Dialogue in and between Different Cultures - International ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

124 Gabriel Dorta Goffman, Erving. 1986. Interaktionsrituale. Über Verhalten in direkter Kommunikation. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp. Götzenbrucker, Gerit & Roman Hummel. 2001. “Zwischen Vertrautheit und Flüchtigkeit. Beziehungsdimensionen in computervermittelten Konversationen – am Beispiel von Chats, MUDs und Newsgroups”. Chat-Kommunikation. Sprache, Interaktion, Sozialität & Identität in synchroner computervermittelter Kommunikation. Perspektiven auf ein interdisziplinäres Forschungsfeld ed. by Michael Beisswenger, 201-224. Stuttgart: ibidem. Gumperz, John. 2001. “Interactional Sociolinguistics: A personal perspective”. The Handbook of Discourse Analysis ed. by Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen & Heidi Hamilton, 215-228. Malden: Blackwell. Höflich, Joachim & Julian Gebhardt. 2001. “Der Computer als Kontakt und Beziehungsmedium. Theoretische Verortung und explorative Erkundungen am Beispiel des Online-Chats.” Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft 49/1:24-43. Keim, Inken. 2001. “Der Umgang mit territorialen Ansprüchen als Merkmal sozialen Stils”. Höflichkeitsstile ed. by Heinz-Helmut Lüger, 187-212. Frankfurt a. M.: Lang. Lüger, Heinz-Helmut. 2001. Höflichkeit und Höflichkeitsstile. Frankfurt a. M.: Lang. Runkehl, Jens, Peter Schlobinski & Torsten Siever. 1998. Sprache und Kommunikation im Internet. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. Schütz, Alfred & Thomas Luckmann. 1994a. Strukturen der Lebenswelt. Vol. 1 (5 th ed.). Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp. Schütz, Alfred & Thomas Luckmann. 1994b. Strukturen der Lebenswelt. Vol. 2 (3 rd ed.). Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp. Tophinke, Doris. 2001. “Handlungstheorie, Kommunikationstheorie, Lebenswelt”. Sprachtypologie und sprachliche Universalien. Ein Internationales Handbuch. Vol.1 ed. by Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher & Wolfgang Raible, 40-62. Berlin & New York: de Gruyter. Watts, Richard J. 2003. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chat Behaviour Intercultural Some aspects of chat behaviour across cultures Angelika Fröhlich & Sonja Lux University of Mainz, Germany The paper investigates the question whether there is a typical cultural chat behaviour depending on the nationality. After considering the properties and various restrictions of computer-mediated communication, we take a closer look at the correlation of the Internet culture and nationality of the chatters. Using a sample taken from various German and Russian chat rooms, our main focus is the comparison of Russian and German chatters. Along with typical elements of the chat communication, greeting and parting phrases and nonverbal signs, we examine the choice of topics and juxtapose our findings in order to comprehend the cultural influence on or of the Internet. This results in our perception that the Internet already has an own culture to which chatters contribute. 1. Introduction The changes in the technologies concerning the communication sector during the last two decades have had a demonstrable influence on language (cf. Hentschel 1998, Fix 2001:58). Not only did they change our communication channels from face-to-face dialogues to more distant ways of communication, we also changed the way we communicate, due to the limitations that often occur along with new methods of interacting. Never before, we are sure, it crossed our minds that a short notice we want to pass on to someone else should be limited to 160 letters, as it is the habit now for millions of people when writing an SMS. Much notice was already given by researchers all over the world to the field of chat communication (Runkehl et al. 1998, Fix 2001, Beisswenger 2002, Misoch 2006, Dorta 2007 among others). No doubt, most dialogues that take place in chat rooms remind us of oral communication: the topics, the length of the sentences, often with colloquial grammar, the rapid turns and so on. On the other hand, one cannot deny the fact, that being as ‘dialoguish’ as any neighbours’ talk, chat is realised in written form. People do not really ‘talk’, but type and read their own and other contributions (cf. Hess-Lüttich & Wilde 2003). A very early study by Reid (1991) gave a definition for the IRC, which can as well be applied to most existing forms of chat nowadays.
Page 2 and 3:
iada.online.series Volume 1/08 Dial
Page 4 and 5:
Edited by Marion Grein Dialogue in
Page 7 and 8:
Introduction The core of this first
Page 9 and 10:
The Practice of Repeating in Englis
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21:
Page 24 and 25:
16 Marion Grein sympathisch empfund
Page 26 and 27:
18 Marion Grein 4. Funktionen des S
Page 28 and 29:
20 Marion Grein 6. Frequenz von Kom
Page 30 and 31:
22 Marion Grein 4 You did a [INT] A
Page 32 and 33:
24 Marion Grein 6 Metaphorische Ans
Page 34 and 35:
26 Marion Grein betreffen hier posi
Page 36 and 37:
28 Marion Grein denen man ein Kompl
Page 38 and 39:
30 Marion Grein Japan (Barnlund&Ara
Page 40 and 41:
32 Marion Grein Goffman, Erving. 19
Page 42 and 43:
34 Yana Tregubova kultureller Aspek
Page 44 and 45:
36 Yana Tregubova speziell in Auffo
Page 46 and 47:
38 Yana Tregubova Warum wird die Ge
Page 48 and 49:
40 Yana Tregubova zählt, sollte es
Page 50 and 51:
42 Yana Tregubova Betrachten wir ex
Page 52 and 53:
44 Yana Tregubova Dienste der illok
Page 54 and 55:
46 Yana Tregubova merksamkeit viel
Page 56 and 57:
48 Yana Tregubova 10. Umgang mit En
Page 58 and 59:
50 Yana Tregubova noch um Verständ
Page 61 and 62:
The Impact of Socio-Cultural Aspect
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71:
Page 74 and 75:
66 Elena Xeni including slang, argo
Page 76 and 77:
68 Elena Xeni − in cases where it
Page 78 and 79:
70 Elena Xeni Conventions and norms
Page 81 and 82: Cultural Dialogue between France an
Page 91 and 92: 9. Translating the term «Contrat P
Page 93: Cultural Dialogue between France an
Page 96 and 97: 88 Anna Szczepaniak-Kozak Consequen
Page 98 and 99: 90 Anna Szczepaniak-Kozak to make c
Page 100 and 101: 92 Anna Szczepaniak-Kozak readers c
Page 102 and 103: 94 Anna Szczepaniak-Kozak are unifo
Page 105 and 106: Religiöse Euphemismen im Griechisc
Page 113 and 114: Deutsche Euphemismen: Religiöse Eu
Page 115 and 116: Deutsche Euphemismen: Religiöse Eu
Page 117 and 118: - Begraben werden: seine letzte Ruh
Page 119 and 120: Politeness and Social Dynamics in C
Page 121 and 122: Politeness and Social Dynamics in t
Page 123 and 124: (2) Example (recording 19_15.09.01
Page 131: Politeness and Social Dynamics in t
Page 135 and 136: Chat Behaviour Intercultural 127 of
Page 137 and 138: 3.2 Netiquette Chat Behaviour Inter
Page 139 and 140: Chat Behaviour Intercultural 131 di
Page 141 and 142: Chat Behaviour Intercultural 133 ba
Page 143 and 144: Chat Behaviour Intercultural 135 Sn
Page 145 and 146: Chat Behaviour Intercultural 137 (8
Page 147 and 148: Chat Behaviour Intercultural 139 di
Page 149 and 150: Chat Behaviour Intercultural 141 (1
Page 151 and 152: Chat Behaviour Intercultural 143 Ve
Page 153 and 154: “BillyBoy: Hey freche Liesl! =) F
Page 155 and 156: Chat Behaviour Intercultural 147
Page 157: Chat Behaviour Intercultural 149 Th
Page 160: 152 List of Contributors Dr. Neelak
show all

Dialogue in and between Different Cultures - International ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?