Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Special Issue on the English Language in Ukrainian Context, November 2020 Pp.132-141
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/elt3.12
Communicative Styles through the Prism of Intersubjectivity
Iryna Sieriakova
Department of Foreign Languages, Faculty of Economics and Law
Kyiv National Linguistic University, Kyiv, Ukraine
Olha Chernenko
Department of Germanic and Finno-Ugrian Philology, Faculty of Germanic Philology
Kyiv National Linguistic University, Kyiv, Ukraine
Oleksandr Muntian
Department of the Russian Language and Literature, Faculty of Slavic Philology
Kyiv National Linguistic University, Kyiv, Ukraine
Nataliya Zhdanova
Department of Foreign Languages, Faculty of Economics and Law,
Kyiv National Linguistic University, Kyiv, Ukraine
Abstract:
The style people communicate has a significant impact on how they get the things they want, express needs, avoid conflicts, and make healthy intersubjective relationships. The success of communication is always the shared responsibilities of both communicators – the sender and the recipient. The article offers the theoretical assumptions and practical results of the research on the communicative correlation between the phenomenon of intersubjectivity, and the existence of the communication styles – assertive, aggressive, and submissive. The authors introduce a semiological approach to the paradigm of intersubjective processes, apply the conversation analysis to the material of English fictional discourse, and characterize the nonverbal profiles of the communication styles under investigation. The article aims at highlighting the specificity of intersubjectivity realization in different communicative styles according to the degree criterion and intensity features. The main findings of the research reveal the intersubjectivity as a communicative style forming principle, which differently actualizes the concept of ”self and other” and manages the creation of the communicative climates (supportive or unsupportive) via verbal and nonverbal behaviors of the sender and the recipient who can or cannot demonstrate their intersubjective competence.
Keywords: Communicative style, conversation analysis, English discourse, intersubjectivity, intersubjective competence, semiological approach, verbal and nonverbal behaviors
Cite as: Sieriakova, I., Chernenko, O., Muntian, O., & Zhdanova, N. (2020). Communicative Styles through the Prism of Intersubjectivity. Arab World English Journal: Special Issue on English in Ukrainian Context. 132-141.
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/elt3.12
References
Brems, L., Ghesquière, L., & Van de Velde, F. (eds.) (2014). Intersubjectivity and intersubjectification in Grammar and Discourse: Theoretical and descriptive advances. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Dubtsova, O. V. (2015). Intraprofessional and Interprofessional Communication: Communicative Strategy. Scientific Notes of Vinnytsia Mykhailo Kotsiubynskyi State Pedagogical University. Series: Pedagogy. Psychology, 44, 137-141.
EtelamЁ aki, M. (2016). Introduction: Discourse, grammar and intersubjectivity. Nordic Journal of Linguistics, 39 (2), 101-112.
Finegan, E. (1995). Subjectivity and Subjectivisation: An Introduction. In: D. Stein, & S. Wright (Eds.), Subjectivity and Subjectivisation (pp. 1-15). Cambridge: Cambridge University press.
Gamble, T. K., & Gamble, M. (2012). Communication works (11th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages.
Levinson, S. C. (2013). Action formation and ascription. In J. Sidnell, & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 103–130). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Marнn Arrese, J. I. (2010). Subjectivity and Intersubjectivity in Discourses. MЄ Luisa Blanco Gуmez & Juana I. Marнn Arrese (eds.), Discourse and Communication: Cognitive and Functional Perspectives (pp. 11-40). Madrid: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad Rey Juan Carlos & Dickinson.
Martynyuk, A. P. (2009). Differentiation of Discourse and Text from the Perspective of an Integration Approach. Newsletter of Kharkiv National University V.N. Karazin, 866, 49-54.
Martynyuk, A. P. (2020). The Problem of Meaning Formation in Communication. Newsletter of Kharkiv National University V.N. Karazin. Series: Philology. Methods of Foreign Language Teaching, 91 https://doi.org/10.26565/2227-8877-2020-91-04
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1964). The Primacy of Perception. Evanston, III: Northwestern University press.
Nuyts, Jan (2001). Epistemic Modality, Language and Conceptualization: A Cognitive-Pragmatic Perspective. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Norton, R. (1983). Communicator style: Theory, applications, and measures. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Rehling, L. (2004). Improving teamwork through awareness of conversational styles. Business Communication Quarterly, 67(4), 475-482.
Schiffrin, D. (1994). Approaches to discourse. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Shevchenko, I. S. (2018). Intersubjectivity in discourse categories. I.M. Kolegaeva (eds.). Love for the Word: Philological Notes in Honor of Prof. V. A. Kucharenko: Collection of Scientific Articles. Odessa: KP Odessa City Publishing (pp. 268-275)
Schutz, A. (1967). The Phenomenology of the Social World. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Stepanov, Yu. S. (1998). Language and Method: To Modern Philosophy of Language. Moscow: Languages of Russian Culture.
Traugott, E. (2010). (Inter)subjectivity and (inter)subjectification: a reassessment. D. L. Vandelanotte, & H. Cuyckens (eds.), Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization (pp. 29-70). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Waldherr, A. & Muck, P. (2011). Towards an integrative approach to communication styles: The Interpersonal Circumplex and the Five-Factor Theory of personality as frames of reference. Communications, 36, 1-27.