怀疑论者的“跨文化交际”指南——拆穿“跨文化”,反思“文化”

Hongbing Yu
{"title":"怀疑论者的“跨文化交际”指南——拆穿“跨文化”,反思“文化”","authors":"Hongbing Yu","doi":"10.1515/lass-2023-0014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Starting with a critique of so-called intercultural communication, the present paper contests and challenges the prevalent and dominant essentialist views of “culture”. It is exposed that these views have a detrimental underlying logic that is both destructive and self-destructive. Instead, the paper proposes a radically new idea of culture, a minimalist approach supported by insights gleaned from contemporary semiotic inquiry. In this approach, culture is defined as a biological instinct to acquire information through modeling, that is, learning by models. This instinct is at work, or is realized, in specific acts of such modeling, resulting in cultural practices and cultural artifacts. In the case of humanity, a cultural practice is anything a human does that can be modeled by another human and a cultural artifact is any object that humans make and can model. The paper argues it is imperative to keep in mind that when we deal with the “intercultural”, we are only dealing with concrete yet different cultural practices or cultural artifacts. This is an effective way to completely refute essentialism. In a sense, the paper is meant to be a wake-up call, instead of a fighting talk. Its main objective is not to negate or obliterate the field of “intercultural communication”, among others, but rather to save them from themselves—a true and worthy field of “intercultural communication” is a field against essentialism, instead of an accessory to essentialism, whether the commission is “before the fact” or “after the fact”.","PeriodicalId":74056,"journal":{"name":"Language and semiotic studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A skeptic’s guide to “intercultural communication”—debunking the “intercultural” and rethinking “culture”\",\"authors\":\"Hongbing Yu\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/lass-2023-0014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Starting with a critique of so-called intercultural communication, the present paper contests and challenges the prevalent and dominant essentialist views of “culture”. It is exposed that these views have a detrimental underlying logic that is both destructive and self-destructive. Instead, the paper proposes a radically new idea of culture, a minimalist approach supported by insights gleaned from contemporary semiotic inquiry. In this approach, culture is defined as a biological instinct to acquire information through modeling, that is, learning by models. This instinct is at work, or is realized, in specific acts of such modeling, resulting in cultural practices and cultural artifacts. In the case of humanity, a cultural practice is anything a human does that can be modeled by another human and a cultural artifact is any object that humans make and can model. The paper argues it is imperative to keep in mind that when we deal with the “intercultural”, we are only dealing with concrete yet different cultural practices or cultural artifacts. This is an effective way to completely refute essentialism. In a sense, the paper is meant to be a wake-up call, instead of a fighting talk. Its main objective is not to negate or obliterate the field of “intercultural communication”, among others, but rather to save them from themselves—a true and worthy field of “intercultural communication” is a field against essentialism, instead of an accessory to essentialism, whether the commission is “before the fact” or “after the fact”.\",\"PeriodicalId\":74056,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Language and semiotic studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Language and semiotic studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/lass-2023-0014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language and semiotic studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/lass-2023-0014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文从对所谓的跨文化交际的批判开始,对流行的、占主导地位的“文化”本质主义观点提出了质疑和挑战。它暴露了这些观点有一个有害的潜在逻辑,既具有破坏性又具有自我破坏性。相反,本文提出了一种全新的文化观念,一种从当代符号学研究中收集到的见解支持的极简主义方法。在这种方法中,文化被定义为一种通过建模获取信息的生物本能,即通过模型学习。这种本能在这种建模的具体行为中起作用,或者被实现,从而产生文化实践和文化产物。在人类的情况下,文化实践是人类可以被另一个人模仿的任何事情,文化工件是人类制造并可以建模的任何物体。本文认为,必须记住,当我们处理“跨文化”时,我们只处理具体但不同的文化实践或文化制品。这是彻底驳倒本质论的有效途径。从某种意义上说,这篇论文是一个警钟,而不是一场战斗。它的主要目的不是否定或抹杀“跨文化传播”领域,而是将其从自身中拯救出来——真正有价值的“跨文化传播”领域是一个反对本质主义的领域,而不是本质主义的附属品,无论该委员会是“在事实之前”还是“在事实之后”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A skeptic’s guide to “intercultural communication”—debunking the “intercultural” and rethinking “culture”
Abstract Starting with a critique of so-called intercultural communication, the present paper contests and challenges the prevalent and dominant essentialist views of “culture”. It is exposed that these views have a detrimental underlying logic that is both destructive and self-destructive. Instead, the paper proposes a radically new idea of culture, a minimalist approach supported by insights gleaned from contemporary semiotic inquiry. In this approach, culture is defined as a biological instinct to acquire information through modeling, that is, learning by models. This instinct is at work, or is realized, in specific acts of such modeling, resulting in cultural practices and cultural artifacts. In the case of humanity, a cultural practice is anything a human does that can be modeled by another human and a cultural artifact is any object that humans make and can model. The paper argues it is imperative to keep in mind that when we deal with the “intercultural”, we are only dealing with concrete yet different cultural practices or cultural artifacts. This is an effective way to completely refute essentialism. In a sense, the paper is meant to be a wake-up call, instead of a fighting talk. Its main objective is not to negate or obliterate the field of “intercultural communication”, among others, but rather to save them from themselves—a true and worthy field of “intercultural communication” is a field against essentialism, instead of an accessory to essentialism, whether the commission is “before the fact” or “after the fact”.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A poetics of “Wind in a Box” Narrative as “legal tender”: the semiotic meanings of “exchange” in Malcolm Bradbury’s Rates of Exchange Directives and references in selected coronavirus-motivated internet memes “Survival” and “death” in Céline’s novels Discourse analysis of knowledge-based live streaming: a case study of East Buy streamer Dong Yuhui
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1