Intercultural Education, Vol. 17, No. 4, October 2006, pp.

407419

Towards intercultural communication: from micro to macro perspectives

Xiaoping Jiang*
Guangzhou University, The Peoples Republic of China
isadorajiang@yahoo.co.nz IsadoraJiang Education 000000October 2006 4 17 2006 & Francis Original Article 1467-5986 Francis Ltd Intercultural 10.1080/14675980600971434 CEJI_A_197044.sgm Taylor and (print)/1469-8439 (online)

This paper investigates intercultural communication and its significance to higher education. The paper briefly discusses culture, subculture and the meeting of cultures. It also provides a brief survey of developments in intercultural communication research. With reference to New Zealand, the paper further points to some limitations of intercultural communication theories, but meanwhile acknowledges the significance of these theories to higher education. The author argues that adopting interculturalism based on the principles of equality and respect at the national and institutional levels is more crucial than merely mastering some intercultural competencies or applying some intercultural communication models outlined in intercultural communication theories.

Introduction Todays world seems to be shrinking as it becomes increasingly interconnected due to advances in high tech communication systems and transport and the processes of globalization. With this unprecedented interconnectivity, our perception of the world is changing and becoming more complicated and sophisticated. Our social network correspondingly broadens, transgressing borders virtually and physically. Frequent contacts with people from different cultural backgrounds make us aware of vast differences in the cultures that largely shape our identity. These intercultural interactions challenge us to widen our outlook and expand in new directions. Research in intercultural communication focuses on these contacts between culturally diverse people. The research is thought-provoking, as it prompts us to reflect on our own lives and our relationships with each other in this world. With the intensified internationalization of higher education (HE), the field of intercultural communication has gained in importance and prominence. Many universities, mainly in the West, have experienced a large growth in their student
*School of Foreign Studies, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou 510006, Peoples Republic of China. Email: isadorajiang@yahoo.co.nz ISSN 1467-5986 (print)/ISSN 1469-8439 (online)/06/04040713 2006 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/14675980600971434

408 X. Jiang population from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds. This raises the issue of how to accommodate this cultural diversity on campus. Are intercultural communication theories adequate to address this issue? This paper provides a summary and critical review of intercultural communication theories. In particular, crucial issues in intercultural communication are discussed. First, the paper briefly outlines the concepts of culture, subculture and the meeting of cultures. The history of intercultural communication as a field of study is then investigated. Importantly, the paper critiques the limitations of intercultural communication theories, with special reference to New Zealand and China, whilst at the same time acknowledging the significance of these theories in HE. Finally, interculturalism is advocated, as it adopts the notion that no culture dominates, hence shaping an environment that enables authentic, equitable intercultural communication to occur. Culture, subculture and the meeting of cultures Before studying what does or should happen when cultures meet, a note is in order regarding the term culture itself. Culture can be seen as the Sum total of ways of living, including behavioral norms, linguistic expression, styles of communication, patterns of thinking, and beliefs and values of a group large enough to be self-sustaining transmitted over the course of generations (Jandt, 2001, p. 499). Moreover, in addition to culture, there is subculture. Subcultures are derived from larger cultures in a society and can be seen as a representation of fragmentation in culture (Fong, 2004), yet boundaries between culture and subculture are complicated and fluid. Any individual is likely to belong to multiple orders of group, subgroup and supergroup. For all these reasons, culture tends to defy the possibility of reaching a more specific consensus about its definition. The definition of culture stated above refers largely to stable practices happening within an ethnically stable group of people within stable physical and legal national borders. Although this formulation remains serviceable, contemporary culture must be sketched as fluid, amorphous and unstable. In the 21st century, cross-ethnic and cross-border communication and transport complicate that concept of culture much more. Under these influences cultures cease to be limited by ones geographic location or ones racial origin. Clearly, the infinitely more high tech communications and rapid transport systems that drive todays globalization and internationalization exponentially increase the combinations and permutations of cultural exchange. The result is that now, in an almost untrackably fast and complicated way, cultures, at whatever level and however they are defined, are in ever closer contact. The meeting of cultures has generated a proliferation of intercultural communication theories. This paper selects some key existing theories for critical review. The sections that follow briefly explore the history of intercultural communication as a field of study, critically examine the major theories of intercultural communication and address some crucial issues in intercultural communication.

Intercultural communication 409 A brief history of intercultural communication as a field of study Intercultural communication as a human activity has been around since human history began. It has been a human concern for millennia. It takes place when culturally diverse people interact. Seen in this light, intercultural communication is not a new phenomenon. However, what is new is the systematic study of exactly what happens when cross-cultural contacts and interaction take placewhen message producer and message receiver are from different cultures (Samovar & Porter, 1985, p. 1). Furthermore, the degree and forms of intercultural communication are different from those of centuries ago, as can be seen in the growth of populations, the advances in technology and transportation and the unprecedented interactions between people from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds. There are now an increasing number of intercultural contacts leading to communication between people from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds. This communication occurs as a result of intercultural contacts, such as in the fields of business, mass media, science and education (Allwood, 2003, p. 1). Since the mid 20th century, intercultural communication has been a developing discipline. Intercultural communication as a recognizable sphere of education and research has been developed more recently to respond to particular needs which co-occur with the growing movement of people who are going abroad to study, work and live (Pusch, undated, p. 11). However, intercultural communication research is still in its infancy. As Leeds-Hurwitz (1990) observed, the young field still has little history written about it (p. 262). Few researchers in this field provide any detailed discussion of the history of intercultural communication. One of the few studies which has investigated the history of the field in detail is Leeds-Hurwitzs (1990) article, highlighting the history of the US Foreign Service Institute (FSI), and the work of Edward Hall (1959). Kohls (cited in Hart, 1997, p. 13) also deals with the history of intercultural communication study through an exploration of several milestones, such as significant publications, the establishment of institutions and other important events. However, compared with Leeds-Hurwitzs deliberately narrow and detailed investigation Kohls endeavour is broad, but lacks depth and a systematic structure. The history which follows combines these two scholars approaches and presents a systematic, broad, yet also brief, detailed history of intercultural communication. William Hart (1997, p. 13) divided the study of intercultural communication into four stages: establishment of a conceptual framework in the 1950s, paradigm acceptance in the 1960s and 1970s, theory construction in the early 1980s and upcoming mature, normal science. Intercultural communication research started with the conceptual framework presented by Hall and others at the FSI in the early 1950s. This conceptual framework was put forward mainly in The silent language (Hall, 1959), marking the birth of intercultural communication since it synthesized what are now considered fundamental issues in understanding culture and communication (Dodd, 1995, p. 26). Subcultures began to take themselves seriously. The events of the 1960s, such as the womens rights movement and other human rights movements facilitated the testing

410 X. Jiang (through training) of notions formerly developed in the intercultural communication research of Hall and other researchers. By the 1970s, specialized intercultural communication courses, societies and journals were established, indicating the acceptance of the field, which then moved from its formative stage of carefree infancy to a somewhat mature stage of adulthood (Saral, as cited in Hart, 1997, p. 7). In the late 1970s, the maturation process experienced an identity crisis; the field wrestled with a definitional problem (Nwankwo, 1979, p. 325). Researchers in the field attempted to seek a clear definition of intercultural communication, but with little success. By the early 1980s, the field experienced a surge in activity with the work of William Gudykunst and Young Yun Kim, who established intercultural communication-oriented theories. Yet in 1989, Gudykunst and Nishida observed that there was still no single overarching theoretical paradigm to steer intercultural communication research, so that, from a positivist perspective, the fields development was still immature. The 1990s continued theory construction and testing in the field, but whether intercultural communication research has since reached a stage of maturity remains unclear, bearing in mind that culture is a dynamic phenomenon. Furthermore, the interaction between two or more cultures often1 leads to hybridization, the ways in which forms become separated from existing practices and recombine with new forms in new practices (Rowe & Schelling, 1991, p. 231). Thus the complexity of exchange has led to increased research, with various attempts made to theorize the phenomena. Given the increase in research on intercultural communication, it is appropriate to critically examine the principal theories of intercultural communication and consider what really matters in any intercultural encounter. A review of theories of intercultural communication In the discussion of intercultural communication theories there have been three major scientific approaches, positivist, humanist and systems, as shown in Table 1. The positivist approach follows the analyticreductionistmechanicbehavioral quantitative (Kim, 1988, original emphasis). Traditionally it has been acknowledged as the most scientific approach, as it represents the essence of natural science. If A then B is the practical reasoning that usually exists in everyday life, above all in Western European and North American societies (Kim, 1988). It is believed that this pragmatic logic might help us simplify and predicate or even manage real phenomena through careful observation. For instance, Gudykunsts (1988) Uncertainty and anxiety follows this approach. Gudykunst (1988) studied individual intercultural experiences from a psychological perspective. He based his theory on the assumption that individuals might try to reduce uncertainty in their first intercultural encounters with people from different cultural backgrounds by proactively predicting others attitudes, beliefs, feelings, and behavior, as well as retrospective explanations about others behaviour. Gudykunst presented a set of predicative statements linking the factors considered to influence the psychological reactions. The factors comprise a knowledge of host

Table 1. A summary of theories in intercultural communication (Kim, 1988, pp. 1617) Humanist approach Systems approach

Meta-theoretical grounding

Positivist approach

Characteristics

1. Analyticreductionist mechanisticbehavioral quantitative 2. If A then B 3. Viewing theory as a set of principles, often called axioms or laws

Representative theorists and their theories

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Gudykunst (1988) Gallois et al. (1988) Forgas (1988) Ting-Toomey (1988) Ellingsworth (1988)

1. Syntheticholisticideographic contextual 2. Describing the nature of the phenomenon as it unfolds 3. Focusing on the historical meaning of experience and its developmental and cumulative effects at the individual and social levels 1. Applegate & Sypher (1988) 2. Cronen et al. (1988) 3. Collier & Thomas (1988)

1. Integrating the external objective patterns and the internal subjective experiences of individuals 2. Stressing interaction of communication phenomena and viewing interacting elements of a given entity as co-determining the outcome being investigated 1. Kim & Ruben (1988) 2. Yum (1988) 3. Kincaid (1988)

Intercultural communication 411

412 X. Jiang culture, shared networks, intergroup attitudes, favourable contact, stereotypes, cultural identity, cultural similarity, and second language competence (p. 124), which are identified as being able to reduce uncertainty and anxiety. Four have an impact on uncertainty reduction, intimacy, attraction, display of nonverbal affiliative expressiveness, and the use of appropriate uncertainty reduction strategies, while the other four are concerned with anxiety reduction, strangers motivation to live permanently in the host culture, host nationals intergroup attitudes, host culture policy toward strangers, and strangers psychological differentiation (Gudykunst, 1988). Arguably, Gudykunst emphasizes psychological and linguistic aspects at the micro level and thus overlooks the impact of the macro or global environment and national foreign policies in his intercultural communication research. The humanist approach challenges the positivist approach by focusing on presenting the nature of the phenomenon as it unfolds and by emphasizing the freedom of individuals. This approach accentuates a syntheticholisticideographiccontextual methodology (Kim, 1988, p. 17, original emphasis). Following the interpretative approach, humanist research is mainly concerned with the historical meaning of experience and its developmental and cumulative effects at the individual and social levels (Kim, 1988). Thus, the theoretical goal is chiefly to describe and clarify a given communication phenomenon. Guided by this goal, humanist theorists endeavour to maintain the original structure engendered by the individuals who are parts of the communication event. This approach is well represented by the theories proposed by James Applegate and Howard Sypher, Vernon Cronen, Victoria Chen and Barnett Pearce, as well as Mary Collier and Milt Thomas, who primarily investigated the subjective and intersubjective processes of interpretation and perspective employed in communication (Kim, 1988). For example, in Applegate and Syphers (1988) A constructive theory of communication and culture the impact of culture on individual communication behaviour is delineated. The emphasis of the theory is on the interpretative nature of communication, the interconnected culture and the individuals cognitive construction of reality. The constructive theory focuses on how individual differences in social perception processes affect the development and use of person-centered communication behaviours (Applegate & Sypher, 1988, p. 44). This theory represents the humanist approach to research into intercultural communication. As do the theories applying the positive approach, this theory concentrates on micro perspectives as to how to make intercultural communication effective through an analysis of individual differences, cultural identity and management of meanings. Although it does not exclude the social situation, the theory similarly overlooks the impact of the global context that situates the intercultural event. The systems approach highlights the interactive nature of communication phenomena and interactive elements of a given system as codetermining the outcome being investigated (Kim & Gudykunst, 1988, p. 18). It also identifies the structure of a system and the forms of information exchange which arise in the system. Similarly to the positivist approach, the systems approach highlights the importance of identifying lawlike principles and patterns of interaction among systems elements (Kim &

Intercultural communication 413 Gudykunst, 1988). Yet it critiques the insensitivity of the positivist approach in the complicated, transactional, dynamic nature of communication phenomena (Kim & Gudykunst, 1988). Resembling the humanistic approach, the systems approach considers communication as an emergent and interactive process and emphasizes the whole of a communication system (Kim & Gudykunst, 1988). Therefore, this approach incorporates the external objective patterns and the internal subjective experiences of individuals which operate concurrently and are inseparable (Kim & Gudykunst, 1988). The representative systems theorists are Kim and Brent Ruben, June Ock Yum and Lawrence Kincaid. As an illustration, Kim and Ruben (1988) presented Intercultural transformation: a systems theory, which addresses the process of intercultural transformation happening in the internal condition of individuals as they take part in wide ranging intercultural communication activities. In this internal transformation the development of the individuals cognitive, affective, and behavioral patterns is seen to transcend their culturally governed psychological constraints (Kim & Ruben, 1988, p. 299, original emphasis). This theory also elucidates why and how intercultural transformation takes place. Its major theme is the stressadaptationgrowth dynamic which drives individuals to build up intercultural capital (Kim & Ruben, 1988, p. 299, original emphasis). This theory is also constrained by a focus on psychological and interpersonal analysis in intercultural communication. A comprehensive theoretical framework from which to understand intercultural communication is not possible through focusing only on psychological and interpersonal analysis. It is necessary to take account of the impact of macro level processes, and this account must incorporate a social, political and economic dimension. We cannot consider culture simply as a dimension of reality (frequently termed the cultural dimension) because all economic, political, religious, legal, educational, scientific and technological activities are cultural activities, since they are part of a certain culture (Coll, 2002). Culture cannot be independent of these activities as they are all expressions of a particular culture and constituents of a society and social group. Particularly, national policies can also have profound effects on intercultural communication. To take the Chinese in New Zealand as an example, many Chinese New Zealanders experienced overt racism during times of anti-Chinese legislation. In 1881, the first anti-Chinese legislation was passed, and this was followed by more legislation against the Chinese aimed at preventing more from settling in New Zealand. The Chinese were the only ethnic immigrant group that underwent the insulting process of having thumb prints taken whenever they entered and left New Zealand (Ip, 1996). Furthermore, Chinese immigrants were the only racial community that was required to pay a poll tax10 in 1881, increased to 100 in 1896. Altogether the New Zealand Customs collected 308,080 in poll tax from Chinese immigrants. Moreover, between 1908 and 1952 the Chinese were the only racial minority required to pay an extra fee for their application for naturalization. Furthermore, denial of citizenship during this period meant a loss of access to political representation, voting rights and social welfare benefits, such as pension and unemployment subsidies (Ip, 1996, 1999,

414 X. Jiang p. 15). During the period of anti-Chinese legislation few New Zealanders would communicate with the Chinese. Often they did not allow their children to play with Chinese children. With such a hostile attitude prevailing, many Chinese people who stayed in New Zealand did not enjoy equal basic rights and little intercultural communication took place. These days New Zealand recognition of the contributions made by the Chinese community and the financial value of international students means that attitudes have shifted to some extent. This is further evident in the governments formal apology in 2002 to the Chinese community with regard to the above historical injustices (Peoples Daily, China, 2002) and Chinese representation, although still minimal, at the governmental and local levels. The significance of intercultural communication theories to higher education Intercultural communication theories, despite their limitations, provide insights which are becoming increasingly significant for providers of HE because of the growing cultural diversity brought about by international students and new immigrant students in HE institutions (HEIs). These insights could play a central role in that they might forestall miscommunication, prevent misunderstandings and avoid mistakes and, beyond such damage control or evasive action, lead to positive gains from a broadening of onesor an institutions or a cultures or a nationsintellectual horizons through the interplay and challenging of ideas. Faced with culturally diverse campuses, HEIs should base their education on intercultural objectives so as to prepare students adequately for effective communication between cultures on a daily basis. Cooperatively conducted intercultural education efforts may facilitate the transmission of appropriate knowledge and understanding through academic programmes and the development of new knowledge through research (Hinner, 1998). The concept of knowledge in play here helps offset some of the dominant economic imperatives based on rational utility maximization, such as the lack of inwardness and the splitting of the knower from the known (Magalhases & Stoer, 2003, p. 43). It could also help to counter the individualization of knowledge by explicitly recognizing that in a globalized world the individual shares knowledge not only with members of his/her own culture but now also with members of other cultures. International students and new immigrant students bring an international and intercultural perspective to course content, pedagogy and, particularly, to classroom discussions (Ward, 2001). Their different views present new perspectives on learning and new world views to teachers and administrators. This poses a challenge for teachers and administrators as to how to meet their expectations and how to manage issues arising from cultural differences in their interactions with international and new immigrant students. Intercultural communication theories are instructive in dealing with this challenge. It is natural that intercultural incompatibility or conflict might well occur when two or more cultures meet. This is because each person has his/her own cultural values, face concerns (a phenomenon most talked about with

Intercultural communication 415 reference to Asian, especially Oriental, students) and communicative styles in coping with intercultural conflicts. For instance, familiarity with Gudykunsts uncertainty and anxiety theory can make teachers, administrators and students realize the impact of ethnolinguistic identity, second language ability, expectations, group similarity, shared networks, interpersonal salience, self-monitoring, cognitive complexity and tolerance for ambiguity upon uncertainty and anxiety reduction (Gudykunst, 1988, p. 129). This theory also has a particular implication for international students, teachers and administrators that the prediction of others attitudes, beliefs, feelings and behaviour can reduce uncertainty. However, they can also form stereotypes that could well impede intercultural communication. In short, intercultural communication theories are of use and significance in informing strategies designed to cope with concrete intercultural incompatibility or conflicts in HE. Yet this can only be realized under the condition that interculturalism, whereby no culture dominates and each one has a voice, is accepted as a national and institutional policy to create an equal and productive intercultural environment. Interculturalism: desirable policy for promoting equitable intercultural communication in higher education The term interculturalism generally indicates a set of perspectives and attitudes aimed at promoting an open and dynamic interaction and exchange between different cultures and is not limited to defending the right to their co-existence within a determined space (Comedia Network, undated). Fral (1996, p. 10) argued that interculturalism begets something deeper and more interesting than multiculturalism: the idea of a mutual friction of cultures, an interaction, an exchange between cultures (p. 1). She preferred the word interculturalism to cultural pluralism or multiculturalism because, for her, the former presupposes the latter but with the added awareness that different cultures never sit quietly side by side, they always intermingle or fight among each other (Fral, 1996). Another point needs to be made as to nomenclature. Broadly, this paper uses the word interculturalism to refer to a policy of promoting intercultural interaction. One notable feature of interculturalism is that the interaction is not always peaceful; far from it. Fral (1996) explicitly stated that cultures inevitably intermingle or fight (p. 1, emphasis added). The prospect of physical violence, or racial hostility, is what makes it so important that interculturalism be given careful attention. Indeed, if meetings between cultures were always peaceful and unproblematic they would provoke infinitely less debate than is apparent all around the globe, including in the arena of HE. They would also require less urgent academic attention. As Bhabha (1994) stated, The differences between disjunctive sites and representations of social life have to be articulated without surmounting the incommensurable meanings and judgements that are produced within the process of transcultural negotiation (p. 162). Bhabhas argument indicates that differences and divisions

416 X. Jiang have to be uttered in intercultural communication without necessarily having been resolved or removed, because disjunctions and discontinuities actually happen every day when meaning is drawn out of an intercultural communicative event. Thus, differences should be accepted as an everyday reality, rather than overcome and erased in any intercultural encounter (see Coll, 2002). In the case of the internationalization of HE in New Zealand this negotiation is more visible because of the upsurge in international and immigrant students since the 1990s. With the growth in student diversity, New Zealand universities are faced with the issue of how best to assist their internal others (immigrant students) and external others (international students) in their internationalization polices and strategies. The multicultural classroom requires teaching staff to be inclusive and create a productive learning environment where cooperation across cultures can occur. This can be especially challenging, as Ward (2001) observed that New Zealand students are not keen on intercultural relations and interactions. Furthermore, Oettli, ProVice Chancellor International at Waikato University, has considered the universities capacity to provide adequate assistance to international students with respect to their reported higher learning needs, extra demand on teachers and limited English ability. He urges precaution in that that to preserve the unique Kiwi experience which makes studying in New Zealand very appealing, [the] international student population should not surpass the institutions capacity to support them (Evans, 2002, p. 21). Common considerations here are the infrastructure for managing diversity and the availability of learning and language support, as well as the pastoral care that a HEI can offer. While this infrastructure support is of use to internal and external others, more importantly interculturalism based on equality and respect should be included as a fundamental policy in the internationalization of HE to ensure the basic value of equality in an intercultural encounter. Yet, New Zealand largely lacks this essential element of policy at the governmental, sectoral and institutional levels at present. The internationalization of HE in New Zealand is economically oriented under neo-liberal ideology and policies. Although the social, cultural and academic rationales for this internationalization are mentioned, no concrete policies and strategies have been formulated, let alone practices. Chinese international students make up almost half of the total international student population in New Zealand (Scott, 2003), yet there are very few organizations designed specifically to assist them to cope with cultural differences and other intercultural challenges. Lack of an intercultural policy and specific support will jeopardize the development of a complete internationalization strategy that should include initiatives concerning curriculum, teaching, learning, research and administration. The other consequence of an economically oriented strategy is that it puts New Zealand at risk of losing its competitive advantage in the international education market. A recent report has already revealed a large drop in the number of Chinese self-funded students in New Zealand (Howie, 2004). Ideally, therefore, the principles of equality and interculturalism should inform policy and practice at all levels of government and the education system. This should be applicable to policy-makers, teachers and administrators, as well as educational

Intercultural communication 417 organizations, management bodies and support services (Kelly, 2002, p. 36). Future policies on the internationalization of HE should focus on a rights-based equality approach, making provision for cultural diversity as a central criterion and making it integral to the design of systems. In short, an inclusive interculturalism should be the basis of policy and practice and be diffused throughout the education system. This approach ensures that diversity is accommodated as the criterion and function in an equality framework that acknowledges all cultural differences and the way they interact (Kelly, 2002). Thus, interculturalization can be considered a desirable outcome of the internationalization of HE, one that will ensure each persons dignity and rights in any intercultural encounter. Furthermore, HEIs, in order to maximize educational opportunities and honour their own mission statements, have a responsibility to help students gain a strong sense of personal identity through valuing and representing their unique cultural and traditional heritage, thereby helping students develop, understand and respect other cultures and traditions. Administrators and educators need to provide students with opportunities to explore the characteristics and values that diverse cultural groups stand for. The knowledge they acquire through their proactive exploration will enable students to cope with issues arising from stereotyping, prejudice, discrimination and racism (Government of Manitoba, undated). Conclusion This paper points out that the concepts of culture and subcultures are amorphous and their complications and fluidity need to be acknowledged. The brief survey of the historical development of intercultural communication as a field of study shows that intercultural communication is still developing and there is much space to be explored. Theories of intercultural communication mainly apply a functional approach and foretell how culture affects communication. The theories approach intercultural communication predominantly from psychological, linguistic and interpersonal perspectives and overlook the macro context of the society in which it is rooted. With special reference to New Zealand HE, the paper argues that interculturalism based on the fundamental principle of cultural equality should be adopted as HE policy. Interculturalism offers the potential to enrich the mutual knowledge of different cultures and to create an authentic and productive learning environment for both domestic and international students. Note
1. The qualifier often recognizes that sometimes a particularly strong trait will completely dominate and lead to assimilation into the relevant parent culture, in much the same way as a strictly dominant gene might. Nevertheless, nurture is arguably more important than nature in the cultural context and dominance is at least as likely to result from an active favouring of one culture, without any inherent superiority of the trait itself. This is all the more reason to foster culture by means of respectful interculturalism.

418 X. Jiang Notes on contributor Xiaoping Jiang obtained her Ph.D. in education at the University of Auckland, New Zealand. She is currently an Associate Professor of English at Guangzhou University, People Republic of China. Dr Jiang has published extensively, mainly in the areas of translation theories and skills, intercultural studies and higher education. References
Allwood, J. (2003) Intercultural communication. Available online at: http://www.immi.se/intercultural/ (accessed 26 March 2004). Applegate, J. & Sypher, H. (1988) A constructivist theory of communication and culture, in: Y. Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds) Theories in intercultural communication (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage), 4165. Bhabha, H. (1994) The location of culture (London, Routledge). Coll, A. (2002) Proposals for intercultural diversity in the era of globalisation. Available online at: www.alliance21.org/en/proposals/finals/final_intercul_en.pdf (accessed 3 April 2004). Collier, M. & Thomas, M. (1988) Cultural identity: an interpretative perspective, in: Y.Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds) Theories in intercultural education (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage), 99120. Comedia Network (undated) Interculturalism. Available online at: http://www.comedianetwork.org/glossary/worddescription.php?url_wordid=6p (accessed 12 March 2004). Cronen, V., Chen, V. and Pearce, B. (1988) Coordinated management of meaning: a critical theory, in: Y.Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds) Theories in intercultural education (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage), 6798. Dodd, C. (1995) Dynamics of intercultural communication (Madison, WI, Brown & Benchmark). Ellingsworth, H. (1988) A theory of adaptation in intercultural dyads, in: Y.Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds) Theories in intercultural education (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage), 259279. Evans, S. (2002, 29 May) Too much of everything, Educational Review, pp. 2023. Fral, J. (1996) Pluralism in art or interculturalism? Available online at: http://kvc.minbuza.nl/uk/ archive/amsterdam/ukverslag_feral.html (accessed 12 March 2004). Fong, M. (2004) Identity and the speech community, in: M. Fong & R. L. Chuang (Eds) Communicating ethnic and cultural identity (Lanham, MD, Rowman & Littlefield). Forgas, J. (1988) Episode representations in intercultural communication, in: Y.Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds) Theories in intercultural education (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage), 186212. Gallois, C., Franklyn-Stokes, A., Giles, H. & Coupland, N. (1988) Communication accommodation in intercultural encounters, in: Y.Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds) Theories in intercultural education (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage), 157185. Government of Manitoba (undated) Multicultural education: a policy for the 1990s. Available online at: www.edu.gov.mb.ca/ks4/docs/policy/multic/#Education%20for%20Intercultural%20 Understanding (accessed 20 April 2004). Gudykunst, W. (1988) Uncertainty and anxiety, in: Y. Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds) Theories in intercultural communication (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage), 123156. Hall, E. (1959) The silent language (Garden City, NY, Doubleday Press). Hart, W. (1997) A brief history of intercultural communication: a paradigmatic approach. Available online at: http://web.odu.edu/webroot/instr/AL/wbhart.nsf/pages/histICC (accessed 26 March 2004). Hinner, M. (1998) The importance of intercultural communication in the globalized world. Available online at: http://www.wiwi.tu-freiberg.de/englisch/downloads/Global.PDF (accessed 18 April 2004). Howie, C. (2004, 1 April) Chinese student number drop blamed for downturn, The Southland Times, p. 3. Available online at: http://www.stuff.co.nz (accessed 10 October 2004).

Intercultural communication 419

Ip, M. (1996) Dragons on the long white cloud: the making of Chinese New Zealanders (North Shore City, New Zealand, Tandem Press). Ip, M. (1999) Chinese political participation in New Zealandthe role of Taiwanese immigrants. Available online at: http://www.stevenyoung.co.nz/chinesevoice/participation/manyingapr0 (accessed 3 September 2004). Jandt, F. (2001) Intercultural communication: an introduction (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage). Kelly, M. (2002) Promoting anti-racism and interculturalism in education: draft recommendations towards a National Action Plan. Available online at: http://www.justice.ie/802569B20047F907/ vWeb/flMJDE5NKJ5N/$file/education.pdf (accessed 3 March 2004). Kim, Y. (1988) On theorizing intercultural communication, in: Y. Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds) Theories in intercultural communication (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage), 1121. Kim, Y. & Gudykunst, W. (Eds) (1988) Theories in intercultural communication (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage). Kim, Y. & Ruben, B. (1988). Intercultural transformation: a systems theory, in: Y. Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds) Theories in intercultural communication (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage), 299321. Kincaid, L. (1988) The convergence theory of adaptation in intercultural dyads, in: Y. Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds) Theories in intercultural education (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage), 280298. Leeds-Hurwitz, W. L. (1990) Notes in the history of intercultural communication: the foreign service institute and the mandate for intercultural training, The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 76(3), 280298. Magalhases, A. M. & Stoer, S. R. (2003) Performance, citizenship and the knowledge society: a new mandate for European education policy, Globalisation, Societies and Education, 1(1), 4166. Nwankwo, R. (1979) Intercultural communication: a critical review, The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 65, 324346. Peoples Daily, China (2002, 13 February) New Zealand Govt apologizes to Chinese community, p. 2. Available online at: http://english.people.com.cn/200202/13/eng20020213_90400.shtml (accessed 20 October 2005). Pusch, M. (undated) The field of intercultural communication. Available online at: http:// www.olemiss.edu/courses/psy561/ICC%20History.doc (accessed 26 March 2004). Rowe, W. & Schelling, V. (1991) Memory and modernity: popular culture in Latin America (London, Verso Press). Samovar, L. A. & Porter, R. E. (Eds) (1985) Intercultural communication: a reader (Belmont, CA, Wadsworth). Scott, D. (2003) Participation in tertiary education 2003 (Wellington, New Zealand, Ministry of Education). Ting-Toomey, S. (1988) Intercultural conflict styles: a face-negotiation theory, in: Y. Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds) Theories in intercultural education (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage), 213 235. Ward, C. (2001) The impact of international students on domestic students and host institutions: a literature review, paper prepared for the Export Education Policy Project, Strategic Information and Resourcing Division (Wellington, New Zealand, Ministry of Education). Yum, J. (1988) Network theory in intercultural communication, in: Y. Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds) Theories in intercultural education (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage), 239258.