This paper focuses on the motivational concerns that underlie the management of relations. In linguistics, the management of relations has been discussed extensively within politeness theory, and so the paper starts by identifying four key issues of controversy in politeness theory: a) should "polite" language use be explained in terms of face (e.g. Brown and Levinson, 1987), conversational maxims (e.g. Leech, 1983), and/or conversational rights (e.g. Fraser, 1990); b) why are speech acts such as orders interpersonally sensitive -is it because they are a threat to our autonomy (Brown and Levinson, 1987), or because of cost-benefit concerns (Leech, 1983); c) is Brown and Levinson"s concept of negative face too individually focused, and should a social identity component be included (Matsumoto, 1988); and d) is face just a personal/individual concern or can it be a group concern (Gao, 1996)? The paper then uses reports of authentic rapport sensitive incidents to throw light on these controversial issues and to find out the relational management concerns that people perceive in their everyday lives. It maintains that such data is important to politeness theory, because linguistic politeness needs to be studied within the situated social psychological context in which it occurs. The paper ends by presenting and arguing for a conceptual framework that draws a fundamental distinction between face and sociality rights, and that incorporates an independent/interdependent perspective, thus providing a more comprehensive framework for analysing the management of relations than is currently available.

No abstract

This paper explores the insights that theories of identity can offer for the conceptualisation and analysis of face. It argues that linguists will benefit from taking a multidisciplinary approach, and that by drawing on theory and research in other disciplines, especially in social psychology, they will gain a clearer and deeper understanding of face. The paper starts by examining selected theories of identity, focusing in particular on Simon"s (2004) self-aspect model of identity and Brewer and Gardner"s (1996) theory of levels of identity. Key features from these theories are then applied to the conceptualisation and analysis of face. With the help of authentic examples, the paper demonstrates how inclusion of these multiple perspectives can offer a richer and more comprehensive understanding of face and the frameworks needed for analysing it.

This paper reports an empirical study of the psychological and sociocultural adjustments of two cohorts of Chinese students taking a foundation course in English language at a British university. Using Zung's (1965) Self-Rating Depression Scale and a modification of Ward and Kennedy's (1999) Sociocultural Adaptation Scale, quantitative data were obtained on the students' adjustment experiences, and these were correlated with other variables such as grade point average, age and length of stay in Britain. Interview data provided a richer picture of their experiences. The study found that the majority of students had few psychological or sociocultural adjustment difficulties. Nevertheless, social interaction with non-Chinese was consistently identifed as problematic and this, as well as difficulties in adjusting to daily life, were very highly correlated with psychological stress. End-of-course grade point average was found to be negatively correlated with the psychological stress experienced near the beginning of the academic year. The paper calls for further research to follow up these findings, and concludes with a list of suggestions for universities to help address overseas students' psychological and sociocultural adjustment needs.

No abstract

A wide range of studies indicate that power and distance affect the production and interpretation of language. However, this paper argues that greater consideration needs to be given to the conceptual nature of these dimensions, and to terminological usage. In the first half of the paper, the need for this consideration is explained. A number of pragmatic studies are examined, and this reveals that authors often use the same terms with different meanings, or different terms with the same meaning, and that the parameters are rarely explicitly defined. Then the paper reviews recent calls for an extra parameter of interlocutor relations to be added: for affect to be separated from distance. In the second half of the paper, relevant social psychological research is reported, and it is concluded that the number of `horizontal' dimensions of interlocutor relations needs to be reconsidered. Power, on the other hand, emerges as a robust and relatively unitary dimension, yet its label has connotations that may not be cross-culturally valid.

According to UNESCO statistics, the People's Republic of China (PRC) sends far more students to study overseas than any other country in the world. Similarly, from the receiving countries' point of view, PRC students form by far the highest proportion of international students. In many respects, this is a success story, but it also poses a number of risks to universities. This paper focuses on one of those key risks that of student dissatisfaction (including from PRC students themselves). Using a sequential mixed-method study, it addresses two research questions: (a) Chinese students' level of satisfaction with their social integration into the university community and (b) the barriers that Chinese students' perceive in becoming more socially integrated into the university student community. The research finds that many Chinese students are dissatisfied with their range of friendships and that they find it more challenging to socialise with students of other nationalities than other students do. They point out a number of barriers to integration, with cultural distance playing a major role, but also argue for the impact of individual factors. The paper concludes by considering the implications for universities and suggestions for further research.

This paper explores the management of rapport in intercultural business interactions. It compares two Chinese-British business welcome meetings that were held by the same British company. Despite many similarities between the two meetings, both the British and the Chinese were very satisfied with the first meeting, while the Chinese were very annoyed by the second. This paper describes the similarities and differences between the two meetings, and explores why they were evaluated so differently. It argues that research into the management of relations in intercultural communication needs to use a broader analytic framework than is typical of intercultural discourse research, and that it needs to gather a wider range of data types.