EDWARD T.

HALL
A. High Context Communication and Low Context
Communication
The Context
The context gives additional information, which is necessary to encode the whole situation /
background of a given information.

(retrieved 10.05.2014 at http://my.ilstu.edu/~jrbaldw/372/Values.htm)

High Context
An example for High Context Communication would be the question, where my (the editor’s) black
pepper is. A high context information would be: above my micro-wave. Those people, who know
me, my apartment and my kitchen can immediately find the pepper. Their context is to know who I
am, where I live, where my kitchen is and where micro-wave. Without the context (additional
information) there is not enough information to encrypt the proper meaning.
In high context communication an information can have different meanings according. It
needs additional information to encode (understand). Speaking in examples is also a high
context information.
 Less verbally explicit communication, less written/formal information
 More internalized understandings of what is communicated
 Multiple cross-cutting ties and intersections with others
 Long term relationships
  Strong boundaries- who is accepted as belonging vs who is considered an “outsider”
 Knowledge is situational, relational.
 Decisions and activities focus around personal face-to-face relationships, often around a
central person who has authority.
(quoted from Culture at Work http://www.culture-at-work.com/highlow.html)
High Context Communication is also common in many Western countries
“The table sheds light on just how difficult it can be for a foreigner to understand what the
British really mean when they’re speaking – especially for those take every word at face value.
Phrases that prove the trickiest to decipher include ‘you must come for dinner’, which foreigners
tend to take as a direct invitation, but is actually said out of politeness by many Britons and often
does not result in an invite. The table also reveals that when a person from Britain begins a sentence
“with the greatest respect …’, they actually mean ‘I think you are an idiot’.” (Alice Philipson in The
Telegraph 02 Sep 2013)
WHAT FOREIGNERS
WHAT THE BRITISH SAY WHAT THE BRITISH MEAN
UNDERSTAND
I disagree and do not want to
I hear what you say He accepts my point of view
discuss it further
With the greatest respect You are an idiot He is listening to me
That’s not bad That’s good That’s poor
That is a very brave proposal You are insane He thinks I have courage
Quite good A bit disappointing Quite good
Do it or be prepared to justify Think about the idea, but do what
I would suggest
yourself you like
The primary purpose of our
Oh, incidentally/ by the way That is not very important
discussion is
I was a bit disappointed that I am annoyed that It doesn’t really matter
Very interesting That is clearly nonsense They are impressed
I’ll bear it in mind I’ve forgotten it already They will probably do it
Why do they think it was their
I’m sure it’s my fault It’s your fault
fault?
It’s not an invitation, I’m just
You must come for dinner I will get an invitation soon
being polite
I almost agree I don’t agree at all He’s not far from agreement
I only have a few minor
Please rewrite completely He has found a few typos
comments
Could we consider some other
I don’t like your idea They have not yet decided
options
(retrieved 30.09.2013 at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/10280244/Translation-table-explaining-the-truth-behind-British-politeness-
becomes-internet-hit.html)

Low Context
A good manual is an example of low context communication / information. No other information is
necessary to understand it. In low context communication an information has only one single
meaning. No additional information is necessary to encode (understand) the meaning.
 Rule oriented, people play by external rules
 More knowledge is codified public, external, and accessible.
 Sequencing, separation–of time, of space, of activities, of relationships
 More interpersonal connections of shorter duration
 Knowledge is more often transferable
  Task-centered. Decisions and activities focus around what needs to be done, division of
responsibilities.
(received 10.05.2014 at http://www.culture-at-work.com/highlow.html)

High Context vs. Low Context

Take a look how members of high and low contextual cultures see themselves and their opposites:

High Context Communication Low Context Communication

 polite  open
 respectful  true
 integrates by similarities/harmony  integrates by authenticity
 not direct  direct

High Context claims Low Context Low Context claims High Context

 impolite  hiding information

 “cannot read between the lines”  not trustable
 naïve  arrogant
 no self discipline  too formal
 too fast  too slow

B. Monochrone / Polychrone Times

Polychrone time Monochrone time

 no fixed schedule  has a fixed schedule

 flexible  inflexible
 different tasks at one time  one task at a time
 short term orientated  long term orientated

Western cultures intend to have a monochrone time (mono=single / chrone=time). Time is used as a
single line, where all events are lined up. Asian and African cultures intend to have a polychrone
conception of time (poly=different / chrone=time). Events happen simultaneously in a polychrone
conception of time.
Dialogue – when two time systems collide
Mr. Paul Rosen is the international sales representative for his computer equipment company. His
most recent trip takes him to China,where he is scheduled to meet with his Chinese counterpart,
Patrick Chang.
Mr. Rosen and his training team arrived in Beijing three days ago for a scheduled appointment with
Mr. Chang. However, Mr. Chang has not yet met with Mr. Rosen or his team. Finally, a call to Mr.
Rosen’s hotel room indicates that Mr. Chang is prepared to meet with him. When Mr. Rosen arrives
at the location, he is asked to wait outside Mr. Chang’s office. As he waits, he notices many people
entering and leaving Mr. Chang’s office at a very quick pace. The hallways of this building are a
hustle and bustle of activity, with people shuffling in and out of many rooms. Finally, after several
hours, Mr. Rosen is called in to meet Mr. Chang.
Mr. Rosen: Ah, Mr. Chang, it’s so good to finally see you. Gosh, I’ve been waiting for days. Did
you forget our appointment?
Mr. Chang: Hello, Mr. Rosen. Please sit down. Everything is fine?
Mr. Rosen: Actually no … (Phone rings) … the problem is …
Mr. Chang: Excuse me … (Takes the phone call and speaks in Chinese. After several minutes he
concludes the phone conversation) Yes, now … everything is fine?
Mr. Rosen: Well, actually, I’ve got a small problem. You see, the computer equipment you
ordered…(A staff person enters the room and hands Mr. Chang something to sign.)
Mr. Chang: Oh, excuse me… (signs the document) Yes, now, everything is fine?
Mr. Rosen: As I was saying … all of the computer equipment you ordered is just sitting on a ship at
the dock. I need your help in getting it unloaded. I mean, it’s been there for two weeks!
Mr. Chang: I see … This is no problem.
Mr. Rosen: Well, if it sits in the heat much longer, it could be damaged. Could I get you to sign a
worksgroups to have it unloaded by Friday?
Mr. Chang: There is no need for that. The job will get done.
Mr. Rosen: Well, could we set up some kind of deadline? You see, I have a staff of people here
waiting to train your people on the equipment. I need to let them know when it will be ready. How
about this Friday? Could we do it then? My people are here now, and they’re waiting to begin
training.
Mr.Chang: Dont worry. We have been living quite well without those equipment for years. If
necessary, we could wait for several weeks. That’s not the problem.
There is little chance that Mr. Chang will sign any kind of workgroups for Mr. Rosen. Mr. Rosen is
also distressed by the constant interruptions. To Mr. Chang, Mr. Rosen is in too much of a hurry.
Mr. Rosen is monochronic, whereas Mr. Chang operates from a polychronic time orientation.
E. T. Hall – Proxemics /Personal Space in Different Cultures
Edward T. Hall (*16.04.1914) was the most popular founder of Intercultural Communication. He
put up three theories: High / Low Context, Monochrone / Polychrone Conception of Time and
Proxemics. Personal Space varies depending on the culture.
.

http://psychology.about.com/od/nonverbalcommunication/ss/understanding-body-language_8.htm
(…)
 Intimate distance – 6 to 18 inches (15-45cm)
This level of physical distance often indicates a closer relationship or greater comfort
between individuals. It often occurs during intimate contact such as hugging, whispering, or
touching.
 Personal distance – 1.5 to 4 feet (45-120cm)
Physical distance at this level usually occurs between people who are family members or
close friends. The closer the people can comfortably stand while interacting can be an
indicator of the intimacy of the relationship.
  Social distance – 4 to 12 feet (1,20m-3,50m)
This level of physical distance is often used with individuals who are acquaintances. With
someone you know fairly well, such as a co-worker you see several times a week, you might
feel more comfortable interacting at a closer distance. In cases where you do not know the
other person well, such as a postal delivery driver you only see once a month, a distance of
10 to 12 feet may feel more comfortable.
 Public distance – 12 to 25 feet (3,50-7,50m)
Physical distance at this level is often used in public speaking situations. Talking in front of
a class full of students or giving a presentation at work are good examples of such situations.
(…)
Understanding Body Language by Kendra Cherry at about.com) Read the full post online here or
download pdf here.
(received 03.01.2014 at http://psychology.about.com/od/nonverbalcommunication/ss/understanding-body-language_8.htm)

.
(…) According to Hall, perception of the levels of intimacy of space is culturally determined.
People from different cultures perceive space (and place) differently. Hall stressed that differing
cultural frameworks for defining and organizing space, which are internalized in all people at an
unconscious level, can lead to serious failures of communication and understanding in cross-
cultural settings. For instance, ‘Germans sense their own space as an extension of the ego. One sees
a clue to this feeling in the term “Lebensraum,” which is impossible to translate because it
summarizes so much’ (Hall p.134). Or when the English use the telephone, Hall observes ‘since it is
impossible to tell how preoccupied the other party will be they hesitate to use the phone; instead,
they write notes. To phone is to be “pushy” and rude. A letter or telegram may be slower, but it is
much less disrupting. Phones are for actual business and emergencies’ (…).
Proximity as a Prerequisite of Being Human from Future Case. Read the full article online here or
download pdf here.
(received 03.01.2014 at http://futurecase.wordpress.com/2012/06/28/proximity-as-a-prerequisite-of-being-human/)

.
Proxemics is the understanding of space in the holistic sense, as well as the cultural association we
place upon space. It is the study of how an environment, at the interactive and interpretive level, is
bestowed with meaning by people in daily life. The term “Proxemics” was coined in the 1950s by
Edward Hall to address the study of our conceptualization and use of space, as well as how various
differences impact our experiences within a given area. In other words, Proxemics is the study of
place and space from the cultural vantage point.

SOURCE: https://laofutze.wordpress.com/