Entry 8: My Final E-Reflection

As week 13 draws to a close, I am finally greeted by a small sense of relief. After all this would finally mean that I can just concentrate studying for the final exams and not have to worry for about some impending deadlines that forever seem to clog the week 12/13 period.

My thoughts about after taking GEK1036 is that the module was worth the bid points that I spent on it. This is because the module not only taught me to be more culturally aware, but it has also allowed me to practice my research, report writing and presentational skills.

Below are some of the highlights of the module for me:

The well structured course content which covers both macroscopic cross - communications topics like speech acts and speech events and microscopic topics like CMC and face and politeness has given me a taste of what cultural studies would be like without going too much into the details. The only downside was that we didn’t manage to cover professional communication, due to the Good Friday public holiday. I would think that this particular topic would be quite applicable to graduating students that are heading into the workforce.

Similarly, the opportunity to be able to work a project on a particular discourse topic of our choice brings depth to the course. As I was pretty tied down with my final year project, I decided to do an individual project so that my peers wouldn’t have to accommodate my crazy lab schedules when finding a common time to meet. The advantage of doing an individual project is that I set my ‘own meeting times’, and I work when I feel like working. The only downside is that there isn’t someone to reaffirm/challenge your ideas. However, I thought that the project proposal and literature review assignments serve as an excellent affirmation to me so that I know my project was heading in the correct direction.

If I had to suggest ways to improve the course, I feel that Dr Deng could look into integrating the class activity between the lecture, and not leave it till after the lecture. This would allow the students to keep an even more attentive mind, because active group discussion can serve to engage the students. Having said that, I think the tutorials activities should be kept the same because they serve as an excellent platform to substantiate the lecture content that was covered in class.

Lastly, I would like to thank Dr Deng for taking the time to comment on our blog posts. I really appreciate your feedback that you have given me for all my posts. I would also like to thank my fellow peers for their active participation during class, and for making our class so lively! All the best for the coming exams!

Entry 7: Different Different, But Same

Week 9: Communicative Situations 2 - Cross-Gender Interactions

Does a men's brain really look like that?

John Gray adopted the metaphor “Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus”, likening men and women to the classical Roman god Mars and goddess Venus as ideal types in his widely successful book of the same title. Hence, it does not come as a surprise that there are indeed differences between cross-gender and same-sex interactions.

The first theory that accounts for this difference is ‘dominance’ theory. As the power continuum is not allocated to man and women equally, it often results in man having more “power” than women.

The second theory is called the ‘difference theory’ and this is often link to biological factors (hormones) and socialization patterns of the 2 genders.

I believe the major fallacy of both theories is that is homogenizes both genders to behave in a certain way. If the above 2 theories stand, how do we account for men who are known as the “lady’s men” or women who are known as the “men’s lady” (is the such a term?). These 2 groups of people don’t seem to fall under the classification of being either man or women. Even Gray realizes that his "Martians" and "Venusians” stereotypes cannot be applied blindly to individuals. In the same light I think the above theories can be used as a framework to analyse cross-gender interaction, but it is by no means to be taken like the holy grail.

So if men and women are that different? Wouldn’t it be tempting to be able to get in to the heads of the opposite gender (just for a day) and get a sneak peak of what is actually going on in their brains? Maybe those so-called “lady’s men” are can really read women’s thoughts, or maybe simply they just bat for the other team. Anyhow, this brings to mind the film “What Women Wants” that starred Mel Gibson as a male chauvinist, who is able to read the mind of women after encountering a bathroom accident.

Maybe if we could all read the opposite gender’s thoughts, it would save us all a lot of trouble? But then again, without the ‘trouble’, there wouldn’t be ‘the fun’ right?

Entry 6: A Face-Threatening ‘Affair’

Week 7: Cultural Systems 2 – Face, Politeness and Power

The two most prominent approaches to the study of linguistic politeness are the conversational-maxim view by Leech (1980, 1983) and the face management view (Brown & Levinson 1987).

As I didn’t want my entry to just contain blatant materials that are lifted from the lecture notes, I racked my brains to find relevant examples to exemplify the use of these two approaches.

Then it struck me! The headline news for the past week had revolved around Jack Neo (a local film maker) and his extra-marital affairs that recently came to light. Thus, I decided to use the 2 approaches of linguistic politeness to assess his press conference clip (see below), where he made a public apology for his affair.

I feel that my analysis is relevant to the contents of the press conference, because the speaker (Jack Neo), being a well-known public figure in Singapore is using the press conference to maintain a harmonious relationship with the general public by seeking their forgiveness.

Disclaimer: My analysis of the press conference is purely from the angle of using linguistic expression in the cultural context, and I would not be commenting on my personal opinions with regards to Jack Neo’s adulterous ways.

http://www.razor.tv/site/servlet/segment/main/news/44818.html

In the clip, you would see that he expressed deep remorse over his adulterous actions and he apologized to the media by saying “I caused this saga. All this is my fault. It has nothing to do with anyone else… Please give me a chance.” After which he is seemingly over-whelmed by his emotions and his eyes started brimming with tears.

I believe he is employing the sympathy maxim here, by ‘maximizing sympathy between self and other’. In this instance, this would be the most appropriate maxim to adopt as he is seeking for the public’s forgiveness on the affair.

Following Jack Neo’s address, it was his wife’s turn to address the media.

http://www.razor.tv/site/servlet/segment/main/news/44820.html

She attempts to seek the understanding of the media and began by saying “I am not an artiste. I don’t know how to handle this (the affair & the press conference)”. I believe she started off with a modesty maxim, minimizing praise to self, so that it reduces the social distance between her and the media. Subsequently, it would help the viewers to sympathize with her and her current situation.

She goes on to professed her love for Jack Neo, marriage and her family and said that “I have already suffered a lot. Please spare me.” The of the word “please spare me” puts the viewers in a higher status and allows us to assume that we have got the power in deciding whether Jack Neo’s acts should be forgiven.

Also, when faced with this face-threatening act (FTA), Jack Neo’s wife (Irene) redressed the FTA with positive politeness. Saying that she has already suffered a lot, she is attempting to demonstrate closeness and solidarity with the media reporters and ultimately the viewers at home. This is because one seldom confesses their’s suffering to another person, unless he or she is a close friend and/or family member.

On a personal note, I do feel that this press conference seemed somewhat staged, especially the dramatic exit. Having said that, I think it is really up to Irene to decide for herself if her husband is to be given a second chance

Entry 5: Singapore's Dimensions of Cultural Variability

Week 6: Communications Systems 1: Components and Representation

Hofstede highlighted in his studies 4 major dimensions along which national culture differ. They were classified as: (1) power distance (2) individualism versus collectivism (3) uncertainty accepting versus uncertainty avoidance and (4) masculinity versus femininity.

For my entry this week, I will be looking at these 4 dimensions of cultural variability by cross-examining Singapore’s ranking for each of the dimensions found in Hofstede’s study. Thereafter, I would attempt to give my two cent’s worth on our country’s ranking for each of the dimensions.

(1) Power-Distance

Singapore was ranked pretty high up in the power-distance index, which implies that people in Singapore recognizes and accept a hierarchy (including within families) based on factors such as age, gender and family background.

Since our independence in 1965, it has been driven into us that we are a small country with limited land and no natural resources. Hence, for us to thrive as a nation, citizens understand that we need to abide by certain rules and fulfill certain social objectives that are set out by our government in order for our nation to prosper.

This could have either consciously or subconsciously instill in us that it is acceptable for people in higher positions to have certain amount of control our people with less authority. I guess it also suggests that a society's level of inequality is endorsed by the followers as much as by the leaders. Power and inequality, of course, are extremely fundamental facts of any society and anybody with some international experience will be aware that 'all societies are unequal, but some are more unequal than others'.

(2) Individualism versus collectivism

In general, high power distance countries tend to be a feature of collectivist societies. Hence it did not come as a surprise when Hofstede's ranking found that Singapore, being a high power distance country, was a collectivistic society.

I believe the reason why our nation is a collectivistic country goes back to the fact that we are still a relatively young nation and it is important for the government to inculcate a certain level of national loyalty in our people. After all, human resource is our only and most precious resource. If we do not instill a certain level of national loyalty amongst our people, we could end up losing our 'human talents' to other countries.

(3) Uncertainity accepting versus uncertainty avoidance

Our country was found to be on the extreme right of the continuum, i.e. our people were extremely tolerant to uncertainties. Hofstede mentioned that people of culture where uncertainty can be tolerated are generally more dynamic and are more ready to face changes.

This somewhat surprises me, because Singaporeans are generally deemed to be “kiasee” (very risk adverse), so it seems to disagree with Hofstede’s findings.

Personally, I feel that most Singaporeans are not as risk-taking due to the fact that our course of lives seemed to be already been planned out for us for at least the first 20 years of our lives. If you think about it, most children advance from their (compulsory) primary to tertiary education. Seldom do they evaluating if they could have certain talents like in the sporting arena or in the performing arts that is worth developing, thinking that these areas would not be a viable career option in Singapore. Hence, I do not exactly agree with Hofstede’s finding on this particular dimension.

I think his results were derived from people that grew up in the 1970s (since he conducted his studies in the 1980s). People who grew up in the post independence era could be more risk taking, because we were still a young nation then and individuals were still trying to find their foothold in the society. Comparatively, I feel that many of our younger generation are less risk-taking these days, often relying on “tested and proven formulas” to tackle their day to day tasks.

(4) Masculinity versus femininity

Singapore is in the middle of Hofstede’s theoretical range pertaining to the degree to which masculine or feminine traits prevail. I guess the reason for this is because materialistic possessions and sex roles are clearly differentiated in our culture. Moreover, we come from a strong asian background which values the roles that a man and women should play. However, with the influx of western culture in our society, there is a blurring of gender roles like fathers are no longer deemed to be the sole bread winner of the house and occupations like engineers that were traditionally a male-dominated industry are opening up to members of the opposite sex as well.

Overall, I feel that Hosfstede has made some very precious insights to our Singapore culture, but it could be time that the study was re-conducted for dimensions like uncertainity avoidance in particular.

Entry 4: Linear Oriental Writings?

Week 5: Written Discourse

This week’s lecture on written discourse has enabled me to understand the cultural-specific ways of writing by selected cultural group, particularly the Chinese. Kaplan (1972) pointed out that the “oriental” written discourse takes a circular form whereby the writer often looks at a topic from a variety of angles, adopting an indirect approach and only coming to the topic sentence at the end.

Having received my entire Chinese Education in Singapore, I had been taught to write in a slightly different manner. I could still recall how my Higher Mother Tongue teacher taught me to tackle writing a Chinese argumentative essay at O Levels, or what some of us know as “ 报章报道”.

The entire essay would usually be written in this typical format:

1. Brief Introduction of the topic
2. State your stand for the subject matter
3. Topic Sentence 1 with substantiation in relation to your stand
4. Topic Sentence 2 with substantiation in relation to your stand
5. Recommendations to rectify/improve the current situation
6. Conclusion

As one would be quick to pick out, this style of writing seems to coincide with the style of writing that we were taught at A Levels to tackle the General Paper. Also, this format follows a typical expository discourse in English beginning with a topic statement, followed by subdivisions supported by examples and illustrations.

However, Kaplan (1966) highlighted that “Oriental” writing is usually indirect, and the indirectness could be the influence of the “eight-legged essay”, an essay form that has been the standard device of the civil service examinations from the middle of 15^th century to early 20^th century. His conclusion can seem somewhat over simplistic, as I feel that he fails to consider his observation along side with the social-pragmatic factors that surrounded China in that era.

Bearing in mind that Kaplan study was done in 1966, most of his respondents could have been brought up in the post Civil War Era (1949 – present). At that time, many sensitive political issues could not be discussed openly by the media and educational institutions. This could have inadvertently led to the formation of an indirect style of writing, so that the journalists and scholars could use various rhetorical questions, analogies and anecdotes to reveal their intention in an indirect way.

This leads me to ponder if we were to compare the paragraph development of current local Singaporean Chinese writers and Mainland Chinese writers, would we pick a vast difference in their written discourse?

With the process of globalization taking place and the assortment of westernized media/literature that are hurl at the Chinese people, it could impact of their style of written discourse in a huge way and this could result in a “blurring” of writing style amongst the various language groups.

Entry 3: The Other End of The Line

Week 4: Spoken Discourse

Let me first amuse my readers with a comic strip about a telephone conversation between 2 animals.

The focus of this week’s lecture is on understanding speech events involving a broad-spectrum use of spoken discourse in areas like narratives, telephone openings and use of listener responses in conversation.

My entry would focus on the Singaporean Phone Opening.

My family usually has our reunion dinner at my grandfather’s place. However, we decided to have it at our house this year and my mother wanted me to drop a phone call to my grandfather on Friday to remind him about the dinner before Saturday.

The telephone conversation below was translated from mandarin.

Opening of the phone call:

(Ring)

GP: Hello

Me: Hello, Ah-Gong ah?

GP: Guangyi! Have you eaten?

Me: Yes I have Ah-Gong. What about you?

GP: I have already eaten. What are you doing now?

Me: Oh I am watching TV. My mother wants me to remind you…

Based on Sun (2004), the above conversation would be classified as other-orientated inquires. This is because the above telephone conversation focuses on the addressee’s general state and current activities.

My phone conversation with my grandfather might not be truly representative for all phone conversation that takes place between all grandfathers and grandchildren, but I feel that the general pattern is pretty similar to the eight moves that Sun (2004) identified in his study.

I shall now attempt to break down my phone conversation using Sun’s interactional moves framework.

(1) Greeting: Hello?/Hello, Ah-Gong ah

(2) Addressing: Hello, Ah-Gong ah

(3) Identification: Guangyi!

(4) Question-after-you: Have you eaten?

Like pointed out in Sun’s study, this demonstrates the phatic nature of the inquiry and these inquiries indicate to the addressee that the speaker is ‘‘favorably disposed to him’’. Like in my case, I would believe that my grandfather is favourably disposed to me.

(5) Affirmation of reconnecting: Yes, I have Ah-Gong. What about you?

I believe my reply constitutes to what Sun mentioned in his article that when that both participants appreciate their relationship and any efforts at maintaining the bond can be picked out in (5). He also mentioned that these comments also legitimized the foregrounding of such remarks at the beginning of their interaction prior to phatic inquiries such as ‘Have you eaten’, given the equal relationship between these conversational partners.

(6) Voice recognition comments: Not applicable.

Although the caller (me) did not offered self-identification, the callee (my grandpa) made it clear that he had actually know who was calling him by acknowledging my name in (3).

(7) Disturbance Check: What are you doing now?

In Chinese culture, asking what the caller could be one of the means of starting telephone conversations between familiar counterparts. Or in my grandfather’s case, he might just want to find out if I any other important things to attend to. If not, he could chat a little more with me on the phone.

(8) Prioritized communicative acts: My mother wants me to remind you…

Overall, I agree with Sun that small talk in Chinese discourse is both constitutive and reflective: through linguistic choices, callers and callees project their perceptions of the relationships between them and construct discourse interactions accordingly, like in the case of my telephone conversation with me and my grandfather.

Now let me end my entry, with a movie trailer from this 2008 movie called "The Other End of The Line".

I watched this movie quite a while ago (on YouTube... and it's still on YouTube!). I was not particularly inspired by the movie, but I thought the inter-cultural relationship concept that transpired based on a telephone call was a interesting one, though unconvincing in real life. Well for anyone who might be suffering a writer's block after the festive holidays, maybe watching this movie might give you some inspiration. Ha Ha!

Happy Lunar New Year to all!

Entry 2: Yearly Lunar Episodes

Week 3: Speech Events

Following Mary Fong’s (2000) study of the ‘Luck Talk’ in celebrating the Chinese New Year, I was inspired to write a follow-up piece examining Singaporean Chinese people’s ways of speaking during the New Year event.

To conduct my study, I roped in my sister’s (Age: 19) and mother’s (Age: 49) help. I interviewed them separately on areas mentioned by Fong in her article. Though my study is not meant to be exhaustive, it suggests that some ‘Luck Talk’ does permeate conversations during the Lunar New Year, and it happens more so during the festive season than in everyday talk.

I focussed on the 2 research questions that Mary Fong highlighted:

1. What is the meaning of bad luck and good luck?
2. What are the speech acts of 'Luck Talk' related to the beliefs of good and bad luck of the Singaporean people during our Chinese New Year celebration?

Below are their responses (edited for succinctness):

Question 1:

Overall, both my sister and mother responded in a similar fashion saying bad luck is when things do not go your way all the time. Typical examples would include misfortunes in life, like loss of money, sudden lost of loved ones and inability to reach certain goals at work. Good luck is the opposite of bad luck. It happens when things seemingly go your way and you meet good fortunes in most of the things you set out to do.

However, my mother added that bad luck and good luck changes from year to year for a person and one can carry out certain acts to improve one’s luck.

Question 2:

Generally, both participants agreed with Fong’s findings that greeting and well wishes are exchanged to express good wishes and greetings for the purpose of creating a happy ambience and sharing hopes of good luck with one another to start off the Lunar New Year.

On the portion about positive conversation, my sister highlighted that a proto-typical positive conversation that follows after exchanging greetings would include questions like:

• Are you still studying?
• What are you majoring in?
• Which year of study are you in?
• Do you have any boyfriends?

What is interesting in that she mentioned that she is usually asked similar questions yearly by the same relatives.

This leads me to ponder if this constitutes to a positive conversation after all? Yes, you can view it as your relative being concerned about what’s going on in your life and he/she is trying to be positive by asking you seemingly forward-looking questions. However, if he/she has truly paid attention, would he/she still be asking you the same questions yearly?

No doubt, this situation usually takes place more often between distant relatives, it has become a speech event that never fails to occur take between my sister and some of my relatives during the festive season.

My stand is that I deem these speech events to be somewhat positive in nature, and it could also be a way to avoid saying words that signify death, sickness, poverty, or anything else unlucky so as not to invite bad luck for the coming year.

To my fellow GEK 1036 peer(s) who have encountered similar situations before, what is your take on it?

Entry 1: Responding to Compliments: How will the world change?

Week 2: Speech Acts

When someone compliments you for your new haircut, bag or simply for your efforts in a project, how would you respond without coming across as being arrogant or over-the-top to the extent of sounding fake?

After an insightful lesson on compliment responding, I was deeply intrigued by this particular speech act in pragmatics. Being the most studied speech act in pragmatics, it has continued to draw attention from various academics of pragmatics, particularly compliment responding amongst Chinese.

Chen (1993) finds that Chinese he compliment responses (CRs) are characterized by rejection, whereby speakers typically denigrate the object of the compliment when they respond to compliments. As this paper was written almost 2 decades ago, I believe that changes in the compliment response behavior amongst Chinese could have evolved.

Chen and Yang (2009) affirmed my thoughts when they replicated Chen’s (1993) study with a same research site (Xi’an, China) and a similar subject population (university students from a local university). Their research showed that Xi’an Chinese are now found to overwhelmingly accept compliments. In fact, they accept compliments as much as do speakers of many Western languages such as English and German. The authors attributed this change to the influx of Western cultural influences that has occurred in the City of Xi’an since the early 1990s.

The validity of the above research could also be transposed onto Singapore’s context. Being a Chinese brought up in Singapore, our traditons and beliefs are largely influenced by the western culture. This has directly impacted the evolution of our speech acts and most Singaporean Chinese are generally accepting of compliments. It seems that as we are slowly discarding our sense of modesty for a more confident self; and leads me to wonder whether if our Western counterparts are also undergoing any changes in their self-image?

In this case, this evolution could bring about a set of speech acts that could be utilized across the globe. In a fast shrinking world where contact between cultures and languages is becoming the norm, I am not surprised with an increased understanding of the pragmatics of different cultures as well as how different cultures will influence each other, a set of “globalized speech acts” could be reached and recognized.