2 ms·

To me, this seems absurd and counterproductive. But then again, the Dutch are known to be direct communicators. Im wondering though, if so much of the words ar

To me, this seems absurd and counterproductive. But then again, the Dutch are known to be direct communicators. Im wondering though, if so much of the words are intentionally left ambiguous, where does the fault of a miscommunication typically land? In Dutch culture, the fault almost always lies clearly with the speaker. They should have been clearer. However, if so much of the communication is done by the listener, does the fault of a miscommunication end up there as wllt?

marcosdumay 2y ago
The fault for miscommunication always falls on whatever party has less power.
wewtyflakes 2y ago
I think the point being made was that the issue of communication across cultures is inherently low context, so it is not reasonable to assume a shared cultural context when talking across this boundary. This may mean it would be better to be clear and direct as to minimize misunderstandings.
deaddodo 2y ago
I mean, all of the Germanic languages are fairly direct. English has very little ambiguity in general discourse: Other person: Could you help me move this weekend? You: No, I have other things to do. / I'd rather not. / I can help you find paid movers. / Etc Any ambiguity stems from a secondary layer of familiarity / emotional connection. Meanwhile, I've been to areas where a no was interpreted more as an invitation for negotiation (Catalonia, Mexico, South Italy, etc). So, at least from my personal experience, the language is less at fault and more the culture being more a default-no/default-yes and/or individualist/communal type culture. That being said, I don't speak Japanese, so perhaps Japanese does have some linguistic limits to direct discourse.
- sph 2y ago
  It's definitely cultural rather than linguistic. I have been told (in Britain) I can come across as rude because I am usually direct with disagreement rather than making a lot of ceremony about it. I am a native Italian speaker, and I find the English apologetic fear of confrontation even in benign settings (i.e. "I do not think this idea can work") to be infuriating. Likewise, slavic cultures such as Russian/Eastern-European can seem even more direct and downright hostile if you're not used to dealing with them, because they don't feel the need to mince words and, I guess, prefer clarity and honesty. I have since learned to be a bit more diplomatic, yet I find my Italian assertiveness can come in useful to deal with standstill situations at work where everyone is tiptoeing around each other in uncertainty and no one wants to call the shots. At work and in personal setting, I much prefer honesty and being direct than trying to do your utmost not to offend. Avoiding offense requires a lot of assumption about somebody else's state of mind, with the risk of getting it catastrophically wrong because people are generally terrible mind readers. Empathy is a great tool, but the best way to disagree is, in most cases, simply to say "no."
  - deaddodo 2y ago
    > I have been told (in Britain) I can come across as rude because I am usually direct with disagreement rather than making a lot of ceremony about it. I am a native Italian speaker, and I find the English apologetic fear of confrontation even in benign settings (i.e. "I do not think this idea can work") to be infuriating. I think that even further reinforces the point too. Canadians, Australians and Americans tend to use more direct language (again, outside of familiarity-based scenarios) compared to the British and Irish; and are seen as particularly rude because of it. The same goes with American businesses doing business in Japan, where "cultural" relations managers are specifically on hand to smooth things over. But from their perspective, there's no use mincing words or dilly-dallying to sign a contract or otherwise close business, especially after weeks-months of schmoozing and negotiating.

marcosdumay 2y ago

The fault for miscommunication always falls on whatever party has less power.

wewtyflakes 2y ago

I think the point being made was that the issue of communication across cultures is inherently low context, so it is not reasonable to assume a shared cultural context when talking across this boundary. This may mean it would be better to be clear and direct as to minimize misunderstandings.

deaddodo 2y ago

I mean, all of the Germanic languages are fairly direct. English has very little ambiguity in general discourse: Other person: Could you help me move this weekend? You: No, I have other things to do. / I'd rather not. / I can help you find paid movers. / Etc Any ambiguity stems from a secondary layer of familiarity / emotional connection. Meanwhile, I've been to areas where a no was interpreted more as an invitation for negotiation (Catalonia, Mexico, South Italy, etc). So, at least from my personal experience, the language is less at fault and more the culture being more a default-no/default-yes and/or individualist/communal type culture. That being said, I don't speak Japanese, so perhaps Japanese does have some linguistic limits to direct discourse.

sph 2y ago
It's definitely cultural rather than linguistic. I have been told (in Britain) I can come across as rude because I am usually direct with disagreement rather than making a lot of ceremony about it. I am a native Italian speaker, and I find the English apologetic fear of confrontation even in benign settings (i.e. "I do not think this idea can work") to be infuriating. Likewise, slavic cultures such as Russian/Eastern-European can seem even more direct and downright hostile if you're not used to dealing with them, because they don't feel the need to mince words and, I guess, prefer clarity and honesty. I have since learned to be a bit more diplomatic, yet I find my Italian assertiveness can come in useful to deal with standstill situations at work where everyone is tiptoeing around each other in uncertainty and no one wants to call the shots. At work and in personal setting, I much prefer honesty and being direct than trying to do your utmost not to offend. Avoiding offense requires a lot of assumption about somebody else's state of mind, with the risk of getting it catastrophically wrong because people are generally terrible mind readers. Empathy is a great tool, but the best way to disagree is, in most cases, simply to say "no."
- deaddodo 2y ago
  > I have been told (in Britain) I can come across as rude because I am usually direct with disagreement rather than making a lot of ceremony about it. I am a native Italian speaker, and I find the English apologetic fear of confrontation even in benign settings (i.e. "I do not think this idea can work") to be infuriating. I think that even further reinforces the point too. Canadians, Australians and Americans tend to use more direct language (again, outside of familiarity-based scenarios) compared to the British and Irish; and are seen as particularly rude because of it. The same goes with American businesses doing business in Japan, where "cultural" relations managers are specifically on hand to smooth things over. But from their perspective, there's no use mincing words or dilly-dallying to sign a contract or otherwise close business, especially after weeks-months of schmoozing and negotiating.