Introduction
Chinese have systematically practiced communication for over two thousand years, but from the Western perspective communication education and research in Chinese societies only began to burgeon in recent decades. In addition to summarizing the Western and traditional Chinese communication study and practice, this chapter identifies four problems faced by Chinese communication community and suggests solutions from the perspective of globalization.
Although the study of communication in the West can be traced back to Aristotle's Rhetoric, it must wait until the 20th century for communication study to become an independent discipline. According to Delia (1987), three major social trends in the 19th century fostered the systematic study of human communication at the beginning of the 20th century. First, the industrialization brought about the speed and quality of printing; second, the urbanization led to the cluster of population; and third, the widespread of education increased the quantity of media. These trends transformed the Western world, especially the United States, from an agricultural into an industrial or modern society. With the rapid development of communication industry, the study of communication as well began to burgeon. A century later, the collective efforts of scholars have advanced the study of communication into a highly inclusive and wellidentified discipline (Infante, Rancer, & Womack, 1996; Littlejohn, 1982, 1998; Zarefsky, 1995).
To succinctly summarize the discipline of communication study, ontologically, communication scholars, influenced by mechanism, actionalism, and constructivism, agree that communication is a holistic phenomenon, a social reality, and a developmental and orderly process. Epistemologically, in order to answer what are the most appropriate methods for studying communication, scholars in communication discipline approach the question from six epistemological perspectives, including rationalism, rational empiricism, mechanistic empiricism, logical positivism, constructivism, and general system theory. Metatheoretically, communication scholars continue to employ the laws, the rules, and the systems approaches to guide the theoretical explanations of communication behaviors. Finally, in terms of methodology, communication study has gradually moved from the functional and interpretive paradigms to integrate the scientific and humanity approaches by employing triangular methods and multivariate analyses (G. Chen, 1999a; Smith, 1988).
Based on these paradigmatic assumptions, the discipline of communication study has grown to a full blossoming tree that embraces branches from intrapersonal, interpersonal, small group, organizational, public, mass, to intercultural/international communication. This communication tree shows a strong integration of knowledge and principles of other disciplines such as anthropology, business, English, psychology, sociology, and philosophy (G. Chen, 1999b; Littlejohn, 1982). The feature of inclusiveness and diversity is clearly reflected in the topical areas of communication education. For example, according to a report from National Communication Association (Chesebro, 1989), communication majors in the United States may focus on any one of the following areas that are attached to branches of the communication tree: advertisement, argumentation, debate, communication education and development, forensics, interpretation and performance, journalism, language science, media, political communication, public relations, public speaking, technology and information science, etc.
The picture of communication study in the United States described above serves as a nice model for contrasting the development of the discipline in other areas of the world. This chapter aims to examine the development of communication study as a discipline in Chinese societies. Problems of Chinese communication study and solutions from the perspective of globalization are discussed.
Communication Study in Chinese Societies
As a daily phenomenon of human societies, the practice of communication as well shows its diversity and variations in Chinese societies. The concept of communication has been emerged in China more than two thousand years ago. Although the meaning of communication in the traditional China, which more emphasized verbal exchange or delivery, is not identical with the modern perception of the concept, it is found that the following terminologies were used to represent communication activities (Huang, 1997):
Ch uan– means "to turn, to revolve," referring to delivering or forwarding a message, teaching knowledge and skills, recording a person's life, and orally distributing information.
Bo– means "to sow seed," referring to spreading or disseminating messages.
Yang – means "to rise up and flutter (as a flag), to flourish, to manifest," referring to consciously making a message or person flourishing or manifesting in pubic.
Liu – means "to flow (like water)," referring to a process in which one's reputation or virtuous message is disseminated naturally and unintentionally.
Bu – means "the woven cloth," referring to the downward process of announcing or disseminating organized information or government order to the public.
Xuan – means "the emperor's room or the imperial decree or edict," referring to the dignified declaration or proclamation of emperor's order.
Tong – means "unobstructed," referring to the free flow of oral communication.
Di – means "to deliver or exchange," referring to the exchange or delivery of materials via, for example, the courier system.
These extended meanings relating to the concept of communication in the traditional China were found in both settings of formal and informal communication. The formal communication, usually between the emperor and government officials or common people, was conducted through nine common channels in the traditional Chinese society: zhao?, chi, cheng, zou, biao, yi,?? jian, shu, and xi?.
Both zhao and chi are imperial decree, mandate, or edict by which the emperor conveyed an order, proclamation, or benevolence to government officials or citizens. If the message targets an individual, it would be read openly to the person. If the message aims to reach the public, it would be posted prominently in the town.
Cheng is an appeal letter written by an official to the emperor. The purpose of cheng is to express a subordinate's appreciation for the reward, grant, or benevolence. Zou is an impeach report, issued by lowerrank government officials, to the emperor to report the disloyal of another official. Provocative language usually was used in zou to describe the disloyal behaviors of an official and how to impeach him or her. Biao is a formal statement which states one's situation in order to let the emperor understand, for example, why the subordinate cannot carry out the obligation or accept the order. The message in biao is usually highly emotionladen.
Yi is an argumentative statement used by government officials to express their disagreement or different opinions to the emperor when the jian (the oral admonition) is not available. Although using yi or jian to admonish the emperor often put the presenters in a risky situation for being executed, it was a common way for Chinese literate elite, as a government official, trying to persuade the emperor for a good deed. The language in yi or jian tends to be acute and sharpened. Shu is a petition letter, in which grievance or suggestion is expressed, used in the upward communication. Finally, xi is a summons to arms, which lists the crimes of a tyrant and is usually issued by an emperor or a challenger, used to seek the support or acquiescence of the population in a given region (Wright, 1979).
In addition to formal written channels of the Chinese communication, messages exchanged through oral communication have long been elaborated by Chinese, especially in the practice of informal communication among common people. For example, Han Fei, born in around 280 B.C., has pointed out 12 kinds of obstacle and 12 kinds of taboo in the process of oral communication (Han, 1978). In informal communication, in addition to channels, such as shuo (to say), tan (to talk), jiang (to speak), and lun (to comment), used for the daily oral interaction and channels, such as song (to intone), yin (to chant), yong (to hum), and chang (to sing), used for literary exchanges, shui fu (persuasion) was the most common practice which was used in both formal and informal communication (Wu, 1991). Chinese not only considered Shui fu as a skill, but also developed a systematic theory to explain it, thus one must go through a rigid learning and training process in order to fully acquire the ability of shui fu. Although the Confucian tradition did not put an emphasis on this line of oral communication, abundant writings and anecdotes on persuasion exist in the Chinese literary history (G. Chen, 1995; Chen & Starosta, 19978; Chen & Zhong, 2000). The tradition continues today and scholars have begun to systematically study the Chinese persuasive communication decades ago (Fong, 1975; Heisey, 2000; Lu, 1998; Oliver, 1971). However, the study of persuasive communication only represents a small portion of the field of human communication. The research on other areas of communication study is still scarce in Chinese societies.
Problems of Communication Study in Chinese Societies
Although communication education and research in Chinese societies have begun to burgeon in recent decades, a close observation of the field in China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan found that the emphasis of the field is fragmented and unbalanced (S. Chen, 2000, 2001; T. Chen, 1993; Liu, 1993; Sun, 1993; Wong & Zang, 1993). Despite the recent establishment of the first speech communication department at Hsi Hsin University in Taiwan and the department of communication studies at Hong Kong Baptist University, China is still behind the trend. Residing the largest Chinese population, China is slow in instituting a more systematic study in the field of communication. Sparse studies and courses on the subject of communication continue to be operated in especially the discipline of English or Linguistics. Comparing to the West, the development of communication discipline in Chinese societies shows a picture of fragmentation and incompleteness (G. Chen, 1999a). More specifically, the discipline of communication study in Chinese societies suffers from four common problems: incomplete landscape, skill orientation, lack of collaboration, and westernization.
Incomplete Landscape
G. Chen (1988) criticized that communication study in Taiwan, mainly embedded in the discipline of journalism, is only limited to the content of mass communication. In other words, the department of journalism is the field in which we see the subjects of communication study are taught, and the term "communication" only refers to the study of printed and telecommunication media. Other communication subjects either do not exist or are partially situated in other disciplines. For example, rhetoric is studied in the English department, focusing writing and speaking skills only; and small group and organizational behaviors in Sociology, with an emphasis on the group level of communication. As previously indicated, although the department of (speech) communication has been established in the 90s and more and more human communication courses are offered in traditional journalism or mass communication department, the emphasis on journalism and media continues to dominate in higher education in China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. The orientation results in an incomplete landscape for the discipline of communication study in Chinese societies.
Skill Orientation
With the influence of journalism which traditionally orients to the basic education and career training, theory building becomes a victim in the process of developing communication discipline. Except for adopting theories developed by Western communication scholars and borrowing a few other theories from social science disciplines for the purpose of instruction in the classroom, communication study and education in Chinese societies is clearly slanted to the acquisition of practical skills. Although the overemphasis on skill acquisition is an inherent problem of communication discipline everywhere and it is understandable that one of the goals of college education is to equip students with appropriate skills in order to develop a successful career, the problem becomes more severe if the practical orientation is extended to the education in graduate level. As a student, to focus their study on practical areas, such as public relation, advertising, broadcasting, oral communication, debate, persuasion, and building interpersonal relationship, is advantageous in searching for a job; while the disadvantage is that most communication graduates tend to receive a lower paid job due to this practical oriented education in the college. Another disadvantage is that the lack of theory courses often leads communication graduates to a less competitive situation, comparing to graduates from other disciplines, in which the ability of creativity and critical thinking is limited. Thus, in the short term, it may be easier for communication graduates to find a job, but in the long run, their weakness of less competitiveness will prevent them from achieving a full development in their career (G. Chen, 1998).
Lack of Collaboration
The incomplete landscape and skill orientation of communication study in Chinese societies also cause the problem of sharing existing resources among different colleges. This is clearly reflected in the curriculum design and in the process of developing a new program of communication study. For example, especially in Taiwan due to the rapid development of communication education in recent years, in order to attract students for the enrollment, not only the program development and curriculum design are rushing to the practical or skill direction of communication study, scholars' research, in order to compete for funding or grants, as well tends to orient to practical subjects and personal interests. Worse, the competition leads to the separateness between colleges and among scholars regarding collaboration and idea exchange. This lack of collaboration and idea exchange results in several negative effects, including program overlapping, resources wasting, and identity problem (G. Chen, 1999b).
Westernization
The trend of westernization mirrors the history of modern China. From the late 19th century science and democracy movements ceaselessly flush the Chinese land and impact every aspect of Chinese life. There is no exception for the impact of this trend on the educational system and academic scholarship, including new discipline such as communication study. In the process of westernization the traditional cultural identity begins to thin out and a new identity is not yet established. For example, in communication discipline most instructors in Chinese societies are trained in the West, curricula are designed following the Western model, textbooks adopted in the class are either written by Western scholars or translated from their work, and communication theories employed are lacking Chinese cultural components. To transplant Western communication models into Chinese societies without going through a critical evaluation process soon will face the challenge accompanied with the coming of new millennium. In other words, the trend of westernization in communication discipline will soon run into a difficult situation because of the demand of cultural identity inherent in the trend of globalization.
Prospect of Communication Study in Chinese Societies
The advent of a new era of telecommunications and human interconnection has introduced a globalizing trend in human society in which people are forced to redefine the meaning of identity, community, and citizenship, and communication educators and scholars everywhere are required to face this impact of globalization. According to G. Chen (1998) and Chen and Starosta (1996, 1998, 2000), four issues emerged from the trend of globalization will constantly challenge communication discipline, including how to build a new sense of community, how to balance the dialectical relationship between cultural identity and cultural diversity, how to deal with impact of global media, and how to foster citizenship in the global civic society.
A close examination on these potential impacts of globalization reveals that the center of problems faced by human beings in the future society actually surrounds the movement and countermovement between two dialectical forces, i.e., globalization versus localization, or between cultural diversity and cultural identity. In other words, it is assumed that the success of communication study in Chinese societies in the 21st century is dependent on the ability to balance the pulling and pushing forces between globalization and localization. All the problems of communication study Chinese societies face now, including incomplete landscape, skill orientation, lack of collaboration, and westernization, should be improved and resolved under the umbrella of this assumption.
Globalization versus Localization
Globalization refers to a process of reducing barriers between countries and encouraging a closer interaction in different aspects of human society. The process dissolves the limit of space and time through the widespread connectivity and integrates human societies into a global community. It provides human beings a challenge to understand the magnitude and implications of such a powerful and complicated transformation and to learn how to collaboratively take part in shaping a better future world. That is, instead of being an isolated island, people will live in a global network which is characterized by global connectivity in all levels of our life (Chen & Starosta, 2000).
However, according to Chuang (2000), the process of globalization also reflects a dilemma that represents a pulling and pushing between local diversity and global identity, or between heterogenized local cultures and a homogenized world culture. The dilemma was called "global paradox" dictating that the more globalized the world is, the more powerful its smallest players will be (Naisbitt, 1994). In other words, "globalization not only demands an integration of cultural diversity in the global community, but at the same time also reflects people's needs to develop a strong self or cultural identity(ies)" (Chen & Starosta, 2000, p. 5). How people learn to integrate, negotiate, and cocreate diverse cultural identities through communication in order to establish a new global civic community will be the key issue of human education in the future (Boulding, 1988; Collier & Thomas, 1988). In sum, globalization has broken through the boundaries of space, time, cultural assumptions, and the scope, structure, and function of human society. It demands new ways of thinking and organization and opens up new imperatives for investigating every aspect of human life, including the design and content of academic and scholarly activities. Communication discipline in Chinese societies cannot exempt itself from the impact of this demand.
Prospect of Chinese Communication Study
Applying the impact of globalization to communication study in Chinese societies, we see the problems of incomplete landscape, lack of collaboration, and westernization are typically caused by the inability to balance the dialectical relationship between globalization and localization. These problems lie at root of lacking understanding of the communication discipline in a global level or at root of protecting personal or group interests in the local market. In other words, in the process of program establishment and curriculum design communication educators and scholars in Chinese societies only accept the resources and adopt the policy that fit their own perspective. This orientation not only shows the narrowmindedness and blindness of communication study and education in Chinese societies, but also creates a barrier for developing a locally distinctive and a globally ingrained communication program. As to the problem of skill orientation, the neglect of knowledge and theories about the nature, structure, and impact of globalization and localization can only leads communication majors, without being equipped with a clear perspective on the demand of the new millennium, to live and work in a limited space of the society.
To foster the ability to balance the dialectical relationship between globalization and localization, Chinese societies must cultivate a global mindset that demands members in communication discipline to think globally and act locally. That is, communication study, including education and research, needs to be grounded in the soil of Chinese culture, while its voices are projected to the global context. To achieve this balance a clear goal must be made, i.e., connection and cooperation.
More specifically, in order to develop a global mindset Chinese communication community must first build a connection and cooperation among themselves and then endeavor to harmoniously balance contradictions inherent in the differences and competition between themselves and the world through the process of learning, negotiation, and strategic alliances. Taken together, the prospect of communication study in Chinese societies is founded on the fulfillment of the following four fundamental imperatives through the means of connection and cooperation.
First, Chinese communication community needs to expand its perspective for a global picture. This imperative demands Chinese communication community to equip its program, its curriculum design, and its members with a mental ability to scan the world in a broad perspective and always consciously expect new trends and opportunities so that personal, social, and organizational objectives can be achieved in a harmonious way (Gupta & Govindarajan, 1997; Rhinesmith, 1992, 1996). Through the process of observation, competition, cooperation, and exchange with other communication communities in different cultures, research, education, and policy of communication study in Chinese societies are moving like a running river in which elements of global perspective are its evolving forces. Although it is the communication study in Chinese societies, it as well reflects the global trend that is shared by communities all over the world.
In a nutshell, the internal drive for a broad perspective is the foundation for globalizing Chinese communication study. This demand of globalizing necessarily involves integration of the three dimensions of human ability: affective, cognitive, and behavioral. It begins with a feeling of relatedness to others in the global communication community and then continues with a motivation to broaden our understanding of the global phenomena in communication discipline. Then, it culminates in the construction of working models of relationships in the behavioral level which leads to the formation of new institutional patterns, including curriculum, program, and policy designs (Boulding, 1988). Moreover, this is a process of molding members in Chinese communication community into multicultural persons to share a common global space, resources, and opportunities in order to build interdependence with "strangers" who constitute the population of the global communication societies.
Second, Chinese communication community needs to be knowledgeable enough to balance contradictions of globalization. The main contradiction of globalizing process is caused by the pulling force of localization. Localization demands Chinese communication community to have its root grounded in the soil of Chinese culture. It is a process for Chinese communication study to define, redefine, invent, and reinvent its own cultural components in a historical sense that forms the identity and characteristics of the so called "Chinese communication study." This especially refers to the curriculum design and the building of communication theories from the Chinese cultural perspective. For instance, in addition to communication theories embedded in the Western cultural milieu, which components of Chinese culture can be extracted to form a set of explanations regarding the issues, such as the impact of global communication and transportation technology, multiculturalism, and postmodern fragmentation and inconsistency, faced by the global society? Thus, knowing cultural, social, and other similarities and differences not only ensures a sound action in localizing Chinese communication study, but also helps to transform members into multicultural persons and maintain a multicultural coexistence in order to develop a global civic culture (P. Adler, 1982; Boulding, 1988; Chen & Starosta, 1997, 1999). This is the level of "glocalization" depicted by Robertson (1995), which describes the dynamics of the local in the global and the global in the local.
Third, Chinese communication community needs to be flexible enough to flow with and manage changes on personal and professional levels due to the impact of globalization. In addition to cultivating a mindset for global perspective and knowledge for balancing the inherent contradictions between globalization and localization, the abilities for dealing with the impact of globalization need to be nourished. Among them, the ability of cognitive, affective, and behavioral flexibility to ride the wave of globalization on the personal and institutional levels is the cardinal one. In other words, the trend of globalization brings about a dynamic change by breaking through the boundaries of space, time, and human societies. How to educate members of Chinese communication community, including faculty, staff, and students, to be flexible enough in order to integrate different cultural identities and interests and to negotiate and cocreate cultural identity through communication becomes a critical issue Chinese communication study must face. Flexibility mirrors a high degree of cognitive complexity, acknowledgment and respect of cultural differences, and the ability to manage interaction that moves beyond the goals traditional communication study aimed to achieve. Without the complement of flexibility to flow with the wave and manage changes of globalization, practical communication will prove to be insufficient for members of Chinese communication community to survive in the globalizing society.
Finally, Chinese communication community needs to be sensitive and open enough to value diversity for continuous improvement. Through a perpetual learning and improving process to foster sensitivity and openness towards cultural diversity is another ability for members of Chinese communication community to be equipped with. Because globalization brings people of different cultures together in every aspect of communication and life, crosscultural sensitivity becomes a significant ability for citizens of Chinese communication community to communicate constructively among one another within their own community and among different communities. The ability not only helps members assert their own identity, but also confirm others' identities.
As a prerequisite component of being crosscultural sensitivity, openness allows members of Chinese communication community to seek continuous improvements in the constantly changing environment that characterizes the process of globalization. Openness as well provides a strong motivation for continuous learning to deal with cultural differences. It represents the decrease or absence of ethnocentrism and parochialism. N. Adler (1996, 1997) pointed out that both ethnocentric and parochial people are incapable of appreciating cultural diversity, because they are often blinded by their own practice and unable to detect the changes and complexity of globalization trends.
Through the willingness of cooperation, sensitivity and openness function as key abilities to the improvement of the problem of incomplete landscape faced by Chinese communication study. The cooperation and idea exchange among three recently founded Chinese communication associations, i.e., Chinese Communication Association, Association for Chinese Communication Studies, and Chinese Communication Society, is a good example. Although the three associations are situated in different geographical areas, their collaboration disintegrates the limit of time and space by drawing, on the one hand, a dynamic picture of demanding independence and selfrule for the study of Chinese communication and, and on the other hand, developing a sound and solid foundation of riding on the wave of globalization. It provides a great opportunity for scholars and practitioners in the global Chinese communication community to prepare and equip their members with necessary knowledge and abilities for a successful and productive participation in the upcoming global society.
To summarize, the future of Chinese communication study must aim to educate its members to become a competent citizen in both global and local levels, and the problems faced by Chinese communication study should as well be solved under this framework. By first developing a global mindset, members of Chinese communication community are enabled to envision the change of world trends and to engage in the process of regulating the change through the abilities of motivating themselves to respect diversity, expecting themselves to reconcile conflict, propelling themselves to regulate change, and orienting themselves to the globalizing process.
Based on this global mindset, Chinese communication community must equip its members with knowledge or cognitive awareness of its own traditional study or practice of human communication and those from other cultural perspectives in order to integrate them into the flux of globalization trend. This integrating knowledge in turn will function as the basis for Chinese communication community to help its members unfold their potentiality by fostering a set of communication abilities, including flexibility, sensitivity, and openness, to manage changes and balance contradictions caused by the dialectical relationship between globalization and localization, and to further become constructive communicators who are able to recognize and assert their own and others' multiple identities in the personal, departmental, community, national, regional, and global levels. Through this effort problems of incomplete landscape, skill orientation, lack of collaboration, and westernization faced by Chinese communication study and education will be solved with a hope to move into the new millennium.
Conclusion
Using the impact of globalization on human society to examine the problems and prospect of communication study and education in Chinese societies, this chapter starts with the discussion of communication practice in the West and then explicates the traditional Chinese communication study and practice. Through the comparison and observation of Chinese communication study and education in China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan, the author points out four problems faced by the Chinese communication community: incomplete landscape, skill orientation, lack of collaboration, and westernization. In order to cope with these problems, the author argues that they must be put under the framework of riding on the wave of globalization by leading Chinese communication study and education to accomplish four goals: (1) to establish a global perspective, (2) to cultivate cognitive awareness to balance contradictions caused by the dialectical relationship between globalization and localization, (3) to equip the ability of flexibility to flow with and manage changes due to the impact of globalization, and (4) to foster communication abilities of sensitivity and openness to value diversity for continuous improvement.
References
Ad ler, N. J. (1996). Organizational development in a multicultural environment. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 19, 349365.
Adler, N. J. (1997). International dimensions of organizational behaviors. Cincinnati, OH: SouthWestern College.
Adler, P. S. (1982). Beyond cultural identity: Reflections on cultural and multicultural man. In L. A. Samovar and R. E. porter (Eds.), Intercultural communication: A reader (pp. 389405). Belmont, CA: Wadworth.
Boulding, E. (1988). Building a global civic culture. New York: Teachers College.
Chen, G. M. (1995, November). A classification of Chinese persuasive communication strategies. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Speech Communication Association, San Antonio, Texas.
Chen, G. M. (1998). Intercultural communication via email debate. The Edge: The EJournal of Intercultural Relations, 1, 4. Retrieved November 15, 1998 from the World Wide Web: http://kumo.swcp.com/biz/ theedge/chen.htm.
Chen, G. M. (1999a). An overview of communication theory and research. Mass Communication Research, 58, 257268.
Chen, G. M. (1999b). The prospect of communication education in Chinese societies. Mass Communication Research, 59, 179181.
Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (1996). Intercultural communication competence: A synthesis. In B. R. Burleson (Ed.), Communication Yearbook, 19, 353384.
Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (1997). A review of the concept of intercultural sensitivity. Human Communication, 1, 116.
Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (19978). Chinese conflict management and resolution: Overview and implications. Intercultural Communication Studies, 7, 116.
Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (1998). Foundations of intercultural communication. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (1999). A review of the concept of intercultural awareness. Human Communication, 2, 2754.
Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (2000). Communication and global society: An introduction. In G. M. Chen and W. J. Starosta (Eds.), Communication and global society (pp. 117). New York: Peter Lang.
Chen, G. M., & Zhong, M. (2000). Dimensions of Chinese compliancegaining strategies. Human Communication, 3, 97109.
Chen, S. (2000). Reflections on the first course in communication studies. Mass Communication Research, 65, 118 .
Chen, S. (2001). An analysis of communication publications in Taiwan over the past 50 years. Mass Communication Research, 67, 124 .
Chen, T. (1993, June). An overview and prospect of communication research in Hong Kong. Paper presented at the conference of Chinese Communication Research and Education. Taipei: Taiwan.
Chesebro, J. (1989). Pathways to careers in communication. Annandale, VI: Speech Communication Association.
Chuang, R. (2000). Dialectics of globalization and localization. In G. M. Chen and W. J. Starosta (Eds.), Communication and global society (pp. 1933). New York: Peter Lang
Collier, M. J., & Thomas, M. (1988). Cultural identity: An interpretive perspective. In Y. Y. Kim and W. B. Gudykunst (Eds.), Theories in intercultural communication (pp. 99120). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Delia, J. G. (1987). Communication research: A history. In C. R. Berger and S. H. Chaffee (Eds.). Handbook of communication science (pp. 2098). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Fong, P. C. (1975). The persusion study of preChin's he zong and lian heng. Taipei: Shan Wu.
Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. (1997). Guest for global dominance: Building global presence ［on line］. Available: http//www.bmgt.umd.edu/cib/wplist.htm/
Han, F. (1978). Essays of Han Fei Tze. Taipei: Pu Tian.
Heisey, D. R. (Ed.) (1998). Chinese perspective in rhetoric and communication. New York: Ablex.
Heisey, D. R. (Ed.). (2000). Chinese perspectives in rhetoric and communication . Stamford, CT: Ablex.
Huang, J. K. (1997). Communication concepts in the ancient Chinese culture. In X. P. Sun (Ed.), Essays on Chinese communication (pp. 2132). Beijing: People.
Infante, D. A, Rancer, A. S. & Womack, E. F. (1996). Building communication theory. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.
Littlejohn, S. W. (1982). An overview of contributions to human communication theory from other disciplines. In F. E. X. Dance (Ed.), Human communication theory (pp. 243285). New York: Harper & Row.
Littlejohn, S. W. (1998). Theories of human communication. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Liu, H. K. (1993, June). An overview and prospect of communication research in Mainland China. Paper presented at the conference of Chinese Communication Research and Education. Taipei: Taiwan.
Lu, X. (1998). Rhetoric in ancient China, fifth to third century B.X.E.: A comparison with classical Greek rhetoric. Columbia, South Carolina: University of South Carolina Press.
Naisbitt, J. (1994). Global paradox. New York: Aven.
Oliver, R. (1971). Communication and culture in ancient India and China. New York: Syracuse University.
Rhinesmith, S. H. (1992).Global minsets for global managers.Training & Development, October, 6368
.Rhinesmith, S. H. (1996). A manager's guide to globalization. Irwin, IL: Chicago.
Robertson, R. (1995). Glocalization: Timespace and homogeneityheterogeneity. In M. Featherstone, S. Lash, and R. Robertson (Eds.), Global modernities (pp. 2544). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Smith, M. J. (1988). Contemporary communication research methods. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Sun, S. P. (1993, June). An overview and prospect of communication research in Mainland China. Paper presented at the conference of Chinese Communication Research and Education. Taipei: Taiwan.
Wong, C., & Zang, G. (1993, June). An overview and prospect of communication research in Taiwan. Paper presented at the conference of Chinese Communication Research and Education. Taipei: Taiwan.
Wright, A. F. (1979). Chinese civilization. In H. D. Lasswell, D. Lerner, and H. Speier (Eds.), Propaganda and communication in world history. Honolulu: The University of Hawaii.
Wu, D. C. (1991). Oral communication in the preChin period. Taipei: The Cultural Committee of Administration Yuan.
Zarefsky, D. (1995). On defining communication discipline. In J. T. Wood and R. B. Gregg (Eds.), Toward the twentyfirst century: The future of speech communication. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
书目分类 出版社分类