Content uploaded by Marietta Baba
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Marietta Baba on Apr 03, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
A Biography of Edward T. Hall
... Kültür üzerine ömür boyu sürecek araştırmasının temellerini de Filipinler'de ABD ordusunda görev yaptığı II. Dünya Savaşı sırasında atmıştır (Baba, 1995). ...
Enformasyon sistemleri kuramı kültürel farklılıkların iletişim sürecini nasıl etkilediğine, farklı kültürel grupların sosyal yapılarını ve değerlerini anlamaya ve iletişimi bu bağlamda yapılandırmaya yönelik bir çerçeve çizmektedir. Kültürel olarak hayli yüklü ve gündelik yaşamda örtük halde bulunan sistemleri aydınlatarak, kültürel farkın- dalığı artırmayı ve kültürlerarası ilişkileri daha etkili hale getirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Farklı kültürlere mensup insanların giderek daha sık bir araya geldiği küreselleşen günümüz dünyasında, enformasyon sistemleri kuramının çerçevesiyle düşünmek yeni iletişim kanallarının kültürel farklılıklar ekseninde değerlendirilmesine olanak tanımaktadır. Kitabın bu bölümü ünlü antropolog Edward Hall’un yaşamı, eserleri ve enformasyon sistemleri kuramını konu almaktadır. Kuramın düşünsel ve kavramsal araçları kullanılarak, kuramın kültürlerarası iletişim açısından olanakları/sınırlılıkları tartışılmaktadır.
... The lack of educational materials in different languages may be also connected with the origin of scholars who have been studying intercultural communication because they are the ones who have made this topic widely known and contributed to people studying it more thoroughly. Most of them are Americans, for instance, Stella Ting-Toomey, William B. Gudykunst, Janet M. Bennett, Milton J. Bennett, Fred E. Jandt and Edward T. Hallwho is considered one of the "founding fathers" of the study of intercultural communication [12]. We should mention one Englishman -Richard D. Lewis -and Young Yun Kim -a scholar who was born and raised in Seoul, Korea but currently works at the University of Oklahoma, Norman. ...
The importance of intercultural communication in today’s globalised world is undeniable. Scholars from different countries have contributed to the development of this field and created educational materials – textbooks on intercultural communication devoted to classifications and features of different cultures – and textbooks on foreign languages that include exercises devoted to developing intercultural skills in everyday and professional contexts. Teachers of foreign languages are making an effort to use the available materials that provide a wide outlook on various cultures and help students prepare for being a part of intercultural community. However, there is an evident shortage of such materials in languages other than English. The article provides the results of the analysis of online sources that demonstrates that the majority of available resources that are in any way connected with intercultural communication are in English. The article dwells on the reasons for English dominance in intercultural communication study and suggests a global effort as a solution. Whether we are looking at textbooks purely on intercultural communication or foreign language learning resources, it is important to understand that the English language cannot be the only medium of intercultural competence formation – other languages can and should be a prism through which intercultural communication is studied.
... Regarding biographies, the acclaimed field "father," Edward T. Hall (who apparently never set out to establish a field of intercultural communication and whom we suggest should more accurately not be labeled as "founder," but more indirectly as an inspiration, impetus, or "grandfather," just as Margaret Mead, Clyde and Florence Kluckhohn, and Ruth Benedict were surely influential "grandparents"), has been profiled in relation to his contributions to the IC field (e.g., Baba, 1995; Hall and the Foreign Service Institute in Leeds-Hurwitz, 1990a;Rogers, Hart, & Miike, 2002; including several biographical interviews by Bluedorn, 1998;Sorrells, 1998). Other formative scholars and institutions have also been studied: such as the people and organizations influenced by Franz Boas at Columbia, specifically Margaret Mead (Leeds-Hurwitz, 2010a); Simmel's "concept of the stranger," (Rogers, 1999); Rogers' role in IC (Hart, 2005); Triandis' contributions profiled in his own review and awards received, APA, 1995) or those of his students and collaborators (Adamopolis & Kashima, 2000;Bhawuk, 2000); and Oliver's contributions (Berquist, 1990;Fritz, 2010;Shuter, 2011). ...
Taking a biographical approach in order to contribute to the sociology of science that formed, integrated, or demarcated the intercultural communication (IC) or related intercultural fields, this volume documents the constructed history of twelve scholars considered to be among the early influencers of the field(s) that developed during the 1970s starting from the United States.
This introductory essay illustrates the needs for such a volume to fill an important gap in IC history, provides a rationale for focusing on the 1970s, and discusses the current state of documenting various expressions of the intercultural discipline. It highlights the value of biography as one historical window from which to review or reconstruct the social history derived from the interdisciplinary influences and outcomes of IC or related intercultural fields. After a brief review of earlier people and tracks that influenced the field’s eventual formation, it provides categorical and chronological summaries of people and their initiatives in and around the 1970s that established IC, the rationale that guided inclusions or omissions for this “selected” set of biographies, and highlights other worthy influencers not included.
This essay provides an overview for the questions that contributing authors were asked to address about each person featured in this special issue: (1) the ways they founded, influenced, or affected the ongoing IC field or related intercultural work, (2) the topics or domains that they influenced, (3) the lines or types of IC they launched and outcomes of their legacies, and (4) the principles, practices, or personal characteristics those in the field now can reconsider as catalysts for renewal or future developments.
Distance regulation (i.e., proxemics) and physical contact (i.e., haptics) are two kinesics subdisciplines. After World War II, ET Hall identified four spaces, giving rise to proxemics. This stimulated knowledge of distance management, especially regarding cultural diversity and violations. Nevertheless, proxemic interpretations are often ambiguous due to the number of potential variables involved. Haptics experts emphasize the role of touch in building empathy, trust, and bonds, as well as the role of oxytocin (the “hormone of love”) as a determinant. Yet, these are often overestimations caused by statistical procedures. The brain needs a vast neural network and several neurotransmitters to process and interpret tactile information in specific circumstances. This reveals the fascinating complexity of the relationship between physical contact, social interactions, and emotions.
Anthropology is known for its qualitative methods and its body of theory which is based on 150 years of study of human origins and cultures. This vast body of knowledge provides a base for the continuing study of humans in all contexts and twenty-first-century anthropology includes an array of subfields specializing in human behavior in diverse contexts. Enterprise anthropology is one of these subfields and this volume captures some of the valuable work being conducted in this field in Asia. It is a welcome addition to the literature on business anthropology not only for the quality of the research but also because it demonstrates the growth of the field in Asia. In this chapter, I first discuss enterprise anthropology and its relation to the field of business anthropology. Then I provide a brief history of the field’s development to put the importance of this current volume in context.
Anthropologist Edward T. Hall's contrast between polychronic and monochronic orientations toward time has stimulated research in the business and management sciences. While Hall's approach to time is ethnographic, the business and management sciences measure polychronicity with a survey instrument, the Inventory of Polychronic Values (IPV). An examination of the IPV and the results it has yielded, however, indicate that it is not measuring polychronicity in the ethnographic sense. The IPV remains firmly within monochronic time and thus fails to seriously engage cultural difference. The transformation of the ethnographic meaning of polychronic to a conceptual one raises methodological and analytical questions of general relevance to the cross-cultural study of work.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.