achieve the aims of the study, the following research questions are to be addressed: What are the conversational distances of the Vietnamese informants in given situations? What are the conversational distances of the American informants in given situations? What are the main similarities and differences in conversational distances between Vietnamese and American informants? What are the recommendations to the Vietnamese learners of English for avoidance of culture shock in conversational distances? III Scope of the study Every effort had been made for the thesis to be sufficiently explicit The author hopes that by the time you, the readers, have reached this part, you will have gained a useful insight into an aspect of cross-cultural communication However, shortcomings are inevitable and shethe author should be is pleased to hear any comments from the readers 52 53 BibliographyIBLIOGRAPHY IN ENGLISH Axtell, R.E (1998) Gestures - The Do’s and Taboos of Body Language around the World John Wiley & Son, Inc Beisler, F., Scheeres, H., & Pinner, D (1997) Communication Skills 2nd Edition Longman Berko, R.M., Wolvin, A.D., & Wolvin, D.R (1989) Communicating: A Social and Career Focus Fourth edition Houghton Mifflin Company Boston Brown, R.B amdand Johnson, D., (2004) The power of handshaking Virginia: Capital books Dao Thi Thu Trang (2007) - A Vietnamese - American Cross-cultural study of touching behaviour - M.A Combined Program Thesis VNU-CFL Do Thi Mai Thanh (2000) - Some English - Vietnamese Cross-cultural differences in reequestingrequesting - M.A Thesis VNU-CFL Dwyer, J (2000) The Business Communication Handbook Fifth Edition Prentice Hall Hall, E.T (1963) Proxemics-The Study of Man’s Spacial Relations and BounderiesBoundaries In Man’s Image in Medicine and Anthropology, p.p.422-45 New York: International Universities Press Hybels, S & Weaver II, R.L (1992) Communicating effectively Von Hoffman Press Inc 10 Hall, E.T (1974) The Silent Language Doubleday & Co New York 11 Kramsch, Claire (1998) Language and culture Oxford University Press 12 Levine, D.R & Adelman, M.B (1982) Beyond Language - Intercultural Communication for English as a Second Language Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey 13 Mai Thach Lam (2007) - A study on Vietnamese - English Cross-cultural communication in sitting postures - M.A Minor Thesis VNU-CFL 14 Mehrabian, A (1972) Nonverbal Communication Wadsworth, Belmont California Chicago: Aidine-Atherton 15 Nguyen Quang (1998) Cross-cultural Communication CFL - Vietnam National University - Hanoi 16 Pease, A (1993) Body Language Sheldon Press, London 17 Phan Thi Van Quyen (2001) - Some English - Vietnamese Cross-cultural differences in refusing a request - M.A Thesis - VNU-CFL 18 Thwaites, T & Davis, L & Mules, W (1994) Tools for cultural studies - An introduction Macmillan PhublishersPublishers Australia 19 Wright, A (1987) How to communicate successfully Cambridge University press, Cambridge 20 Verderber, R.F (1990) Communicate Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont, California 21 Zimmerman, G.I & Owen, J.L & Seibert, D.R (1986) Speech Communication West Publishing Company 22 Zanger, V.V (1993) Face to face Heinle & Heinle Publishers, Boston, USA IN VIETNAMESE Nguyễn Quang, (2002) Giao tiếp giao tiếp giao văn hóa, NXB Đại học Quốc gia Hà Nội Nguyễn Quang, (2003) Giao tiếp nội văn hóa giao tiếp giao văn hóa NXB Đại học Quốc gia Hà Nội Nguyễn Quang (Sắp xuất bản) Giao tiếp phi ngôn từ qua văn hóa INTERNET SOURCES http://www.helpguide.org/mental/eq6_nonverbal_communication.htm http://www.andrews.edu/~tidwell/lead689/NonVerbal.html http://www.artoftravel.com/02communication.htm http://www.rsc-ne-scotland.ac.uk/ie/Relationships_with_Customers/Establishing%20and %20maintaining%20relationships%20with%20customers%20version%202-130.htm http://www.buzzle.com/articles/nonverbal-communication-an-overview.html http://humanresources.about.com/od/interpersonalcommunicatio1/a/nonverbal_com.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxemics Appendix A Survey QuestionnaireURVEY QUESTIONAIRE This survey questionairequestionnaire is designed for my research into “A VietnameseAmerican cross-cultural study of conversational distance” Your assistance in completing the following items is highly appreciated You can be confident that this questionairequestionnaire is for research purpose only, and that you will not be indentifiedidentified in any discussion of the data Would you kindly return the completed questionairequestionnaire to me prior to 31st January, 2009 Thank you very much! Please tick (√) where appropriate:  Your age: - Under 20 - From 20 to 40 - Above 40  Your gender: - Male - Female  Your marital status: - Married - Single  Your occupation: _  Area where you have spent most of your time: - Urban - Rural Conversational Distances (Distance between you and your partner during conversing) A: 0-6 inches (0-15 cm) B: 6-18 inches (15-46 cm) C: 1.5-2.5 feet (0.46-0.77 m) D: 2.5-4 feet (0.77-1.23 m) E: 4-7 feet (1.23-2.16 m) F: 7-12 feet (2.16-3.7 m) G: 12-15 feet (3.7-4.6 m) H: 15-25 feet (4.6-7.7 m) Close friend Your mother Your father Your brother Your sister Same sex Opposite sex Your acquaintance Same sex Opposite sex Your colleague Same sex Opposite sex Your boss Identify how often you use this kind of conversational distance Please tick (√) where appropriate Very often Your mother Your father Your brother Your sister Same sex Close friend Opposite sex Your acquaintance Same sex Opposite sex Same sex Your colleague Opposite sex Your boss Sometimes Rarely Never Appendix B Bản điều traẢN ĐIỀU TRA Chúng soạn điều tra nhằm tìm hiểu khoảng cách tham thoại người Việt Các liệu thu thập sử dụng cho để phân tích cho luận văn cao học khơng nhằm mục đích khác Xin quý vị vui lòng dành chút thời gian trả lời câu hỏi điều tra nhằm giúp chúng tơi hồn thành việc nghiên cứu khoa học Xin khẳng định quý cam kết vị chúng tơi khơng nêu danh tính q vị trường hợp Xin cảm ơn quý vị Xin quý vị cho biết thông tin thân (Bằng cách đánh dấu (√) vào thích hơp)  Tuổi: - Dưới 20 - Từ 20 đến 40 - Trên 40  Giới tính: - Nam - Nữ  Tình trạng nhân: - Đã lập gia đình - Chưa lập gia đình  Nghề nghiệp: _  Nơi quý vị sống lâu nhất: - Thành thị - Nông thôn ... cultures and factors affecting conversational distances Special emphasis is given to : - classification and usage of conversational distances as well as and their usage - factors affecting conversational. .. Italian, Latin American, Arab and African are considered to be high-contact culture, in which interactants usually keep small distances among themselves - American, Canadian, Northern European,... situations? What are the conversational distances of the American informants in given situations? What are the main similarities and differences in conversational distances between Vietnamese and