CHAPTER

NONVERBAL CODES
7 AND CULTURAL SPACE

CHAPTER OBJECTIVES THINKING DIALECTICALLY ABOUT

After reading this chapter, you NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION:
should be able to: DEFINING NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION
1. Understand how verbal and Comparing Verbal and Nonverbal Communication
nonverbal communication What Nonverbal Behavior Communicates
differ.
THE UNIVERSALITY OF NONVERBAL BEHAVIOR
2. Discuss the types of messages
that are communicated Recent Research Findings
nonverbally. Nonverbal Codes
3. Identify cultural universals in Stereotype, Prejudice, and Discrimination
nonverbal communication. Semiotics and Nonverbal Communication
4. Explain the limitations of
DEFINING CULTURAL SPACE
some cross-cultural research
findings. Cultural Identity and Cultural Space
5. Define and give an example Changing Cultural Space
of cross-cultural differences Postmodern Cultural Spaces
in facial expressions, prox-
emics, gestures, eye contact, INTERNET RESOURCES
paralanguage, chronemics, SUMMARY
and silence.
6. Discuss the relation- DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
ship between nonverbal
ACTIVITIES
communication and power.
7. Define cultural space. KEY WORDS
8. Describe how cultural spaces REFERENCES
are formed.
9. Explain why it is important to
understand cultural spaces in
intercultural communication.
10. Understand the differences
between the modernist and
postmodern views of cultural
spaces.

260
 Chapter 7 / Nonverbal Codes and Cultural Space 261

Nonverbal elements of cultural communication are highly dynamic and play an

important role in understanding intercultural communication. Our Kenyan student
Gladys describes a nonverbal misstep when she rst arrived in the United States:
Back at home women love touching and patting each other’s hair as a way
of admiring it. When I moved to the United States, there was this lady who
attended the same church we did. The lady was fairly friendly and even talked
of inviting me to her apartment. She had long blonde hair. One day, I made the
mistake of patting her hair as a way of admiring how long it was. She was so
mad at me, and that occurrence strained our relationship which never recovered.
Since then I became afraid of patting anyone’s hair again.
Consider expected spatial distance. A colleague recently observed that walking
on the sidewalks in England, she found herself frequently bumping into oncoming
pedestrians—and gured out it was because people tend to walk on the same side of
the pavement as they drive on the road. So walking in England, as they approached
her and she steps to her left, they step to their right.
While the consequences for these encounters may be a bit awkward, in some
other instances, understanding nonverbal communication can be more consequential.
For example, consider nonverbal norms for interactions with police. Cultural experts
warned tourists visiting Japan for the recent Rugby World Cup that police there have
every legal right to stop citizens and foreigners and ask for ID. In fact, even raising your
voice can be interpreted as noncompliance, with serious consequences. Japanese citi-
zens, when stopped by police, will stand perfectly still and speak calmly. “No sudden
moves. No surprises. Nobody goes to jail” (Richards, 2019) .
You may never need to know the appropriate nonverbal behavior for encounters
with Japanese police, but you certainly will nd yourself in many intercultural com-
munication situations and cultural spaces. Your own nonverbal communication may
create additional problems and, if the behaviors are inappropriate for the particular
cultural space, may exacerbate existing tensions. In other cases, your use of nonver-
bals might reduce tension and confusion.
The rst part of this chapter focuses on the importance of understanding non-
verbal aspects of intercultural communication. We can examine nonverbal com-
munication in terms of the personal–contextual and the static–dynamic dialectics.
Although nonverbal communication can be highly dynamic, personal space, ges-
tures, and facial expressions are fairly static patterns of speci c nonverbal communi-
cation codes. These patterns are the focus of the second part of this chapter. Finally,
we investigate the concept of cultural space and the ways in which cultural identity
is shaped and negotiated by the cultural spaces (home, neighborhood, and so on)
that people occupy.
There are no guidebooks for reading everyday nonverbal behaviors, and nonver-
bal communication norms vary from culture to culture; therefore, we believe it is
useless to list nonverbals to memorize. Instead, it will be more bene cial for you to
learn the framework of nonverbal communication and cultural spaces so you can tap
into the nonverbal systems of whatever cultural groups become relevant to your life.
Understanding communication is a matter of understanding how to think dialectically
262 Part II / Intercultural Communication Processes

FIGURE 7-1 Nonverbal behavior can communicate status and power.

How are these elements expressed in the nonverbal behavior of these bor-
der-crossers and border guards? (Johan ORDONEZ/AFP/Getty Images)

about systems of meaning, and not discrete elements. Nonverbal intercultural commu-
nication is no exception.

THINKING DIALECTICALLY ABOUT NONVERBAL

COMMUNICATION: DEFINING NONVERBAL
COMMUNICATION

In this chapter, we discuss two forms of communication beyond speech. The rst
includes facial expression, personal space, gestures, eye contact, paralanguage, use
of time, and conversational silence. (What is not said is often as important as what
is spoken.) The second includes the cultural spaces that we occupy and negotiate.
cultural space The Cultural spaces are the social and cultural contexts in which our identity forms—where
particular we grow up and where we live (not necess arily the physical homes and neighbor-
configuration of the
communication that hoods, but the cultural meanings created in these places).
constructs meanings In thinking dialectically, we need to consider the relationship between the non-
of various places. verbal behavior and the cultural spaces in which the behavior occurs, and between the
nonverbal behavior and the verbal message. Although there are patterns to nonverbal
behaviors, they are not always culturally appropriate in all cultural spaces. Remember,
too, that some nonverbal behaviors are cultural, whereas others are idiosyncratic, that
is, peculiar to individuals.
 Chapter 7 / Nonverbal Codes and Cultural Space 263

Comparing Verbal and Nonverbal Communication

Recognizing Nonverbal Behavior Both verbal and nonverbal communication are sym-
bolic, communicate meaning, and are patterned—that is, they are governed by contextu-
ally determined rules. Societies have di erent nonverbal languages, just as they have
di erent spoken languages. However, some di erences between nonverbal and verbal
communication codes have important implications for intercultural interaction.
Let’s look at some examples of these di erences. The following incident occurred
to Judith when she was new to Algeria, where she lived for a while. One day she stood at
her balcony and waved to one of the young Algerian teachers, who was walking across the
school yard. Several minutes later, the young teacher knocked on the door, looking expec-
tantly at Judith, as if summoned. Because Judith knew that it was uncommon in Algeria
for men to visit women they didn’t know well, she was confused. Why had he come to her
door? Was it because she was foreign? After a few awkward moments, he left. A few weeks
later, Judith gured it out. In Algeria (as in many other places), the U.S. “wave” is the non-
verbal signal for “come here.” The young teacher had assumed that Judith had summoned
him to her apartment. As this example illustrates, rules for nonverbal communication vary
among cultures and contexts.
Let’s consider another example. Two U.S. students attending school in France were
traveling by train to Germany, when the conductor walked into their compartment and
berated them in English for putting their feet on the opposite seat. They wondered how
he had known that they spoke English. As these examples suggest, nonverbal communi-
cation entails more than gestures—even our appearance can communicate loudly. The
students’ appearance alone probably was a su cient clue to their national identity. One
of our students described a recent experience she had as a tourist in Berlin:
Even though I had read that it was considered impolite to call the server in a
restaurant by raising a hand/ nger, I found myself doing it without thinking! Until
a German friend pointed it out.
While some nonverbal behaviors are very conscious (like wearing/not wearing a facial
mask during a pandemic), as these examples show, nonverbal behavior mostly oper-
ates at a subconscious level. We rarely think about how we stand, what gestures we
use, and so on. Occasionally, someone points out such behaviors, which brings them
to the conscious level.
When misunderstandings arise, we are more likely to question our verbal com-
munication than our nonverbal communication. We can search for di erent ways to
explain verbally what we mean. We can also look up words in a dictionary or ask
someone to explain unfamiliar words. In contrast, it is more di cult to identify non-
verbal miscommunications or misperceptions.

Learning Nonverbal Behavior Although we learn rules and meanings for language
behavior in grammar and language arts lessons, we learn nonverbal meanings and
behaviors by more implicit socialization. No one explains, “When you talk with
someone you like, lean forward and smile frequently, because that will communicate
that you really care about him or her.” In many contexts in the United States, such
 STUDENT VOICES

I have a couple of good friends who are deaf, and it is evident that body language, eye
contact, and visual communication are far more important in our conversations than
between two hearing people. I found that both of my friends, who lived very close to me,
would much rather stop by my house than call me on the relay. I can see the cultural
implications of space and distance. We keep in touch mostly by using WhatsApp. It’s
funny because the messages that I get from those guys have more commonly used slang
words than most of my hearing friends use. The question is: Do my friends understand
the slang, make it a part of their language, and create a sign for it, or do they know the
words through somewhat of a verbal exchange with the hearing?
—Andrea

behaviors communicate immediacy and positive meanings (Ray & Floyd, 2006). But
how is it interpreted if someone does not display these behaviors?
Sometimes, though, we learn strategies for nonverbal communication. Have you
ever been told to shake hands rmly when you meet someone? You may have learned
that a limp handshake indicates a weak person. Likewise, many young women learn
to cross their legs at the ankles and to keep their legs together when they sit. These
strategies combine socialization and the teaching of nonverbal codes.

Coordinating Nonverbal and Verbal Behaviors Generally, our nonverbal behaviors

reinforce our verbal behaviors. For example, when we shake our heads and say “no,”
we are reinforcing verbal behavior, and not surprisingly, consistency between verbal
and nonverbal behaviors usually translates into perceptions of credibility and posi-
tive rst impressions (Weisbuch, Ambady, Clark, Achor, & Weele, 2010). However,
nonverbal behaviors can also contradict our verbal communication. If we tell a friend,
“I can’t wait to see you,” and then don’t show up at the friend’s house, our nonver-
bal behavior is contradicting the verbal message. Because nonverbal communication
operates at a less conscious level, we tend to think that people have less control over
their nonverbal behavior. Therefore, we often think of nonverbal behaviors as convey-
ing the “real” messages.

What Nonverbal Behavior Communicates

Although language is an e ective and e cient means of communicating explicit
relational messages information or content, every communication also conveys relational messages—
Messages (verbal
and nonverbal) that information on how the talker wants to be understood and viewed by the listener.
communicate how we These messages are communicated not by words, but through nonverbal behav-
feel about others.
ior, including facial expressions, eye gaze, posture, and even our tone of voice
(Bello, Brandau-Brown, Zhang, & Ragsdale, 2010). Nonverbal behavior also com-
status The relative municates status and power. For example, employees tend to look at supervisors for
position an individual cues to interpreting instructions, whereas supervisors direct their eye gaze at subordi-
holds in social or
organizational nates less often; U.S. men, with historically higher status, tend to take up more space
settings. than women when seated (“manspreading”), a pattern that some are resisting now
264
 Chapter 7 / Nonverbal Codes and Cultural Space 265

Respeta el espacio
de los demás

Dude…
Stop the Spread,
Please
It’s a space issue.

FIGURE 7-2 Signs in public transportation in Madrid and New York

City signal a cross-cultural resistance to “manspreading.” (Sources: The
Independent and The Guardian)

(see Figure 7-2). Relatedly, a Korean student explained that in Korea, at family, social
or business setting meals, it is customary to wait for the oldest person (with highest
status) to start eating, then others can start eating. What are the consequences when
people do not follow these “rules”; when women sprawl when seated or subordinates
do not direct their gaze at a supervisor who is giving instructions?
In addition, many people believe that nonverbal behavior communicates
deception, and scholars have spent years investigating this assumption—using sophisti- deception The act
cated research methodologies, including computer-assisted observational tools, exper- of making someone
believe what is not
imental (lab) studies, and in-depth interviews with interrogators and suspects—with true.
few conclusive results. Some suggest that people from di erent cultural groups exhibit
di erent behaviors when lying (Vrij, Granhag, & Mann, 2010). Still others suggest
that deception is better detected by looking at language use—at how consistent people
are in their speech (Blair, Reimer, & Levine, 2018; Dunbar et al., 2019). However,
scholars now conclude that the nonverbal cues to deception are “faint and unreliable
and that people are mediocre lie catchers” (Vrij, Hartwig, & Granhag, 2019, p. 19).
Most nonverbal communication about a ect, status, and deception happens at
an unconscious level. For this reason, it plays an important role in intercultural inter-
actions. Both pervasive and unconscious, it communicates how we feel about each
other and about other cultural groups.
A useful theory in understanding nonverbal communication across cultures is
expectancy violations theory. This theory suggests that we have expectations (mostly expectancy
subconscious) about how others should behave nonverbally in particular situations. violations theory The
view that when
When these expectations are violated (e.g., when someone stands too close to us), someone’s nonverbal
we will respond in speci c ways. If an act is unexpected and interpreted negatively, behavior violates our
for example, when someone stands too close to us at a religious service, we tend expectations, these
violations will be
to regard the person and the relationship rather negatively. However, if the act is perceived positively or
unexpected and interpreted positively (e.g., an attractive person stands close at a negatively depending
party), we will probably regard the relationship rather favorably. In fact, more favor- on the specific context
and behavior.
ably than if someone stands the exact “expected” distance from us at a religious
266 Part II / Intercultural Communication Processes

service or party. Because nonverbal communication occurs at a subconscious level,

our negative or positive feelings toward someone may be due to the fact that they
violated our expectations—without our realizing it (Burgoon, 1995; Floyd, Ramirez,
& Burgoon, 2008).

THE UNIVERSALITY OF NONVERBAL BEHAVIOR

Most traditional research in intercultural communication focuses on identifying

cross-cultural di erences in nonverbal behavior. How do culture, ethnicity, and gen-
der in uence nonverbal communication patterns? How universal is most nonverbal
communication? Research traditionally has sought to answer these questions.
As we have observed in previous chapters, it is neither bene cial nor accu-
rate to try to reduce individuals to one element of their identity (gender, ethnicity,
nationality, and so on). Attempts to place people in discrete categories tend to
reduce their complexities and lead to major misunderstandings. However, we often
classify people according to various categories to help us nd universalities. For
example, although we may know that not all Germans are alike, we may seek infor-
mation about Germans in general to help us communicate better with individual
Germans. In this section, we explore the extent to which nonverbal communication
codes are universally shared. We also look for possible cultural variations in these
codes that may serve as tentative guidelines to help us communicate better with
others.

Recent Research Findings

Research investigating the universality of nonverbal communication has focused
on four areas: (1) the relationship of human behavior to that of primates (par-
ticularly chimpanzees), (2) nonverbal communication of sensory-deprived children
who are blind or deaf, (3) facial expressions, and (4) universal functions of nonver-
bal social behavior.
Chimpanzees and humans share many nonverbal behaviors. For example,
both exhibit the eyebrow ash—a slight raising of the eyebrow that communicates
recognition—one of the most primitive and universal animal behaviors. Primates and
humans also share some facial expressions, and recent research reveals another ges-
ture shared by chimps and humans—the upturned palm, meaning “gimme.” There
do seem to be compelling parallels between speci c facial expressions and gestures
displayed by human and nonhuman primates, universally interpreted to hold simi-
lar meanings. However, it still remains true that communication among nonhuman
primates, like chimps and monkeys, appears to be less complex than among humans
(Preuschoft, 2000).
Studies have also compared the facial expressions of children who were blind
with those of sighted children and found many similarities. Even though the children
who were blind couldn’t see the facial expressions of others to mimic them, they still
made the same expressions. This suggests some innate, genetic basis for these behav-
iors (Galati, Sini, Schmidt, & Tinti, 2003).
 Chapter 7 / Nonverbal Codes and Cultural Space 267

Indeed, many cross-cultural studies support the notion of some universality in

function of nonverbal communication, particularly in facial expressions; for example, facial expressions
the eyebrow ash just described, the nose wrinkle (indicating slight social distancing), Facial gestures that
convey emotions and
and the “disgust face” (a strong sign of social repulsion). It is also possible that groom- attitudes.
ing behavior is universal (as it is in animals), although it seems to be somewhat sup-
pressed in Western societies (Schiefenhovel, 1997).
Although research may indicate universalities in nonverbal communication,
some variations exist. The evoking stimuli (i.e., what causes the nonverbal behavior)
may vary from one culture to another. Smiling, for example, is universal, but what
prompts a person to smile may be culture speci c. Similarly, there are variations in
the rules for nonverbal behavior and the contexts in which nonverbal communication
takes place. For example, people kiss in most cultures, but there is variation in who
kisses whom and in what contexts. When French friends greet each other, they often
kiss on both cheeks but never on the mouth.
Finally, it is important to look for larger cultural patterns in the nonverbal behav-
ior, rather than trying simply to identify all of the cultural di erences. Researcher
David Matsumoto (2006) suggests that although cultural di erences in nonverbal pat-
terns are interesting, noting these di erences is not su cient. Studying and cataloging
every variation in every aspect of nonverbal behavior would be an overwhelming task.
Instead, he recommends studying nonverbal communication patterns that vary with
other cultural patterns, such as values.
For example, recent research links cultural patterns of individualism and collec-
tivism to di erences in facial cues and ultimately to di erent uses of emoji. A study
analyzing one month of emoji usage of 3.88 million active users from 212 countries/
regions found that cultural groups that emphasize individualism (e.g., Australia,
France) and encourage expressions of happiness over sadness do use more happy
emoji (Lu et al., 2016). Might people from collectivist cultures misinterpret or think
others overuse these smiley emojis?

Nonverbal Codes
Physical Appearance Physical appearance is an important nonverbal code. It
includes physical characteristics like height, weight, and body shape, as well as per-
sonal grooming (including body hair, clothing choices) and personal artifacts such
jewelry, glasses, and backpacks/briefcases/purses, medical facial masks.
Of course, physical attractiveness is dynamic and variable—beauty is in the eye
of the beholder, to some extent (Swami et al., 2010). However, are there any uni-
versal measures of attractiveness? Do di erent cultures have di erent standards
for beauty? It turns out that two aspects of beauty seems to be present in many
cultures: (1) There is more emphasis on female attractiveness than male, and
(2) men consistently express stronger preferences for attractive mates than women
(Gottschall, 2008).
Japanese seem to prefer smaller-bodied women than the British, and in gen-
eral, prefer small-headed and longer-legged women—the so-called hattou shin beauty
(Swami, Caprario, & Tovée, 2006). Our Japanese students tell us that, generally,
Japanese nd thinner lips more attractive than do U.S. Americans. Concerning
 POINT of VIEW

Whether women must wear a headscarf as a matter of faith is controversial, even

among Muslims, and there are many reasons why Muslim women do or do not
wear hijab.
Communication scholar Steve M. Croucher (2008) asked Muslim women in
France their reasons for wearing the hijab. Their reasons included: it provides a feel-
ing of security, a shield from public eyes, it demonstrates their commitment to their
religious community, it is an expression of their identity, or sometimes even a protest
against a secular (French) government.
In contrast, Asra Q. Nomani and Hala Arafa (2015) reject the interpretation
that wearing the hijab is a “pillar” of Islam. They point out that hijab literally means
“curtain” in Arabic, “hiding” and “isolating” someone or something, and is never
used in the Koran to mean headscarf. They suggest that this interpretation is a well-
nanced e ort by conservative Muslims to dominate modern Muslim societies and
spread an ideology of political Islam, called “Islamism.” For information about
the di erence between the various forms of covering (the Hijab, Niqab, and Burka)
in di erent world regions, visit https://theculturetrip.com/middle-east/articles/the
-di erence-between-the-hijab-niqab-and-burka/

male attractiveness, in one study, Greek women showed a preference for smaller
men and smaller overall body weight—than did British women (Swami et al., 2007).
How do clothing choices and artifacts like purses and backpacks gure in? We
might argue that these can be individual choices that express elements of one’s person-
ality and a liation with particular social groups—for example, goth clothing versus jock
or preppie. Some clothing may re ect religious a liation and expressions of religious
identity, as we discussed in Chapter 5 (see Figure 7-3). For example, some orthodox
Jewish women cover their heads at all times with scarves or hats; some of Judith’s rela-
tives wear prayer bonnets that cover the head and “cape” dresses (modest, shirtwaist
dresses with an extra layer of material designed to deemphasize the female shape); Mus-
lim women in many countries wear the Islamic hijab (headscarf) or burqa (sheet-like
covering of the entire body with only eyes showing) (See Point of View on this page).
As you might expect, women have various reasons for their clothing choices. Sometimes
these choices con ict with secular society or norms in other cultures. For example, on a
visit to Saudi Arabia where Sharia law dictates that women cover their heads in public,
First Lady Melania Trump dressed modestly but without a headscarf, as did Trump’s
daughter Ivanka. Other leaders have also shunned the scarf including German Chancel-
lor Angela Merkel, former British Prime Minister Theresa May, and former Secretary of
State Hillary Clinton (Downes, 2019). In 2010, the French parliament made it illegal for
Muslim women to wear the full veil, a law supported by a majority of French citizens,
and there are similar sentiments in Britain (Thompson, 2011). Most U.S. Americans
are not in favor, and some suggest that values of tolerance and religious freedom should
prevail—banning the burqa in very limited contexts (schools, courts) where faces need
to be seen. Some compare the ban to the French requiring Jews to wear a Star of David
268
 Chapter 7 / Nonverbal Codes and Cultural Space 269

FIGURE 7-3 Muslim women in many countries wear the Islamic burqa as
an expression of religious identity. (philipjbigg/Alamy Stock Photo)

during World War II, emphasizing the underlying intolerance and prejudice (Zaretsky,
2010), which will be discussed later in this chapter. The context and people involved
may call for di erent choices. During Iranian President Rouhani’s 2016 trip to Europe
where he made $18 billion worth of business deals, the Italians decided to cover some
of their famous nude statues during his visits to art museums, in deference to Rouhani’s
strict theocratic sensibilities. They placed plywood boxes and panels around the nudes
to obscure them from the president’s vision, or at least in photo-ops (Tharoor, 2016).

Facial Expressions As noted earlier, there have been many investigations of the uni-
versality of facial expressions. During the past 60 years, psychologist Paul Ekman
(2003) and colleagues, through extensive and systematic research, have maintained
that there are six basic emotions expressed through universal facial expressions: hap-
piness, sadness, disgust, surprise, anger, and fear. And in a recent essay in Psychol-
ogy Today, Ekman (2019) reports that he suspects, although he hasn’t investigated
it, that contempt may also be a universal emotion. Using sophisticated computer-
generated digital measurement, other research found that the six basic emotions sug-
gested earlier held true for Western Caucasians. However, East Asians showed less
distinction, and more overlap between emotional categories, particularly for surprise,
fear, disgust, and anger, speci cally showing “signs of emotional intensity with the
eyes, which are under less voluntary control than the mouth, re ecting restrained
facial behaviors as predicted by the literature” (Jack, Garrod, Yub, Caldarac &
Schyns, 2012, p. 7242). So this research refutes the notion that human emotion is
universally represented by the same set of six distinct facial expression signals, and
270 Part II / Intercultural Communication Processes

early research probably neglected expressions of shame, pride, or guilt, fundamental

emotions in East Asian societies.
While a smile may signal a universally positive emotion, there are cultural
variations in how much and how often people are expected to smile. Recent stud-
ies show that eastern Europeans tend to smile less than western Europeans, and
North Americans tend to smile more often than any other cultural group, and many
Americans nd it disconcerting that wearing facial masks hides their smiles. Commu-
nication experts suggest that these di erences stem from deeply held cultural prefer-
ences involving friendliness and sincerity. America is a “culture of a rmation,” where
friendliness reigns and people should be happy, or at least appear to be happy. In
comparison, French, German, and eastern European cultures place a strong emphasis
on sincerity and presenting one’s feelings “truthfully,” so people are expected to smile
only when they are truly feeling happy. In fact, someone who smiles a lot is seen as a
bit loony or perhaps insincere; after all, who is truly happy all the time? In most cul-
tures women tend to smile more than men, probably re ecting the social expectations
that women are supposed to be more a liative and communal, and smiling is a way to
express these attributes (Szarota, 2010).

Proxemics Unlike facial expressions, the norms for personal space seem to vary con-
proxemics The study siderably from culture to culture. Proxemics is the study of how people use various
of how people use types of space in their everyday lives: xed feature space, semi xed space, and infor-
personal space.
mal space. Fixed feature space is characterized by set boundaries (divisions within
an o ce building); semi xed feature space is de ned by xed boundaries such as
furniture. Informal space, or personal space, is characterized by a personal zone or
“bubble” that varies for individuals and circumstances. The use of each of these spa-
tial relationships can facilitate or impede e ective communication across cultures; the
area that humans control and use most often is their informal space.
contact cultures Are there cultural variations in how people use personal space? A recent study of
Cultural groups personal distances in six countries did nd some cultural di erences as well as some
in which people
tend to stand close
universals (Høgh-Olesen, 2008). First, the universal norms: We tend to place our-
together and touch selves further away when we are standing near to more than one stranger, we narrow
frequently when they down our personal space when we are in control of our own “territory” (personal
interact—for example,
cultural groups in
space) and expand it when we arrive in someone else’s territory. Now for the cultural
South America, the variations—you probably know from personal experience that when someone stands
Middle East, and too close to you or too far in conversation, you tend to feel uncomfortable and may
southern Europe. (See
noncontact cultures.)
even move to shorten or widen the space. The same study found that people from
Northern countries of Greenland, Finland, and Denmark systematically kept larger
noncontact cultures distances between them and their conversational partner than did Italians, Indians, and
Cultural groups in
which people tend to Cameroonians. These results support Edward Hall’s 1966 observations about personal
maintain more space space. Hall distinguished contact cultures from noncontact cultures. He described
and touch less often contact cultures as those societies in which people stand closer together while talking,
than people do in
contact cultures. For engage in more direct eye contact, use face-to-face body orientations more often
instance, Great Britain while talking, touch more frequently, and speak in louder voices. He suggested that
and Japan tend to societies in South America and southern Europe are contact cultures, whereas those
have noncontact
cultures. (See contact in northern Europe, the United States, and the Far East are noncontact cultures—
cultures.) in which people tend to stand farther apart when conversing, maintain less eye
 STUDENT VOICES

Our students describe their experiences with contact/noncontact cultural behavior:

“I went to a great lecture by an Italian scholar last semester (at PSU) so I
decided to talk with him after the lecture. While I was talking with him, he
stood so close to me that I could even feel his breath and it made me feel really
uncomfortable; sometimes he even put his hand on my shoulder. I watched him
after and saw he stood close to everyone who talked to him.”
—Emma
In my home country of Peru, it’s normal to have more contact and less distance
when talking with people. I remember going to Camp at UCLA during middle
school. When greeting other girls, I’d approach and try to say hi like we did
back home, but they would back o and ask what I was doing. After that I g-
ured out the people here are more used to having space.
—Magda
When I rst saw people here hugging each other as greeting, I was shocked!
In China, we’re not used to hugging people. We shake hands, wave hands, nod
heads but not hug. I’m now getting used to it.
—Wei
In my Muslim school in Indonesia, hugging is not permissible and still con-
sidered as taboo and having to experience that clash of nonverbal action (like
when I went to a more permissive school in Singapore), and then here, it gives
me the perspective of the more lenient side of showing a ection.
—Atok

contact, and touch less often. Subsequent research seems to con rm Hall’s observa-
tions, see Student Voices above.
Of course, many other factors besides regional culture determine how far we
stand from someone. Gender, age, ethnicity, context, and topic all in uence the
use of personal space. In fact, some studies have shown that regional culture is
perhaps the least important factor. For example, in many Arab and Muslim soci-
eties, gender may be the overriding factor, because unmarried men and women
rarely stand close together, touch each other, or maintain direct eye contact.
In contrast, male friends may stand very close together, kiss on the cheek, and
even hold hands—re ecting loyalty, great friendship, and, most important, equal-
ity in status, with no sexual connotation (Fattah, 2005; Khuri, 2001). Religion
may also be a factor in in uencing (and regulating) proxemic behavior. Several
ights were delayed in 2019 amid controversy when groups of Ultra Orthodox
Jewish men refused to sit beside women—based on their interpretation of Jewish
religious law prohibiting physical contact with women (https://www.haaretz
.com/israel-news/.premium-el-al- ight-delayed-because-haredim-wouldn-t-sit-next-to
-women-1.6200187).
271
272 Part II / Intercultural Communication Processes

FIGURE 7-4 In many Asian countries, the

traditional greeting is a bow. The depth of
the bow signals the status relationship of the
two individuals. (Andersen Ross/Blend Images
LLC)

Gestures Gestures, perhaps even more so than personal space, vary greatly from cul-
ture to culture (see Figure 7-4), even though social media can quickly spread particular
gestures throughout the world, e.g., the “ nger heart” that originated in Korea (Boboltz,
2018). The consequences for this variation can be quite dramatic, as former First Lady
Michele Obama discovered when she threw her arm around Her Majesty The Queen and
shocked the Queen and the British media. One of the classic British rules of contact is
that you never touch the Queen.
Researcher Dane Archer (1997) describes his attempt to catalog the various
gestures around the world on video. He began this video project with several hypotheses:
First, that there would be great variation, and this he found to be true. However, more
surprising, his assumption regarding the existence of some universal gestures or at least
some universal categories of gestures (e.g., every culture must have an obscene gesture)
was not con rmed.
 POINT of VIEW

SHAKE HANDS? OR BOW?

Handshakes and bows are important nonverbal greetings around the world. In many
Asian countries, the traditional greeting is a bow. It does not signal subservience,
but rather humility and respect. The most important guideline here is to observe the
other’s bow carefully and try to bow to the same depth. The depth of the vow signals
the status relationship of the two individuals. Too deep a bow will be seen as ingratiat-
ing, too shallow a bow will seem arrogant. In many countries now, particularly in a
business context, people may combine the bow and handshake: a slight bow or nod
accompanied with a handshake.
Handshakes can vary in frequency and rmness. Some Europeans shake hands at
each encounter during the day and may spend as much as 30 minutes a day shaking
hands. Here are some guidelines:

Germans: Firm, brisk, and frequent

French: Light, quick, and frequent
Latin American: Firm and frequent
North America: Firm and infrequent, compared to France and Latin
America
Arabs: Gentle, repeated and lingering (may place hand over
heart after)
Koreans: Moderately rm
Most other Asians: Very gentle and infrequent

Sources: From R. E. Axtell, Essential Do’s and Taboos: Complete Guide to International Business and
Leisure Travel (Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2007), p. 20; T. Morrison and W. A. Conaway,
Kiss, Bow, Shake Hands (Avon, MA: Adams Media, 2006).

He gathered his information by visiting English as a Second Language classes and

asking international students to demonstrate gestures from their home cultures. He
drew several conclusions from his study: First, that gestures and their meanings can
be very subtle. His work “often elicited gasps of surprise, as ESL students from
one culture discovered that what at rst appeared to be a familiar gesture actually
means something radically di erent in another society” (p. 87). For example, in
Germany, and many other European cultures, the gesture for “stupid” is a nger on
the forehead; the American gesture for “smart” is nearly identical, but the nger is
held an inch to the side, at the temple. Similarly, the American raised thumb gesture
of “way to go” is a vulgar gesture, meaning “sit on this” in Sardinia and “screw you”
in Iran.
Second, Archer emphasizes that gestures are di erent from many other nonverbal
expressions in that they are accessible to conscious awareness—they can be explained,
273
274 Part II / Intercultural Communication Processes

illustrated, and taught to outsiders. Finally, as noted earlier, he had assumed there
would be some universal categories—a gesture for “very good,” a gesture for “crazy,”
an obscene gesture. Not so. A number of societies (e.g., the Netherlands, Norway,
Switzerland) have no such gesture. In the end, he concludes that through making the
video, “We all acquired a deeply enhanced sense of the power, nuances, and unpre-
dictability of cultural di erences” (p. 87). And the practical implication of the project
was to urge travelers to practice “gestural humility”—assuming “that we cannot infer
or intuit the meaning of any gestures we observe in other cultures” (p. 80).

eye contact Eye Contact Eye contact often is included in proxemics because it regulates interper-
A nonverbal code, sonal distance. Direct eye contact shortens the distance between two people, whereas
eye gaze, that
communicates less eye contact increases the distance. Eye contact communicates meanings about
meanings about respect and status and often regulates turn-taking.
respect and status Patterns of eye contact vary from culture to culture. In many societies, avoiding
and often regulates
turn-taking during eye contact communicates respect and deference, although this may vary from con-
interactions. text to context. For many U.S. Americans, maintaining eye contact communicates
that one is paying attention and showing respect.
When they speak with others, most U.S. Americans look away from their listen-
ers most of the time, looking at their listeners perhaps every 10 to 15 seconds. When
a speaker is nished taking a turn, he or she looks directly at the listener to signal
completion. However, some cultural groups within the United States use even less eye
contact while they speak. For example, some Native Americans tend to avert eye gaze
during conversation, as a sign of respect.

paralinguistics Paralinguistics Paralinguistics refers to the study of paralanguage—vocal behaviors

The study of vocal that indicate how something is said, including speaking rate, volume, pitch, and stress.
behaviors includes
voice qualities and Saying something very quickly in a loud tone of voice will be interpreted di erently
vocalization. from the same words said in a quieter tone of voice at a slower rate. There are two
types of vocal behavior—voice qualities and vocalizations.
voice qualities Voice qualities—or the nontechnical term, tone of voice—mean the same thing as
The “music” of the vocal qualities. Voice qualities include speed, pitch, rhythm, vocal range, and articu-
human voice, including
speed, pitch, rhythm, lation; these qualities make up the “music” of the human voice. There do appear to
vocal range, and be some universal meanings for particular vocal qualities. A recent study found that
articulation. vocalizations (e.g., screams, laughter, tone of voice showing disgust, fear) communi-
cating the six basic emotions were recognized equally by two dramatically di erent
cultural groups: European native English speakers and residents of remote, culturally
isolated Namibian villages. The researchers conclude that some emotions are psy-
chological universals, communicated by vocal signals that can be broadly interpreted
across cultures that do not share language or culture (Bänziger, Patel, & Scherer,
2014; Sauter, Eisner, Ekman, & Scott, 2010). We all know people whose voice quali-
ties are widely recognized. For example, actor Harvey Fierstein’s raspy voice or James
Earl Jones’ deep resonant voice, especially in his Darth Vader role. Paralinguistics
often lead people to negatively evaluate speakers in intercultural communication con-
texts even when they don’t understand the language. For example, Chinese speakers
often sound rather musical and nasal to English speakers; English speakers sound
rather harsh and guttural to French speakers.
 Chapter 7 / Nonverbal Codes and Cultural Space 275

Vocalizations are the sounds we utter that do not have the structure of vocalizations
language and include vocal cues such as laughing, crying, whining, and moaning The sounds we utter
that do not have the
as well as the intensity or volume of one’s speech. They also include sounds that structure of language.
aren’t actual words but that serve as llers, such as “uh-huh,” “uh,” “ah,” and “er.”
The paralinguistic aspects of speech serve a variety of communicative functions.
They reveal mood and emotion; they also allow us to emphasize or stress a word
or idea, create a distinctive identity, and (along with gestures) regulate conversa-
tion. Paralanguage can be a confusing factor in intercultural communication. For
example, Europeans interpret the loudness of Americans as aggressive behavior,
whereas Americans might think the British are secretive because they talk qui-
etly. Finnish and Japanese are comfortable having pauses in their conversations,
whereas most U.S. Americans are seen to talk rapidly and are pretty uncomfort-
able with silences.

Chronemics Chronemics concerns concepts of time and the rules that govern its chronemics
use. There are many cultural variations regarding how people understand and use The concept of time
and the rules that
time. Edward Hall (1966) distinguished between monochronic and polychronic time govern its use.
orientation. People who have a monochronic concept of time regard it as a commod-
ity: Time can be gained, lost, spent, wasted, or saved. In this orientation, time is lin- monochronic
An orientation to
ear, with one event happening at a time. In general, monochronic cultures value being time that assumes
punctual, completing tasks, and keeping to schedules. Most university sta and fac- it is linear and is a
ulty in the United States maintain a monochronic orientation to time. Classes, meet- commodity that can
be lost or gained.
ings, and o ce appointments start when scheduled; faculty members see one student
at a time, hold one meeting at a time, and keep appointments except in the case of
emergency. Family problems are considered poor reasons for not ful lling academic
obligations—for both faculty and students.
In contrast, in a polychronic orientation, time is more holistic, and perhaps more polychronic
circular: Several events can happen at once. Many international business negotiations An orientation to time
that sees it as circular
and technical assistance projects falter and even fail because of di erences in time and more holistic.
orientation. For example, U.S. businesspeople often complain that meetings in the
Middle East do not start “on time,” that people socialize during meetings, and that
meetings may be canceled because of personal obligations. Tasks often are accom-
plished because of personal relationships, not in spite of them. International students
and business personnel observe that U.S. Americans seem too tied to their sched-
ules; they suggest that U.S. Americans do not care enough about relationships and
often sacri ce time with friends and family to complete tasks and keep appointments.
Time orientation can di er even for di erent ethnic/language groups. For example,
an American businessman scheduled a meeting with French-speaking and Flemish
speaking Belgian media personnel; the Flemish delegation arrived on time and asked
pointed and direct questions about the project e ciency. In contrast, the French-
speaking Belgian delegation slowly trickled in 15 to 20 minutes late and were more
concerned about the project’s team synergies and creativity (Pant, 2016).

Silence Cultural groups may vary in the degree of emphasis placed on silence,
which can be as meaningful as language (Acheson, 2007). One of our students
recalls his childhood:
276 Part II / Intercultural Communication Processes

I always learned while growing up that silence was the worst punishment ever. For
example, if the house chore stated clearly that I needed to take the garbage out, and
I had not done so, then my mother would not say a word to me. And I would know
right away that I had forgotten to do something.
In most U.S. American contexts, silence is not highly valued. Particularly in devel-
oping relationships, silence communicates awkwardness and can make people
feel uncomfortable. According to scholar William B. Gudykunst’s (1985, 2005)
uncertainty reduction theory, the main reason for communicating verbally in
initial interactions is to reduce uncertainty. In U.S. American contexts, people
employ active uncertainty reduction strategies, such as asking questions. How-
ever, in many other cultural contexts, people reduce uncertainty using more passive
strategies—for example, remaining silent, observing, or perhaps asking a third
party about someone’s behavior. Scholar Covarrubias has described the impor-
tant role of silence in many traditional Native American communicative practices
where silence is not seen “as an absence, but, rather, as a fullness of opportunity
for being and learning” (2007, p. 270) and she suggests that these American
Indian perspectives can contribute to our knowledge of communication in many
cultural contexts.
Recent research has found similar patterns in other cultures. For example, the
asiallinen (matter-of-fact) verbal style among Finnish people that involves a distrust of
talkativeness as “slickness” and a sign of unreliability (Carbaugh & Berry, 2001; Saja-
vaara & Lehtonen, 1997). Silence, for Finns, re ects thoughtfulness, appropriate con-
sideration, and intelligence, particularly in public discourse or in educational settings
like a classroom. In an ethnographic study investigating this communication pattern,
Wilkins (2005) reports two excerpts from interviews that illustrate this pattern—one
interview with a Finnish student and one with an American student:

Excerpt 1
Finnish Student: I have been to America.
Wilkins: Can you tell me what the experience was like?
Student: The people and the country were very nice.
Wilkins: Did you learn anything?
Student: No.
Wilkins: Why not?
Student: Americans just talk all the time.
Excerpt 2
Wilkins: Do you like Finland?
American Student: Oh yes, I like it a lot.
Wilkins: How about the people?
Student: Sure, Finns are very nice.
Wilkins: How long have you been at the university?
Student: About nine months already.
 STUDENT VOICES

Giving gifts seems to be a universal way to please someone, if the gift is appropriate. One
colleague of mine, Nishehs, once tried to impress our boss, Joe. Nishehs brought a well-
wrapped gift to Joe when they rst met with each other in person. Joe was indeed pleased
as he received the gift from Nishehs, but his smile faded away quickly right after he
opened the gift. Joe questioned Nishehs angrily, “Why is it green?” Shocked and speech-
less, Nishehs murmured, “What’s wrong with a green hat?”
The miscommunication resulted from the cultural di erences between them. Nishehs
is an Indian, whereas Joe is Chinese. For the Chinese, a green hat means one’s wife is
having an extramarital a air.
—Chris

Wilkins: Oh, have you learned anything?

Student: No, not really.
Wilkins: Why not?
Student: Finns do not say anything in class.
In addition to a positive view of silence, nonverbal facial expressions in the
Asiallinen style tend to be rather xed—and expressionless. The American student, of
course, did not have the cultural knowledge to understand what can be accomplished
by thoughtful activity and silence.
Scholars have reported similar views on talk and silence in Japanese and Chinese
cultures in uenced by Confucianism and Taoism. Confucius rejected eloquent
speaking and instead advocated hesitancy and humble talk in his philosophy of the
ideal person (Chang, 1997; Kim, 2001). As one of our Taiwanese students told us,
“In America, sometimes students talk about half the class time. Compared to my
classes in Taiwan, if a student asked too many questions or expressed his/her opinions
that much, we would say that he or she is a show-o .”
In a review of scholarly research on silence, communication scholar Kris Ache-
son (2007) acknowledges that silence in the United States has often been associated
with negative, unhealthy relationships, or with disempowerment; for example, when
women and/or minorities feel their voices are not heard. However, like Covarrubias,
Carbaugh (1999) and other scholars, Acheson encourages us to consider the contri-
bution of positive and sometimes powerful uses of silences in certain contexts. For
example, nurses and doctors are encouraged to honor silent patients and learn to
employ silence in their ethical care; young people are advised to seek out silence in
their lives for the sake of health and sanity, to even noise-proof their homes in an
attempt to boost health. In business contexts, sometimes keeping quiet is the best
strategy and talking too much can kill a business deal. In education, teachers can
create a space for understanding rather than counterarguments by asking for silent
277
278 Part II / Intercultural Communication Processes

re ection after comments or performances. In religion, the Quakers have a long tradi-
tion of approaching silence as a deeply meaningful communicative event and impor-
tant part of decision making (Molina-Markham, 2014). Finally, she admits that in
some contexts, like politics and law, silence is still seen as completely negative; for
example, pleading the Fifth equates silence with guilt, and silence by politicians is
often viewed as too much secrecy.

Stereotype, Prejudice, and Discrimination

As noted previously, one of the problems with identifying cultural variations in
nonverbal codes is that it is tempting to overgeneralize these variations and ste-
reotype people. For example, researchers in the early 1970s identi ed certain non-
verbal behaviors associated with African Americans—“getting and giving skin,”
the stance and strutting walk of pimps and “players,” and the “Afro-style” hairdo
(Cooke, 1972; Kochman, 1972). Since then, these nonverbal behaviors have
been used to stereotype all Blacks—still seen in pop culture images on television
and lm.
In any case, we would be wise to be careful about generalizations. Cultural
variations are tentative guidelines that we can use in intercultural interaction.
They should serve as examples, to help us understand that there is a great deal
of variation in nonverbal behavior. Even if we can’t anticipate how other people’s
behavior may di er from our own, we can be exible when we do encounter dif-
ferences in how close someone stands or how she or he uses eye contact or con-
ceptualizes time.
While explicit racial slurs are less common today, a series of recent stud-
ies showed that bias (both negative and positive) is demonstrated through subtle
facial expressions and body language in popular television programs. They also
showed that the more viewers watched shows that had pro-white nonverbal bias,
the more biased viewers became—even though they could not consciously identify
the biased behaviors they had seen in the programs. Overall, the ndings suggest
that these “hidden” patterns of biased nonverbal behavior in uence bias among
viewers (Weisbuch, Pauker, & Ambady, 2009). These same researchers con-
ducted similar studies regarding (positive) nonverbal biases toward slim women
(Weisbuch & Ambady, 2009).
Prejudice is often based on nonverbal aspects of behavior. That is, the negative
prejudgment is triggered by physical appearance or behavior. For example, preju-
dice is sometimes expressed toward Muslim women who wear the hijab, or toward
men from the Middle East or South Asia wearing turbans, or even toward people
who appear to belong to a particular ethnic group. Asian-appearing individuals
experienced hostility directed at them during the COVID-19 pandemic, and FBI
reports that hate crimes against Latinos increased in 2019 for the third straight
year as well as reports of individuals who are targeted just for the color of their skin
(Kaleem, 2019). Like Lizette Flores, a Latina and native Arizonan, walking back
from lunch one day, passing a group of protesters at the Phoenix Capitol building.
One of the them yelled “Go back to Mexico!” directed at her—and not the two light-
skinned Latinas with her (Mejia, 2018).
 STUDENT VOICES

A close friend I used to have in high school took honors classes and did great in school.
He was Hispanic and dressed more or less like a “cholo,” with baggy pants and long
shirts. When he went to speak with his counselor upon entering university, the counselor
came to the conclusion that my friend was going to take easy classes rather than honors
classes. His mother, who had accompanied him to the advising meeting, couldn’t believe
what the counselor was saying! My friend’s appearance obviously caused the counselor to
come to a conclusion about who and what type of person my friend was.
—Adriana

There is also evidence that people draw conclusions about men and women as
gay or straight based their vocal pitch, a characteristic beyond control of the speaker.
More importantly, these stereotypes can lead to prejudice and discrimination—in
social and professional settings (Fasoli et al., 2017).
From these kinds of experiences with prejudice, victims can often spot prejudi-
cial behavior and people with surprising accuracy. In an interesting study, Blacks were
able to detect prejudiced people (identi ed previously by objective survey measure-
ment) after only 20 seconds of observation, with much higher accuracy than whites
(Richeson & Shelton, 2005). Victims may also then develop imaginary “maps” that tell
them where they belong and where they are likely to be rejected. They may even start
to avoid places and situations in which they do not feel welcome (Marsiglia & Hecht,
1998). Can you identify places you’ve been where you or others were not welcome?
Stereotyping or prejudice can lead to overt nonverbal actions to exclude, avoid,
or distance and are called discrimination. Discrimination may be based on race (rac- discrimination
ism), gender (sexism), or any of the other identities discussed in Chapter 5. It may Behaviors resulting
from stereotypes
range from subtle, nonverbal behavior such as lack of eye contact or exclusion from a or prejudice that
conversation, to verbal insults and exclusion from jobs or other economic opportuni- cause some people
ties, to physical violence and systematic exclusion. To see how exclusion and avoid- to be denied equal
participation or rights
ance can be subtle, consider all the communication choices people can make that based on cultural-
a ect whether other people feel welcome or valued or like outsiders who don’t belong group membership,
(Johnson, 2017): such as race.

▪ Whether we look at people when we talk with them

▪ Whether we smile at people when they walk into the room or stare as if to say
“What are you doing?” or stop the conversation with a hush they have to wade
through to be included in the smallest way
▪ Whether we listen and respond to what people say, or drift away to someone or
something else; whether we talk about things they know about, or stick to what’s
peculiar to the “in-group”
▪ Whether we acknowledge people’s presence, or make them wait as if they
weren’t there; whether we avoid touching their skin when giving or taking some-
thing; how closely we watch them to see what they’re up to
279
280 Part II / Intercultural Communication Processes

As described in Chapter 5, more assertive expressions are called “microaggressions”:

brief subtle denigrating messages sent by well-intentioned people who are unaware
of the hidden messages being communicated. While these messages may be sent ver-
bally (“You speak good English.”—said to an Asian American whose family is been in
the States for 100 years), many times they’re sent nonverbally (clutching one’s purse
more tightly) or environmentally (symbols like the confederate ag or using American
Indian mascots). Such communications are usually outside the level of conscious
awareness of perpetrators. Often people who send these messages believe they are
acting with the best of intentions and would be aghast if someone accuses them of
committing microaggressions. Psychologist Derald Wing Sue’s research (2010) sug-
gests that most people have unconscious biases and prejudices that leak out in many
interpersonal situations and decision points. While these microaggressions may seem
somewhat trivial taken one at a time, the cumulative results of constant and continuing
(almost daily) microaggressions have a tremendous impact on the targets of these mes-
sages: they assail self-esteem, produce anger and frustration, deplete psychic energy,
lower feelings of well being and worthiness, produce physical health problems, and
career costs (O’Keefe & Green eld, 2019; Pitcan, Park, & Hayslett, 2018).
Discrimination may be interpersonal, collective, or institutional. Interpersonal
racism is expressed subtly and indirectly as well as more overtly, but also more per-
sistent. Equally persistent is institutionalized or collective discrimination whereby
individuals are systematically denied equal participation in society or equal access
to rights in informal and formal ways. An example of institutionalized discrimination
may be when women wearing hijabs are subject to extra scrutiny by TSA security.
Our student described the experience of traveling to the Middle East with a group of
American women, some of whom were covered: “I watched the way that TSA agents
interacted with women who were covered. They seemed often skeptical and spent an
increased amount of time questioning and talking to these women. The forced choice
of whether to cover or not before moving through the U.S.’s TSA was a tough one,
and a choice that we all wished no one had to make. I saw rsthand the reality of
stigma and prejudice based on nonverbal appearance/behavior.’’
Another example can be evidenced in hiring practices where resumes (and appli-
cants) with “foreign” or “non-white” names are routinely rejected, leading some appli-
cants to “whiten” their resumes. This entails eliminating language in resumes that reveals
race. Recently researchers tested the e ect of whitened resumes. They created two sets of
resumes, one whitened and the other not, and randomly sent them in response to 1,600
job postings in 16 U.S. cities. They found that whitened resumes were twice as likely to
get callbacks—a pattern that held even for companies that emphasized diversity.
“The most troubling part is that we saw the same kind of rates for employers who
said that they were pro-diversity [in job postings] and the ones that didn’t mention
it,” said Kang. Thus the statements of self-described “pro-diversity employers” aren’t
really tied to any real change in the discriminatory practices” (Lam, 2016).

Semiotics and Nonverbal Communication

semiotics The analysis The study of semiotics, or semiology, o ers a useful approach to examining how dif-
of the nature of and
relationship between ferent signs communicate meaning. While semiotics is often used for analyzing lan-
signs. guage/discourse, we nd it more useful in analyzing nonverbals and cultural spaces.
 POINT of VIEW

POLAND’S LGBT-FREE ZONES

Nonverbal spaces are created by cultural biases and can be contested, as shown in this
recent Washington Post news report; cities and even entire provinces in Poland are now
declared as LGBT-free zones. Consider how this might be similar or di erent from created
cultural spaces in the United States where certain groups have been excluded: “Sundown
Towns,” neighborhoods or clubs exclusively for whites:
In Spring 2019, the popular Law and Justice leader, Jarosław Kaczyński turned from
anti-immigrant rhetoric to a new target: LGBT community. This new focus was partly
in reaction to Warsaw’s mayoral support for sex education curriculum in schools—
which Kaczyński referred to as “an attack on the family” and as “LGBT ideology”. He
further declared it a “threat to Polish identity, to our nation, to its existence and thus
to the Polish state.” Some parts of the Catholic church and some media agree.
Poland has always been a socially conservative country but not all Poles agree
with this recent ramped-up rhetoric. In fact, a 2017 survey showed traditionally anti-
gay attitudes softening and some fear that the intense rhetoric may lead to increased
homophobia and hate crimes. It’s a divided society. At one Polish city’s rst-ever
LGBT rights march in July 2019, “the music could barely drown out the boos from
bystanders.”
Adapted from Noack, R. (2019, July 19). Polish towns advocate LGBT-free zones while the ruling
party cheers them on. washingtonpost.com, Retrieved February 20, 2020, from https://www
.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/polands-right-wing-ruling-party-has-found-a-new-targetlgbt
-ideology/2019/07/19/775f25c6-a4ad-11e9-a767-d7ab84aef3e9_story.html

A particularly useful framework comes from literary critic Roland Barthes (1980). semiosis
The process of
In his system, semiosis is the production of meaning and is constructed through the producing
interpretation of signs—the combination of signi ers and signi ed. Signi ers are the meaning.
culturally constructed arbitrary words or symbols we use to refer to something else,
signs In semiotics, the
the signi ed. For example, the word man is a signi er that refers to the signi ed, an meanings that emerge
adult male human being. from the combination
Obviously, man is a general signi er that does not refer to any particular man. of the signifiers and
signifieds.
The relationship between this signi er and the sign (the meaning) depends on
how the signi er is used (e.g., as in the sentence, “There is a man sitting in the signifiers In
semiotics, the
rst chair on the left.”) or on our general sense of what man means. The di er- culturally constructed
ence between the signi er man and the sign rests on the di erence between the arbitrary words or
word man and the meaning of that word. At its most basic level, man means an symbols that people
use to refer to
adult human male, but the semiotic process does not end there. Man carries many something else.
other layers of meaning. Man may or may not refer to any particular adult male,
but it provides a concept that you can use to construct particular meanings based signified In semiotics,
anything that is
on the way the sign man functions. What does man mean when someone says, expressed in arbitrary
“Act like a real man!” words or signifiers.
281
282 Part II / Intercultural Communication Processes

What do you have in mind when you think of the term man? How do you know
when to use this signi er (and when not to use it) to communicate to others? Think
of all of the adult males you know. How do they “ t” under this signi er? In what
ways does the signi er reign over their behaviors, both verbal and nonverbal, to
communicate particular ideas about them? We are not so much interested in the
discrete, individual signi ers, but rather the ways that signi ers are combined and
con gured. The goal is to establish entire systems of semiosis and the ways that
those systems create meaning. Semiotics allows us one way to “crack the codes” of
another cultural framework.
The use of these semiotic systems relies on many codes taken from a variety
of contexts and places: economic institutions, history, politics, religion, and so
on. For example, when Nazi swastikas were spray-painted on synagogue steps in
Lincoln, Nebraska in 2020, and a noose was pinned to a Black student’s dorm
room door at Michigan State University in 2019, the messages they communi-
cated relied on semiotic systems from the past. The history of the Nazi persecu-
tion of Jews during World War II and the terrible history of murderous lynchings
of Blacks in the U.S. are both well-known. The power behind the signi ers—the
swastika and the noose—comes from that historical knowledge and the codes of
anti-semitism/racism that it invokes to communicate the message. Relations from
the past in uence the construction and maintenance of intercultural relations in
the present. Semiotics is a useful tool for examining the various ways that mean-
ing is created in advertisements, clothing, tattoos, and other cultural artifacts.
Semioticians have been attentive to the context in which the signi ers (words and
symbols) are placed to understand which meanings are being communicated. For
example, wearing certain kinds of clothes in speci c cultural contexts may com-
municate unwanted messages (see Adriana’s example in the Student Voice box,
p. 279). The meanings can vary from culture to culture. For example, in China,
the color red symbolizes good luck and celebration; in India, it denotes purity;
however, in South Africa, red is the color of mourning. In Egypt, yellow is the
color of mourning; and in Japan, yellow symbolizes courage (Kyrnin, 2008). In
the United States, black clothing can hold various meanings depending on the
context: in some high schools, black is considered to denote gang membership; an
elegant black dress is suitable for a formal dinner event but probably has a di er-
ent meaning if worn by a bride’s mother at her wedding.
Yet cultural contexts are not xed and rigid. Rather, they are dynamic and eeting,
as Marcel Proust (1981) noted in writing about Paris in Remembrance of Things Past:
The reality that I had known no longer existed. . . . The places we have known do
not belong only to the world of space on which we map them for our own conve-
nience. None of them was ever more than a thin slice, held between the contiguous
impressions that composed our life at that time; the memory of a particular image is
but regret for a particular moment; and houses, roads, avenues are as fugitive, alas,
as the years. (p. 462)
As this excerpt shows, there is no “real” Paris. The city has di erent meanings at dif-
ferent times for di erent people, and for di erent reasons. For example, executives
of multinational corporations moving into Paris see the city quite di erently from
 Chapter 7 / Nonverbal Codes and Cultural Space 283

immigrants arriving in Paris for personal reasons. Remember the 1400 immigrants
evicted from a Paris “shantytown” in 2020? Therefore, to think about cultural con-
texts as dynamic means that we must often think about how they change and in whose
interests they change.

DEFINING CULTURAL SPACE

At the beginning of this book, we provided some background information about

where we grew up. Our individual histories are important in understanding our
identities. As writer John Preston (1991) explains, “Where we come from is impor-
tant to who we are” (p. xi). There is nothing in the rolling hills of Delaware and
Pennsylvania or the red clay of Georgia that biologically determined who Judith
and Tom are. However, our identities are constructed, in part, in relation to the
cultural milieu of the Mid-Atlantic region or the South. Each region has its own his-
tories and ways of life that help us understand who we are. Our decision to tell you
where we come from was meant to communicate something about who we think we
are. So, although we can identify precisely the borders that mark out these spaces
and make them real, or material, the spaces also are cultural in the ways that we
imagine them to be.
The discourses that construct the meanings of cultural spaces are dynamic and
ever-changing. For example, the Delaware that Judith left behind and the Georgia
that Tom left behind are not characterized by the same discourses that construct
those places now. In addition, the relationship between those cultural spaces and our
identities is negotiated in complex ways. For example, both of us participated in other,
overlapping cultural spaces that in uenced how we think about who we are. Thus, just
because someone is from, say, Rhode Island or Samoa or India does not mean that
his or her identity and communication practices are reducible to the history of those
cultural spaces.
What is the communicative (discursive) relationship between cultural spaces and
intercultural communication? Recall that we de ne cultural space as the particular
con guration of the communication (discourse) that constructs meanings of various
places. This may seem like an unwieldy de nition, but it underscores the complex-
ity of cultural spaces. A cultural space is not simply a particular location that has
culturally constructed meanings. It can also be a metaphorical place from which we
communicate. We can speak from a number of social locations, marked on the “map
of society,” that give added meaning to our communication. Thus, we may speak as
parents, children, colleagues, siblings, customers, Nebraskans, and a myriad of other
“places.” All of these are cultural spaces.

Cultural Identity and Cultural Space

Home Cultural spaces in uence how we think about ourselves and others. One of
the earliest cultural spaces we experience is our home. As noted previously, nonverbal
communication often involves issues of status. The home is no exception. As English
professor Paul Fussell (1983) notes, “Approaching any house, one is bombarded with
284 Part II / Intercultural Communication Processes

class signals” (p. 82). Fussell highlights the semiotic system of social class in the
American home—from the way the lawn is maintained, to the kind of furniture within
the home, to the way the television is situated. These signs of social class are not
always so obvious from all class positions, but we often recognize the signs.
Even if our home does not re ect the social class to which we aspire, it may
be a place of identi cation. We often model our own lives on the patterns from our
childhood homes. Although this is not always the case, the home can be a place of
safety and security. African American writer bell hooks (1990) describes the “feel-
ing of safety, of arrival, of homecoming” when as a child she would arrive at her
grandmother’s house, after passing through the scary white neighborhood with “those
white faces on porches staring down at us with hate” (p. 42).
Home, of course, is not the same as the physical location it occupies or the
building (the house) at that location. Home is variously de ned in terms of speci c
addresses, cities, states, regions, and even nations. Although we might have historical
ties to a particular place, not everyone has the same relationship between those places
and their own identities. Indeed, the relationship between place and cultural identity
varies. We all negotiate various relationships to the cultural meanings attached to the
particular places or spaces we inhabit. Consider writer Harlan Greene’s (1991) rela-
tionship to his hometown in South Carolina:

I often think longingly of my hometown of Charleston. My heart beats faster and

color rushes to my cheek whenever I hear someone mentioning her; mirages rise up,
and I am as overcome and drenched in images as a runner just come from running.
I see the steeples, the streets, the lush setting. (p. 55)

Despite his attachment to Charleston, Greene does not believe that Charleston feels
the same way toward him. He explains, “But I still think of Charleston; I return to
her often and always will. I think of her warmly. I claim her now, even though I know
she will never claim me” (p. 67). Perhaps gay individuals in Poland today may feel as
Greene did, since some towns there, supported by the ruling party, have advocated
LGBT-free zones (Noack, 2018) (see Point of View, p. 281).
The complex relationships we have between various places and our identities
resist simplistic reduction. These writers—hooks and Greene—have negotiated di er-
ent sentiments toward “home.” In doing so, each demonstrates the complex dialecti-
cal tensions that exist between identity and location.

Neighborhood One signi cant type of cultural space that emerged in U.S. cities
in the latter 19th and early 20th centuries was the ethnic or racial neighborhood
(see Figure 7-5). Historical studies show, however, that the ethnic neighborhoods of
the European immigrants were rarely inhabited by only one ethnic group, despite
memories to the contrary. According to labor historian D. R. Roediger (2005),
even the heart of Little Italy in Chicago was 47% non-Italian, and “No single side of
even one square block in the street between 1890 and 1930 was found to be 100%
Italian. . . . The percentage of Russians, Czechs, Italians and Poles living in segre-
gated neighborhoods ranged from 37% to 61%” (p. 164). However, this type of real seg-
regation was reserved for the African Americans—where 93% of African Americans
 Chapter 7 / Nonverbal Codes and Cultural Space 285

FIGURE 7-5 Many cities abound with multiple cultural spaces. In this
photo, several different cultural contexts are adjacent and emphasize
the increasing significance of multiculturalism. How would people in this
urban place experience cultural spaces differently from people who live
in less diverse cultural spaces? How might it influence their intercultural
communication patterns? (Robert Brenner/PhotoEdit)

lived in ghettos. By law and custom, and under di erent political pressures, some
cities developed segregated neighborhoods. Malcolm X (Malcolm X & Haley, 1964),
in his autobiography, tells of the strict laws that governed where his family could
live after their house burned down:
In those days Negroes weren’t allowed after dark in East Lansing proper.
There’s where Michigan State University is located; . . . East Lansing harassed
us so much that we had to move again, this time two miles out of town, into the
country. (pp. 3–4)
The legacy of “white-only” areas pervades the history of the United States and
the development of its cultural geography. The segregation of African Americans
was not accidental. Beginning in 1890 until the late 1960s (when fair-housing laws
were passed), whites in America created thousands of whites-only towns, commonly
known as “sundown towns,” a reference to the signs often posted at their city limits
that warned, as one did in Hawthorne, California, in the 1930s: “Nigger, Don’t Let
the Sun Set on YOU in Hawthorne.” In fact, historian J. Loewen (2005) claims that
during that 70-year period, “probably a majority of all incorporated places [in the
United States] kept out African Americans.”
286 Part II / Intercultural Communication Processes

Neighborhoods exemplify how power in uences intercultural contact. Thus,

some cultural groups de ned who got to live where and dictated the rules by which
other groups lived. These rules were enforced through legal means and by harassment.
For bell hooks and Malcolm X, the lines of segregation were clear and unmistakable.
In San Francisco, di erent racial politics constructed and isolated Chinatown. The
boundaries that demarcated Chinatown—the acceptable place for Chinese and Chinese
Americans to live—were strictly enforced through violence. Newly arrived immigrants
were sometimes stoned as they left the piers and made their way to Chinatown or those
who wandered into other neighborhoods could be attacked by “young toughs” who
amused themselves by beating Chinese (Nee & Nee, 1974, p. 60).
In contrast to Malcolm X’s exclusion from East Lansing, the Chinese of San
Francisco were forced to live in a marked-o territory. Yet we must be careful not to
confuse the experience of Chinese in San Francisco with the experiences of all Chi-
nese in the United States. For example, newly arrived Chinese immigrants to Savan-
nah, Georgia were advised to live apart from each other. They were told of the whites’
distrust of Chinatowns in San Francisco and New York. So no Chinatown developed
in Savannah (Pruden, 1990).
Nor should we assume that vast migrations of Chinese necessarily led to the
development of Chinatowns in other cities around the world. The settlement of
Chinese immigrants in the 13th Arrondissement of Paris, for example, re ects a
completely di erent intersection between cultures: “There is no American-style
Chinatown [Il n’y a pas de Chinatown à la américaine]” in Paris (Costa-Lascoux &
Yu-Sion, 1995, p. 197).
Within the context of di erent power relations and historical forces, settlement
patterns of other cultural groups created various ethnic enclaves across the U.S.
landscape. For example, many small towns in the Midwest were settled by particu-
lar European groups. Thus, in Iowa, Germans settled in Amana, Dutch in Pella,
and Czechs and Slovaks in Cedar Rapids. Cities, too, have their neighborhoods,
based on settlement patterns. South Philadelphia is largely Italian American, South
Boston is largely Irish American, and Overtown in Miami is largely African Ameri-
can. Although it is no longer legal to mandate that people live in particular districts
or neighborhoods based on their racial or ethnic backgrounds, the continued exis-
tence of such neighborhoods underscores their historical development and ongoing
functions. This is especially true in Detroit, Michigan—one of the most segregated
metropolitan region in the country—where the eight-mile road was made famous by
the title and the location of the lm starring Detroit hip-hop artist Eminem. The
eight-mile, eight-lane road separates one city that is 91% white from the other that
is overwhelmingly African American. (See the Point of View box on the following
page) Economics, family ties, social needs, and education are some factors in the
perpetuation of these cultural spaces.
Similar spaces exist in other countries as well. Remember the terrorist attacks in
Paris in November 2015? A number of terrorists came from the same Brussels neighbor-
hood, Molenbeek. There is a relationship between place and human relations, as one
expert described Molenbeek as one of the segregated suburbs, isolated from the wider
Belgium society, where “there are problems with failed integration, socioeconomic
problems, and crime that can be exploited for the jihadists” (Robins-Early, 2016).
 POINT of VIEW

EIGHT MILE ROAD

Sometimes called Detroit’s mini Berlin Wall, sometimes called the Wailing
Wall, this seemingly innocent looking wall in Joe Louis Park does little to
betray its shameful past.
After World War I, some Black residents of Detroit moved into a then rural
and vacant area near the intersection of Wyoming and Eight Mile. In 1940,
a developer sought to build homes for middle income whites in a nearby area.
However, the Federal Housing Administration’s policies of that era precluded
their approving loans in racially mixed areas. To secure FHA approval, this
developer put up a wall six feet high, one foot in width and one half mile in
length, to clearly demark the white and Black areas. His wall led the FHA to
approve loans for his project.

Built in 1940, this wall presaged the racial divisions that have come to be
symbolized by Eight Mile Road. (John Ruberry/Alamy Stock Photo)
Source: From http://detroityes.com/webisodes/2002/8mile/021106-04-8mile-berlin-wall.htm.

The relationships among identity, power, and cultural space are quite complex.
Power relations in uence who (or what) gets to claim who (or what), and under what
conditions. Some subcultures are accepted and promoted within a particular cultural
space, others are tolerated, and still others may be unacceptable. Consider Jerusalem,
one of the most important contested cultural spaces in world. For Muslims, Jews and
287
288 Part II / Intercultural Communication Processes

Christians, it is not just a location, for many it is at the very core of their religious
identities. The access to these holy places for each of these groups has waxed and
waned depending on powerful political forces. Most recently, Trump’s announcement
that the U.S. embassy would be moved there, e ectively con rming it as the Jewish/
Israeli capital, led to protests and violence (Schulson, 2017).
Sometimes residents ght to keep their neighborhood from being changed by
powerful outsiders. This is the case in Boyle Heights, a low-income Latino com-
munity of small shops, mariachis, and taco stands that is the last holdout to L.A.
gentri cation. Property values are skyrocketing and posters o ering cash for homes
are there. The residents fear that the new money and outsiders will erase their com-
munal Chicano identity. They have organized, and their e orts, criticized by some for
being violent/radical/relentless, have been successful in closing down arts galleries
and businesses they see as guilty of gentri cation. There is some ambivalence as some
of the upwardly mobile new residents are Latinx, but the organizers say they reject all
“gentri ers” regardless of race—anyone who demands amenities that don’t address
community needs and causes rents to rise (Hurtado, 2019). Identifying with various
cultural spaces is a negotiated process that is di cult (and sometimes impossible)
to predict and control. The key to understanding the relationships among culture,
power, people, and cultural spaces is to think dialectically.

Regionalism Ongoing regional and religious con icts, as well as nationalism and
ethnic revival, point to the continuing struggles over who gets to de ne whom. Such
con icts are not new, though. In fact, some cultural spaces (such as Jerusalem) have
been sites of struggle for many centuries.
Although regions are not always clearly marked on maps of the world, many
regionalism Loyalty people identify quite strongly with particular regions. Regionalism can be expressed
to a particular region in many ways, from symbolic expressions of identi cation to armed con ict. Within
that holds significant
cultural meaning the United States, people may identify themselves or others as southerners, New Eng-
for that person. landers, and so on. In Canada, people from Montreal might identify more strongly
with the province of Quebec than with their country. Similarly, some Corsicans might
feel a need to negotiate their identity with France. Sometimes people y regional
ags, wear particular kinds of clothes, celebrate regional holidays, and participate
in other cultural activities to communicate their regional identi cation. However,
regional expressions are not always simply celebratory, as the con icts in Kosovo,
Chechnya, Eritrea, Tibet, and Northern Ireland indicate.
National borders may seem straightforward, but they often conceal con icting
regional identities. To understand how intercultural communication may be a ected
by national borders, we must consider how history, power, identity, culture, and con-
text come into play. Only by understanding these issues can we approach the complex
process of human communication.

Changing Cultural Space

Chapter 8 discusses in greater detail the intercultural experiences of those who tra-
verse cultural spaces and attempt to negotiate change. In this chapter, however, we
want to focus on some of the driving needs of those who change cultural spaces.
 STUDENT VOICES

his student explains her di culty in knowing when she is in Japan as she
moves through the airport and onto the airplane. How are these cultural spaces
T di erent from national borders?
Whenever I am at LAX [Los Angeles International Airport] on the way back to Japan,
my sense of space gets really confused. For example, I y into LAX from Phoenix, and as
I line up at the Korean Air check-in counter, I see so many Asian-looking people (mostly
Japanese and Koreans). Then, as I proceed, getting past the stores (e.g., duty-free shops)
and walk farther to the departure gate, I see a lot less Americans and, eventually and
practically, NOBODY but Asian-looking people (except for a very limited number of non-
Asian-looking passengers on the same ight). So, when I wait at the gate, hearing Japa-
nese around me, I get confused—“Where am I? Am I still in the U.S.? Or am I already
back in Japan?” This confusion gets further heightened when I go aboard and see
Japanese food served for meals and watch a Japanese lm or TV program on the screen.
So, to me, arriving at the Narita International Airport is not the moment of arriving in
Japan. It already starts while I am in the U.S. This is just one of the many examples of
postmodern cultural spaces that I have experienced in my life.
—Sakura

Travel We often change cultural spaces when we travel. Traveling is frequently

viewed as an unimportant leisure activity, but it is more than that. In terms of inter-
cultural communication, traveling changes cultural spaces in ways that often trans-
form the traveler. Changing cultural spaces means changing who you are and how you
interact with others. Perhaps the old saying “When in Rome, do as the Romans do”
holds true today as we cross-cultural spaces more frequently than ever.
On a recent trip to Belgium, Tom ew nonstop on British Airways from Phoenix
to London and then on to Brussels. Because the entire ight was conducted in
English, Tom did not have a sense of any transition from English to French. Unlike
ying the now defunct Sabena (Belgian National Airlines) from the United States to
Belgium, ying British Airways provided no cultural transition space between Ari-
zona and Belgium. Thus, when he got o the plane in Brussels, Tom experienced a
more abrupt cultural and language transition, from an English environment to a Flem-
ish/French environment.
However, globalization and cyberspace can change the way we experience
changing cultural spaces. In recent travels, Judith and Tom are struck by the simi-
larities of big cities around the world. Shopping areas in Shanghai, Las Vegas, and
Capetown have the same upscale shops: Prada, Louis Vuitton, Tommy Hil ger, etc.
with the same upscale products. In traversing these spaces one can forget that he/she
is not at home. Some think that cyberspace and mobile technology may be changing
the way we experience travel. For example, tourists sometimes stay in hotel rooms
watching Net ix lms they’ve downloaded, just like at home—“traveling without
seeing” (Bruni 2013), or taking photo after photo, moving around, trying to get the
best angle—and not really seeing or remembering what’s in front of them. Cognitive
289
290 Part II / Intercultural Communication Processes

psychologists call this “the photo taking impairment e ect,” since it turns out that
when the brain is preoccupied with camera angles, etc. the camera captures the
moment, but the brain doesn’t (Henkel, 2014). Do you alter your communication
style when you encounter travelers who are not in their traditional cultural space? Do
you assume they should interact in the ways prescribed by your cultural space? These
are some of the issues that travel raises.

Migration People also change cultural spaces when they relocate. Moving, of course,
involves a di erent kind of change in cultural spaces than traveling. In traveling, the
change is eeting, temporary, and usually desirable; it is something that travelers seek
out. However, people who migrate do not always seek out this change. For example, in
recent years, many people have been forced from their strife-torn homelands in Syria
and Iraq and have settled elsewhere. Many immigrants leave their homelands simply
so they can survive. But they often nd it di cult to adjust to the change, especially if
the language and customs of the new cultural space are unfamiliar.
Even within the United States, people may have trouble adapting to new surround-
ings when they move. Tom remembers that when northerners moved to the South they
often were unfamiliar with the custom of traditional New Year’s Day “good luck foods”
of black-eyed peas for health and collards (for money). Ridiculing the customs of their
new cultural space simply led to further intercultural communication problems.

Postmodern Cultural Spaces

Space has become increasingly important in the negotiation of cultural and
social identities, and so to culture more generally. As Leah Vande Berg (1999)
explains, scholars in many areas “have noted that identity and knowledge are pro-
foundly spatial (as well as temporal), and that this condition structures meaningful
postmodern cultural embodiment and experience” (p. 249). Postmodern cultural spaces are places
spaces Places that that are de ned by cultural practices—languages spoken, identities enacted, rituals
are defined by
cultural practices— performed—and they often change as new people move in and out of these spaces.
languages spoken, Imagine being in a small restaurant when a large group of people arrives, all of
identities enacted, whom are speaking another language. How has this space changed? Whose space
rituals performed—
and that often is it? As di erent people move in and out of this space, how does the cultural
change as new character change?
people move in and Think about how the same physical place might have a di erent meaning to some-
out of these spaces.
one from a di erent cultural group. Scholar Bryce Peake (2012) does just that. He
examines the relationship between listening, cultural identity, and power negotiation
in the British overseas territory of Gibraltar. He describes the interrelationships of
the language soundscapes of English, Spanish, and Llanito—a local Gibraltarian cre-
ole of Spanish, Genoese, Hebrew, English, Maltese, and Arabic, particularly as dem-
onstrated on a day of the British nationalistic parade. Llanito allows Gibraltarians to
imagine themselves as a bu er between Spanish and British—a soundscape that “can
be listened to in such a way that sounds like Spanish to the uninformed, and signi es
‘not British’ to Gibraltarians.” In the frictions between the British-ness and Spanish-
ness of Gibraltarians, Main Street on parade is a site where listening is used as a
means to reproduce the strategies by which power is maintained and operationalized.
 POINT of VIEW

An example of a postmodern cultural space is the mobile massively multiplayer online

real-time strategy (MMMORTS) game Lords Mobile—where players develop their own
bases, build armies, attack and destroy enemy bases, seize resources, and capture enemy
leaders. Communities of players (guilds) from many di erent countries are formed across
cultural, linguistic and time zone di erences.

As researchers Hommodova Lu and Carradini (2019) discovered, after investigating

a guild with members from 25 countries, these players support each other in vari-
ous ways. For example, players’ defenses can be attacked—resulting in monetary and
resource loss—even when they are not online. When this happens, if the player is not
online, other players jump in to defend (even in the middle of the night!). The mem-
bers also form social bonds, engaging in conversations on many topics, using transla-
tors. The researchers point out that, although these rather eeting online intercultural
relationships provide important support, because of the mobile, real-time nature of the
game, they sometimes interfere with work and personal obligations.
Source: From L. A. Hommadova, & S. Carradini, “Work–Game Balance: Work Interference, Social
Capital, and Tactical Play in a Mobile Massively Multiplayer Online Real-Time Strategy Game,” New
Media & Society, (2019): 1–24.

“In this way, Gibraltarians speak into existence the spaces in which they speak; the
codes they use—Llanito, Spanish, or English-both simultaneously construct spaces in
particular ways, while being intimately a ected by and tied to other noises within the
soundscape—all of which are intimately tied to the construction and performance of
the self” (p. 187). It will be interesting to see the e ect of a recent political con ict,
as residents here have voted to remain in the E.U. even as their English government
has exited the E.U.
Another set of postmodern spaces that are quite familiar are those on interactive
media. There are MMORPG’s (massively multiplayer online role-playing games like
World of Warcraft, Final Fantasy, Elder Scrolls Online), virtual worlds like Smeet,
Kaneva, and Oz World where people meet in real time and interact primarily for
recreational purposes and with mobile devices, these games are truly postmodern
intercultural encounters, where participants from multiple countries, cultures, and
backgrounds play across time zones and in cultural, physical, and cyber spaces (Hom-
madova Lu & Carradini, 2019) (see Point of View, above). As we discussed in Chapter
1, there are other media spaces like blogs and online discussion groups where people
meet for fun, to gain information, or experience a supportive community (e.g., trans-
gender people, ethnic communities). Of course, there are now almost 3 billion people
who use social networking sites and some scholars question the e ect on relationships
of so much time spent in these cultural spaces. While these sites o er opportunities for
connection, learning and support, and empowerment, results of one study suggest the
longer someone spends on Facebook, the worse their mood gets (Hunt et al., 2018).
The reasons may be jealousy that comes from constant comparisons (my friends are
having such good times, traveling to exotic places, parties I’m not invited to, etc.)
291
292 Part II / Intercultural Communication Processes

In addition, they can be hostile cultural places of harassment and exclusion.

As we mentioned in Chapter 1, LGBTQ individuals are more likely to be the
targets of bullying than heterosexual and cisgender individuals. Women gamers
and game developers are also subjected to harassment by male gamers, violent
threats, and rampant misogyny (#gamergate) (Dougherty & Isaac, 2016). In addi-
tion, some experts suggest that the new digital divide may be between those who
have and don’t have access to the new “shared, collaborative, and on-demand”
gig economy, of Uber and Lyft ride sharing, Airbnb and VRBO home sharing,
and crowdfunding sites. These appear to be used mostly by the educated, urban,
and young (under age 45) (Smith, 2016), whereas many who are employed in this
economy tend to be ethnic/racial minorities, who work part time, and are nan-
cially insecure (Gig Economy, 2018).
The uid and eeting nature of cultural space stands in sharp contrast to the
18th- and 19th-century notions of space, which promoted land ownership, surveys,
borders, colonies, and territories. No passport is needed to travel in the postmodern
cultural space because there are no border guards. The dynamic nature of postmod-
ern cultural spaces underscores its response to changing cultural needs. The space
exists only as long as it is needed in its present form.
Postmodern cultural spaces are both tenuous and dynamic. They are created
within existing places, without following any particular guide. There is no marking o
of territory, no sense of permanence, or o cial recognition. The postmodern cultural
space exists only while it is used. An example of the postmodern cultural spaces is
the classroom building at the Technical University of Denmark. The rooms and walls
are uid, can be moved to accommodate the needs of any particular day’s activities—
classes, meetings, study groups, and a digital neon sign on the outside of the building
notes the particular rooms and room numbers that will be in use that day.
The ideology of xed spaces and categories is currently being challenged by
postmodernist notions of space and location. Phoenix, for example, which became
a city relatively recently, has no Chinatown, or Japantown, or Koreatown, no Irish
district, or Polish neighborhood, or Italian area. Instead, people of Polish descent,
for example, might live anywhere in the metropolitan area but congregate for special
occasions or for speci c reasons. On Sundays, the Polish Catholic Mass draws many
people from throughout Phoenix. When people want to buy Polish breads and pas-
tries, they can go to the Polish bakery and also speak Polish there. Ethnic identity is
only one of several identities that these people negotiate. When they desire recogni-
tion and interaction based on their Polish heritage, they can meet that wish. When
they seek other forms of identi cation, they can go to places where they can be Phoe-
nix Suns fans, or community volunteers, and so on. Ethnic identity is neither the sole
factor nor necessarily the most important one at all times in their lives.
The markers of ethnic life in Phoenix are the urban sites where people congregate
when they desire ethnic cultural contact. At other times, they may frequent di erent
locations in expressing aspects of their identities. In this sense, the postmodern urban
space is dynamic and allows people to participate in the communication of identity in
new ways (Drzewiecka & Nakayama, 1998).
 Chapter 7 / Nonverbal Codes and Cultural Space 293

Cultural spaces can also be metaphorical, with historically de ned places serving
as sources of contemporary identity negotiation in new spaces. In her study of aca-
demia, Olga Idriss Davis (1999) turns to the historical role of the kitchen in African
American women’s lives and uses the kitchen legacy as a way to rethink the university.
She notes that “the relationship between the kitchen and the Academy [university]
informs African American women’s experience and historically interconnects their
struggles for identity” (p. 370). In this sense, the kitchen is a metaphorical cultural
space that is invoked in an entirely new place, the university. Again, this postmodern
cultural space is not material but metaphoric, and it allows people to negotiate their
identities in new places.

INTERNET RESOURCES

http://nonverbal.ucsc.edu/
This website provided by the University of California–Santa Cruz allows students to
explore and test their ability to read and interpret nonverbal communication. The
site provides videos that examine nonverbal codes, including personal space and
gestures, to better understand cross-cultural communication.
https://www.lifewire.com/visual-color-symbolism-chart-by-culture-4062177
This website is dedicated to providing information pertaining to the color symbolism
that exists throughout di erent cultures. Its purpose is to allow Web page designers
to understand how their usage of color might be interpreted by di erent groups and
world regions. The page also provides informative links on how gender, age, class,
and current trends also play a factor in the meaning of color.

SUMMARY

▪ Nonverbal communication di ers from verbal communication in two ways: It is

more unconscious and learned implicitly.
▪ Nonverbal communication can reinforce, substitute for, or contradict verbal
communication.
▪ Nonverbal communication communicates relational meaning, status,
and deception.
▪ Research investigating the universality of nonverbal behaviors includes com-
parison of primate behavior, behavior of deaf/blind children, cross-cultural
studies, and search for universal social needs lled by nonverbal behaviors.
▪ Nonverbal codes include physical appearance, facial expressions, eye contact, ges-
tures, paralanguage, chronemics, and silence.
▪ Sometimes cultural di erences in nonverbal behaviors can lead to stereotyping of
others and overt discrimination.