Analysis Of Applicability Of Communicative Distance Theory In Chinese Cultural Context

Communicative Distance theory is proposed by Janet G. Lukens in 1978. He made a systemic observation and a qualitative analysis on speech divergence phenomenon. He found that ethnocentrism can be reflected explicitly or implicitly in linguistic variations, such as phonology, syntax, semantics, discourse structure, idiomatic expressions and even paralinguistic features etc.. Then, he categorized these linguistic variations and created three scales of ethnocentrism—low, moderate, high. Hence three scales of psychological distances--(1) the distance of indifference, (2) the distance of avoidance, and (3) the distance of disparagement. Speech in accordance with the three communicative distances may be used: (1) to demonstrate lack of concern for persons of other cultures and reflect an insensitivity to cultural differences (the distance of indifference), (2) to avoid or limit the amount of interaction with out-groups (the distance of avoidance), and (3) to demonstrate feelings of hostility towards out-groups and deride or belittle them (the distance of disparagement). In 1984, American scholar William B. Gudykunst re-evaluated Lukens'theory and made a new interpretation of it. He believed that ethnocentrism and cultural relativism are opposite sides of the same coin. A high level of ethnocentrism and a high level of cultural relativism can be seen as opposite ends of an attitudinal continuum. So we can label at least five different points on the continuum:high ethnocentrism, moderate ethnocentrism, low ethnocentrism/low cultural relativism, moderate cultural relativism, and high cultural relativism. Each of these five points should be reflected in a different level of communicative distance. However, this theory is based on the research findings by western scholars. Lukens'application test is also towards different ethnic groups—especially blacks and whites in the United States. Very little research has been done up to date to on communicative distance theory, especially its appropriateness in different cultures. Since the communicative distance theory is conceived and amended by only American scholars, whether it is appropriate and applicable in other culture is important in cross-cultural communication, particularly in a one which is quite different from western culture.The current study is based on the Communicative Distance theory, and a quantitative analysis is employed. Based on the theory, a questionnaire is also designed. The purpose of this study is to: (1) test the applicability and effectiveness of communicative distance theory in China; (2) clear out the current situation about Chinese ethnocentrism and cultural relativism, which contains two points: a, foreign language learners have less tendency in ethnocentrism and b, the learners who has a long studying time has less tendency in ethnocentrism than those who has a short time; and (3) help to make necessary completion and amendment on the explanatory power and applicability of the communicative distance theory in order to enrich this theory. The results of the questionnaires were analyzed by SPSS. It was found out that Chinese learners of English identify least with high ethnocentrism (distance of disparagement); as in distance of indifference, the ethnocentrism is relatively low, the participants scored lower than the rest distances. Since the participants are generally English learner of many years who have a certain amount of knowledge about cross-cultural communication, they got a higher score in questions of cultural relativism than in questions of ethnocentrism.According to the result, the Communicative Distance theory of five distances by Gudykunst is instructive and relatively effective in Chinese cultural context. Most participants hold a negative attitude towards ethnocentrism and a positive attitude towards cultural relativism; participants with a longer studying time got higher scores than those with short studying time, and the longer the studying time is, the higher the score is. However, as the original theory was created and developed in American culture, some components must have some inappropriateness in Chinese culture, which was reflected obviously in the distance of avoidance. This point needs further investigations in future.