Page 20 - Silence in Intercultural Communication

Chapter 2. A review of silence in intercultural communication 7

the Polish government, is an example of such silence. A number of the essays in
Thiesmeyer (2003) also discuss this type of silence.
To summarise, I have listed the forms of silence below, from micro units to
macro units:

1. intra-turn pauses
2. inter-turn (switching) pauses / gaps
3. turn-constituting silences with illocutionary force
4. temporary silence of individuals who do not hold the floor in interaction
5. an individual’s total withdrawal of speech in a speech event
6. silence of a group of participants as a constituent of social / religious events
7. discourse suppressed by a dominant force at various levels of social organi-
sation
As we can see, some silences are noticeable, but others are seemingly insignificant
and may never normally come to attention in our everyday life. When we look at
these various forms of silence, it makes us realise how complex and ambiguous,
yet finely-tuned our use of silence in communication can be.

2.2.2 Functions of silence

Studies of silence have demonstrated its wide range of functions. However, before
we look at those functions, silences in communicative situations and non-commu-
nicative situations have to be distinguished, as silence can only have communica-
tive functions in ‘communicative’ situations (Jaworski 1993, 1997; Saville-Troike
1985). In addition, silences which “structure communication” and “regulate so-
cial relationships” (Saville-Troike 1985: 4) have to be differentiated from silences
“which carry meaning” (ibid.: 6). Examples of the former type can be the custom-
ary use of silence in certain social contexts in specific communities (e.g. Agyekum
2002; Basso 1972; Nwoye 1985), but the silence which can be found and conven-
tionally accepted in encounters between strangers at a public environment, for
example on public transport, can also be considered to fall into this type. (On the
other hand, silence is expected to be broken between strangers who sit next to
each other at a party.) The latter type of silence “which carry meaning” (Saville-
Troike 1985: 4) in communicative situations is described as silence which is ei-
ther meaningful but without propositional content, or “silent communicative acts
which are entirely dependent on adjacent vocalizations for interpretation, and
which carry their own illocutionary force” (Saville-Troike 1985: 6). The first type
of silence in this distinction can be represented by hesitations and pauses, which
may play a role in projection of impressions, attitudes or emotions (e.g. Crown