以下视频帮助您理解“直接和间接的交际风格”

Script

Hello students! I'm so pleased to be able to share this lecture on direct and indirect communication styles with you. Intercultural communication is endlessly fascinating to me, and I hope you'll find it engaging as well!

In today's lesson, we'll be looking at how communication styles can vary across cultures, specifically focusing on differences between direct and indirect styles.

Direct communicators get straight to the point. They speak explicitly and focus primarily on the words being said rather than relying on context or nonverbal cues. This allows efficient transfer of information, but can sometimes be seen as blunt by other cultures.

On the other end of the spectrum, indirect communicators imply meaning rather than stating things explicitly. Nonverbal cues like tone, facial expressions, and body language matter just as much, or even more than, the verbal message. This allows indirect speakers to be subtler and more polite, but can sometimes lead to ambiguity.

Let's compare how a direct and indirect communicator might respond to a common situation. Imagine you order a coffee with no cream, but the barista hands you one with cream. A direct response would be "I asked for no cream." Simple and clear, but somewhat impolite.

An indirect response might be "I'm sorry, it seems there's been a small mistake. I ordered this without cream. It's really no trouble, but I'd be grateful if you wouldn't mind remaking it when you have a moment." The mistake is implied rather than stated outright.

Isn't that fascinating how the same situation elicits such different communication styles? And this is just one simplified example - these differences have profound implications for cross-cultural collaboration and global business. Miscommunications occur constantly between direct and indirect communicators.

In upcoming lectures, we'll cover best practices for navigating these gaps. You'll learn skills like active listening, interpreting nonverbal signals, and code-switching between high and low context communication.

For now, start observing your own communication style. Do you lean more direct or indirect? How might someone from another culture perceive the way you communicate?

I hope this overview has piqued your interest in this captivating aspect of intercultural communication. Until next time, stay curious!

以下视频帮助您理解自夸的和谦虚的交际风格

Script 

Greetings students! In today's lecture, we will explore how communication styles can vary between self-enhancement and self-effacement across cultures.

Self-enhancement refers to a communication style where individuals promote their own accomplishments, status, and positive qualities. In self-enhancing cultures, it is socially acceptable and expected for people to boast about themselves, take credit for success, and call attention to their achievements.

On the other hand, self-effacement refers to downplaying or understating one’s achievements and abilities. In self-effacing cultures, overtly promoting oneself is seen as inappropriate and egocentric. People are more modest and highlight their shortcomings rather than accomplishments.

For example, suppose a co-worker asks how a recent presentation went. A self-enhancer may respond: “I did fantastic! My presentation absolutely nailed it and the CEO complimented me in front of everyone.”

However, a self-effacer would be more likely to say: “It went pretty well I think. A few slides could have been better. Luckily my teammates also did great jobs with their parts.”

As you can see, the same situation elicits very different approaches to self-presentation and humility based on cultural programming. In upcoming lectures, we’ll dive deeper into self-enhancement and self-effacement communication patterns across cultures. For now, start noticing how you and those around you approach promoting versus downplaying accomplishments.

Verbal communication styles vary across cultures. One difference is how elaborate, exacting or succinct people are.

Those with an elaborate style use flashy, embellished language. They emphasize lively, vivid descriptions. This can be engaging but less accurate. For example, some Arab, Middle Eastern and African American cultures often use an elaborate verbal style.

An exacting style reflects a just-the-facts mentality. The focus is accuracy and precision in word choice. Many mainstream American professionals tend to prefer this more exacting approach.

A succinct style values concise statements and silence. Cultures like Japan and China using this approach often say only what's necessary. This is efficient but lacks context for some.

In cross-cultural interactions, recognizing these verbal styles prevents misunderstandings. Being aware if others are elaborate, exacting or succinct helps mutual understanding. Adapting one's style shows respect.

With flexibility, people of different styles can communicate across cultures. An elaborate speaker may tone down embellishments, while an exacting one adds context. Understanding our varied verbal styles is key for effective cross-cultural dialogue.

Hey everyone! Today we're looking at two contrasting communication styles - instrumental and affective.

When someone has an instrumental style, they use communication to achieve specific goals or outcomes. Their messages are designed to persuade, influence, or maintain status. It's about getting results!

Picture a hard-driving salesperson closing a deal. Or a politician rallying supporters during a campaign speech. The focus is swaying people towards a desired outcome.

In cultures with mostly instrumental styles, like the US, the burden is on the speaker to construct messages the audience understands. They carefully choose words to be convincing.

Now affective styles - those are different. Here, the focus is on the communication process itself. An affective speaker cares less about precise outcomes. They closely watch the listener's reactions and adapt as they speak. The responsibility to understand rests with both parties.

This style is common in China and aims for harmony in the discussion. There's no aggressive persuading or debate. Message and meaning are created cooperatively.

It's like close friends having a heart-to-heart talk. The understanding emerges from both through thoughtful listening and sharing.

So in summary - instrumental styles drive towards goals. Affective ones focus on the process. Both play major roles across cultures.

Understanding these differences can help prevent misunderstandings. An affective speaker may seem indirect to an instrumental one. But neither style is better - just different.

Being aware of these styles helps us communicate successfully across cultures. With some flexibility, we can connect with diverse approaches.