Face & Intercultural Communication Marlen Elliot Harrison Marlen.harrison@jyu.fi "among the most troublesome kinds of problems that arise in negotiation are the intangible issues related to the loss of face" (Brown, 1977, p. 275).

What is Face? Activity: Make a small group of no more than 4 people. Compare your homework notes with your group members. You have 5 minutes. First, what is meant by ”face”? Second, what kinds of theories did you discover? Third, why is this concept meaningful for this course? Let’s share what we’ve discussed as a large group. Can we name at least 4 different theorists and their ideas about face? Ting-Toomey: Negotiation theory, 1985 Goffman: Image of self, 1955 Brown & Levinson: Politeness in language use, 1978 Tannen: Face and gender, 1990 In a moment, I’ll provide personal examples from Japan and the USA. What questions do you have so far?

Face Activity: What is the significance of ”face” in Finnish culture, in general, and in your own lives, specifically? Work with your group members to identify a situation which illustrates the concept of ”face.” For example, agree upon a situation you’ve all encountered in which ”face” has been an issue. You have 5 minutes. Let’s share what we’ve discussed as a large group. Can we identify at least 2 different ways that we deal with ”face” in social situations? Saving Face vs Losing Face: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0WEOrd7jsI

Context Group Harmony vs Individualism Activity: High Context vs Low Context cultures. Work with your group members to brainstorm an understanding of what these terms might mean and which types of cultures may be high or low context cultures. You have 5 minutes. Learn more: Edward Hall (1976, Beyond Culture), Geert Hofstede (2001, Culture’s Consequences) Let’s share what we’ve discussed as a large group. How are these concepts (face and context) significant in relation to this course?

Maintaining Face Ting-Toomey's article, Intergroup Diplomatic Communication, highlights the fact that during negotiation, there are two simultaneous face processes going on. Although much more attention has been given in the past to face-threatening behaviors, face-honoring processes also occur. She argues that diplomats must learn that face-maintenance is the key to successful inter-group negotiation. By face-maintenance, she means "the desire to project an image of strength and capability, or conversely, to avoid projecting an image of incapability, weakness, or foolishness. (Rosenberg, 2004) To find Rosenberg’s article, just search for “Sarah Rosenberg Face.” Another great read is Lisa Vilkki’s Politeness, Face and Facework (2006); just search for ”Vilkki Politeness”

Face in Context Example from Japan #1: ”Maybe…多分” Group harmony, honne & tatemae 本音と建て前, avoiding conflict Example from USA #2: ”Volunteering” Climb the ladder of success, get ahead, illustrate confidence and drive Activity: Based on what we’ve discussed, what are some strategies for managing ”face” in cross-cultural settings? Work with your group members to identify at least two English linguistic strategies for managing face. You have 5 minutes.

Strategies & Conclusion http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/comm440-540/face.htm To find this article, search ”Face Oregonstate Walker” CONCLUSIONS Is understanding face a matter of learning sentences and vocabulary? Can we learn face-management strategies in a classroom? Final Activity: Talk with your group one last time and identify: One issue related to face you want to know more about. One idea or concept that you learned today that you hadn’t known before. One thing that you might do differently after today’s presentation.