ABSTRACT
Advances in sociolinguistic investigations of intercultural gatekeeping encounters have evolved from those which attribute miscommunication and the resulting failure of such encounters to cultural mismatches (e.g., Akinnaso & Ajirotutu, 1982; Gumperz, 1982, 1992), to a more complex recognition that there is indeed no one-to-one correspondence between cultures and communicative styles. More recently, scholars have suggested that shared discourse styles (Gee, 1996) and an establishment of rapport through co-membership (Erickson & Shultz, 1982) contribute to a matching of communicative styles. It is these matches, they claim, rather than the more simplistic view, which, similar to previous claims about cultural matches, can lead to smooth verbal interactions. Moreover, further consideration has led scholars such as Shea (1994) and Meeuwis and Sarangi (1994) to recognize the role that pretext—the greater context of an interaction, including structural parameters, power dynamics, dominance, and prejudice—plays in influencing the potential for a successful gatekeeping encounter. 1 A number of similar studies have also indicated that one main determiner in the outcome of a gatekeeping encounter is the establishment (or lack thereof) of a trusting relationship between the interlocutors involved in that gatekeeping encounter (Gumperz, 1992; Kerekes, 2003); that is, the relationship between the person being judged and the judging authority figure whose legitimate, institutionalized role enables her or him to make a decision which will effect the future of the person she or he judges. Although scholarly perspectives on gatekeeping encounters have thus widened to include factors not evident merely in the verbal interactions themselves, the focus of most sociolinguistic studies on this topic still lies primarily on the verbal actions which occur during the gatekeeping encounter, and/or nonverbal factors immediately and directly affecting those verbal actions. It is the aim of this chapter to consider, therefore, to what degree factors outside of the gatekeeping encounter itself—even those that do not overtly or directly come into play during the gatekeeping encounter—affect its outcome.
