Accommodative Strategies as Core of the Theory

The pragmatics of mimesis: A case study of intercultural email communication

“…This gels well with Donald's conception of mimesis, which emphasises that in imitating, the imitator may elaborate upon or creatively alter the source material (Donald, 2011). Additionally, this may be a case of partial adjustment, as described by Dragojevic et al (2016).…”

“…In Victoria's data, Liz uses "Dear" much more often than her average usage, leading to sequences of up to 10 emails with the same greeting form. This unusually high usage may be due to a number of socio-psychological-cultural factors making Liz want to emphasise closeness/sameness or build rapport (see Donald, 2013;Dragojevic et al, 2016;van Baaren et al, 2009). A similar pattern can be seen in Alice's data, though the sequences tend to be shorter (up to five consecutive emails with the same greeting).…”

“…While Merlin Donald convincingly argued that mimetic acts play a large part in the formation of such behaviours as ritual, we attempt to provide some data that may show this process in action in natural language. We frame our discussion in terms of Donald's (1995Donald's ( , 2011Donald's ( , 2013) work on human mimetic skill, Howard Giles' communication accommodation theory (CAT; Dragojevic, Gasiorek, & Giles, 2016;Gasiorek, 2016;Giles, 2016;Giles, Taylor & Bourhis, 1973), and Daniel Kádár's (2017) work on conventionalisation and ritualisation.…”

“…Here we are specifically looking at convergence/divergence (Dragojevic et al, 2016;Giles, 2016) in terms of CAT-that is, email writers choosing to use the same or different forms of greeting/sign-off as their email partner.…”

“…Our tendency to unconsciously mimic is moderated by both enduring and temporary characteristics of the mimicker and the mimickee. (van Baaren et al, 2009(van Baaren et al, p. 2382 This mimetic practice or accommodation towards the conversational partner functioning at some times and not at others has, in the relevant literature, been attributed to a range of factors including in-group/out-group membership (van Baaren et al, 2009), social status/power (Giles, 2016), liking/disliking of the conversational partner (Dragojevic et al, 2016;van Baaren et al, 2009), or even one's ability to produce similar language/behaviour (Dragojevic et al, 2016). Our analysis suggests that, although it is not always in operation, there is a tendency for mimesis (in the form of imitation or convergence) to operate.…”