XITOY KUNDALIK MULOQOTIDA TAKTIL IMO-ISHORALAR: TIPOLOGIYASI, FUNKSIYALARI, MADANIY BELGILANGANLIK
##article.subject##:
taktil imo-ishoralar, haptika, noverbal muloqot, xitoy madaniyati, madaniyatlararo muloqot, proksemika, konfutsiy odobi##article.abstract##
Taktil muloqot noverbal aloqa kanallari orasida alohida o‘rin tutadi: hech qanday boshqa kod – mimika, imo-ishoralar yoki proksemika – bunday kuchli madaniy bosimni boshdan kechirmaydi va bir xil harakatning bunchalik keng qamrovli talqinlarini keltirib chiqarmaydi. Xitoy madaniyati an’anaviy ravishda «kontaktsiz» deb tasniflanadi, ammo bunday tavsif haqiqiy manzarani soddalashtiradi: xitoyliklarning kundalik hayotidagi taktil imo-ishoralar bostirilmagan, balki munosabatlar turlari o‘rtasida qayta taqsimlangan. Ushbu ishning maqsadi – kundalik xitoy muloqotida amal qiladigan taktil imo-ishoralarning asosiy turlarini tizimlashtirish, ularning funksiyalarini ajratib ko‘rsatish va madaniy belgilanganlik mexanizmlarini tavsiflashdan iborat. Akademik krossmadaniy empirik ma’lumotlar, etnografik kuzatuvlar va tarixiy-falsafiy materiallar asosida yumshoq qo‘l siqishdan tortib, ta’zim o‘rnini bosuvchi barmoqlar bilan stolni marom bilan taqillatishgacha bo‘lgan sakkizta barqaror taktil imo-ishora turi aniqlangan. Har bir tur uchun kontekst, ruxsat etilgan ishtirokchilar doirasi va kommunikativ funksiya belgilangan. Taktil aloqaning beshta funksiyasi: marosim-odob, maqom-belgilovchi, affektiv-do‘stona, performativ va ijtimoiy-integratsiyalovchi funksiyalar asosida tasnif taklif qilingan. Fazoviy va taktil xulq-atvor o‘rtasidagi nomuvofiqlik aniqlangan: xitoyliklarda qulay shaxslararo masofa boshqa bir qator «kontaktsiz» madaniyatlar vakillariga qaraganda torroq bo‘lib chiqqan, biroq taktil aloqalar chastotasi minimal darajada qolmoqda. Tizimli bo‘shliq – xitoy namunasida teginishning tana ruxsat etilganlik xaritasining miqdoriy jihatdan yo‘qligi – belgilangan va uni to‘ldirish yo‘nalishlari ko‘rsatilgan. Olingan natijalar xitoy tilida muloqot qiluvchi muhitda ishlash uchun mutaxassislar tayyorlashda talab qilinishi mumkin.
Библиографические ссылки
Бутовская М.Л. Язык тела: природа и культура. Москва: Научный мир, 2004.
Hall E.T. The Hidden Dimension. New York: Doubleday, 1966.
Heslin R., Alper T. Touch: A Bonding Gesture. Nonverbal Interaction. Eds. J.M. Weimann,
R. Harrison. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1983: 47–75.
Jones S.E., Yarbrough A.E. A Naturalistic Study of the Meanings of Touch. Communication Monographs. 1985; Vol. 52, No. 1: 19–56.
Sorokowska A. et al. Preferred Interpersonal Distances: A Global Comparison. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 2017; Vol. 48, No. 4: 577–592. DOI: 10.1177/0022022117698039.
Suvilehto J.T. et al. Cross-Cultural Similarity in Relationship-Specific Social Touching. Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 2019; Vol. 286, Art. 20190467. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2019.0467.
Sorokowska A. et al. Affective Interpersonal Touch in Close Relationships: A Cross-Cultural Perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2021; Vol. 47, No. 12: 1705–1721. DOI: 10.1177/0146167220988373.
Suvilehto J.T. et al. Topography of Social Touching Depends on Emotional Bonds Between Humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2015; Vol. 112, No. 45: 13811–13816. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1519231112.
Yang Chunmei. Why Chinese Have Been Slow to Embrace Hugging. Sixth Tone. 2017; Aug. 2. Available at: https://www.sixthtone.com/news/1000611
Zhou Y. Nonverbal Behaviors in Chinese Communication: A Pedagogical Approach Through Chinese Films: Master's thesis. Columbus: The Ohio State University, 2019. Available at: https://etd.ohiolink.edu/acprod/odb_etd/ws/send_file/send?accession=osu1563502215931556
Mu Qian, Meng Fan-mao. Comparative Research on Body Language Between Chinese and English. US-China Foreign Language. 2014; Vol. 12, No. 7: 564–569. Available at: https://www.davidpublisher.com/Public/uploads/Contribute/5518cb1359e2b.pdf
Руженцева Н.Б., Чжан Ифан. Специфика коммуникативного поведения китайцев: восприятие носителями российской лингвокультуры. Педагогическое образование в России. 2016; №11: 89–95. Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/spetsifika-kommunikativnogo-povedeniya-kitaytsev-vospriyatie-nositelyami-rossiyskoy-lingvokultury
Yu X., Xiong W., Lee Y.-C. An Investigation Into Interpersonal and Peripersonal Spaces of Chinese People for Different Directions and Genders. Frontiers in Psychology. 2020; Vol. 11, Art. 981. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00981.
McDaniel E., Andersen P.A. International Patterns of Interpersonal Tactile Communication: A Field Study. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. 1998; Vol. 22, No. 1: 59–75. DOI: 10.1023/A:1022952509743.
Wu M.S., Li B., Zhu L., Zhou C. Culture Change and Affectionate Communication in China and the United States: Evidence From Google Digitized Books 1960–2008. Frontiers in Psychology. 2019; Vol. 10, Art. 1110. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01110.
