Page 93 - Silence in Intercultural Communication

80 Silence in Intercultural Communication

discourse of native English speakers (Blimes 1997; Levinson 1983; Sacks et al.
1974) and cannot simplistically be assumed as a norm for Japanese speakers of
English. The assumption of more pressure attached to participation through indi-
vidual nomination should thus only be taken as a possibility, and whether Japanese
students are unlikely to be silent when they are nominated in their actual class-
room performances will be addressed in the case studies (see Chapters 5).
In open class discussions and question time after a student’s own presenta-
tion, pressure to participate still appears to be felt, as participation is often as-
sessed and students have an awareness that they are expected to play an active role
in discussion after their own presentations. However, a student’s silence when the
floor is open to everyone in a class discussion would not be interpreted as specific
a message as it may be in one-on-one situations. In this way, different levels of
pressure to speak are likely to be felt by students in different participant struc-
tures, and the more the pressure to speak is felt, the less frequently silence can be
expected to occur. One of the Japanese students in fact commented that he found
one of the tutorials good for him because everyone was nominated for comments
and it forced him to participate.
The second dimension of the relationship between silence and participant
structures is degree of public exposure. Apprehension about ‘speaking in front of
people’ was given as a reason for silence by six of the Japanese students:

(20) [...] I don’t like speaking in front of people, though I don’t mind speaking in a
small group. [24:184 M5]

(21) I don’t like that kind of, speaking in front of people, you see. [16:162 F5]

Strategies for dealing with this apprehension included taking a seat near the lec-
turer to make speaking less threatening compared with having to speak up to
address the lecturer from a distance, and a preference for asking questions of lec-
turers in private after class rather than during the class. For example:
(22) [...] even if I have something I didn’t understand [during the lecture], I’d prefer
to, like um, go and ask a question to the lecturer by myself later. [28:46 F3]

The preference for private communication with lecturers has often been discussed
in studies in teaching of international students in general (Ballard & Clanchy
1991; Thorp 1991) and Japanese students (Anderson 1992). In the survey study by
Braddock et al. (1995) at Macquarie University in Australia, 69% of the overseas
students (among whom more than 80% of respondents were from Asian regions)
indicated that they preferred asking questions after lectures rather than during
lectures (p. 48). However, similar studies on Australian student preferences have