cross-cultural fertilisation 什么意思
cross-cultural fertilisation
跨文化交流
例句筛选
1.
So is translation as a form of cross-cultural communication.
因此翻译成为一种文化交流形式。
2.
These cross-cultural lessons are needed if Lenovo is to accomplish the fourmain parts of its strategy.
这些跨文化课程对于联想实现其四个主要战略十分必要。
Cross-cultural Communication是什么意思
cross-cultural communication
n. 跨文化交际;
[例句]With diversified expression and information flow, we can mend the broken bridge of cross-cultural communication and build an information link to the future.
有了多元化的表达和信息流动，我们就可以修补破损的跨文化交流桥梁，修建一条通向未来的信息之路。
跨文化交际是什么？
指本族语者与非本族语者之间的交际， 也指任何在语言和文化背景方面有差异的人们之间的交际。通俗来说就是如果你和外国人打交道（由于存在语言和文化背景的差异），应该注意什么问题，应该如何得体地去交流。从对外汉语专业的角度，“跨文化交际”的概念可以这样界定：在特定的交际情景中，具有不同的文化背景的交际者使用同一种语言（母语或目的语）进行的口语交际。交际双方进行的是直接的言语交际当前国内的跨文化交际研究主要集中在外语教学界。跨文化交际是一门年轻的学科，它是在国际交往日益频繁、全球经济一体化的特定时代产生的新兴学科。在中国，跨文化交际研究是改革开放的产物，是汉语国际推广战略决策的需要。跨文化交际又是一门综合性学科，它是当代社会科学学科综合研究的结果，学科背景主要涉及文化语言学、社会语言学、言语交际学。其中文化语言学凸显“文化”的侧面，社会语言学凸显“社会”的侧面，而言语交际学凸显“交际”的侧面，这三个不同的侧面都围绕语言符号与非语言符号的“语用”这个核心。正是在这个基础上建立起了这么一门综合性的语言学科。通俗解释在学习英语的过程中有这样一些问题。许多人在语言交流当中有很多障碍，最早的时候沟通障碍在于你的英语表达不好而产生误解，这是传统的看法。
Cross-cultural Communication是什么意思
Cross-cultural Communication
n.跨文化交际;
例句：
With diversified expression and information flow, we can mend the broken bridge of cross-cultural communication and build an information link to the future.
有了多元化的表达和信息流动，我们就可以修补破损的跨文化交流桥梁，修建一条通向未来的信息之路。
cross-cultural communication 和 inter-cultural communication的区别
两者切入的角度不同，都属于Intercultural Communication 的领域。cross-cultural communiation 更多的是强调the differences of different cultural communities or groups;而intercultural communication 更注重研究what is happening when people from different culture have contact with each other。两者都属于较老的流派。总是前者更注重文化群体之间的差异，而后者强调不同文化群体相互接触时发生的各种事情。。。
求一篇以Cross-cultural awareness为题目的英语作文
Cross-cultural awarenessAfter China's entry into the WTO, China's economy gradually integrated into the world economy. In the increasingly frequent international exchanges, intercultural communication in various fields has become the basis for a talented person, the foundation of the economy, trade and cultural exchange. And cross-cultural awareness is the ability of cross-cultural communication indispensable part. Cross-cultural awareness is composed of three parts: according to the sensitivity of cultural differences, cultural differences are willing to learn the degree of and respect for cultural differences.Certainly, there are three obstacles in cross-cultural awareness training: the lack of foreign language ability, unreliable sources of information and cultural prejudice. Research shows that improving language skills, seeking a reliable source of information and multicultural thinking, can effectively improve cross-cultural awareness. As contemporary college students, we should pay attention to the cultivation of cross-cultural awareness. And only in this way, can we adapt to this pluralistic society and serve the society.自己看看能不能用吧。
"cross-culture teaching" 请问关于这个主题的论文资料 谢谢了。 着急！！！！
speech act theory and its application in chinese efl classroom
abstract：
to learn a language is to learn how to communicate in
that language. but in daily communication with native
speakers, many chinese learners of english fail to use english
tactfully or appropriately. this article intends to analyze
some basic principles of speech act theory and their
application in efl classroom. it is concluded that in foreign
language teaching, teachers should try to foster learners’
linguistic competence and pragmatic competence as well.
key words：speech act，cross cultural communication，pragmatic
competence
introduction
in our daily life, it seems that we live in a world of
speeches, because we keep producing “speech acts”. we have the
linguistic competence. but it doesn't mean we have the
communicative competence in that language. communicative
competence is made up three component parts: linguistic
competence, pragmatic competence and cognitive and affective
capacity.
traditionally, in teaching english as a foreign language
(efl), the form of english has been emphasized in the efl
classroom. it results in the fact that students with good
mastery of english forms fail to communicate in english
appropriately. here is an example:
a foreign guest remarked to a chinese interpreter, a young
lady who had graduated not long ago from a university:
foreign guest: your english is excellent. really quite fluent.
chinese lady: no, no. my english is quite poor.
the foreign guest felt a bit puzzled. the foreign guest
meant to express his appreciation. in response to this
appreciation, the chinese lady should follow some cooperative
principles by saying “thanks”. but her reply violated the
quality maxim of cooperative principles (grice, 1975). as a
result this conversation can’t go on.
the failure in the communication mentioned above is
just an example. in cross-cultural communication, when we
speak a foreign language, though our grammar may be correct,
we cannot speak it tactfully and appropriately just because of
cultural differences. so in foreign language teaching, it is
very important to help the students understand the speech acts
and the cultural difference between source language and target
language. hence in teaching efl in the chinese context,
communicative approach takes priority though the forms are
important as well.
speech acts theory
speech acts theory makes great contribution to cross-cultural
communication. the theory was initiated by the philosopher,
j.l. austin in 1962. in his book austin’s initial distinction
is between constative and performative utterances (speech). a
constative one is an utterance which roughly serves to state a
fact, report that something is the case, or describe what
something is. performative utterances, on the other hand, are
those that have three characteristics: (a) they are performed
in saying something; (b) they cannot be performed unless
language is used; (c) they have connected with them
performative verbs the occurrence of which as a main verb in a
present tense, indicative, active, a first person sentence
marks explicit what act a speaker intends to be performing in
uttering the sentence. austin suggests that statements are
merely one kind of speech act, that any statements, if only
they are uttered in appropriate circumstances, may be regarded
as implicit performatives. this leads to his new account: any
speech act comprises at least two and typically three,
sub-acts: locutionary act, illocutionary act and
perlocutionary act. according to austin, the locutionary act
“includes the utterance of certain noises, the utterance of
certain words in a certain construction and the utterance of
them with a certain ‘meaning’” (austin, 1962: 94). in other
words, it is the act of conveying literal meaning by means of
syntax, lexicon and extra-linguistic knowledge. as austin
puts it, the illocutionary act can be regarded as the force
with which the sentence was employed. “saying something will
often, or even normally, produce certain consequential effects
upon the feelings, thoughts, or actions of the audience, or of
the speaker, or of other persons…. we shall call the
performance of an act of this kind the performance of a
perlocutionary act or perlocution” (austin, 1962: 101).
perlocutionary act is the consequence of, or the change
brought about by, the utterance. j. searle (1969) improved
this speech act theory by introducing indirect speech act
theory. he argues that, where a certain force is part of the
meaning, where the meaning uniquely determines a particular
force, these are not two different acts but two different
labels for the same act, and he reached the conclusion that
there are only illocutionary acts. searle holds that (1) the
basic linguistic unit is not a sign, but a speech act; (2)
speech acts are controlled by two types of rules: regulative
rules (dynamic rules for performing illocutionary acts in
communication) and constitutive rules (basic rules recognized
as for performing utterance and prepositional acts).
“in contrast to austin, who focused his attention on how
speakers realize their intentions in speaking, searle focuses
on how listeners response to utterances, that is how one
person tries to figure out how another is using a particular
utterance. what we can see in both austin and searle is a
recognition that people use language to achieve a variety of
objectives. if we want to understand what they hope to
accomplish, we must be prepared to take into account factors
that range far beyond the actual linguistic form of any
particular utterance” (r. wardhaugh, 1998:285).
on the basis of the speech act theory, some linguists have
developed theories on word meaning and conversational
implicaure. grice (1975) develops his remarkable theory of
conversational implicatures. in any conversation, only certain
kinds of “moves” are possible at any particular time because
of the constraints that operate to govern exchanges. these
constraints limit speakers as to what they can say and
listeners as to what they can infer. grice calls the
overriding principles in conversation “cooperative
principles”: “make your conversational contribution such as is
required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted
purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are
engaged.” (grice, 1975: p45). he lists four maxims that follow
from the cooperative principle: quantity, quality, relation
and manner. the most important cooperative principle in human
communication is linguistic politeness put forward by leech
(1983). he holds in communication, participants should follow
the politeness principle of tact maxim, generosity maxim,
modesty maxim, agreement maxim and sympathy maxim.
but different cultures have different value of politeness and
have different expressions in their speech acts. these
differences may lead to pragmatic failure in cross-cultural
communication.
cross-cultural communications
communication is dynamic, interactive and irreversible.
it usually includes the following components: behavioral
source, encoding, message, channel, responder, decoding,
response and feedback. successful communication involves the
participants mutual understanding and tactful and appropriate
verbal exchanges. but the communication between people from
different cultural background can more easily go wrong than
that from the same culture, because
“many of the meanings and understandings, at the level of
ongoing processes of interpretation of speaker’s intent,
depend upon culturally specific conventions, so that much of
the meaning in any encounter is indirect and implicit. the
ability to expose enough of the implicit meaning to make for a
satisfactory encounter between strangers or culturally
different speakers requires communicative flexibility”
(gumperz and cook-gumperz, 1982, p14).
foreign language learners need to develop this communicative
flexibility, this ability to cross cultural boundaries.
different cultures have different expressions in their speech
acts. in cross-cultural communication, any utterances can be
interpreted to have illocutionary speech acts. however, when
we want to translate an utterance with a certain illocutionary
act into another language, there may be various kinds of
interpretations. the illocutionary force of the utterance may
be diminished. for example, “你吃了吗?”(ni chi le ma? “have you
eaten?”), “你上那儿去?” (ni shang na’er qu? “where are you
going?”). these utterances have the illocutionary speech acts
of greeting in the chinese context. but if one asks american
friends the same questions, the original illocutionary force
doesn’t exist. the american friends may feel confused at this
“inquiry”.
w. barnett pearce (1994) analyzes the differences of
the performative speech acts (especial in different cultures):
(a) differences in coverage of speech acts that people can
perform. for example, the remark “you have a lovely wife” is
regarded natural and highly appreciated by westerners, but in
the chinese context it would be regarded indecent. (b)
differences in the diversity of speech acts. for example,
people from one culture may express “i love you” in various
ways, while people from another culture may express in only
one or two ways. (c) differences in rules of performing speech
act. in some western countries, it is very common to make
promise by swearing to god, but in other countries, it may be
regarded insincere. (d) differences in the acceptance of new
message. (e) differences in attitude to the conversation.
doctors are sensitive to patients’ intentional runaround while
some people pay little attention to speakers’ intention.
obviously, we have to overcome these differences to master the
ability of speech acts in order to achieve successful
communication. however, it is very difficult to define the
illocutionary force of speech acts, thus the problem is how to
deal with it to serve for efl teaching effectively. olshtain
and cohen offer the term “speech act set” to refer to a single
function with a set of structures beyond that of the single
utterance, differing from a speech act (single utterance
functions) and a speech event (a conversation, a lecture,
etc.). olshtain and cohen suggest that speech acts be studied
as sets of formulas, which perform the same function by
referring to the speech act of apology as an example of
analysis. for example, when the offender is positively
inclined to apologize, the steps of the formulas may be: step
one: an expression of an apology (“i’m sorry.” “please forgive
me”, etc.); step two: an explanation or account of the
situation (“i was caught in the rain.”); step three: an
acknowledgment of responsibility (“it’s my fault.”); step
four: a promise of non-recurrence (“i will never be late
again.”), etc.
the study of speech acts and the sets of formulas are very
useful in cross-cultural communication, because different
cultures, even different communities in the same culture have
different rules in performing the speech acts. so sets of
formulas of speech acts are important for foreign language
learners to perform appropriate communication.
speech acts vary in cultures, gender, occupation, etc.,
which causes great difficulties in our daily communication. it
is very important for foreign language learners to understand
the cultural differences between the source language and the
target language. how to help learners to develop this
communicative ability in classroom setting? is it possible to
conduct an effective pedagogical approach in efl teaching in
nonnative background? this is a challenge to traditional way
of foreign language teaching.
communicative approach in teaching efl
teaching efl in the chinese context is traditionally
related to the form of english (phonological, grammar and
vocabulary), which a person needs to know about in his
communication. “but a knowledge of the form (even when that
knowledge is perfect) does not enable a person to communicate”
(li, 1987). any language course should aim to help the
students acquire not just knowledge of the form but
communicative competence. communicative competence in english
is made up of three component parts: linguistic competence,
pragmatic competence, and cognitive and affective capacity.
traditional english course focus only on one dimension of the
communicative competence, ignoring the other two. the
structuralists believe that “teachers should teach the
language, not about the language” (j. c. richards & t. s.
rodgers, 1986). on the ‘stimulus-response’ basis, they claim
that foreign language learning is a mechanical habit-formation
process. by doing pattern drills and reciting dialogues, the
learners are expected to minimize the chances of making
mistakes so that they can form a good habit. typical pattern
drills include : “ask me if i have seen any movies lately”,
“ask me who the screenwriter is”. the students respond
grammatical correctly: “have you seen any movies lately?”,
“who is the screenwriter?” (yang, 1998)
yet, language is not just words and grammar. there is always
content when people communicate. “in fact, language is best
learnt when it is a medium for learning some other subject or
an exchange for affective or humanistic purposes” (li, 1987).
students are human beings. they have their cognitive and
affective capacity.
pragmatic competence (the use of language) is also neglected
in traditional and structuralist language courses. actually,
this competence “enables students to know how different
communicative functions are realized in english, and who can
say what to whom, how, when, why, under what circumstances and
in what context” ( li, 1987).
in efl classroom of the chinese context, teachers should help
the learners to develop the communicative competence from the
dimensions of linguistic competence, communicative competence
and cognitive and affective capability. while teaching the
knowledge of forms of english, teachers should also provide
information about the usage of english language. for example,
the utterance “sit down please” has the illocutionary force of
command. it’s improper to address to a visiting foreign guest.
instead, the chinese host should make another utterance with
the illocutionary acts of invitation, such as “please take a
seat” or “be seated please”. in order to learn standard,
decent and universal english, efl learners should be exposed
to “authentic language” (li, 1984) of english. “authentic
language” is the language that a person uses in real life to
achieve communicative purposes. let’s look at the following
dialogue:
billy: excuse me, miss， could you please tell me if this is
the way to the business department?
