Reviewed by Anastassia Zabrodskaja, Tallinn University

This volume summarizes the discussion of the analyses of misunderstandings in intercultural discourse: the presumption of the editors is that intercultural communication does not consist of misunderstandings alone. Divided into two parts, Part 1 deals with the basic assumptions of the linguistic reconstruction of intercultural communication and clarifies the relationship between language and culture. Georges Lüdi investigates how general linguistic theory could be influenced by a functional grammar of code-switching. He also outlines the attitudes towards translinguistic markers (i.e. the forms on the surface of discourse), such as loans, interferences, and code-switching. Jochen Rehbein proposes that misunderstandings are a step within the sequence of communication and that communication cannot be accomplished as long as misunderstandings remain unsolved. Considering whether the analysis of intercultural communication has determined and enriched linguistic methodology and theory, Jan D. ten Thije concludes that the combination of generalizing, perspectivizing, and contrasting cultural standards can help foster intercultural understanding.

Part 2 focuses on interactive analyses of intercultural discourse. Through rhetorical conversation analysis, Grit Liebscher demonstrates how speakers manage perspectives by means of rhetorical devices. She concludes that interculturality is a matter of negotiation between the participants rather than a concept that can be defined a priori. Jennifer Hartog analyzes talk between a German and a Turk. Using the notion of misunderstanding, Hartog describes various kinds of communicative trouble and reveals that discourse between interlocutors of different cultures is not always intercultural.

Martina Rost-Roth examines intercultural communication in institutional settings. She demonstrates that interactions are marked by miscommunication and problems in understanding and argues that many communication problems are directly linked to differences in cultural conventions (e.g. temporal references). Dennis Day discusses expressions that refer to collectives of people—for example, terms that have the potential to refer to people as members of social groups (generally) and ethnic or cultural groups (specifically). According to Day, there is a distinction between the notion of an ethnic group and the (superordinate) notion of cultural group. In an analysis of data from two industrial work places in Sweden, Day demonstrates that interethnic communication can be identified from an interlocutor’s perspective.

Through an overview of British-German business communication, Claudia Bubel argues that, in spite of conflicting factors, small talk is accomplished in an orderly fashion. Lise Fontaine explores the use of we and its complex composition within group. Helga Kotthoff investigates hyper-rituals and lamentations in modern Georgia. Finally, moving beyond linguistic and cultural explanations of (mis)understandings and (mis)communication, Shi-xu explains intercultural communication as primarily a cultural-power practice.

In sum, these papers present new perspectives on linguistic analyses of intercultural communication.