Cover not available

In:A Pragmatic Agenda for Healthcare: Fostering inclusion and active participation through shared understanding
Edited by Sarah Bigi and Maria Grazia Rossi
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 338] 2023
► pp. 106–123

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

Chapter 4
Face-to-face intercultural communication and mediated intercultural communication as related to health communication

 | State University of New York
Published online: 17 November 2023
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.338.04kec
Abstract
The chapter argues that any communication happens in a specific context composed of three aspects: individual experience-based sociocultural aspect (CA), actual situational aspect (SA), and aspect of language as a tool of communication (LA). CA refers to the attitudinal frame of reference a person develops throughout his/her life and brings into the interaction through intersubjectivity. SA includes the psychological, social and physical variables affecting common ground building. LA means the language repertoire of the individual with its conceptual knowledge. These aspects are always present but affect interaction in different degrees depending on whether it happens face-to-face or through a medium and it is situated closer to the intracultural or intercultural end of the continuum. The chapter discusses the substantiations of these aspects.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Intersubjectivity
    • 2.1The role of intersubjectivity
    • 2.2Intersubjectivity in mediated communication
  • 3.Common ground building
  • 4.Conceptual knowledge
    • 4.1Nature of conceptual knowledge
    • 4.2Linguistic knowledge and conceptual knowledge
    • 4.3Conceptual knowledge and different registers
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
References (42)
References
Baraldi, Claudio, and Laura Luppi. 2015. “Ways of Overcoming Linguistic Barriers in Healthcare Intercultural Communication.” Language and Intercultural Communication 15: 581–99. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bates, Daniel G., and Fred Plog. 1980. Cultural Anthropology (2nd ed.). New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bierwisch, Manfred, and Robert Schreuder. 1992. “From Concepts to Lexical Items.” Cognition 42: 23–60. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bigi, Sarah, and Maria Grazia Rossi. 2020. “Considering Mono- and Multilingual Interactions on a Continuum: An Analysis of Interactions in Medical Settings.” In Multilingual Healthcare, edited by Christiane Hohenstein, and Magdalène Lévy-Tödter, 12–33. FOM-Edition. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biocca, Frank, Chad Harms, and Judee K. Burgoon. 2003. “Toward a More Robust Theory and Measure of Social Presence: Review and Suggested Criteria.” Presence 12: 456–480. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blommaert, Jan. 1998. “Different Approaches to Intercultural Communication: A Critical Survey.” Plenary lecture, Lernen und Arbeiten in einer international vernetzten und multikulturellen Gesellschaft, Expertentagung Universität Bremen, Institut für Projektmanagement und Witschaftsinformatik (IPMI), 27–28 February. Retrieved from [URL].
Brooks, Emma. 2022. “Translanguaging Health.” Applied Linguistics 43 (3): 517–537. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. 2009. “Context and Common Ground.” In Concise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics, edited by Jacob L. Mey, 116–119. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., Robert Schreuder, and Samuel Butterick. 1983. “Common Ground and the Understanding of Demonstrative Reference.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 22: 245–258. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., and Susan. E. Brennan. 1991. “Grounding in Communication.” In Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition, edited by Lauren B. Resnick, John M. Levine, and Stephanie D. Teasley, 127–149. American Psychological Association. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Correa-Chávez, Maricela, and Amy L. D. Roberts. 2012. “A Cultural Analysis is Necessary in Understanding Intersubjectivity.” Culture and Psychology 18 (1): 99–108. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cox, Antoon, and Shuangyu Li. 2019. “The Medical Consultation through the Lenses of Language and Social Interaction Theory.” Advances in Health Sciences Education 25: 1–17.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garcia, Ofelia, and Wei Li. 2018. “Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education.” Bellaterra Journal of Teaching and Learning Language and Literature 11 (1): 85. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gillespie, Alex, and Flora Cornish. 2010. “Intersubjectivity: Towards a Dialogical Analysis.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 40: 19–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. “Intersubjectivity: towards a dialogical analysis". Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour. 40 (1): 19–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Graci, Roberto. 2023. “Towards an Extended Notion of Common Ground in Aphasiology.” Intercultural Pragmatics 20 (1): 29-49. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gruber, Joseph S. 1985. “Lexical, Conceptual, and Encyclopedic Meaning.” Quaderni di Semantica 2: 254–267.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gumperz, John J. 1982. Discourse Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gumperz, John J., and Celia Roberts. 1991. “Understanding in intercultural encounters.” In The Pragmatics of Intercultural and International Communication, edited by Blommaert Jan and Jef Verschueren, 51–90. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1979. Communication and the Evolution of Society. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
He, Sui. 2021. “Cognitive Metaphor Theories in Translation Studies: Toward a Dual-model Parametric Approach.” Intercultural Pragmatics 18 (1): 25–52. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hildreth, Paul M., Chris Kimble, and Peter Wright. 1998. “Computer Mediated Communications and Communities of Practice.” In Proceedings of Ethicomp’ 98, March 1998, Erasmus University, The Netherlands, 275–286.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hymes, Dell H. 1968. “The Ethnography of Speaking”. In Readings in the Sociology of Language, edited by Joshua A. Fishman, 99–138. The Hague/Paris: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kecskes, Istvan. 2010. “The Paradox of Communication: A Socio-cognitive Approach.” Pragmatics and Society 1 (1): 50–73. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. Intercultural Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. “Intracultural Communication and Intercultural Communication: Are They Different?” International Review of Pragmatics 7: 171–194. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2019a. English as a Lingua Franca: The Pragmatic Perspective. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2019b. “Impoverished Pragmatics? The Semantics-Pragmatics Interface from an Intercultural Perspective.” Intercultural Pragmatics 6 (5): 489–517. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2021a. “Processing Implicatures in English as a Lingua Franca Communication.” Lingua 256. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2021b. “Sociocognitive Pragmatics.” In Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics, edited by Michael Haugh, Dániel Z. Kádár, and Marina Terkourafi, 592–615. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kecskes, Istvan, and Fenghui Zhang. 2009. “Activating, Seeking, and Creating Common Ground: A Socio-cognitive Approach.” Pragmatics and Cognition 17 (2): 331–355. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kiefer, Ferenc. 1990. “Linguistic, Conceptual and Encyclopedic Knowledge: Some Implications for Lexicography.” In BudaLEX ‘88 Proceedings: Papers from the 3rd International EURALEX Congress, edited by T. Magay, and J. Zigány. Budapest.
Liu, Chen-Chung and Jia-Hsung Lee. 2005. “Prompting Conceptual Understanding with Computer-mediated Peer Discourse and Knowledge Acquisition Techniques.” British Journal of Educational Technology 36 (5): 821–837. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miranda, Shaila, Robert Bostrom, and Leslie Albert. 2004. “Communication Media and Intersubjectivity in Small Groups.” AMCIS 2004 Proceedings: 185.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oh, Catherine S., Jeremy N. Bailenson, and Gregory F. Welch. 2018. “A Systematic Review of Social Presence: Definition, Antecedents, and Implications.” Frontiers in Robotics AI 5:114. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rampton, Ben. 1995. Crossing: Language and Ethnicity among Adolescents. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Short, John, Ederyn Williams, and Bruce Christie. 1976. The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. London: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Slobin, Dan, I. 1997. “Mind, Code, and Text.” In Essays on Language Function and Language Type: Dedicated to T. Givón, edited by Joan L. Bybee, John Haiman and Sandra A. Thompson, 437–467. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Song, Ji Hee, Candice R. Hollenbeck, and George M. Zinkhan. 2008. “The Value of Human Warmth: Social Presence Cues and Computer-Mediated Communications.” Advances in Consumer Research 357: 93–794.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walther, Joseph. B. 1992. “Interpersonal Effects in Computer-mediated Interaction: A Relational Perspective.” Communication Research 19 (1): 52–90. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1996. “Computer-mediated Communication: Impersonal, Interpersonal, and Hyperpersonal Interaction.” Communication Research 23 (1): 3–43. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2015. “Social Information Processing Theory (CMC).” In The International Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Communication, edited by Charles R. Berger, Michael E. Roloff, Steve R. Wilson, James Price Dillard, John Caughlin, and Denise Solomon, 1–13. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Hillen, Marij A., Maria Grazia Rossi, Aranka Akkermans, Leonie A.L. Baatenburg de Jong, Jolanda H.M. Dobbe, Tanja Henkel, Vicky Lehmann, Susan J. Oudbier, Tanja J. de Rijke, Ellen M.A. Smets, Thomas G.V. Cherpanath, Marc van Heerde, Anton H. van Kaam, Moniek van de Loo, Marcus J. Schultz, Job B.M. van Woensel, Sanne Prins & Mirjam A. de Vos
2025. Clinicians’ use of metaphoric language in conversations with families of critically ill patients in the intensive care unit. Patient Education and Counseling 137 ► pp. 108813 ff. DOI logo
Li, Chengtuan, Jing Han & Zhiwei Zhao
2025. Establishing emergent common ground. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue