Cover not available

Article published In: Pragmatics
Vol. 35:3 (2025) ► pp.448–473

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

Why not focus on combating the virus?

On the active and passive egocentrism in communications

 | East China Normal University
Published online: 30 April 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.22032.zuo
Abstract
“Egocentrism” in communication usually refers to the fact that interlocutors are subconsciously influenced by their cognitive environment. However, being egocentric may be the product of the interlocutors’ conscious choice rather than the unavoidable impact of cognitive experience. In order to explore some emotive conflicts during the fight against COVID-19 in China, this study distinguishes active egocentrism from passive egocentrism. We further contend that the interplay of the cognitive environment and the active assessment of social context differ in speaker processing and hearer processing, which may result in emotive miscommunications. The facets of the actual social context assessed by interlocutors are also investigated to explain the formation of active egocentrism.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The conscious factors in emotive communication
  • 3.The procedural difference in expression and interpretation
    • 3.1The continuum of cooperation and egocentrism
    • 3.2From the hearer’s perspective
    • 3.3From the speaker’s perspective
  • 4.The individual assessment of the actual situation and the active egocentrism
    • 4.1Female nurses’ dedication
    • 4.2The medical expert’s advice
    • 4.3The praise from the fandom
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
References (63)
References
Androutsopoulos, Jannis. 2014. “Languaging When Contexts Collapse: Audience Design in Social Networking.” Discourse, Context & Media 41: 62–73. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bednarek, Monika. 2017. “Fandom”. In Pragmatics of Social Media, ed. by Christian R. Hoffmann, and Wolfram Bublitz, 545–572. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bezuidenhout, Anne. 2013. “Perspective Taking in Conversation: A Defense of Speaker Non-Egocentricity.” Journal of Pragmatics 481: 4–16. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bou-Franch, Patricia, and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich. 2018. “Relational Work in Multimodal Networked Interactions on Facebook.” Internet Pragmatics 1 (1): 134–160. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Caffi, Claudia, and Richard W. Janney. 1994. “Toward a Pragmatics of Emotive Communication.” Journal of Pragmatics 22 (3–4): 325–373. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Xinren. 2019. Critical Pragmatic Studies on Chinese Public Discourse. New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan. 2011. Impoliteness: Using Language to Cause Offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Decety, Jean, and Jessica A. Sommerville. 2003. “Shared Representations between Self and Other: A Social Cognitive Neuroscience View.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7 (12): 527–533. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Saint Preux, Anna Doquin, and Ocarina Masid Blanco. 2021. “The Power of Conceptual Metaphors in the Age of Pandemic: The Influence of the WAR and SPORT Domains on Emotions and Thoughts.” Language & Communication 811: 37–47. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Freidson, Eliot. 1970. Professional Dominance. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Giora, Rachel. 1997. “Understanding Figurative and Literal Language: The Graded Salience Hypothesis.” Cognitive Linguistics 8 (3): 183–206. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1955. “On Face-Work: An Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction.” Psychiatry 18 (3): 213–231. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1967. Interaction Ritual. Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1981. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gordon, David Paul. 1983. “Hospital Slang for Patients: Crocks, Gomers, Groks, and Others.” Language in Society 12 (2): 173–185. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halász, Katinka. 2018. “Misunderstandings in Communicative Language Use.” Sparchtheorie and Germanistische Linguistik 121: 237–273.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haugh, Michael. 2008. “The Place of Intention in the Interactional Achievement of Implicature.” In Intention, Common Ground and the Egocentric Speaker-Hearer, eds. by Istvan Kecskes, and Jacob Mey, 45–86. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. “Im/Politeness, Social Practice and the Participation Order.” Journal of Pragmatics 581: 52–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hofstede, Geert. 1980. “Culture and Organizations.” International Studies of Management & Organization 10 (4): 15–41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ivaskó, Livia, and Enikő Németh T. 2002. “Types and Reasons of Communicative Failures.” Modern Filológiai Közlemények 41: 31–43.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jaworska, Sylvia. 2021. “Investigating Media Representations of the Coronavirus in the UK, USA and Germany: What Can a Comparative Corpus-Based Discourse Analysis Contribute to Our Understanding of the Covid-19 Pandemic?” In Viral Discourse, ed. by Rodney H. Jones, 26–36. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jenkins, Henry. 2006. Fans, Bloggers, and Gamers: Exploring Participatory Culture. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Textual Poachers: Television Fans and Participatory Culture. New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jenkins, Henry, Mizuko Ito, and danah boyd. 2016. Participatory Culture in a Networked Era. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kecskes, Istvan. 2008. “Dueling Context: A Dynamic Model of Meaning.” Journal of Pragmatics 40 (3): 385–406. 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
Keysar, Boaz. 2007. “Communication and Miscommunication: The Role of Egocentric Processes.” Intercultural Pragmatics 4 (1): 71–84. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langlotz, Andreas, and Miriam A. Locher. 2012. “Ways of Communicating Emotional Stance in Online Disagreements.” Journal of Pragmatics 44 (12): 1591–1606. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. “The Role of Emotions in Relational Work.” Journal of Pragmatics 581: 87–107. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Locher, Miriam. A., and Richard J. Watts. 2005. “Politeness Theory and Relational Work.” Journal of Politeness Research 1 (1): 9–33. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. “Relational Work and Impoliteness: Negociating Norms of Linguistic Behavior.” In Impolinetess in Language. Studies on Its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, eds. by Derek Bousfield, and Miriam A. Locher, 77–99. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lukes, Steven. 1978. “Power and Authority.” In A History of Sociological Analysis, ed. by Thomas B. Bottomore, and Robert A. Nisbet, 633–676. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lupton, Deborah. 1997. “Doctors on the Medical Profession.” Sociology of Health & Illness 191: 480–497. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martikainen, Jari, and Inari Sakki. 2021. “Boosting Nationalism through COVID-19 Images: Multimodal Construction of the Failure of the ‘Dear Enemy’ with COVID-19 in the National Press.” Discourse & Communication 15 (4): 388–414. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mercier, Hugo, and Dan Sperber. 2011. “Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34 (2): 57–74. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miller, Vincent. 2008. “New Media, Networking and Phatic Culture.” Convergence 14 (4): 387–400. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moeschler, Jacques. 2004. “Intercultural [ragmatics: A Cognitive Approach.” Intercultural Pragmatics 1 (1): 49–70. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. “Pragmatics, Propositional and Non-Propositional Effects: Can a Theory of Utterance Interpretation Account for Emotions in Verbal Communication?” Social Science Information 48 (3): 447–464. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Németh T., Enikő. 2015. “The Role of Perspectives in Various Forms of Language Use.” Semiotica 2031: 53–78. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oyserman, Daphna, Heather M. Coon, and Markus Kemmelmeier. 2002. “Rethinking Individualism and Collectivism: Evaluation of Theoretical Assumptions and Meta-Analysis.” Psychological Bulletin 128 (1): 3–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Padilla Cruz, Manuel. 2017. “Interlocutors-Related and Hearer-Specific Causes of Misunderstanding: Processing Strategy, Confirmation Bias and Weak Vigilance.” Research in Language 15 (1): 11–36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Piantadosi, Steven T., Harry Tily, and Edward Gibson. 2011. “Word Lengths Are Optimized for Efficient Communication.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108 (9): 3526–3529. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jones, Rodney H. 2021. “Order out of Chaos: Coronavirus Communication and the Construction of Competence.” In Viral Discourse, ed. by Rodney H. Jones, 69–78. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruusuvuori, Johanna. 2000. Control in the Medical Consultation: Practices of Giving and Receiving the Reason for the Visit in Primary Health Care. Tampere: Tampere University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schröder, Ulrike. 2018. “Face as an Interactional Construct in the Context of Connectedness and Separateness: An Empirical Approach to Culture-Specific Interpretations of Face.” Pragmatics 28 (4): 547–572.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shintel, Hadas, and Boaz Keysar. 2009. “Less is More: A Minimalist Account of Joint Action in Communication.” Topics in Cognitive Science 1 (2): 260–273. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shuvalov, Denis, and Enikő Németh T. 2023. “Perspective-Taking in Argumentative Discourse.” Kazan Linguistic Journal 6 (3): 431–441. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, Helen. 2005. “(Im)politeness, Face and Perceptions of Rapport: Unpackaging Their Bases and Interrelationships.” Journal of Politeness Research 1 (1): 95–119. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. “Face, (Im)politeness and Rapport.” In Culturally Speaking: Culture, Communication and Politeness Theory, ed. by Helen Spencer-Oatey, 11–47. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, Helen, and Peter Franklin. 2009. Intercultural interaction: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Intercultural Communication. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, Helen. 2011. “Conceptualising ‘the Relational’ in Pragmatics: Insights from Metapragmatic Emotion And (Im)Politeness Comments.” Journal of Pragmatics 431: 3565–3578. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Starr, Rebecca Lurie, Christian Go, and Vincent Pak. 2022. “Keep Calm, Stay Safe, and Drink Bubble Tea: Commodifying the Crisis of COVID-19 in Singapore Advertising.” Language in Society: 1–27. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa, and Anssi Peräkylä. 2014. “Three Orders in the Organization of Human Action: On the Interface between Knowledge, Power, and Emotion in Interaction and Social Relations.” Language in Society 43 (2): 185–207. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thomas, Jenny. A. 1995. Meaning in Interaction. An Introduction to Pragmatics. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yu, Hangyan, Lu Huiling, and Jie Hu. 2021. “A Corpus-Based Critical Discourse Analysis of News Reports on the Covid-19 Pandemic in China and the UK.” International Journal of English Linguistics 11 (2): 36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yus, Francisco. 2018. “The Interface between Pragmatics and Internet-Mediated Communication.” In Pragmatics and Its Interfaces, ed. by Cornelia Ilie, and Neal R. Norrick, 267–290. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre, and Dan Sperber. 2004. “Relevance Theory.” In Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Laurence R. Horn, and Gregory L. Ward, 607–632. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zuo, Baiyao. 2018. “Emotive Misunderstanding within an Extended Relevance Theory.” Intercultural Pragmatics 15 (5): 627–650. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue