CC BY
344Communicative strategies and tactics of speech manipulation in intercultural business discourse
by Elena N. Malyuga and Barry Tomalin
Elena N. Malyuga Peoples' Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University) en_malyuga@hotmail.com Barry Tomalin International House London barrytomalin@aol.com
Published in Training, Language and Culture Vol 1 Issue 1 (2017) pp. 28-45 doi: 10.29366/2017tlc.1.1.2 Recommended citation format: Malyuga, E. N., & Tomalin, B. (2017). Communicative strategies and tactics of speech manipulation in intercultural business discourse. Training, Language and Culture, 1(1), 28-45. doi: 10.29366/2017tlc.1.1.2
The study considers the communicative strategies and tactics of linguistic manipulation used by the representatives of professional communities speaking two national varieties of English, British and American, to identify the content and functional-pragmatic characteristics of communicative strategies used in the framework of intercultural business communication in general, and in the framework of two specific genres in particular, presentations and business interviews. The authors also provide general analysis of some gender aspects of speech behaviour in intercultural business communication. The study is conducted along the lingua-pragmatic and socio-cultural lines of research with evaluation of data backed by quantitative analysis. Research material is represented by business discourse texts used by American and British male and female respondents. The authors make inferences about the manipulative nature of communication, single out some of its key features, and present an outline of gender-based differences encountered in professional discourse. The study ultimately holds that gender-based parameters of communication can be described as flexible, which is essentially due to the extensive scope of contextual settings to be considered.
KEYWORDS: communicative strategy, communicative tactics, linguistic manipulation, intercultural business discourse, gender, business interview, presentations
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0)
1. INTRODUCTION
Business activity is considered one of the most significant spheres of social life. Communication in the business sphere is aimed at strengthening international relations, thus becoming an important social and cultural factor. Efficient communication affects a variety of business tasks and solutions and is based on direct interpersonal interaction. Scholars currently pay special attention to professional communication.
Communication problems in oral intercultural business discourse are associated with differences between and within cultures as well as the use of language by non-native speakers. Communicative and sociocultural incompetence indicates difficulties that have to do with the informative and social functions of intercultural business discourse as well as its national and cultural specificity (Chaney & Martin, 2014). In the context of modern economic and social conditions, the
© Elena N. Malyuga, Barry Tomalin 2017 This content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
by Elena N. Malyuga and Barry Tomalin
communicative competence of today's international business specialists has to break new ground.
The article considers lingua-pragmatic features of communicative strategies and tactics of linguistic manipulation, explores communicative strategies implemented by the representatives of professional communities speaking two national varieties of English: British and American. The aim of the paper is to identify the content and functional-pragmatic characteristics of implementation of communicative strategies used in the framework of intercultural business communication in general, and in the framework of two specific genres in particular, presentations and business interviews. The authors also intend to provide general analysis of some gender aspects of speech behaviour typical of men and women participating in intercultural business communication.
2. MATERIAL AND METHODS
The study was conducted within the scope of lingua-pragmatic and socio-cultural lines of research, further supplemented by gender analysis of the findings obtained. Evaluation and analysis of data was backed by quantitative methods of research that allowed for graphic representation of the information gathered. Research material consists of business discourse texts produced by American and British male and female respondents.
3. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
The key factors facilitating feasibility and efficiency of speech manipulation are the linguistic and extra-linguistic factors.
The linguistic factor is a variable reflection of reality, which is manifested in the vocabulary used and based on the verbal manipulation of consciousness: quasi-synonymy, deliberate ambiguity and implicitness of the plane of content (placing the semantic component intended by the addressor into the framework of the utterance).
The extra-linguistic factor covers the social context with its semiotic, psychological, ethno-cultural, social, cognitive, and other features of social and business interaction.
The semiotic factor describes the variations in linguistic expression used to convey awareness of objects and phenomena and their social significance. It also expresses attitudes and how the choice of language and expression is adjusted by communicating entities as a consequence.
The ethno-cultural factor describes expressions containing implicit cultural understandings which may not be obvious to communicators from a different social and cultural background. The social factor is about choosing and selectively imparting information according to the communication environment (e.g. presentations,
Volume 1 Issue 1, 2017
rudn.tlcjournal.org
meetings or networking). It takes into account the ratio of negative and positive comments, such as in statements made from a position of authority, including criticism, praise and positive or negative assessment. It also incorporates an understanding of stereotypes and the myths of what constitutes mass consciousness and understanding.
The cognitive factor is about how information is processed. It covers situations in which inertness of perception leads to errors in assessing the evidence and making assumptions based on false causal links lead to an inadequate representation of reality. Speech activity is a way of acquiring knowledge and understanding the world.
Straightforward linguistic capability is the tip of the iceberg above the waterline. Below lies image visualisation, as well as logical inferences, speech planning, etc.
The psychological factor is about emotional speech manipulation of the recipient. This may occur through persuasion (logical arguments), reliance on consciousness and the mind or on instillation (emotional arguments) appealing to emotions and bringing the recipient into the right psychological state as intended by the speaker (Kasper & Kellerman, 2014).
Manipulation of the recipient's consciousness is only plausible if there is a subject and an object of
'The cognitive factor is about how information is processed. It covers situations in which inertness of perception leads to errors in assessing the evidence and making assumptions based on false causal links lead to an inadequate representation of reality'
manipulation. That being said, it can be defined as "action directed at someone or something in order to achieve or instil something' (Adair, 2003).
The issue of awareness of speech actions is a common subject of scholarly research, whereby intentional and incidental types of manipulation are differentiated. Intentional speech manipulation can be realised through (1) the legitimate authority enjoyed by people of higher status; (2) manipulation (i.e. masked power); (3) persuasion, argumentative reasoning; and (4) strength (physical or psychological) (Akopova, 2013).
Targeted persuasion is one of the communicative methods used to manipulate the recipient's consciousness by tuning into to his or her personal critical judgment (Malyuga & Ponomarenko, 2015; Ponomarenko & Malyuga, 2012). It is based on the selection and logical ordering of facts and inferences according to the general functional aim
by Elena N. Malyuga and Barry Tomalin
of the manipulator. Intercultural business discourse incorporates all kinds of intentional speech manipulation, as studies of techniques of manipulation have shown.
Speech manipulation refers to the communicative application of linguistic expressions, where the native speaker's model of the world is
supplemented by new knowledge, while the preexisting information is being modified, i.e. in this case we are dealing with the onthologisation or simplification of knowledge. The phenomenon of speech manipulation can be viewed as a complex type of speech activity comprising subject, unit, method, tool, product, and result of implementation (see Figure 1).
structure of strategy of speech language recipient's changing the
recipient's speech knowledge recipient's
knowledge manipulation complying behaviour as
modified by with the intended by
the speaker in speaker's the speaker
accordance intentions
with his or her intentions
Figure 1. Speech manipulation components
Whenever speech manipulation yields no immediate result (i.e. the speaker fails to change the recipient's behaviour as consistent with his or her intentions), such speech manipulation is considered unfulfilled.
Speech manipulation is accomplished through communicative strategies and tactics. Strategies of speech behaviour cover the entire scope of mechanisms underlying the content of intercultural business communication, where the
Volume 1 Issue 1, 2017
rudn.tlcjournal.org
key objective is to achieve specific long-term results. Speech strategies imply planning the process of communication depending on the specific communicative setting and personal characteristics of communicating entities, as well as implementing the devised plan. In other words, a speech strategy is basically a complex of speech actions aimed at achieving communicative goals (Littlemore, 2003).
From the functional perspective, all strategies are divided into basic and supplementary. Basic strategies are those considered most significant at a given stage of communicative interaction in terms of the hierarchy of motives and goals. Supplementary strategies, on the other hand, facilitate efficient organisation of dialogic interaction and help exert appropriate influence on the recipient.
According to Mannan (2013), a communicative strategy comprises the following structural components:
• choosing the general speech intention such as an intention to make a statement, ask a question, make a request, propose a suggestion, etc.;
• selecting semantic components of the utterance, as well as the extralinguistic setting, corresponding to the modifying communicative meanings;
• defining the scope of the information
accounting for one theme (topic), one rheme, (explanatory/context information), etc.;
• correlating bits of information referring to the state of consciousness of communicating entities and the empathy factor;
• defining the sequence of communication components (for example, if the speaker
is deeply impressed by what is happening, he or she might begin the sentence with the rheme, thus moving the theme to the end position);
• adjusting the communicative structure of the sentence thus setting a specific communicative mode (dialogue, narration, verbalisation of a written text), style (epic, colloquial) and genre.
While a speech strategy is referred to as a set of speech actions aimed at addressing the speaker's general communicative task, a speech tactic should be viewed as one or more actions facilitating implementation of the corresponding strategy. A strategic plan determines the choice of means and techniques of its implementation, and so speech strategies and tactics are correlated through the opposition of 'class' vs 'type' (Ya-Ni, 2007).
Roebuck (2012) suggests that a communicative tactic can be described as a set of practical moves
by Elena N. Malyuga and Barry Tomalin
within the real process of speech interaction, i.e. a communicative tactic, as opposed to a communicative strategy, is primarily correlated with the communicative goal, rather than communicative intentions (Roebuck, 2012).
Each tactic is designed to express a specific communicative intention of the speaker. Each specific communicative tactic is implemented to modify interaction parameters as intended by the speaker, change assessments, and reshape the entire speech situation.
A communicative tactic is a set of speech actions performed by communicating entities in varying sequences in order to implement or not implement a communicative strategy as consistent with certain rules or in defiance thereof. While communicative strategies essentially outline the general trajectory of dialogue dynamics, communicative tactics reveal the way the corresponding strategy is implemented at each state of the development of a given communicative situation.
Since we believe that intercultural business discourse presents a complex communicative phenomenon comprising both the text and a set of extralinguistic factors such as knowledge of the world, opinions, beliefs and goals pursued by communicating entities, the strategies deployed by communicating entities in the framework of
business discourse are therefore focused on its different aspects.
Strategies deployed in the framework of business communication can be (a) discursive strategies outlining the structure and sequence of communicative interactions; (b) rhetoric strategies realised explicitly and implicitly in order to influence the recipient; or (c) compensatory strategies used to fix various possible linguistic errors and communicative failures (Guffey & Loewy, 2012).
Discursive strategies govern the organisation and the course of intercultural business communication. These are the strategies that mark the beginning, course and closure of the interaction, predetermine its development, regulate speech actions of communicating entities expressing the speaker's expectations with respect to recipient's behaviour by referring him or her to pre-existing knowledge formed based on the peculiarities of social and professional background to facilitate appropriate perception of the information provided. At the level of linguistic representations, discursive strategies are actualised through the signals of text structuring. The most common signals are those indicating the beginning and the end of the text, role shifts, feedback, and participants' involvement (Yew, 2014).
Implementation of rhetoric strategies primarily
Volume 1 Issue 1, 2017
rudn.tlcjournal.org
'Communicative goals may be achieved through a number of means, and rhetoric strategies are about the choice that helps people fulfil their objectives'
implies affecting the recipient's psychological state, his or her ability to assess the situation, elaborate solutions, and choose the most efficient strategies. Communicative goals may be achieved through a number of means, and rhetoric strategies are about the choice that helps people fulfil their objectives. Pursuing their objectives, communicating entities often appear to encounter obstacles, and overcoming these obstacles will require certain 'resources' and techniques.
This is why when engaging in a conversation the speaker does not only establish a goal, but also decides how rigidly or softly, directly or flexibly, etc. he or she is going to proceed, i.e. the speaker outlines a specific strategy to be deployed to achieve a specific goal (Washington, 2013).
In business communication, there are two key modes of manipulation to be singled out -cooperation and competition - and they both deploy a specific set of strategies and tactics. Business disputes are often defined as tools facilitating vibrant interaction of knowledgeable people, and the style of interaction is generally
described through the binary macrostrategies of authority and subordination. Authoritarian rhetoric strategies (dominance, force) are associated with a higher social and professional status of the speaker and are explicitly realised in speech acts of coercion such as orders, demands, commands, and indignation. Implicit representation is reflected in pressuring of the business partner: humiliation, rejection of authority, threats, etc. (Flatley et al., 2012).
Studies suggest that all types of strategies can be generally reduced to three universal and most exhaustive classes, which are presentations, manipulation, and conventions (Tomalin, 2012). They all differ in terms of the level of openness, symmetry, and methods of communicative operation: presentations imply passive communication, manipulation involves active communication, and conventions are associated with interactive communication. According to English (1995), the basic tools deployed with these strategies are messages and dialogues.
Interestingly enough, this issue of what communicative strategies and tactics actually stand for remains a subject of heated debate. Strategy as a notion is analysed in the domains of military science, economics, political science, psychology, and linguistics. Considered in the framework of any of these, the strategic approach appears to be based on the general knowledge and
by Elena N. Malyuga and Barry Tomalin
cognitive models of the society and the individual (Adolphsen, 2014).
In this study, a communicative strategy is viewed as a part of communicative behaviour or communicative interaction, in which variable verbal and non-verbal means are used to achieve a specific communicative goal while taking into account the communicative setting and personal characteristics of communicating entities involved in the process.
The key function fulfilled by communicative tactics is implementing the corresponding communicative strategy, which means that they are all correlated with specific communicative intentions. Tactics that help achieve similar goals are integrated into groups. Thus, one can define a strategy that is constituted by a specific set of tactics, which, in their turn, are made up of communicative moves viewed as tools deployed to implement a specific speech tactic (Wilson, 2001).
Literature review giving insight into the use of communicative strategies and tactics in various types of discourse has indicated that their unified classification remains a matter of dispute, since people's communicative behaviour is driven by a variety of factors. Thus, for example, Issers (2002) distinguishes 'general' and 'specific' strategies, and yet the latter appear to be virtually impossible to
'In business communication, there are two key modes of manipulation to be singled out -cooperation and competition -and they both deploy a specific set of strategies and tactics'
classify due to the diversity and variability of communicative situations.
4. STUDY AND RESULTS
While the study does not intend to classify communicative strategies and tactics, we have to admit that we couldn't use available classifications due to the specific nature of the subject under discussion. We analysed texts produced by the representatives of professional communities in the sphere of business and managed to identify the most common communicative strategies, as well as the tactics used to realise them. Relying on the assumption that communicative strategies are correlated with the pragmatic principles of cooperative interaction (Grice, 1975), they appear to lack the conventional component and rarely remain within the boundaries of regulations governing polite and cooperative interaction. Thus, the study singles out two key groups of strategies -those hindering cooperative communication and those facilitating it, contributing to non-confrontational mode of interaction. Each strategy incorporates a number of tactics (Table 1).
Training, Language and Culture doi: 10.29366/2017tlc.1.1.2
Volume 1 Issue 1, 2017 rudn.tlcjournal.org
Table 1
List of strategies hindering and facilitating cooperative interaction
STRATEGIES TACTICS
Strategies hindering cooperative interaction
Evasion Changing the subject / Forwarding / Avoiding the answer
Open negative response Objection / Indignation / Denial / Referring to inability to fulfil
a request / Unmotivated refusal
Downgrading the recipient's status Accusation / Judgement / Denunciation / Reproach / Ridicule /
Contempt
Communicative confrontation Disagreement / Unwillingness to sustain a conversation /
Distancing
Strategies facilitating cooperative interaction
Solidarity Request to share a judgement / Demonstrating willingness to
cooperate / Reassurance / Intimate interaction / Requesting
emotional support
Scaling up the recipient's status Expressing interest in the content of the conversation / Praise /
Compliment
Establishing positive interaction mode Expressing positive emotional state / Positive assertion /
Emotional support
Using digital technologies, we can reveal and support factual trends in business communication (Malyuga, 2016; Malyuga et al., 2016), for instance in terms of strategy and tactic gender characteristics. The findings can be summed up as follows (Figures 2 and 3):
by Elena N. Malyuga and Barry Tomalin
Figure 2. Quantitative analysis of gender aspects of communicative strategies and tactics represented
in British business discourse
Figure 3. Quantitative analysis of gender aspects of communicative strategies and tactics represented
in American business discourse
Volume 1 Issue 1, 2017
rudn.tlcjournal.org
The evasion strategy is realised through the tactics of forwarding, changing the subject and avoiding the answer. If the speaker goes with this communicative strategy, the aim is obviously to give a negative answer while avoiding direct confrontation. The strategy of downgrading the recipient's status is used by male and female respondents in equal measure in order to accuse the recipient, prove them wrong, and discredit their point of view. These particular goals are achieved through the tactics of accusation, judgement, denunciation, reproach, ridicule, and contempt. The strategy of communicative confrontation is implemented through the strategies on disagreement, unwillingness to sustain a conversation, and distancing.
The other group of strategies under analysis is made up by the communicative strategies deployed in order to facilitate interaction based on the principles of politeness and cooperation. These include, for example, the strategy that involves scaling up the recipient's status, which goal is achieved through the tactics of praise, compliment (most commonly used by male respondents), and expressing interest in the content of the conversation. In order to establish positive interaction mode, both sexes can resort to the tactics of positive assertion, emotional support, and expressing positive emotional state.
Thus, communicative strategies and tactics of
speech manipulation deployed in the framework of intercultural business discourse are primarily associated with the speaker's objectives, his or her intention to regulate the recipient's behaviour, i.e. the speaker encourages the recipient to commence, modify, or terminate an action, thus affecting the recipient's decision-making process and transforming the recipient's worldview (DeVito, 2012).
5. DISCUSSION
A separate matter of discussion in the case of our research involves identifying the peculiarities of speech behaviour in view of specific communicative strategies and tactics being used in the framework of various genres of intercultural business communication. In order to narrow down the scope of the study, this article deals with the features of intercultural business communication typically inherent in its two specific genres, which are presentations and business interviews. Presentation strategies can be referred to as a means of production of the communicative space, as well as a means of its representation in the framework of communication. The main presentation strategies are as follows:
• adequate and active embodiment of the communicative space in the structure of the communicative environment irrespective of the objectives calling for the extension or structural modification of the latter;
by Elena N. Malyuga and Barry Tomalin
• semantic modification of the communicative space entailing transformed the structure of the communicative environment (yet not always prompting its extension);
• expanding and detailing the structure of the communicative environment against the backdrop of unchanged (as a rule) communicative space - expanding informative involvement (Kroehnert, 2010).
The content of any presentation incorporates two different types of communication and, therefore, two types of knowledge that can be represented in the course of intercultural business communication. The first type refers to communication taking place within the transformational space, where knowledge acts as a form of interaction and unification. The second type refers to communication viewed as interaction, where knowledge is perceived in its fundamental sense, a continuum of comprehension. In the practice of social transformation, conventional strategies of communication rely on the first type of knowledge and are characterised by such means of structuring as projects and strategies. Manipulative strategies of communication, on the other hand, rely on the second type of knowledge and are characterised by such means of structuring as ideology, propaganda and advertising. And only through this is it possible to further master the first type.
Presentation strategies also rely on these types of knowledge in varying ways. Interaction within the continuum of comprehension (knowledge type II) is achieved through presentation of the holistic worldview, implementation of the strategies of knowledge presentation and delivery. Perceiving discourse in the framework of such presentation strategy, it would be logical to ask, 'What is being said?' In the transformational space (knowledge type I), unification of knowledge is achieved through the strategy of information transfer. In this case, a logical question would be, 'Who tells whom, what kind of reaction follows, and what kind of feedback is expected?' (Tomalin, 2012). Thus, presentation refers to organising the cultural continuum within both the communicative space and the communicative environment.
Turning to the issues associated with the implementation of communicative strategies and tactics in the framework of the genre of business interviews, we should first dwell on some of its key features and characteristics.
To a casual observer, the difference between interviews and everyday speech might seem insignificant, practically non-existent. Yet, there are actually a number of measurable distinctions between the two genres to be considered. The main characteristics of interviews are their conciseness and brevity. The interviewer's task is to perform a communicative act that would only
Volume 1 Issue 1, 2017
rudn.tlcjournal.org
comprise relevant questions, and do it in a relatively short period of time. All irrelevant aspects must be omitted, and all efforts must be directed towards disclosing the specified topic. At the same time, we should not underestimate the skills of normal, everyday conversation. One way or another, in the most general sense, the art of the interview implies posing the right questions and getting the right answers (Mayer, 2011).
Irrespective of the individual style deployed by each interviewer, and irrespective of the topic being discussed, there are some basic rules to be considered when preparing the questions. First, the question should be discernible: the situation signals the end of the general conversation flow, and the respondent is asked a question. Moreover, each question should be formulated so as to get the required response, while avoiding unnecessary information. If the question is not clear enough, so will be the respondent's answer, and the interview might ultimately deviate from the main subject and lose its integrity. Finally, the respondent may use uncertainty for personal purposes - for example, in order to get around difficult and uncomfortable questions.
Thus, the question should be clear, tactful, understandable, and relatively concise so that its essence doesn't end up lost, and the interview doesn't appear monotonous or even boring. Another important requirement calls for even
distribution of questions (Pearce, 1993). In other words, it would be appropriate for the interviewer not to ask two questions simultaneously, for otherwise the respondent might only provide the answer to one of the questions, most probably the easier one.
Pausing is another aspect worth mentioning. In fact, the speaker can express themselves through pauses (if, of course, they are handled properly) just as efficiently as through the utterance.
Silence may be solemn, respectful, or threatening. On the other hand, polite anticipation of response indicates that it would require a more detailed coverage by the respondent.
The relationship between the interviewer and the respondent, just like any other dialogical relations, are governed by specific rules of interpersonal communication, and particularly by the principle of cooperation that implies that communicating entities aim to ensure successful communication. It is this aim that determines the choice of language means and people's behaviour in general. As to the intonation, we should note that the prosodic contour of utterances found in business interviews is not subject to flexible variation. Therefore, units of the prosodic contour are closely interrelated, interdependent and are rigorously predictable in the framework of each specific utterance (Malyuga & Orlova, 2016).
by Elena N. Malyuga and Barry Tomalin
Any interview is invariably governed by a specific communicative objective or programme. This means that the interviewer's remarks and comments play an important role in organising the interview. Thinking over the 'stimulating remarks', the interviewer focuses primarily on the issues that would appear most significant for the future publication. Accordingly, their speech incorporates various means of manipulation: assumption, persistence, specification. The interviewer's remarks may be structurally simple and stylistically neutral, which typically is the case with information-oriented questions that imply simple answers. 'Stimulating remarks', however, may undergo structural and stylistic complication, which, in turn, brings about more complicated inter-utterance links (Maddux, 1995).
In business interviews, persuasion is not only realised through logical argumentation, but can also be implemented through manipulation of the respondent's feelings and emotions. This factor defines a wide range of expressive means to be used (Malyuga & Tomalin, 2014). Linguistic means used to express assessment, for example, can be represented by the units belonging to all language levels. However, in interviews, they are most extensively represented by units belonging to lexical and syntactic levels. At the lexical level, these are essentially words with positive or negative connotation (nouns, adjectives, verbs, adverbs).
Of particular interest to us are the issues associated with the realisation of communicative strategies and tactics of speech behaviour in the framework of the genre of business interviews in view of gender aspects of communicative exchange.
Studying gender characteristics of discourse, researchers primarily pay attention to the strategies of communicative behaviour. Some believe that one type of speech behaviour may be referred to as 'competitive' (which implies competitiveness, autonomy, aspiration for control), while the other type may be viewed as 'cooperative' (which implies interpersonal interaction, sociability, expression of personal feelings). One way or another, we can say that gender-based models of speech behaviour are not defined by nature, but are rather determined by society, by socio-cultural parameters.
The study has established that communicative strategies used in the framework of intercultural business discourse divided into two key groups -those hindering and those facilitating cooperative interaction. At this point, we shall consider the way these strategies are implemented based on the examples of abstracts from media interviews and in view of some gender aspects. In order to narrow down the scope of the study, this objective will be addressed through the analysis of the corresponding functions of tag questions used in
Volume 1 Issue 1, 2017
rudn.tlcjournal.org
the texts of interviews. Let us consider the following example, which is an extract from an interview with the former United States Ambassador to Egypt, Edward Walker, recorded on the State of the Union radio show hosted by Candy Crowley, aired January 30, 2011.
Interviewer: Mubarak has proved a good ally. He was there to help put up a fight against terror. We are giving up our major alliance partner, aren't we?
Respondent: That's not entirely true. It is actually not about him. It is about Egypt.
Interviewer: And Egypt doesn't seem to care for us, does it?
Respondent: There are a number of reasons that might have triggered that 'we don't care' attitude, but it is the Palestinian issue that seems to override everything else.'
The interviewer finds herself in a situation of communicative confrontation with the respondent. On the one hand, tag questions are being used because the interviewer disagrees with the respondent. On the other hand, they also help her make her point with regard to the topic being discussed. Thus, in this case we are dealing with the strategy hindering cooperative interaction.
The following example is an abstract from an
interview with the boxer Debra Mathews, recorded on Small Business Trends radio show hosted by Anita Campbell, aired July 14, 2009.
Interviewer: Let us now turn to some economic issues closing down on us. I would say, it is quite obvious that we are currently going through a pretty rough period of recession, right? Has it in any way affected the website business?
Respondent: Well, the development rates are surely decreasing. Unfortunately, the web has been damaged by the crisis like many other businesses.
In this particular microcontext, the tag 'right?' used in the framework of the strategy of solidarity is used to express the interviewer's interest in the topic under discussion, as well as her sympathy towards the respondent, which means that in this case we are looking at a strategy facilitating cooperative interaction.
The next example we would like to consider is an abstract from an interview with the Governor Marc Racicot, recorded on the Larry King Live radio show hosted by Larry King, aired December 11, 2000.
Interviewer: It is a dilemma, isn't it, Governor? Dealing with states' rights, federal versus constitutional, the right to - no-one wants to deny
by Elena N. Malyuga and Barry Tomalin
anyone the right to vote.
Respondent: I would absolutely agree.
The tag question deployed by the interviewer is an attempt to make the respondent side with the speaker, an attempt to yield the respondent's support. This same tactic can be used to implement the strategy of evasion. The strategy of evasion, as was earlier noted, is realised through the tactics of forwarding, changing the subject, and avoiding the answer in order to give a negative response while avoiding direct confrontation.
The last example we will refer to is an abstract from an interview with Hillary Clinton, recorded on the Larry King Live radio show hosted by Larry King, aired December 11, 2000.
Interviewer: How do I address you now? Is it Madam First Lady, Hillary, Hillary Rodham, Senator?
Respondent: It's a little confusing, isn't it?
Interviewer: Yes. What do you like the best?
Respondent: Well, I... gee, all of those are, you know, really wonderful things!
In the interviewer's remarks, one might trace a
slight ironic tinge, when he lists the stages of his respondent's political career, which possibly makes her a little bit annoyed and uncomfortable. Using the tag question instead of a direct answer, the respondent turns the potentially awkward situation into a joke. From the functional-pragmatic perspective, more frequent use of tag questions indicates a desire to avoid open confrontations with the interlocutor, and support cooperative interaction.
6. CONCLUSION
Interpersonal interaction is a complex process that involves transfer of information through language in order to convey a specific semantic content, the ultimate aim being to manage the recipient's behaviour. Therefore, speech interaction will always be associated with, at one level, speech manipulation, the speaker's desire to 'mould' the recipient's behaviour to achieve agreement, control or build relationships. This implies that communication is never neutral, for using language involves making targeted manipulative efforts. Having analysed the definitions and features of speech manipulation, the study singled out some of its fundamental characteristics, such as its purposeful nature, its orientation towards ensuring efficient interaction by using the most appropriate language and communication strategies and tactics. A communicative strategy can be defined as a model of action, an element of pre-planned speech activity manifested in a set of
Volume 1 Issue 1, 2017
rudn.tlcjournal.org
speech actions designed to achieve a communicative goal. A communicative tactic aims at using language to fulfil the key strategic task within the framework of the communication. These strategies and tactics are vividly represented in the framework of intercultural business discourse, since the issues associated with efficient realisation of professional tasks using language means are faced by the representatives of a great number of professional communities on a daily basis. Besides, English acts as the language of international communication, and so it plays an important role in harmonising international and
interpersonal communication on a global scale. The study was conducted in the context of two genres of business discourse (presentations and business interviews) and grouped the strategies into two distinct types - those hindering cooperative interaction, and those facilitating it. Speech behaviour varies according to the communicative setting and the social and cultural background of the communicating entities. Thus, parameters of communication can be described as flexible, inasmuch as there will always be a rather extensive number of contextual aspects to be considered.
References
Adair, J. (2003). Effective communication. London, UK: Pan Macmillan Ltd.
Adolphsen, M. (2014). Communication strategies of governments and NGOs: Engineering global discourse at high-level international summits. Manheim, Germany: Springer VS.
Akopova, A. (2013). Linguistic manipulation: Definition and types. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education, 1(2), 78-82.
Chaney, L. H., & Martin, J. S. (2014). Intercultural
business communication (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
DeVito, J. A. (2012). 50 communication strategies. Bloomington: iUniverse, Inc.
English, L. M. (1995). Business across cultures: Effective communication strategies. Addison-Wesley.
Flatley, M., Rentz, K., & Lentz, P. (2012). Business
communication (2nd ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. Syntax and Semantics, 3, 41-58.
Guffey, M. E., & Loewy, D. (2012). Essentials of business communication. Mason: Cengage.
Issers, O.S. (2002). Kommunikativnye strategii i taktiki russkoi rechi [Communicative strategies and tactics of Russian speech]. Moscow, Russia: Editorial URSS.
Kasper, G., & Kellerman, E. (2014). Communication strategies: Psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic perspectives. New York: Routledge.
Kroehnert, G. (2010). Basic presentation skills. Sidney, Australia: McGraw Hill.
Littlemore, J. (2003). The communicative effectiveness
by Elena N. Malyuga and Barry Tomalin
of different types of communication strategy. System, 31(3), 331-347.
Maddux, R. (1995). Quality interviewing. New York: Crisp Learning.
Malyuga, E. (2016, September). Exploiting the potential of ICT: Assessment of students' knowledge. In Proceedings of SGEM2016: 3rd International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conference on Social Sciences and Arts (pp. 319-326). Albena, Bulgaria: SGEM.
Malyuga, E. N., & Orlova, S. N. (2016, July). Teaching professional English terminology to students of economic universities. In Proceedings of EDULEARN16: 8th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies (pp. 7236-7241). Barcelona, Spain: IATED.
Malyuga, E. N., & Ponomarenko, E. V. (2015, July). Effective ways of forming students' communicative competence in interactive independent work. In Proceedings of EDULEARN15: 7th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies (pp. 1397-1404). Barcelona, Spain: IATED.
Malyuga E., Shvets A., & Tikhomirov, I. (2016, July). Computer-based analysis of business communication language. In Proceedings of SAI Computing Conference 2016 (pp. 229-232). London, UK: IEEE.
Malyuga, E., & Tomalin, B. (2014). English professional jargon in economic discourse. Journal of Language and Literature, 5(4), 172-180.
Mannan, Z. (2013). Business communication: Strategies for success in business and professions. Dhaka,
Bangladesh: Saint Martin Publisher.
Mayer, D. (2011). Career essentials: The interview. London, UK: Valley Publishing.
Pearce, R. D. (1993). The structure of discourse in broadcasting interviews. University of Birmingham.
Ponomarenko, E. V., & Malyuga, E. (2012, November). Business English and functional linguistics: Teaching practical English in perfect harmony with theory. In Proceedings of ICERI2012: 5th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation (pp. 4524-4529). Madrid, Spain: IATED.
Roebuck, D. B. (2012). Communication strategies for today's managerial leader. New York: Business Expert Press.
Tomalin, B. (2012). Key business skills. London, UK: HarperCollins Publishers.
Washington, M. C. (2013). Intercultural business
communication: An analysis of ethnocentrism in a globalized business environment. Journal of Business & Management, COES&RJ-JBM, 1(1), 20-27.
Wilson, L. J. (2001). Extending strategic planning to communication tactics. In R. L. Heath (Ed.), Handbook of public relations (pp. 215-222). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Ya-Ni, Z. (2007). Communication strategies and foreign language learning. US-China Foreign Language, 5(4), 43-48.
Yew, D. (2014). Communication strategies for the
global workplace. Singapore: Pearson Education South Asia Pte Limited.
