The problem of discourse marginalization in intercultural meetings is usually attributed to linguistic or pragmatic shortcomings of marginalized second language English speakers who are seen as either “learners,” in contrast to first-language English speakers, as uncommunicative, or even as professionally incompetent. The influence of culturally oriented participation styles, distinct patterns of turn-taking behavior, has so far not been considered as a contributing factor. The present study examines intercultural meeting discourse and reveals how diverse participation styles can lead to marginalization. Pedagogical implications are discussed.
AritzJ.WalkerR. C. (2014). Leadership styles in multicultural groups: American and East Asians working together. International Journal of Business Communication, 51(1), 72–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488413516211
2.
BaraldiC. (2013). Forms of decision making: Gatekeeping and dialogic coordination in CISV organizational meetings. Journal of Business Communication, 50(4), 339–361. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943613497055
Bargiela-ChiappiniF.HarrisS. (1997). Managing language: The discourse of corporate meetings. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.44
5.
BaxterJ. (2014). Who wants to be the leader? The linguistic construction of emerging leadership in differently gendered teams. International Journal of Business Communication, 52(4), 427–451. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488414525460
6.
BjørgeA. K. (2012). Expressing disagreement in ELF business negotiations: Theory and practice. Applied Linguistics, 33(4), 406–427. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams015
7.
BrownP.LevinsonS. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.
CookG. (1989). Discourse. Oxford University Press.
10.
DaricsE.GattiM. C. (2019). Talking a team into being in online workplace collaborations: The discourse of virtual work. Discourse Studies, 21(3), 237–257. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445619829240
11.
DebrayC.Spencer-OateyH. (2019). “On the same page?” Marginalisation and positioning practices in intercultural teams. Journal of Pragmatics, 144, 15–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.03.002
12.
Du-BabcockB. (2006). An analysis of topic management and turn-taking behavior in the Hong Kong bilingual environment: The impact of culture and language use. Journal of Business Communication, 43, 21–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943605282373
13.
Du-BabcockB.TanakaH. (2016). Leadership construction in intra-Asian English as lingua franca decision-making meetings. International Journal of Business Communication, 54(1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488416675451
14.
EhrenreichS. (2010). English as a business lingua franca in a German multinational corporation: Meeting the challenge. Journal of Business Communication, 47(3), 408–431. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943610377303
15.
FaircloughN. (2015). Language and power (3rd ed.). Routledge.
16.
FairhurstG. (2008). Discursive leadership: A communication alternative to leadership psychology. Management Communication Quarterly, 24, 510–521. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318907313714
17.
FordC. E. (2008). Women speaking up: Getting and using turns in workplace meetings. Palgrave Macmillan.
18.
GarciaM. d. C. M.CanadoM. L. P. (2005). Language and power: Raising awareness of the role of language in multicultural teams. Language Intercultural Communication, 5(1), 86–104.
HymesD. H. (1972). On communicative competence. In PrideJ. B.HolmesJ. (Eds.), Sociolinguistics: Selected readings (pp. 269–293). Penguin.
24.
JeffersonG. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In LernerG. H. (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13–31). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.125.02jef
25.
KarlK. A.PeluchetteJ. V.AghakhaniN. (2022). Virtual work meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic: The good, bad, and ugly. Small Group Research, 53(3), 343–365. https://doi.org/10.1177/10464964211015286
26.
Kassis-HendersonJ.CohenL.McCullochR. (2018). Boundary crossing and reflexivity: Navigating the complexity of cultural and linguistic identity. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 81(3), 304–327. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329490618784893
27.
KatsumataE.GuoS. (2020). Intercultural learning through a telecollaboration project: Video conferences and presentations between Taiwanese and Japanese university students. The Aoyama Journal of International Politics, Economics and Communication, 105, 1–24. https://www.sipec.aoyama.ac.jp/uploads/03/21623.pdf
28.
KramschC. (1986). From language proficiency to interactional competence. Modern Language Journal, 70(4), 366–372.
29.
LloydA.PreierA. (1996). Business communication games. Oxford University Press.
MarkakiV.MondadaL. (2012). Embodied orientations towards co-participants in multinational meetings. Discourse Studies, 14(1), 31–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445611427210
32.
MlynářJ.González-MartínezE.LalanneD. (2018). Situated organization of video-mediated interaction: A review of ethnomethodological and conversation analytic studies. Interacting with Computers, 30(2), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwx019
33.
Morrison-SmithS.RuizJ. (2020). Challenges and barriers in virtual teams: A literature review. SN Applied Sciences, 2, 1096. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-2801-5
MurrellJ.StewartA. C.EngelB. T. (1993). Consensus versus devil’s advocacy: The influence of decision process and task structure on strategic decision making. Journal of Business Communication, 30(4), 399–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/002194369303000402
NeeleyT. (2017). The language of global success: How a common tongue transforms multinational organizations. Princeton University Press.
38.
NoorderhavenN. G.BendersJ. G. J. M.KeizerA. B. (2007). Comprehensiveness versus pragmatism: Consensus at the Japanese-Dutch interface. Journal of Management Studies, 44(8), 1349–1370. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2007.00712.x
39.
PaulusT.WarrenA.LesterJ. N. (2016). Applying conversation analysis methods to online talk: A literature review. Discourse, Context & Media, 12, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2016.04.001
40.
PlankenB. (2005). Managing rapport in lingua franca sales negotiations: A comparison of professional and aspiring negotiators. English for Specific Purposes, 24(4), 381–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2005.02.002
41.
PonciniG. (2007). Discursive strategies in multicultural business meetings. Peter Lang.
42.
PullinP. (2010). Small talk, rapport, and international communicative competence: Lessons to learn from BELF. Journal of Business Communication, 47(4), 455–476. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943610377307
43.
Rogerson-RevellP. (2007). Using English for international business: A European case study. English for Specific Purposes, 26(1), 103–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2005.12.004
44.
Rogerson-RevellP. (2008). Participation and performance in international business meetings. English for Specific Purposes, 27(3), 338–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2008.02.003
45.
SacksH. (1984). Notes on methodology. In AtkinsonJ. M.HeritageJ. (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 21–27). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511665868.005
46.
SacksH.SchegloffA.JeffersonG. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735. https://doi.org/10.2307/412243
47.
Santner-WolfartsbergerA. (2015). Parties, persons and one-at-a-time: Conversation analysis and ELF. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 4(2), 253–282. https://doi.org/10.1515/jelf-2015-0020
48.
ScollonR.ScollonS. W. (1995). Intercultural communication: A discourse approach. Blackwell.
Spencer-OateyH.XingJ. (2005). Managing talk and non-talk in intercultural interactions: Insights from two Chinese-British business meetings. Multilingua, 24(1-2), 55–74. https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.24.1-2.55
51.
StandaertW.MuylleS.BasuA. (2016). An empirical study of the effectiveness of telepresence as a business meeting mode. Information Technology & Management, 17(4), 323–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-015-0221-9
52.
StandaertW.MuylleS.BasuA. (2021). How shall we meet? Understanding the importance of meeting mode capabilities for different meeting objectives. Information & Management, 58(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2020.103393
53.
SwartzS.BarbosaB.CrawfordI. (2020). Building intercultural competence through virtual team collaboration across global classrooms. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 83(1), 57–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329490619878834
54.
TanakaH. (2006). Corporate language policy change: The trajectory of management discourse in Japan, the oppressed or the oppressor?Quaderns de filologia. Estudis Lingüístics, 11(20), 279–288.
55.
TenzerH.PudelkoM.HarzingA. W. (2014). The impact of language barriers on trust formation in multinational teams. Journal of International Business Studies, 45, 508–535. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2013.64
56.
VigierM.Spencer-OateyH. (2018). The interplay of rules, asymmetries in language fluency, and team dynamics in culturally diverse teams: Case study insights. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management, 25(1), 157–182. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCSM-08-2016-0157
57.
WalkerR. C.AritzJ. (2014). Leadership talk: A discourse approach to leader emergence. Business Expert Press.
58.
WalkerR. C.AritzJ. (2015). Women doing leadership: Leadership styles and organizational culture. International Journal of Business Communication, 52(4), 452–478. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488415598429
59.
WeiL.HuaZ.YueL. (2001). Interpersonal harmony and textual coherence in Chinese business interaction. Multilingua, 20(3), 285–310. https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.2001.004
60.
WilliamsonJ. (2022). Participation styles, turn-taking strategies, and marginalization in intercultural decision-making discourse. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 85(4), 445–467. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294906221114830
61.
YamadaH. (1990). Topic management and turn distribution in business meetings: American versus Japanese strategies. Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 10(3), 271–295. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1990.10.3.271
62.
YoungD. J. (1991). Creating a low-anxiety classroom environment: What does language anxiety research suggest?The Modern Language Journal, 75(4), 426–437. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1991.tb05378.x
