Cross-Cultural Communication and the Continuity of Cultures: The Role of Intercultural Dialogue

• Authors: Dominique Bouchet
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The author of the article discusses the factors acting upon the current trend toward globalization of communication and human relationships. The focal points he undertakes are: different cultural contexts that influence interpersonal communication; the effects of intercultural communication on the mobility and permanency of cultures; the constituents sustaining our core values and the factors that might be harmful to them. The author also defines what are the constituents of intercultural communication and stresses the need for awareness about the importance of cultural dialogue and cultural dynamism, which is necessary to secure the social bond in times of globalization.

• Publisher: Księgarnia Akademicka
• Journal: Politeja : Pismo Wydziału Studiów Miedzynarodowych i Politycznych Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego
• Year: 2012
• Issue: 2.1(20.1)
• Pages: 27-39

Contributors

author

Dominique Bouchet

• University of Southern Denmark (Odense)

References

• L. Flecheux, Stéréotypes et préjugés. Des filtres qui bloquentles relations interpersonnelles, at <http://base.d-p-h.info/fr/fiches/premierdph/fiche-premierdph-5307.html>
• L. Flecheux, ‘Stéréotypes et préjugés: des filtres qui bloquent les relations interpersonnelles’ in Ch.L. Mayer (ed.), Se former à l’interculturel. Expériences et propositions, Paris 2000, pp. 15-18
• G. Malgesini, C. Giménez, Estereotipo, Madrid 2000; iidem, Prejuicio, Madrid 2000.
• D. Bouchet, ‘The Ambiguity of Modern Conception of Autonomy and the Paradox of Culture’, Thesis Eleven, Vol. 88 (2007), pp. 31-54
• D. Bouchet, ‘Den kulturelle faktor og det psykiske arbejdsmiljø. Om identitetens og kulturens betydning for samarbejdet i organisationer’ in N. Sejersen, P. Dragsbæk (eds.), Gør noget mere. Håndtering af psykisk arbejdsmiljø, Copenhagen 2007, pp. 9-43
• D. Bouchet, ‘Pragmatics of Intercultural Communication. The Bounded Openness of a Contradictory Perspective’, Pragmatics and Society, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2010), pp. 138-154
• C. Lévi-Strauss, D. Eribon, De près et de loin. Suivi d’un entretien inédit “Deux ans après”, Paris 1991, p. 257
• M. Moody-Adams, Fieldwork in Familiar Places. Morality, Culture and Philosophy, Cambridge (Mass.)–London 1997, p. 17.
• R. Aron, ‘Le paradoxe du même et de l’autre. A propos de l’śuvre de Claude Lévi-Strauss’, Commentaire Février, Vol. 8, No. 28-29 (1985): Raymond Aron 1905-1983. Histoire et politique. Numéro spécial, pp. 474-481.
• C. Lévi-Strauss, Race and History, Paris 1958, p. 13
• C. Lévi-Strauss, Race et histoire, Paris 1961, p. 22
• C. Lévi-Strauss, Anthropologie structurale deux, Paris 1973, p. 383.
• M. de Montaigne, Les Essais, livre 3, édition critique d’A. Tournon, Paris 1998, pp. 108-109.
• C. Lévi-Strauss, D. Eribon, De près et de loin, Paris 1988, pp. 204-205
• M. Augé, Non-Places. Introduction to an Anthropology of Supermodernity, London–New York 1995
• M. Augé, Non-lieux. Introduction à une anthropologie de la surmodernité, Paris 1992, p. 66.
• M. Midgley, Can’t We Make Moral Judgements?, New York 1991, p. 84.
• I. Berlin, ‘Alleged Relativism in Eighteenth-Century European Thought’ in idem, The Crooked Timber of Humanity. Chapters in the History of Ideas, ed. H. Hardy, London 2003, p. 85.
• D. Bouchet, ‘Marketing and the Redefinition of Ethnicity’ in J.A. Costa, G.J. Bamossy (eds.), Marketing in a Multicultural World. Ethnicity, Nationalism, and Cultural Identity, Thousand Oaks–London–New Delhi 1995, pp. 68-114
• M. Douglas, Thought Styles. Critical Essays on Good Taste, London–Thousand Oaks 1996, p. 42.
• The View from Afar, New York 1985, p. 23; idem, Le Regard éloigné, Paris 1983, p. 47.
• C. Geertz, ‘The Uses of Diversity’ in idem, Available Light. Anthropological Reflections on Philosophical Topics, Princeton 2000, p. 76.
• E. Zerubavel, The Fine Line. Making Distinctions in Everyday Life, New York 1991, p. 3.
• B. Williams, Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy, London–Cambridge (Mass.) 1985, p. 158.
• E. Morin, Introduction à la pensée complexe, Paris 1990.
• A. Kuper Culture. The Anthropologists’ Account, Cambridge (Mass.)–London 1999, pp. 245-246
• S. Lukes, Liberals & Cannibals. The Implication of Diversity, London–New York 2003, p. 24.
• H. Putnam, ‘Why Reason Can’t be Naturalized’ in eadem, Realism and Reason, Cambridge 1983, p. 234, Philosophical papers, Vol. 3.