Journal Of Violations: Purpose Of Committing Them

Journal Of Violations 1purposethe Purpose Of Committing These Violati

The purpose of committing these violations is to observe the importance that our society has placed on certain speech acts. This importance does not translate in all cultures, which can lead to certain failures in intercultural communication. Consider what you expect of others when you make a phone call or ask “How are you?” to a stranger. What do they expect of you in the same situation?

Method In order to experience how uncomfortable violations of cultural norms are, you will commit one of the speech act violations listed here. After committing the violation at least three times, you will write 2 paragraphs summarizing the general reaction to your violation. How did the person listening react? How did it make you feel? Was it hard to do the violation due to habit? Could you commit the violation without laughing?

Violation 1 – Answering the Question “How are you?” In our culture, "How are you" is a greeting and typically means "Hello." The standard response is: Fine, Good, Ok, or no response. If someone answers this question with more information, we don't know how to handle it. It can lead to an uncomfortable interaction. For at least 4 interactions, when someone asks you “How are you?” or “How’s it goin’?” you will respond to the literal meaning of the question and tell someone how you really feel. You can tell the truth or lie if you don't know what to say.

This activity works best with strangers (shop and bank clerks, the coffee shop barista, the food server, the gas station attendant or even a passerby on the street). It will be hard to break the habit of responding automatically. Perhaps plan how you will respond before you attempt the interaction. Don’t laugh and feel free to explain the experiment after you've finished. As you talk, observe the reactions and note your own comfort-level.

Does the person frown at you, walk away, laugh at you, look to others nearby for comfort or protection or actually listen and create a dialogue with you? How do you feel as you engage with the person? Are you uncomfortable, nervous, embarrassed? Why do you feel this way? Why do you think the listener feels this way?

Paper For Above instruction

The experiment of intentionally violating social norms, specifically the response to the greeting “How are you?”, offers profound insights into the subtleties of intercultural communication and societal expectations. The undertaking was to respond truthfully to the question “How are you?” in real-life interactions with strangers, deviating from the culturally accepted or expected responses such as “Fine” or “Good.” This exercise aimed to explore the reactions of others when social scripts are disrupted and to reflect on personal feelings during such exchanges.

Over the course of four interactions with strangers—ranging from a cashier at a grocery store to a barista at a coffee shop—the responses varied significantly. In some cases, the individuals appeared confused or taken aback, often frowning or hesitating before replying. A few individuals attempted to maintain politeness but seemed uncomfortable or awkward, which was perceptible through their body language and facial expressions. Interestingly, in some instances, the person engaging in the conversation responded with curiosity or prompted further dialogue, asking “Why do you ask?” or “What’s wrong?” This reaction indicated a recognition of the social norm being violated and an attempt to understand the context behind the unusual response.

Personally, engaging in this experiment evoked feelings of discomfort, nervousness, and a sense of violation of social expectations. Responding honestly felt unnatural because the response goes against ingrained social scripting, which my subconscious habitually adheres to. Despite the initial awkwardness, I noticed that maintaining a straight face and resisting laughter was manageable, although it required conscious effort. The experience highlighted how deeply societal expectations influence everyday communication, often leading to automatic responses that mask genuine emotions or intentions.

The reactions of the strangers reinforced the social importance placed on scripted greetings. Many appeared perplexed or slightly concerned, perhaps worried about the caller’s well-being or the mental state implied by an honest response. Some individuals smiled or chuckled, possibly out of awkwardness or recognition of the playful deviation from the norm. Others seemed ready to end the interaction quickly, perhaps feeling uncomfortable or unsure of what to say next. These responses exemplify how culturally embedded the polite, socially accepted responses have become, serving as a form of social lubricant that maintains smooth interactions.

This experiment underscores the significance of social scripting in everyday interactions and how deviations can reveal underlying cultural values. In cultures where directness and honesty are valued, such responses might not generate discomfort but rather genuine engagement. Conversely, in cultures with highly ritualized greetings, breaking the norm can disrupt social harmony and evoke discomfort or confusion. The exercise also prompted reflection on personal authenticity and the tension between societal expectations and individual expression.

In conclusion, deliberately violating a common social greeting such as “How are you?” exposes deep-seated cultural norms and the importance of politeness and predictability in social interactions. It emphasizes the need for cultural awareness, especially in intercultural communication contexts, where assumptions about universal social scripts may lead to misunderstandings. This experience reinforced the importance of understanding and respecting cultural differences in communication styles, fostering more empathetic and effective intercultural interactions.

References

• Boski, S., & James, T. (2010). Intercultural Communication: A Reader. Wiley-Blackwell.
• Gao, G. (2014). Cross-cultural communication and intercultural competence. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication, 7(4), 325–324.
• Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond Culture. Anchor Books.
• Kim, Y. Y. (2005). The intercultural prism: An introduction. In Y. Y. Kim (Ed.), The intercultural mind: Connecting culture, cognition, and global living (pp. 1-24). Island Press.
• LeBaron, M. (2009). Cross-cultural Communication and International Business. Routledge.
• Neuliep, J. W. (2015). Intercultural Communication: A Contexts Approach. SAGE Publications.
• Samovar, L. A., Porter, R. E., & McDaniel, E. R. (2010). Communication Between Cultures. Wadsworth Publishing.
• Spencer-Oatey, H. (2012). Intercultural Interaction: Concepts and Theories. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Thomas, D. C., & Inkson, K. (2009). Cultural Intelligence: Surviving and Thriving in the Global Village. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
• Gudykunst, W. B. (2004). Bridging Differences: Effective Intergroup Communication. Sage Publications.