内容摘要：纵使跨文化传播学领域有着如此坚实的理论基础，出版了主题范围广泛的诸多研究著作，在世界许多国家都有强大的研究项目及投资，在中国，“跨文化传播”始终没有被当做一个独立的研究领域看待，其学科地位也尚未获得学界认同（只是在比较文学中被当作一个子学科或研究视角）。通过清晰地框定文化的层级、种类、范式，以及跨文化传播中的多种过程、阻碍、措施和结果，本文强化了跨文化传播学“跨学科研究”的特质，这也是学界一直以来所忽视的。本文所提供的研究框架可以用于指导跨文化传播学领域今后的课程设置、推动重点更突出的研究并出版学术论著，以及建立跨文化研究相关领域的学科地位（如跨文化心理学、跨文化管理学、跨文化传播学、跨文化教育与培训、文学和语言学中的跨文化语言/文本研究，等等）。
关键词：文化;研究;Process;Model;传播;学科;论著;年刊;课程;多元化;上海外国语大学
作者简介：
Steve Kulich
Title：The (Re)Location of (Inter)Culture: Toward a Dynamic Paradigm Model for Intercultural Communication Theorizing, Development, & Process Analysis
Keynote Speaker：Steve Kulich, Executive Director, Shanghai International Studies University (SISU) Intercultural Institute (SII), China
Abstract：
Now with 55 years of history since its official 1970 beginning as a division of the International Communication Association (ICA), the field of intercultural communications abroad has regularly updated what it considers to be leading theories. Important volumes have documented this process, from the first International and Intercultural Communication Annual (Casmir, 1973, to Asante & Newmark, 1976, and various other essays or volumes up to Gudykunst, 1983, Kim & Gudykunst, 1988, Wiseman, 1995, Gudykunst, 2005).
However, even with such solid theoretical foundations, an extensive range of publications across a broad range of intercultural topics, strong academic programs and significant project funding in many countries worldwide, “intercultural communications” is still not fully recognized as distinct field or considered to have disciplinary status in China (except now as a sub-field/perspective of comparative literature). This may be due in part to many second-rate publications or curriculum design that exhibit muddled conceptions of “culture”, unclarity over what is meant by “inter” or “cross”, or fragmentary application of varied paradigms without understanding their relation to one another.
This paper/keynote seeks to remedy this situation by updating the “Cultural Construction Process Model” presented in the first CIC Annual (Kulich & Weng in Jiang, 2015) as an “Integrative Paradigm and Dynamic Process Model” of intercultural communication. This model seeks to relocate and redefine “culture” at various levels and in multiple expressions, consider the relationship of the contending paradigms of the field, and link them together in a process- and dynamic-growth orientation toward goals of personal or group plurality.
By more clearly framing the levels, types, paradigms of culture and the varied processes, barriers, interventions, and outcomes of intercultural communication, groundwork is laid that can help strengthen the disciplinary quality of what some have dismissed as an “interdisciplinary area of studies.” This should provide a framework for building future curriculum, more focused studies and publications, and eventual disciplinary status in the related intercultural studies areas (cross-cultural psychology, cross-cultural management, intercultural communication, intercultural education and training, intercultural language/textual studies in literature or linguistics, etc.)
