Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Intercultural Communication
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Intercultural Communication
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- Part I Introducing Intercultural Communication
- 1 What Is Culture?
- 2 What Is Intercultural Communication?
- 3 Rethinking Intercultural Competence
- 4 Interculturality or Transculturality?
- Part II Theoretical Approaches
- Part III Methods
- Part IV Application
- Part V Assessment
- Index
- References
4 - Interculturality or Transculturality?
from Part I - Introducing Intercultural Communication
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 February 2020
By
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Intercultural Communication
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Intercultural Communication
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- Part I Introducing Intercultural Communication
- 1 What Is Culture?
- 2 What Is Intercultural Communication?
- 3 Rethinking Intercultural Competence
- 4 Interculturality or Transculturality?
- Part II Theoretical Approaches
- Part III Methods
- Part IV Application
- Part V Assessment
- Index
- References
Summary
This chapter discusses the diverse terminology used to describe contact situations between two or more cultures by focusing on Welsch’s discussions of multi-, inter- and transculturality. The anthropological and psychological dimensions of cultural concepts are shown to arise from the need of human beings as pattern-building and storytelling animals to position themselves by defining identities and alterities in a diverse environment which makes essentialist ontological self-definitions impossible. Using topical and historical examples, the chapter argues that conceptualization of the world as increasingly hybrid and transcultural has very concrete material, social and political consequences. The chapter then explores the connections between notions of cosmopolitanism and different conceptualizations of difference, particularism and universalism. Finally, the ethical dimensions of different ways of categorizing cultures and their implications for developing inter- and transcultural competence as the basis for constructing a peaceful and dialogic future of togetherness in difference are discussed.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Intercultural Communication , pp. 68 - 82Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Antor, H. (1996). The ethics of criticism in the age after value. In Ahrens, R. and Volkmann, L., eds., Why Literature Matters: Theories and Functions of Literature. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter, pp. 65–85.Google Scholar
Antor, H. (2002). Die Vermittlung interkultureller Kompetenz an der Universität: Das Beispiel Kanada. In Volkmann, L., Stierstorfer, K. and Gehring, W., eds., Interkulturelle Kompetenz. Tübingen: Narr, pp. 143–63.Google Scholar
Antor, H. (2006). Multikulturalismus, Interkulturalität und Transkulturalität. Perspektiven für interdisziplinäre Forschung und Lehre. In Antor, H., ed., Inter- und Transkulturelle Studien: Theoretische Grundlagen und interdisziplinäre Praxis. Heidelberg: Winter, pp. 25–39.Google Scholar
Antor, H. (2008). Diversity, cosmopolitanism and ethics in the age of inter- and transculturalism. In Carpi, D., ed., Practising Equity, Addressing Law: Equity in Law and Literature. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter, pp. 191–206.Google Scholar
Antor, H. (2016). Constructing alterity: race, gender, and the body in Shakespeare’s Othello. In Drakakis, J. and Fiorato, S., eds., Performances and Regulations of the Renaissance Body. Berlin: DeGruyter, pp. 73–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appiah, K. A. (2006). Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Ashcroft, B., Griffiths, G. and Tiffin, H. (1998). Key Concepts in Postcolonial Studies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Beck, U. (1997). Was ist Globalisierung? Irrtümer des Globalismus, Antworten auf Globalisierung. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Benhabib, S., with Waldron, J., Honig, B. and Kymlicka, W. (2006). Another Cosmopolitanism, ed. Post, R. (The Berkeley Tanner Lectures 2004). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaicher, G. (1987). Erstarrtes Denken. Studien zu Klischee, Stereotyp und Vorurteil in englisch-sprachiger Literatur. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Boyden, B. (2010). On the Origin of Stories: Evolution, Cognition, and Fiction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Brennan, T. (1997). At Home in the World: Cosmopolitanism Now. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Delanoy, W. (2012). From ‘inter’ to ‘trans’? Or: quo vadis cultural learning? In Eisenmann, M. and Summer, T., eds., Basic Issues in EFL Teaching and Learning. Heidelberg: Winter, pp. 157–67.Google Scholar
Gadamer, H.-G. (1986 [1960]). Wahrheit und Methode: Grundzüge iner philosophischen Hermeneutik. Tübingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
García Canclini, N. (1990). Culturas híbridas: Estrategias para entrar y salir de la modernidad. México: Grijalbo.Google Scholar
Geertz, C. (2017). The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays, 3rd ed. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Gottschall, J. (2012). The Storytelling Animal: How Stories Make Us Human. Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. (1998). The Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory. Boston and Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hall, S. (1996). When was ‘the post-colonial’? Thinking at the limit. In Chambers, I. and Curti, L., eds., The Post-colonial Question: Common Skies, Divided Horizons. London: Routledge, pp. 242–60.Google Scholar
Herder, J. G. (2002). Philosophical Writings, trans. and ed. Forster, M. N.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Huntington, S. P. (1996). The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Matz, F., Rogge, M. and Siepmann, P., eds. (2014). Transkulturelles Lernen im Fremdsprachenunterricht: Theorie und Praxis. Frankfurt am Main: Lang.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neubert, S., Roth, H.-J. and Yildiz, E. (2013). Multikulturalismus – ein umstrittenes Konzept. In Neubert, S., Roth, H.-J. and Yildiz, E., eds., Multikulturalität in der Diskussion: neuere Beiträge zu einem umstrittenen Konzept. Wiesbaden: Springer, pp. 9–29.Google Scholar
Pratt, M. L. (1992). Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Transculturation. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rings, G. (2016). The Other in Contemporary Migrant Cinema: Imagining a New Europe? New York and Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ritzer, George (1993). The McDonaldization of Society: An Investigation into the Changing Character of Contemporary Social Life. Newbury Park, CA: Pine Forge Press.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. (1991). Objectivism, Relativism, and Truth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shakespeare, W. (1986). Othello. In Wells, S. and Taylor, G., eds., William Shakespeare: The Complete Works. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 925–64.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Volkmann, L. (2014). Die Abkehr vom Differenzdenken: Transkulturelles Lernen und global education. In Matz, F., Rogge, M. and Siepmann, P., eds., Transkulturelles Lernen im Fremdsprachenunterricht: Theorie und Praxis. Frankfurt am Main: Lang, pp. 37–51.Google Scholar
Walzer, M. (1994). Thick and Thin: Moral Argument at Home and Abroad. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Welsch, W. (1992a). Transkulturalität – Lebensformen nach der Auflösung der Kulturen. Information Philosophie, 2, 5–20.Google Scholar
Welsch, W. (1992b). Subjektsein heute: Zum Zusammenhang von Subjektivität, Pluralität und Transversalität. Studia Philosophica, 51, 153–82.Google Scholar
Welsch, W. (1994). Transkulturalität – die veränderte Verfassung heutiger Kulturen. In Duve, F., ed., Sichtweisen: Die Vielheit in der Einheit. Weimar: Stiftung Weimarer Klassik, pp. 83–122.Google Scholar
Welsch, W. (1999). Transculturality: the puzzling form of cultures today. In Featherstone, M. and Lash, S., eds., Spaces of Culture: City, Nation, World. London: Sage, pp. 194–213.Google Scholar
Welsch, W. (2017). Transkulturalität. Realität – Geschichte – Aufgabe. Vienna: New Academic Press.Google Scholar
Young, Robert J. C. (1995). Colonial Desire: Hybridity in Theory, Culture and Race. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by