JAPANESE COMMUNICATIVE CULTURE: WHAT SHOULD USSIAN STUDENTS BEAR IN MIND

The article contains an analysis of Japanese speech communication traditions, which are relevant for intercultural dialogue and study of the Japanese communicative culture by Russian people. The topic current importance is due to the growing ties between Russia and Japan in various fields of industry and culture.The paper aims to explore similar and different characteristics in the communicative cultures of two countries . The purpose of such an analysis is to use these data in educational programs in the Japanese language for Russian citizens. The research methodology combines literature review and interviews of Russian and Japanese specialists who engage in linguistic and cultural support to representatives of Japanese and Russian businesses, state, educational, and public structures that implement various forms of collaboration. Totally 56 such specialists from Japan and Russia took part in the survey. They identified a number of specific characteristics of the Japanese communicative traditions behavior, which should be taken into account by Russians studying the Japanese language and culture.The above specifics are explored within the most typical situations of interpersonal interaction.

Authors
Stepanova Valentina 1 , Karaulova Tatiana 1 , Kiyo Yoshida
Publisher
Российский университет дружбы народов
Language
English
Pages
238-246
Status
Published
Organizations
  • 1 Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia
  • 2 Balkanstroy, Japan
Keywords
Japanese communicative culture; Russian communicative culture; cross cultural communication
Date of creation
20.10.2018
Date of change
31.05.2022
Short link
https://repository.rudn.ru/en/records/article/record/13724/
Share

Other records

Chilingaryan Camo, Abdulkader Kais, Krause Kevin
Society and Languages in the Third Millennium. Communication. Education. Translation : Selected Papers, Abstracts, Program of Annual International Conference. Moscow, May 24–25, 2018. Российский университет дружбы народов. P. 46-52