Pragma-dialectical perspective to intercultural discussion as communicative activity

Abstract

The core idea of Pragma-dialectical Theory is critical discussion which means resolving disagreement via argumentative dialogues. The Pragmatic-dialectic Model describing critical discussion has not only reasonableness and validness in logic, but also rhetorical effectiveness and pragmatic properties in intra-cultural context. However, the model cannot appropriately describe intercultural discussion since the discussants try to negotiate both in meaning and in divergence. People from different cultures do not necessarily behave pragmatically in the same way. In order to better describe the process of intercultural discussion, an exploratory approach was taken to first propose modifications of the model and then to confirm the modified model in a case study. The modifications include two aspects: first, its rhetorical and pragmatic properties can be expanded by taking Burke’s “Identification” and by replacing “speech acts” with more comprehensive “pragmatic acts”; second, the argumentation stage can be explored further with “motivation” and “mediation” added to the model. The case study reveals that the discussants with the motivation to seek common substances could take proper pragmatic acts to negotiate on certain substances, and that the mediation by the third party and by the discussants exerted influence both on the motivation and on the pragmatic acts. The modified model is expected to broaden the application scope of Pragma-dialectical theory to intercultural communication, and to better explain many kinds of intercultural discussions.