FOR UNIT III

I. This time you have to read and translate the following English text into the Russian language

NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION

Social, interaction requires numerous forms of nonverbal commutation—the exchange of information and meaning through facial expressions, gestures, and movements of the body. Nonverbal communication is sometimes referred to as “body language”, but this is misleading, because we characteristically use such nonverbal cues to eliminate or expand on what is said in words.

There are no gestures or bodily postures that have been shown to characterize all, or even most, cultures. In some societies, for instance, people nod when they mean “no”, the opposite of Anglo-American practice. Gestures Americans tend to use a great deal, such as pointing, seem not to exist among certain peoples. Similarly, a straightened forefinger placed in the center of the cheek and rotated is used in parts of Italy as a gesture of praise, but appears to be unknown elsewhere.

Hand gestures are a very important form of communication, especially when people don't speak the same language. Some gestures have the same meaning around the world. But other gestures have a special meaning in a culture that might be different from other cultures. Here are two examples.

This is called a 'thumbs up' sign. We think this sign came from gladiator fights in ancient Rome. The gladiator who won the fight could decide about the future of the gladiator who lost. We now know that the thumbs up sign meant 'kill him' so it didn't have a positive meaning at all. Nobody really knows where the thumbs up gesture came from but in most parts of the world it meant 'everything's OK', except if you are in Sardinia or Greece or the Middle East where it is very rude.

This gesture is known as an 'eye pull'. In France, when a person points at their eye like this, it means 'I don't believe you'. In Japan, it

72

is a rude gesture that children sometimes use at the same time as sticking out their tongue at each other. It can also mean “I’m bored”, in Italy and Spain it means 'Be careful'. It is used as a warning.

This is called the “V sign”. It was originally a “Victory” sign but nowadays, especially in the United States, it is a sign for peace. It started to become popular in the 1960s. There is a custom in Asia for people to do the V sign when they are in a photo. This is considered a friendly gesture. In Britain, a V sign with your palm facing you is very rude. Be careful when asking for two things not to make a rude gesture.

If you use this 'OK' sign in the United States and many parts of Europe, it means that you like something. But if you do it in France, it means 'zero' and gives the opposite message. In Brazil you must be especially careful because it is extremely rude. In Japan this gesture is a signal for money. If you use it there, people might think that you are asking for change in coins.

Like facial expressions, gestures and bodily posture are continually used to fill our utterances, as well as conveying meanings when nothing is actually said. All three can be used to joke, show irony, or show skepticism. The nonverbal impressions that we convey inadvertently often indicate that what we say is not quite what we really mean. Blushing is perhaps the most obvious example, but there are innumerable more subtle indicators that can be picked up by other people. Genuine facial expressions tend to evaporate after four or five seconds. A smile that lasts longer could indicate deceit. An expression of surprise that lasts too long may deliberately be used as a parody—to show that the individual is not in fact surprised after all.

73

FOR UNIT IV

I. This time you have to read and translate the following English text into the Russian language

FORGIVENESS AND RECONCILIATION

In the context of ethnopolitical conflict, forgiveness and reconciliation are difficult and challenging concepts. Enright define forgiveness as a ‘willingness to abandon one’s right to resentment, negative judgment, and indifferent behavior toward one who unjustly injured us, while fostering the undeserved qualities of compassion, generosity and even love toward him or her’. While this definition of forgiveness may be disputed, its key aspects are mostly accepted as a process that entails the ending of negative effect, attitudes and behavior and the beginning of positive effect, attitudes and behavior towards the offender. The relationship between forgiveness (as an intrapersonal process) and reconciliation (as an interpersonal process) is usually conceptualized as one following the other, with forgiveness constituting a necessary step to achieving reconciliation.

Most of the research on forgiveness focuses on interpersonal relationships, and only more recently has forgiveness been considered in the context of intergroup relations, intergroup conflict and reconciliation. In the context of ethnopolitical conflict, forgiveness by members of all social groups affected by the conflict is often regarded as a necessary prerequisite of reconciliation. Empirical research on intergroup forgiveness in the context of ethnopolitical conflict is rare, though a quasi-experimental study conducted among religious groups in the Lebanon investigating predictors of intergroup forgiveness suggests a case where all groups were able to accept some form of forgiveness. While the offender’s group membership impacted the least on the propensity to forgiveness, a strong effect on forgiveness was observed for severity of consequences and apology offered by the offender.

Since the early 1970s in Northern Ireland, forgiveness has been called for by individual victims of the Troubles, although it is generally perceived as a sensitive topic. On the one hand, victims may feel that forgiveness is expected from them and may question whether forgiveness entails either forgetting the sufferings of loved ones or the condoning of violent acts. On the other hand, perpetrators may feel that forgiveness offered to them by victims or society would require their acknowledgement

74

of fault, which they may not be prepared to see or admit. Furthermore, in the context of ethnopolitical conflict, it is often difficult to uphold the theoretical distinction between victim and perpetrator, as perpetrators are often able to identify personal experiences when they feel that they have been victimized. In addition, intergroup forgiveness and reconciliation in the context of ethnopolitical conflict could be considered an issue for society as a whole because personal injuries committed by the parties in conflict are often ‘understood as the grief not only of individuals but of whole communities’

Research by Hewstone indicated forgiveness to be associated with strength of group identification and attitudes to the in-group and out-group. Kulle and Hamber emphasize that a lack of forgiveness may threaten peace processes in the long run. As intergroup forgiveness and reconciliation describe affective, cognitive and behavioral components of conflict resolution, they also appear to describe what peace programs, such as crosscommunity contact schemes, ultimately aim for; that is, a societal movement from conflict to peace.

II. Now you have to discuss the following questions

1.How would you define the difference between forgiveness and reconciliation?

2.Do you agree that forgiveness is a necessary prerequisite of reconciliation?

3.Why is it difficult to uphold the theoretical distinction between victim and perpetrator in ethnopolitical conflicts?

4.What are two essential components on the societal movement from conflict to peace?

75