Social domain theory: interpreting intercultural communication
Deferent meanings of 'culture'
The term 'intercultural communication' invites some definition. According to Blommaert (1998), '[flew fields are as fuzzy as that of the study of intercultural communication', and indeed most texts on the subject include at the very least a definition of 'culture', recognizing that a shared understanding of the word cannot be relied on. Meanwhile, from a social theoretical perspective, Archer (1988: 1) claims that culture 'has displayed the weakest analytical development of any key concept in sociology and it has played the most wildly vacillating role within sociological theory'. (For a review of the contributions to the concept as used in pragmatics, from a range of perspectives, see Sarangi 2000.)
In the intercultural communication literature it is customary to distinguish 'high culture' from 'anthropological culture' (Scollon and Scollon 2001), and to make clear that intercultural communication is not particularly concerned with the art, literature and other enduring products of a society. Rather, it responds to 'the customs, worldview, language, kinship system, social organization, and other taken-for granted day-to-day practices of a people which set that group apart as a distinctive group' (ibid.: 139). From a more psychologically oriented position, Brislin (1993) identifies 'culture's features' as those 'ideals, values, and assumptions about life that guide specific behaviors’ (p.23). In other words, internalized 'cultural' norms influence observable practices. Both perspectives emphasize routine behavior ('anthropological culture') rather than the artefacts of an elite ('high culture').
These two senses of the word are, however, related to each other: there must surely be some link between those phenomena which can be identified as somehow exemplifying, say, 'Japanese art' and 'Japanese manners', or 'English literature' and the English language. It is not always possible to classify a particular cultural artefact as belonging to either 'high' culture, with the elitist connotations of that term, or popular culture. Yet many people would have a sense that they can detect American sensibilities in both the routine exchanges expected in an American diner and in an American film or crime novel. (The reason for the scare quotes around some of these phrases will become apparent below.) Moreover, the quite extensive list of features which comprise the 'anthropological' sense identified by Scollon and Scollon requires further exploration before we can deploy the concept of 'culture' in any explanation of what happens in intercultural communication.
