Page 129 - Handbooks of Applied Linguistics Communication Competence Language and Communication Problems Practical Solutions

Multidisciplinary perspectives on intercultural conflict 107

ponent, and that I feel the best way of achieving this is to initially avoid conflict
whilst I muster my arguments and/or gain support from elsewhere. Alter-
natively, I may feel uncomfortable avoiding the problem, because I have a low
tolerance for uncertainty, and prefer to maintain clarity and control. Finding an
effective solution may be more important to me, even if it risks damaging the re-
lationship, because I believe I can amend that at a later date. Or I may feel that
by NOT avoiding the problem, I will be able to resolve it and thus maintain good
relations.
Brown and Levinson’s (1987) politeness super-strategies, and Culpeper’s
(2005, Culpeper, Bousfield and Wichmann 2003) impoliteness super-strategies
are potential verbal tactics that primarily relate to rapport considerations (al-
though naturally they can have a knock-on effect on both relational and cost–
benefit considerations). Analysis of the verbal tactics that people use in conflict
episodes is an area where applied linguistics can make a valuable contribution
to the study of conflict (see section 5.2).
The studies discussed in section 3.2 highlight the importance of considering
culture in the Bermuda Triangle of conflict, and we explore this in detail in the
next section.

4. Conflict and culture

4.1. Conflict and cultural values
Hofstede (1991, 2001) identified five dimensions of cultural values (individual-
ism–collectivism, high–low power distance, masculinity–femininity, high–low
uncertainty avoidance, and long/short-term orientation), and many researchers
have focused on the impact of individualism–collectivism on conflict manage-
ment styles and preferences. Hofstede defines this dimension as follows:

Individualism stands for a society in which the ties between individuals are loose:
everyone is expected to look after him/herself and her/his immediate family only.
Collectivism stands for a society in which people from birth onwards are integrated
into strong, cohesive in-groups, which throughout people’s lifetime continue to pro-
tect them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty.
Hofstede 2001: 225

Leung (1987) found that respondents from an individualist society (the USA)
differed in their conflict-handling preferences from those from a collectivist so-
ciety (China), although he also found some culture-general results. Ting-Too-
mey (1999: 211–212) argues that individualist and collectivist values are re-
flected in independent and interdependent self-construals respectively, and that
these can impact on conflict as shown in Table 2.