Dar’ya Hidulyak

Chernivtsi University

Non-verbal Communication

Although language can be understood as the main way of communication between humans, it is not the only means. Non-verbal communication can be classified under the following headings:kinesics, proxemics, appearance, posture, paralanguage.

Kinesics - is a relatively far reaching expression for body language, a major factor that can differ from cultures to cultures, in particular when no, or little visual information is available on the other culture. One example of such a major misinterpretation is, when Khrushchev visited the US at the height of the cold war, he greeted the press with a clasping of his hands, shaking them over each shoulder. This expression is understood to be a sign of greeting of friends in the former USSR, symbolizing the embracing of a good friend. In the US this gesture is understood to be the symbol of the winner in a battle; consequently, the US media understood the message as a sign that the USSR would be victorious over the US. The examples of misunderstanable, kinesic signs are endless. One of the explanations for that is of course the fact that many of them are based on proverbial sayings in a language, which can not be translated literally. For example the French "ça t'a passé sous le nez" (literally: that has passed under your nose) is often used to describe "you missed your opportunity", the kinesic sign for it is, of course, passing a hand under the nose, which makes perfectly no sense to members of a non-francophone culture. The amount of kinesics usage varies of course, equally. Asian cultures, for example, are less inclined to show any kinesics at all, southern Europeans are far more open to show them. The kinesic usage is also related to genders[3;369].

Proxemics - refers to the way in which people structure the space around them. Generally spoken, low context cultures have a tendency to have farther distances than high context cultures, although this does not apply to south-east Asian cultures, which are equally high context and prefer a large distance. For example shaking hands is something that is highly uncomfortable for Chinese, while even the tap on the shoulder, often practiced by US Americans, can be interpreted as threatening in Northern European countries[3;370].

Appearance - the way how a person 'appears' has been shown to be highly correlated with the evaluation of that person. Appearance can of course be broadly classified in to different ways: biological appearance and acquired appearance. Biological appearance includes skin colour, colour and the shape of eyes, texture and colour of hair, stature and body structure. Stereotyping is, in that area, a very vital fact, that leads to differentiated behavior based on biological, physical appearance. Equally the mode of dressing affects evaluation of a person. While in most Western societies suits and formal attire reflect professionalism, this is not necessarily the case in all societies, in Arabian societies, a ghutra and thobe might be preferred. It is however a widespread assumption, for example, that a suit is required for business purposes, and represents civilized behavior. The perception of dress however is again different regarding the various styles: for example the Italian, more flamboyant, style of dressing might be judged by a UK person as simply 'nouveaux riche', and ridiculously fancy[3;372].

Posture - is the fairly fixed concept of standing, sitting, etc. The way someone sits or stands may, particularly when interpreted together with other non-verbal behavior lead to confusion in intercultural settings[3;374].

Paralanguage - paralinguistics is also a major player in cross-cultural confusion. For example the notion that Americans are talking too loud is often interpreted in Europe as aggressive behavior or can be seen as a sign of uncultivated behavior. Likewise, the British way of speaking quietly might be understood as secretive by Americans[3;380].

Further importance is given to the amount of silence that is perceived as right during a conversation. A Japanese proverb says: "those who know do not speak - those who speak do not know"; this must come as a slap in the face of, for example, US Americans where even a slight silence is seen as embarrassing, and hence is filled up with speaking, something often perceived as hypomanic. Similarly, but different in usage, is the avoidance of silence in Arabic countries, where word games are played and thoughts repeated to avoid silence[2;35].

Symbolism and passive non-verbal communication are equally a major influence factor for communication problems between different cultures. The meanings of colors for example can be highly different in various cultures. Although Lüscher found colour association, and effects highly equal in European societies, and those studies have been confirmed to equally be valid in US America and Canada, however little research has been done outside of that cultural area. More dangerously are, however, historically associated colours and shapes: for example, a red circle symbolizes for many south-east Asians Japanese aggression during W.W.II. Green has become a colour dominantly representing Irish and Ireland in countries with a high Irish immigration rate, such as the UK, US and Australia, while being totally associated with the ecological and peace movement in continental Europe[1;43].

Numerical symbolism equally can vary. An example of this is the number 13, in Christian cultures often associated with bad luck (in Christian mythology, 13 is unlucky as 13 attendants were at the Last Supper), while in Jewish societies, 13 is a number of luck: The Talmud teaches that God has 13 attributes.

Literature:

1. Hudson R.A. Sociolinguistics. - Cambrige University Press, 2001. – 53 p.

2. Hymes D. Models of the interaction of language and social life. //John J. Gumperz & D. Hymes, eds. Directions in Sociolinguistics: Ethnography of Communication. - New York, 1972. - Holt, Rinehart & Winston. - P.35-71

3. Kruger, A. C. & Tomasello, M. Cultural learning and learning culture.// R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds), Handbook of Education and Human Development: New Models of Learning, Teaching and Schooling. – Oxford, 1996: P. 369-387.