»situational frame«

Hall defines action chains as "a set sequence of events, reminiscent of a dance that is used as a means of reaching a common goal." (p.141) As far as I understood it action chains are basically what happens in different situations or is expected to happen: how does it come about to meet friends, which steps are to be taken to engage, to buying something or to writing a book....

While he takes the example of cultural-different approaches to dating someone, I was rather thinking of protocols in politics: which country is being visited first? Which at all? Which officials are honored with a meeting? .... And on a lower business level it is just the same...

Coming to Covert Culture and Action Chains Hall gives various examples. Being asked about how they are doing, Americans would answer in a very self-orientated way while the Pueblo Indians were much more concerned with the groups well-being. In the same way might German answers be disruptive to Americans. Germans like to whine and say directly what all is going bad while Americans often mean that question as an opener to an informal talk.

Disrupting action chains. also lead to problems when criticism is expressed in culturally different ways. While Japanese, according to Hall's observations, tend to not openly express emotions, e.g. anger about a certain behavior, Western people expects to be told when they reach their borders. (cp. p.161)

back to the table of content
jumping some questions right to chapter fourteen

While I needed the summaries to understand what Hall was actually talking about, I summarize my own little reflections on it here:

Hall bases most of his findings on his experiences with the Navajo and Hopi. This sometimes makes it difficult to transfer his theories on expatriates encountering a new cultural environment. Nevertheless he provoked quite some thoughts.

1. language.
I had always thought of language to reflect the life of the respective culture. I had thought of the Inuit for example whose language offers them ten words for white while we have only one. Thus: since they experience a lot of different "whites" they need more words to articulate this experience. Vice-versa: since white is not important in our all-day life, we did not invent any words for it. Hall says that man's explanation of nature tells much more about man than about nature. It shows how he sees the world.
At the same time language, according to Hall, is limiting: while it reveals how man perceives the world, it also limits him in his perception. This becomes obvious when you learn a new language and there are simply no equivalent words to express yourself in just the same way as you would in your mother tongue. English for example is regarded as action-orientated and expressing thoughts in another language can provoke completely different images.
I actually get a little stuck in this concept because experience does not equal language. Language is just a model to structure and share experiences and thoughts.
This leads to another of Hall's ideas: we mistake the model, the symbolization of something as the thing itself. This means that we take poor expression for little intelligence. Thus poor English skills is often interpreted as incompetence. This becomes especially awkward regarding the fact that in most cross-cultural encounters English is not the mother tongue for either party. Culturally-learned concepts are transferred into the foreign language which already does not make sense and are then further translated/interpretated by yet another understanding of language. On official meetings this means that it might make sense to rely on professional translators.
This relates to another of Hall's concept: situational frames. People always approve to be addressed in their situational dialect (e.g. ordering something in a restaurant asks for a special style of talking, acting, ... just like any other situation consists of an appropriate catalogue of language, actions, behaviors). Using the situational dialect tags the speaker as insider and earns him recognition. But using the dialect wrong ultimately declares him as outsider.

2. situational frames and action chains
Hall defines all human interactions as situation which are culturally bound by situational frames and follow patterned action chains. While action chains are not explicitly expressed, they define which behavior is culturally appropriate. Not following the expected action chains is ultimately disrupting.
This shows in all aspects of life. While the question "How are you?" seems to be universal, the answers can be very different. Germans, I generalize at this point, like to hold a monologue on how bad everything is. North-Americans on the other hand regard this question only as an opener and are always fine. North-Americans are regarded to be superficial while Germans are just big whiners. Good start for a talk.
On a higher business level all organizational aspects are defined by action chains: who takes part in a meeting? Where does the meeting take place? Who is seated where? Who gets to talk? Who gets involved in conflict resolution?
On a political level this is worked out in the diplomatic etiquette (sag ich mal so!): which country is visited first? Which at all? Which officials are honored with a meeting?...

Situational frames are the smallest unit which can be observed in culture. They are common settings and situations such as greeting, working, eating, bargaining, fighting, governing, making love, going to school, cooking, hanging out, ... (cp. p.129). They are made up of different components: linguistic, kinetic, temporal, social, material, .... Some of these components can be learned, especially what Hall calls the situational dialect. A situational dialect would be how to order or behave in a restaurant: "a few properly placed words will do" (p.132)

• to facilitate and simplify things and
• to identify the speaker as someone who knows how to work the system and thus as someone who belongs.

Being given the proper expressions, like a condensed code puts the respective individual in high-context.

Hall applies the concept of situational frames not only to cross-cultural encounters. Basically all situations in life are surrounded by a frame of appropriate language and following consequences as well. Hall gives the example of Rosenhan and his group. For the purpose of research they submitted themselves to mental hospitals saying that they heard voices. Once they entered the hospital all their actions were regarded to prove or go in accordance with their insanity.

back to the table of content
further to chapter ten and eleven