Abstract
Intercultural communicology is a complex system of intergroup communication and, in consequence, is a specialized case of human communication in which discourse is constructed in a semiotic world of experience, i.e., the Semiosphere. I look at the Netizen (online citizen) application of semiotic phenomenological theories and categories as we explore their emblematic presence as cosmologies and logics in the sociocultural discourses of the People’s Republic of China. The analysis examines stories published (2010–2011) in the online version of China Daily, a quasi-official newspaper of the Chinese government. The analysis is the main task that Umberto Eco called the semiotic quest for “the logic of culture”. I shall periodically cite the longitudinal statistical research of Richard E. Nisbett reported in his popular book The Geography of Thought. It is important to note that Nisbett’s research confirms the applied practice of the cultural group semiotic in use, rather than theoretically describing the logic constituted by the semiotic systems, which is my goal. In consequence as we shall see, Nisbett makes the mistake of describing the Asian semiotic in terms of a Western logic perspective – not the Asian perspective per se!
Appendix 1
In 2009, a Beijing tourist shop merchant named Liu Mingjie used his computer photoshop skills to create an image of US President Obama (Figures 20) that he printed on T-shirts, canvas carry bags, coin purses, and posters, all showing the famous Communist Party People’s Liberation Army green cap and uniform. It was an instant commercial success among tourists and Chinese alike (for vastly different reasons!). Given his sales success, Liu designed a small sticker that resembled the cover of Time magazine with the Chinese words that translate: “Chairman Mao says I am very handsome.” That was a big success as well. His next project was a line of underwear. This news item, the “innocent” report of a “local event” story entitled “The Entrepreneur who supports ‘ObaMao’” was reported in the September 23, 2009 China Daily by Renée Haines (2009). As my larger analysis demonstrates, this is another case of an American writing from (1) an American cultural context and (2) print journalism paradigm without any apparent comprehension of the Chinese cultural context. Ms. Haines is a B.A. journalism graduate of the University of Texas employed as a copy-editor at China Daily. The news item nearly led to the diplomatic failure of President Obama’s first visit to China (15–18 November 2009).
Liu Mingjie wearing his Obamao T-shirt outside his Beijing shop.
This simple event turned into a political storm of confused values and cultural confrontation in both the US and PR China given the possible interpretations associated with both the English neologism of “Obamao” and it Chinese translations. A blog synopsis of the Chinese-American English language in contact event is given by T. J. Nelson:
After Barack Obama’s visit to China, the Chinese, demonstrating their well-known perspicacity and humor, began calling him “Obamao.” Obama is written in Chinese as 歐巴馬 or 奧巴馬. Ma (horse) [馬] is a very common family name in China. The first two characters are used phonetically in this context. Changing “Obama” to “Obamao” means substituting 毛 [Mao, “hair”] for the last character. “Obamao” is therefore written as 歐巴毛, or sometimes as 奧巴毛. Liu Mingjie, a Beijing merchant, created the famous Obamao T-shirt, shown at left. The caption is a reproduction of the handwriting of Mao Zedong [毛澤東], whose ill-conceived economic policies led China into twenty years of poverty and mass starvation. Mao used the old-style characters. The caption reads, “Serve the people.” [為人民服務] [Wèi rén mín fú wù]. Another way of translating it is “To Serve Man.” Hmm. Do the Chinese know something about Obama that we don’t? Obama is reminiscent of another tall, smooth-talking guy who didn’t quite get the nuances of the social customs of the dominant species on this planet. A suggestion for those looking for Obama’s birth certificate: Forget Kenya. Think Kanamit.
In this blog, “Kanamit” is an allusion to the short story title “To Serve Man” that translates as a double entendre: (1) “to serve” as service to humanity, or (2) “to serve” as a dish of food called “human.”
Appendix 2
Adjunct to the present analysis, is the cultural perception of moveable type in history of printing (first produced in China, then Korea) and the subsequent perceptual process in modern communications technology. In 2012, I was privileged to present the keynote address at the international conference in Korea on the topic “Humans, Media, and Communication Paradigms: Respecification of Printing Media in the Age of Smart Media.” Figure 21 summaries my analysis in that article and contextualizes many of the cultural issues with which my present analysis is concerned.
Semiotic phenomenology applied to print media (Lanigan 2012c: 25).
Acknowledgment
For indexical purposes my name in Chinese: 蓝瑞德博士 [Richard L. Lanigan]. A first draft of this paper was presented as “Netizen Communicology: China Daily and the Internet Construction of Group Culture,” Ninth Chinese Internet Research Conference: “Global Public Goods, National Policies, and Private Interests,” Institute for the Study of Diplomacy, E. A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, US, 23 May 2011. The present paper derives from a second draft presented at the thirty-ninth Annual Meeting, The Semiotic Society of America, Seattle, Washington, US, 2–5 October 2014. I express my appreciation to my colleagues, Western and Eastern, for their comments that promoted constructive reversions.
References
Alexander, Hubert Griggs. 1967. Communication. In Language and thinking: A philosophical introduction, 11–32. New York: D. Van Nostrand.Search in Google Scholar
Alperson, Burton L.1975. In search of Buber’s ghost: A calculus for interpersonal phenomenology. Behavioral Science4(4). 179–190.10.1002/bs.3830200306Search in Google Scholar
Barnlund, Dean C.1975. Public and private self in Japan and the United States: Communicative styles of two cultures. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.Search in Google Scholar
Benveniste, Emile.1973 [1969]. Indo-European language and society, Elizabeth Palmer (trans.). Coral Gables, FL: University of Miami Press.Search in Google Scholar
Bloom, Alfred.1981. The linguistic shaping of thought: A study in the impact of language on thinking in China and the West. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Search in Google Scholar
Biao, Teng.2014. China’s new civil rights movement [Gongmeng]. Washington Post (20 April), A17.Search in Google Scholar
Borden, George A.1991. Cultural orientation: An approach to understanding intercultural communication. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Search in Google Scholar
Carey, James.1989. A cultural approach to communication. In Communication and culture: Essays on media and society, 13–36. Boston, MA: Unwin Hyman.Search in Google Scholar
Carter, Irl.2011. Human behavior in the social environment: A social systems approach, 2nd edn. New Brunswick, NJ: Aldine Transaction.Search in Google Scholar
Cheng, Chung-Ying. 1987. Chinese philosophy and contemporary human communication theory. In LawrenceKincaid (ed.), Communication theory: Eastern and Western perspectives, 23–44. New York: Academic Press.10.1016/B978-0-12-407470-5.50008-6Search in Google Scholar
Ding, Ersu.2010. Parallels, interactions, and illuminations: Traversing Chinese and Western theories of the sign. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.10.3138/9781442685703Search in Google Scholar
Eco, Umberto.1975. Looking for a logic of culture. In T. A.Sebeok (ed.), The tell-tale sign: A survey of semiotics, 9–17. Lisse: Peter de Ridder Press.Search in Google Scholar
Eco, Umberto.1976. A theory of semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.10.1007/978-1-349-15849-2Search in Google Scholar
Eco, Umberto.1989. Openness, information, communication. In The open work, Anna Canogni (trans.), 44–83. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Gao, Ge.1998. An initial analysis of the effects of face and concern for “other” in Chinese interpersonal communication. International Journal of Intercultural Relations22(4). 467–482.10.1016/S0147-1767(98)00019-4Search in Google Scholar
Gao, Ge & XiaosuiXiao.2002. Intercultural/interpersonal communication research in China: A preliminary review. In WenshanJia, XingLu, & D.Ray Heisey (eds.), Chinese communication theory and research: Reflections, new frontiers, and new directions, 21–35. Westport, CT: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar
Gao, Y. H.1998. Kua wen hua jiao neng li de “dao” yu “qi” [The guiding principle and tool of intercultural communication competence]. Language Instruction and Research3. 39–53.Search in Google Scholar
Guan, Shijie.2000. A comparison of Sino-American thinking patterns and the function of Chinese characters in the difference. In D.Ray Heisey (ed.), Chinese perspectives in rhetoric and communication, 25–43. Stamford, CT: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar
Haines, Renee.2009. The entrepreneur who supports “ObaMao.” China Daily. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cityguide/2009-09/23/content_8725909.htm (accessed 31 May 2015).Search in Google Scholar
Hewitt, John P.1989. A view of American culture. In Dilemmas of the American self, 66–108. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hjelmslev, Louis.1961. Prolegomena to a theory of language. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hofstede, Geert.2001. Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Search in Google Scholar
Hofstede, Geert & Gert JanHofstede. 2005. Culture and organizations: Software of the mind, 2nd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill.Search in Google Scholar
Holenstein, Elmar.1976. Roman Jakobson’s approach to language: Phenomenological structuralism, Catherine Schelbert & Tarcisius Schelbert (trans.). Bloomington & London: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hsu, Francis L. K.1981 [1953]. Americans and Chinese: Passages to differences, 3rd edn. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hutzler, Charles.2003. Internet use in China gains breath. Wall Street Journal (18 November), B4.Search in Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman Osipovîch. 1962–2002. Selected writings, 9 vols. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Jia, Wenshan.2002. Introduction: The significance of Chinese communication theory and research in a globalizing world. In WenshanJia, XingLu, & D.Ray Heisey (eds), Chinese communication theory and research: Reflections, new frontiers, and new directions, xiii–xvii. Westport, CT: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar
Kincaid, Lawrence (ed.). 1987. Communication theory: Eastern and Western perspectives. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar
Kim, Min-Sun. 2002. Non-Western perspectives on human communication: Implications for theory and practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage.10.4135/9781452233178Search in Google Scholar
Kim, Young Yun. 2008. Intercultural personhood: Globalization and a way of being. International Journal of Intercultural Relations32(4). 359–368.10.1016/j.ijintrel.2008.04.005Search in Google Scholar
Klyukanov, Igor E.2005. Principles of intercultural communication. Boston, MA: Pearson.Search in Google Scholar
Lanigan, Richard L.1984. Semiotic phenomenology of rhetoric: Eidetic practice in Henry Grattan’s discourse on tolerance. Washington, DC: Center for Advanced Research in Phenomenology & University Press of America.Search in Google Scholar
Lanigan, Richard L.1988. Phenomenology of communication: Merleau-Ponty’s thematics in communicology and semiology. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Lanigan, Richard L.1992. The human science of communicology: A phenomenology of discourse in Foucault and Merleau-Ponty. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Lanigan, Richard L.1997. Television: The semiotic phenomenology of communication and the image. In WinfriedNöth (ed.), Semiotics of the media: State of the art, projects, and perspectives (Approaches to semiotics 127), 381–391. New York & Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110803617-028Search in Google Scholar
Lanigan, Richard L.2000. Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–1914). In Jorge R.Schement (ed.), The encyclopedia of communication and information, vol. 3, 705–707. New York: Macmillan.Search in Google Scholar
Lanigan, Richard L.2007a. Communicology: The French tradition in human science. In PatArneson (ed.), Perspectives on the philosophy of communication, 168–184. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.10.5840/philcomm200724Search in Google Scholar
Lanigan, Richard L.2007b. The phenomenology of embodiment in communicology. In LesterEmbree & ThomasNenon (eds.), Phenomenology 2005: Vol. V, parts I and II, selected essays from North America, 371–398. Bucharest: Zeta.Search in Google Scholar
Lanigan, Richard L.2008. Communicology. In WolfgangDonsbach (ed.), International encyclopedia of communication, vol. 8, 3595–3597. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell; Malden, MA: International Communication Association.10.1002/9781405186407.wbiecc105Search in Google Scholar
Lanigan, Richard L.2009. Cosmology and communicology in an internet world: Semiotic perspectives of the East (PRC) and the West (US). Chinese Semiotic Studies1. 228–254.10.1515/css-2009-0022Search in Google Scholar
Lanigan, Richard L.2010. The verbal and nonverbal codes of communicology: The foundation of interpersonal agency and efficacy. In DeborahEicher-Catt & Isaac E.Catt (eds.), Communicology: The new science of embodied discourse, 102–128. Madison, NJ: Fairleigh Dickson University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Lanigan, Richard L.2011. On homeworld and community models of the city: The communicology of egocentric and sociocentric cultures in urban semiotics. In ZdzisławWąsik & DianaTeters (eds.), Unfolding the semiotic web in urban discourse, 11–46. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar
Lanigan, Richard L.2012a. Familiar frustration: The Japanese encounter with Navajo (Diné) “code talkers” in World War II. In ZdzisławWąsik & Piotr P.Chruszczewski (eds.), Languages in contact 2011 (Philologica Wratislaviensia: Acta et Studia 9), 47–69. Wrocław: Philological of Higher Education in Wrocław.Search in Google Scholar
Lanigan, Richard L.2012b. The logic of phenomena: Semiotic structures of West and East in communicology and culture. Chinese Semiotic Studies6. 39–77.10.1515/css-2012-0106Search in Google Scholar
Lanigan, Richard L.2012c. Communicology and the mother of civilization [moveable type]: The semiotic phenomenology of human embodiment as cultural media. Korean Journal of Communication Studies20(5). 5–16.Search in Google Scholar
Lanigan, Richard L.2013a. Information theories. In PaulCobley & PeterSchulz (eds.), Theories and models of communication, vol. 1, 59–83. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110240450.59Search in Google Scholar
Lanigan, Richard L.2013b. Communicology and culturology: Semiotic phenomenological method in applied small group research. Public Journal of Semiotics4(2). 71–103.10.37693/pjos.2013.4.8843Search in Google Scholar
Lanigan, Richard L.2014. Contact confusion in perception: West meets East, one actuality becomes two realities. In Piotr P.Chruszczewski & John R.Rickford (eds.), Languages in contact 2012 (Languages in contact 1), 103–125. Wrocław, Poland: Philological School of Higher Education in Wrocław.Search in Google Scholar
Lewis, Richard D.2006. When cultures collide: Leading across cultures, 3rd edn. Boston & London: Nicholas Brealey.Search in Google Scholar
Li, You-Zheng1998. Sign conceptions in China. In R.Posner, K.Robering & T. A.Sebeok (eds.), A handbook on the sign-theoretic foundations of nature and culture, vol. 2, 1856–1881. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110156614.2.11.1856Search in Google Scholar
Lotman, Yuri M.1990. Universe of the mind: A semiotic theory of culture, Ann Shukman (trans.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Makino, Yukari.1998–1999. Transcultural speechmaking principles: Mechanisms of linear logic and configural logic. Intercultural Communication Studies8(1). 103–123.Search in Google Scholar
McFeat, Tom. 1974. Small-group cultures. New York: Pergamon.10.1016/B978-0-08-017073-2.50007-0Search in Google Scholar
Mead, Margaret.1970. Culture and commitment: A study of the generation gap. Garden City, New York: Doubleday.Search in Google Scholar
Mengin, Françoise (ed.). 2004. Cyber China: Reshaping national identities in the age of information. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Search in Google Scholar
Nakamura, Hajime.1964. Ways of thinking of Eastern peoples: India, China, Tibet, Japan. New York: Kegan Paul.10.1515/9780824845025Search in Google Scholar
Nam, Kyoung-Ah & JohnCondon. 2010. The DIE is cast: The continuing evolution of intercultural communication’s favorite classroom exercise. International Journal of Intercultural Relations. 34(1). 81–87.10.1016/j.ijintrel.2009.09.001Search in Google Scholar
Needham, Joseph.1954–2004. Science and civilization in China, 24 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Needham, Joseph.1969. The grand transition: Science and society in East and West. London: George Allen & Unwin.Search in Google Scholar
Needham, Joseph.1987. Si hai zhi nei[Dialogue between East and West]. Beijing: Book Publishing House.Search in Google Scholar
Needham, Joseph & DorothyNeedham.1948. Science outpost: Papers of the Sino-British science co-operation office (British Council scientific office in China) 1942–1946. London: Pilot.Search in Google Scholar
Nelson, T. J.2009. Obamao. http://randombio.com/obamao.html (accessed 25 May 2015).Search in Google Scholar
Nisbett, Richard E.2003. The geography of thought: How Asians and Westerners think differently – and why. New York: Free Press.Search in Google Scholar
Oliver, Robert T.1971. Communication and culture in ancient India and China. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles S.1931–1966. The collected papers of Charles S. Peirce, 8 vols., C.Hartshorne, P.Weiss & A. W.Burks (eds.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [Reference to Peirce’s papers will be designated CP followed by volume and paragraph number.]Search in Google Scholar
Prosser, Michael H.1978. The cultural dialogue: An introduction to intercultural communication. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Search in Google Scholar
Reiser, Oliver.1940. The promise of scientific humanism: Toward a unification of scientific, religious, social, and economic thought. New York, NY: Oskar Priest.Search in Google Scholar
Rosen, Stanley.1989. Value change among post-Mao youth: The evidence from survey data. In PerryLink, RichardMadsen, & Paul G.Pickowicz (eds.), Unofficial China: Popular culture and thought in the People’s Republic, 193–216. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.10.4324/9780429270079-12Search in Google Scholar
Rohsenow, John N.2002. A B C dictionary of Chinese proverbs. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Press.Search in Google Scholar
Ruesch, Jürgen. 1953–1972. Semiotic approaches to human relations (Approaches to semiotics 25). The Hague & Paris: Mouton.10.1515/9783110816228Search in Google Scholar
Ruesch, Jürgen & GregoryBateson. 1951. Communication: The social matrix of psychiatry. New York: W. W. Norton.Search in Google Scholar
Ruesch, Jürgen & WeldonKees. 1972. Nonverbal communication: Notes on the visual perception of human relations. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Search in Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward.1931. Communication. In Encyclopedia of the social sciences, 78–81. New York: Macmillan.Search in Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward.2002 [1933]. Symbolism. In Judith T.Irvine (ed.), The psychology of culture: A course of lectures, 219–238. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter10.1515/9783110889468Search in Google Scholar
Sitaram, K. S. & RoyCogdell.1976. Foundations of intercultural communication. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.Search in Google Scholar
Shweder RichardA. & Robert A.LeVine (eds.). 1984. Culture theory: Essays on mind, self, and emotion. New York: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Stewart, Edward C. & Milton J.Bennett.1991 [1972]. American cultural patterns: A cross-cultural perspective. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.Search in Google Scholar
Sun, Zhenbin.2002. Communication studies in China: State of the art. In WenshanJia, XingLu, and D.Ray Heisey (eds.), Chinese communication theory and research: Reflections, new frontiers, and new directions, 3–19. Westport, CT: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar
Tai, Zixue.2006. The Internet in China: Cyberspace and civil society. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203944073Search in Google Scholar
Thaxton, Ralph A., Jr.1997. Salt of the earth: The political origins of peasant protest and Communist revolution in China. Berkeley: University of California Press.10.1525/9780520311763Search in Google Scholar
Triandis, Harry C.1995. Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Search in Google Scholar
Wang, Jian.2000. Foreign advertising in China: Becoming global, becoming local. Iowa City: Iowa State University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Weber, Max.1951. The religion of China: Confucianism and Taoism. New York: Free Press.Search in Google Scholar
Winchester, Simon.2008. The man who loved China[Joseph Needham]. New York: Harper Collins.10.1038/454409aSearch in Google Scholar
Tung-Sun, Chang. 1989[1938, 1939]. A Chinese philosopher’s theory of knowledge. In Sanford I.Berman (ed.), Logic and general semantics: Writings of Oliver L. Reiser and others, 111–132. San Francisco, CA: International Society for General Semantics.Search in Google Scholar
Tung-Sun, Chang. 1946. Zhishi yu wenchua[Knowledge and culture]. Shanghai: Commercial Press.Search in Google Scholar
Wang, Mei-Ling. 2002. Humanism and human rights: A comparison between the Occidental and Oriental traditions. In XingLu, WenshanJia & D.Ray Heisey (eds.), Chinese communication studies: Contexts and comparisons, 181–196. Westport, CT: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar
Weston, Timothy B.& Lionel M.Jensen (eds.). 2012. China in and beyond the headlines. Lanham, MD: Rowan & Littlefield.Search in Google Scholar
Wilden, Anthony.1980 [1972]. System and structure: Essays in communication and exchange, 2nd edn. London: Tavistock.Search in Google Scholar
Wilden, Anthony.1987. The rules are no game: The strategy of communication. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Search in Google Scholar
Wu, Z. M.1988. Wuxing de Wangluo [The invisible net]. Beijing: Guoji wenhua chubanshe.Search in Google Scholar
Xiaoshi, Li & JiaXuerui.2001. Interpersonal relationship and intercultural communication. Intercultural Communication Studies10(3). 27–32.Search in Google Scholar
Xinyan, Jiang.2002. Zhang Dongsun [Chang Tung-Sun] [张东荪]: Pluralist epistemology and Chinese philosophy. In Chung-YingCheng & NicholasBunnin (eds.), Contemporary Chinese philosophy, 57–81. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470753491.ch4Search in Google Scholar
Yang, Guobin.2009. The power of the Internet in China: Citizen activism online. New York: Columbia.Search in Google Scholar
Yu-Lan, Fung. 1949. The philosophy at the basis of traditional Chinese society. In F. S. C.Northrop (ed.), Ideological differences and world order: Studies in the philosophy and science of the world’s culture, 18–34. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Search in Google Scholar
©2015 by De Gruyter Mouton
