Nikitina A.R.

National Technical University of Ukraine “Kyiv Polytechnic Institute”

Non-Verbal Aspect of the Intercultural Communication: the Dimension of Space and Distance

The increased intercultural contact in our post-industrial society inevitably brings forth additional misunderstanding, friction, and tension. Therefore, the means of non-verbal communication, so-called 'silent languages', become one of the most actively researched areas alongside with the verbal matters. The aim of the given research is to analyze the most common occurrences of spatial nature in the sphere of intercultural communication.

In order to understand the nature of intercultural conflicts, it is vital to focus on the basic notions of proxemics – the study of spatial relations, which includes not only fixed features of space such as architecture and spacing of buildings, but semi-fixed features (seating arrangements and furniture arrangements) and dynamic space (use of personal space) [1]. Accordingly, the flow and shift of distance between people as they interact with each other is part and parcel of the communication process. The normal conversational distance between strangers illustrates how important the dynamics of space interaction are [2: 180]. Proxemics assumes that each person has a 'bubble' of space in which he or she moves and in which he or she feels comfortable. Intrusions inro that space are only possible under the circumstances of intimate contact. Outside of that space is the second 'bubble' in which normal interpersonal contacts take place, whereas the third layer is a public space [4: 158].

Thereby, intercultural communicators need to realize that cultures have alternative approaches to space and ways of using it [1].

The distance between the communicators is believed to influence the interlocutors' feeling of 'comfort' [5]. However, the named 'comfort' is a nationally-conditioned concept. The closest distance of communication is characteristic of the Arabic, Japanese, Greek, Spanish cultures; Swedes, Austrians, German, Swiss peoples communicate at 'average' (compared to other cultures) distances. The white population of the North American continent, Australians and New Zealanders prefer to maintain a greater distance in the process of communication.

Furthermore, the English use more space than the French or Italians. French and Italians in turn use significantly more space than the Irish or Scottish. It seems, therefore, that a comfort level exists intraculturally that lends itself to stability [1].

It is estimated, for example, that American males prefer to be approximately 18 to 20 inches from their conversationalists if they are not known too well, and about 22 to 24 inches if they are conversing with a woman. The Americans’ greater distance communicates to the members of the other cultures a sort of reserve, coldness, and haughtiness and a sense of superiority. As a matter of fact, when moving backward/forward from a foreign acquaintance in a conversation, participants are simply attempting to create a spatial dimension with which their respective cultures have conditioned them to be comfortable [3: 267].

Cultural attitudes towards the use of public space are not devoid of discrepancies either. For instance, the English and Germans are conditioned to standing in line and ‘waiting for their turn’ (in this way they feel they are expressing maturity and a concern for individual rights and equality of treatment), whereas Arabs, Mediterranean people and South Americans look on a public place as where everyone has a right to push and shove in order to assert his individual rights. This behaviour is looked on by other cultures as rude, aggressive, thoughtless, and immature.

To conclude, there is a certain amount of spatial and distance discrepancies among the nations and cultures, which add to the lingual misunderstandings thus creating intercultural conflicts. Therefore, in today’s world it is becoming increasingly urgent that the peoples of the earth learn not only each other's languages but also each other's non-verbal habits in communication. Knowing and following these habits and cues is substantial in order to create a barrier-free, mutually respective situation of intercultural communication.

Literature

1. Dodd C. H. Dynamics of intercultural communication. – Madison, Wisconsin: Bown&Benchmark, 1995. – 363 pages.

2. Hall E. T. The silent language. – Garden city, NY: Anchor, 1973.

3. Samovar L.E. Porter R.E. Intercultural communication: a reader. – Belmont, California: Waldsworth Publihing Company, 1985. – 467 pages.

4. Scollone R., Scollone, S. W. Intercultural сommunication: a discourse approach. – Malden, MA, USA: Blackwell Publishing, 2003.

5. Невербальні засоби в міжкультурній комунікації [Електронний ресурс] / Л.М. Корнєва // Культура народов Причерноморья. — 2004. — N49, Т.1. — С. 88-90.