A sociohistorical approach to intercultural communication1

Abstract

This essay applauds Professor Ling Chen for making a philosophical turn in the dominant positivistic intercultural communication scholarship. However, her efforts to do this by situating concrete communication problems in an isolationist and universalizing “consciousness structure” silence local and alternative familially‐regionally‐institutionally‐politically‐historically specific processes of knowing. Drawing on the works of Vygotsky, Luria, and Bateson, this essay advances a sociohistorical approach to intercultural communication. To note, humans respond to changes and differences (double description, Creatura), while nonliving objects respond to impacts and forces (single description, Pleroma). Knowing via communication then becomes the interaction between two minds responding to changes and differences cultivated in concrete life activities. We suggest double description as a method to discuss interpersonal remarks, greeting rituals, and broader cultural claims. It is grounded in a historical understanding of race, gender, power, and politics in the private and public spheres of Chinese and North American cultures. The method of double description affirms a postmodern/postcolonial spirit, holding that communication is multivocal, incomplete, contextual, and critical. Knowledge claims become uniquely imbedded and subject to revision. We propose a laminated process of culture. It obligates a double‐descriptive definition of culture, and contextualization of standpoints/sociohistorical orientation. Thus, we, as scholars, cannot prescribe content answers for those who encounter intercultural problems. We can only provide some initial processual guidelines.