Love expression in the United States and Germany

International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (2011) 307–319

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Intercultural Relations journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijintrel

Love expression in the United States and Germany Elisabeth Gareis ∗ , Richard Wilkins Baruch College/CUNY, United States

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Accepted 18 June 2010 Keywords: Love Love expression U.S./German culture comparison United States Germany Culture change German language English language influence

a b s t r a c t The study had the goal to compare love expression in the United States and Germany. The data offer insight into love expression as a cultural script and symbol of culture change, suggesting competing ways of using the locution “I love you” in the two cultures. Not only is verbal love expression less central in Germany, but for the German, the locution “I love you” is traditionally reserved for private disclosure of a formal love, governed by a communal imperative for feelings of meaningfulness. This is juxtaposed with an American desire for disclosing love in expressive ways and in a broad range of contexts, including nonromantic relationships. Globalization issues, such as the universal (expressive culture) versus the particular (reserved culture), are evoked, and the spreading in Germany of an expressive culture across a variety of settings suggested. Spurred by the use of telecommunication technology and often met with resistance, the tensions arising from these semantic and pragmatic changes in the use of love expression represent one of the interesting aspects of this paper. © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction In an exhibit on the history of love letters (Museum for Communication, Nuremberg, Germany, 14 February–26 August 2007), a banner spanning the length of a wall listed love expressions in a variety of languages. The German section featured 14 expressions, most of them in dialect form: Ick heb die leev (East Frisian), Ik hald fan die (Frisian), Ik heew de liif (Frisian), Ik hon fan dei (Frisian), Ick liebe dir (Berlin dialect), Ich liebe dich (standard German), Isch habb disch libb (Hessian), Du gfällsd mer fai (Franconian), Isch hann disch lieb (Saarland dialect), Ich hoan dich geer (Alsatian), Isch liebdsch (Saxon), I lieb die (Bavarian), I mog di ganz arg (Swabian), I stand total uf di (Vorarlberg dialect). Translated into English, the expressions range from “I hold you dear,” “I am fond of you,” “I like you” to “I love you.” The list is somewhat playful and mixes everyday expressions with more exclusive ways of declaring love. Specifically, it does not make apparent that people in the past declared the actual “Ich liebe dich” [I love you] only seldom and only in solemn, romantic contexts, such as marriage proposals. Other forms, like “Ich hab’ dich lieb” [I hold you dear] served as love declarations for everyday situations, including nonromantic relationships (e.g., parental, friendship). Recently, however, a wider spread of “Ich liebe dich” has been reported in Germany—one including nonromantic contexts and approaching the use of the English “I love you” in the United States. The usage change occurred gradually and remained largely under the radar for some time; but when McDonald’s launched its I’m loving it campaign in Germany in 2003 and

∗ Corresponding author at: Department of Communication Studies, B8-240, Baruch College/CUNY, 55 Lexington Ave., New York, NY 10591, United States. Tel.: +1 646 312 3731; fax: +1 914 524 7559. E-mail address: [email protected] (E. Gareis). 0147-1767/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2010.06.006

308

E. Gareis, R. Wilkins / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (2011) 307–319

translated its slogan literally into Ich liebe es, awareness of the issue reached critical mass and caused a national debate. Newspapers and magazines, such as the Tagesspiegel (Herbst, 2003) and Spiegel (Ankenbrand, 2003), commented critically, pointing out that love is an emotion too deep and transcending to be evoked for mundane objects or businesses, like McDonald’s. Comparing U.S. and German love expression, Hönicke (2003, para 4) asserts that an American is relatively quick in expressing love for profane things and therefore is able to give his/her heart to fast food. The German translation “Ich liebe es,” however, is just too strong to be squeezed into a styrofoam box together with a fatty burger. A few years and more inflationary incidents later, the topic continues to elicit impassioned comments on the degeneration and Americanization of love expression, as the following sardonic entry in a design and marketing blog (Schafrinna, 2007, para 1) illustrates. Dear lovers, You have done it. You degraded one of the most meaningful words of our language to a banal commonplace phrase. Whereas Pro7 [a cable TV network] recognizes the superficial nature of love by at least using the English language for its “We love to entertain you” [commercial], . . . the disproportionately stronger expression “Liebe” has made its way into more and more advertising slogans. A reader responds (Schafrinna, 2007, Comment #22): . . . the meaningful word “Liebe” is being rendered harmless, and we don’t notice how it creeps in. When it is as superficial as in English, it’s too late . . . What, by the way, do Americans say when they want to express that they truly love someone? 2. Literature review 2.1. Angloamericanisms in the German Language To provide a context for the Americanization of love expression in Germany, it helps to look at the larger influx of Angloamericanisms in the German language. Whether through migration, trade, war, or other encounters, foreign vocabulary—even grammatical features—finds its way into other languages. In the course of history, the German language experienced waves of Latin, Greek, French, and Italian influences in the 17th and 18th century, and more recently an influx of English. In the 19th and early 20th century, English language imports were manageable; since the latter part of the 20th century, however, new English words have been entering the language at such an unprecedented rate that discourse is at times becoming unintelligible to Germans with no or limited English proficiency (in particular, older people without English schooling, young people with less than a higher education, and immigrants from non-English speaking countries) (Zabel, 2001). The areas most effected by Angloamericanisms are technology, advertising, economy, leisure activities, fashion, and youth culture (Zifonun, 2002). For example, to integrate technological inventions and novelties, modern languages have an extensive need for new vocabulary. Some languages borrow words, others invent their own. In a study comparing European languages on their use of the native language for new computer terminology, for instance, Finnish showed a 93% native rate, French 86%, Polish 82%, Spanish 80%, Swedish 69%, Dutch 68%, Italian 65%, German 57%, and Danish 52% (Zimmer, 1997, p. 48). In other words, Finnish and French have the least amount of English computer jargon; German and Danish are the most angloamericanized. Everyday German conversations, TV reports, and newspaper articles are not only infused with words for new technology (e.g., attachment, laptop, mouse pad), but also with English words replacing synonymous or near-synonymous German words (e.g., bike, date, deadline, feeling, freelancer, lifestyle) (Junker, 2001; Sick, 2006). In trend-determined areas, such as advertising, fashion, and pop music, sometimes the majority of content words (i.e., meaning-carrying words, such as verbs, nouns, and adjectives) are in English. The following sentence from a fashion magazine is an example: “Der Shootingstar unter den Designern bekam standing Ovations für die super-coolen Outfits mit den trendigen Tops im Relax-Look” [the shooting star among the designers received standing ovations for the super cool outfits with the trendy relax-look tops] (quoted in Zimmer, 1997, p. 21). The reason for the global influence of English—its worldwide distribution during British colonialism and the importance of U.S. achievements in science, technology, entertainment, and economy, among others—have been discussed widely. There are additional factors, however, that can explain the extraordinary influx of English in Germany: (1) linguistically, English words are often shorter and less cumbersome than German words (e.g., Campus for Hochschulgelände) (Zifonun, 2002; Zimmer, 1997). (2) Politically, due to its unconditional capitulation at the end of WWII and subsequent institution of the Marshall Plan, Germany lost sovereignty and became dependent on the USA (Stephan, 2006). To this day, U.S. army bases dot the landscape in Germany, creating a presence that is lacking elsewhere. (3) Culturally, the USA became Leitkultur after WWII, and as such appears modern, dynamic, young, lively, and appealing (Zimmer, 1997). At the same time as English and U.S. culture rose in importance, Germany experienced an identity crisis. In particular, the desire to avoid anything reminiscent of nationalism affected attitudes toward language and culture in the German speech community (Stark, 2001). Germans often go out of their way to complain about the behaviors or attitudes of their compatriots and blame Germanness for the

E. Gareis, R. Wilkins / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (2011) 307–319

309

defects (Zimmer, 1997). The standard reaction to offensive behavior is to call it “typisch deutsch” [typically German]. (4) Psychologically, the status of English as the language of youth culture and the Internet constitutes a counterpoint to German provinciality. English is proof of cosmopolitan superiority (Zimmer, 1997). It is being sold as the language of winners, and German as the language of losers (Zifonun, 2002). For example, it is much cooler to ride one’s “bike” than one’s “Fahrrad” [the equivalent German term]; worlds lie between the two experiences. Linguistic-cultural inferiority feelings, coupled with an admiration for English, which is seen as more modern, have lead to an immune system weakness of the German language and culture (Stark, 2001). According to a representative study (n = 1820) by the Gesellschaft für deutsche Sprache (2008), 65% of Germans feel that the German language is degenerating. Reasons given include a declining interest in reading, the simplified language use in new communication technology (e.g., instant messages and e-mail), and the influence of other languages, especially English. Thus, 73% of the respondents assert that an increasing number of German words are lost because they are displaced by English. Although 18% believe that the German language has become more versatile and lively due to this influx—even that one can express oneself better with English than with German words and that English words are losing their foreignness (Fink, 2001)—39% disapprove of the increase. The concern within the populace is echoed by voices of linguistic scholars who warn that the German language is being changed to a degree that far exceeds what it experienced historically through Latin and French influences (Autorengruppe, 2001). In the past, the use of foreign words was limited to relatively isolated circles of speakers and limited in time (e.g., it was mostly nobility and military personnel who incorporated French in the 17th and 18th century). Today’s influx, however, is widespread and expected to continue due to globalization and the increasing importance of English as a world language (Zimmer, 1997). Scholars find three phenomena especially troubling: (1) German seems to have lost the capacity for renewal—instead of creating German words, one simply imports English ones (Zifonun, 2002). (2) A large number of English words remain unassimilated and thus influence the regulatory code of German (e.g., past tense formation, noun genders, and pronunciation are unclear). This forces speakers to switch from one grammatical code to another, leading to immense interferences between German and English (Zimmer, 1997). (3) Whereas English is the language of all domains in the U.K. and United States (e.g., family, friends, work, media, advertising, signage, music, sport and leisure), German appears to be losing domains in Germany. With domain removal being one of the reasons for linguistic extinction (genocide and migration being the other two), the damage seems serious enough that some fear the destruction of the language as a whole (Pogarell, 2001). 2.2. Love expression In the context of love expression, a wholesale switch from German to English does not seem to be indicated; instead, observers lament a loss of gradation, noting that even elementary verbs, such as to love and to hate have undergone a shift in meaning due to the influence of English. Whereas lieben [to love] and hassen [to hate] used to denote strong emotions, today they are often synonymous with to like and not to like, resulting in a loss of differentiation (Deutsche Sprachwelt, 2005; Zimmer, 1997). Although comments concerning changes in love expression are widespread, many appear to be based on anecdotal evidence. Research on the topic of love expression remains rare. Existing studies related to love generally focus either on defining love (as maternal, marital, filial, etc.) (e.g., Bierhoff, 1991; Lee, 1973; Sternberg, 1986), on historical changes in conceptions of love (e.g., Badinter, 1986; Hahn & Burkart, 1998), on gender differences in love styles (e.g., Hendrick & Hendrick, 1995; Sprecher & Metts, 1999), or on cross-cultural differences in practices related to friendship, dating, marriage, and parenting (e.g., Dion & Dion, 1996a; Dion & Dion, 1996b; Hatfield & Rapson, 1996; Levine, Sato, Hashimoto, & Verma, 1995; Murstein, Merighi, & Vyse, 1991; Simmons, von Kolke, & Shimizu, 1986). There are few studies focusing on love expression per se. Seki, Matsumoto, and Imahori (2002), for example, investigated intimacy in Japan versus the United States. Surprisingly, the high-context Japanese in the study valued direct verbalizations (such as “I love you” or “I like you”) within relationships with mother, father, and same-sex best friend more than do Americans. The authors speculate that this unexpected finding may be due to the relatively young age of the student respondents and their adherence to nonconforming youth culture. In addition, the study focused only on preferred expression mode and not on frequency. The authors speculate that, had frequency been included, the ranking would likely have been higher for U.S. Americans. Kline, Horton, and Zhang (2008) compared love expression between U.S. Americans and East Asians (Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans). They found that Americans use more physical contact (e.g., hugs) to communicate love than do East Asians. Likewise, Americans use more direct verbalizations (“I love you,” “I like you,” and “I miss you”). Specifically, 45% of Americans used direct love expression in friendships versus 37.3% of East Asians, and 50% of Americans used direct love expression in marriage versus 28.9% East Asians. Wilkins and Gareis (2006) focused on the declaration “I love you” among students in the United States. Respondents included domestic and international students of various backgrounds (including Europe, Eastern Europe, Asia, and Latin America). The study found that international students, irrespective of background, tended to declare love in their native languages only with romantic partners, unlike the Americans who also used direct verbalizations with family and friends. While nonnative speakers were hesitant to use the native-language version of “I love you” with family and friends, however, many used the locution freely in English—even with the same family members and friends.

310

E. Gareis, R. Wilkins / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (2011) 307–319

2.3. Research questions If emotion expression is shaped in cultural environments, the locution “I love you” can be used as an access point into communication systems and lead to a greater understanding of social roles, relationships, and culturally preferred ways of speaking (Kline et al., 2008; Wilkins & Gareis, 2006). These ways of speaking, in turn, reflect cultural values, constituting what Wierzbicka (1998) calls a system of cultural scripts. Changes in the ways of speaking are therefore presumed to indicate changes in underlying cultural values. The present study has the goal to compare love expression in the United States and Germany. The thematic clusters emerging from the literature review include the issues of frequency of verbal love declarations, verbal versus nonverbal love expression, use of verbal love locutions in nonromantic contexts, and culture change related to the declaration of love. Hymes (1974) suggested to analyze speech events according to setting, participants, sequence, aims of speaking, tone, media, norms of speaking, and genre. In the spirit of Hymes’ rubric and based on the themes emerging from the literature review, we formulated the following research questions: 1. How frequently is the locution “I love you” used in different relationship types in the two cultures? 2. What is the preferred mode (verbal or nonverbal) for declarations of love, and what are the contextual parameters for verbal and nonverbal declarations of love? 3. How does present use of the locution “I love you” differ from past use? 4. What settings for love expression are prevalent in the two cultures? 5. How extensive is foreign language use in love expression? 3. Methodology Our methods for locating informants was snowballing; i.e., using one contact to recruit another. Our core initial contacts were college students in the United States and Germany. In the United States, the college of origin was Baruch College (part of the City University of New York); in Germany, students at the Fachhochschule Coburg and the Universität Osnabrück served as initial contacts. To obtain responses from a broad age range, we encouraged the initial contacts to recruit additional respondents from a variety of ages. A total of 213 informants participated in the study, including 102 U.S. Americans and 111 German nationals. The sample consists of 147 females and 66 males. While we received responses representing all age groups, the 21–25 age group represents 35% of the sample; the 16–20, 41–45, and the 70+ age groups represents on average 10% each; and the rest represents less than 10% each. With respect to marital status, 40% of the sample are single, 33% are married, 19% are in a partnership, 5% are widowed, and 3% are divorced. Most have completed college (41%), 20% have completed some college or received an associate degree, 15% have had some graduate school education, 13% have received either a master’s or a PhD, and 8% are high school graduates. There are no significant differences in how the demographics of gender, age, marital status, or level of education are dispersed based on whether or not the respondent is a U.S. or a German citizen. The study was conducted in form of a survey. With the research questions combining quantitative and qualitative aspects, we chose a mixed-method survey design, supplementing a systematic examination of demographic and contextual parameters of love declarations with free-response data from open-ended questions. In the introduction to the survey, the respondents were informed that “we are interested in the verbal expression ‘I love you’ and its nonverbal equivalents (i.e., gestures or behaviors that express love) in different settings and relationships (e.g., romance, family, friendship, etc.).” The survey contained the following questions. 1. Frequency: “How often is the declaration ‘I love you’ made in the following relationships: spouses, romantic lovers, parents and their children, children and their parents, siblings, grandparents and their grandchildren, grandchildren and their grandparents, cousins, friends, and acquaintances?” (Respondents had the choice between frequently, occasionally, rarely, and never.) 2. Verbal versus Nonverbal Love Declaration: (a) “Which is more common: verbal or nonverbal declarations of love?” (b) “What reason(s) might explain the frequency with which verbal or nonverbal declarations of love occur?” (c) “What can and should accompany a verbal declaration of love?” (d) “Provide three examples of nonverbal declarations of love.” 3. Past versus Present: (a) “Is the declaration ‘I love you’ used more often now than in decades past?” (b) “If more or less often, what, in your opinion, explains this change?” 4. Setting: (a) “List three places where love is typically declared?” (b) “Please describe an incident in which you declared love or love was declared to you?” (c) “Have there been incidents in which the issue of love declaration created tension with a person either of your own or a different cultural background (i.e., when expectations were not met, beliefs were compromised, or confusion ensued)?” 5. Foreign Language Use: “Do you use a foreign language for verbal love declaration? If so, how often, what language(s), and why?” The questionnaire was translated into German for the German respondents by one of authors, who is bilingual in English and German. The author also translated the responses into English at the end of the study. We posted the survey online, but

E. Gareis, R. Wilkins / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (2011) 307–319

311

participants also had the option to complete the survey on paper—a method chosen by the majority of respondents in the 65-plus age range. We evaluated the quantitative data by first constructing frequency distributions to display the counts for each response and the relative percentage of responses for each value. We used cross-tabulations to examine relationships between two or more variables and explored if an independent variable such as gender, nationality, age, marital status, and education had any effect on dependent variables. We used four general types of strategies for the analysis of the qualitative data: (a) the critical incident technique (Flanagan, 1954) where we asked participants for memorable experiences involving love declarations; (b) account analysis (Harré & Secord, 1973) where we asked respondents to account for how they perceived a critical incident or an important episode in regards to emotion expression; (c) cultural-themes analysis (Spradley, 1980) where we systematically searched for general semantic relationships among domains; and (d) constant comparative method (Glaser & Strauss, 1967), where we compared free-response data to group answers to determine categories and formulate theories.

4. Results 4.1. Relationships and frequency of the locution “I love you” The respondents were asked how frequently the locution “I love you” occurred in their cultures in a variety of romantic and nonromantic relationships. Across both cultures, the locution was used most frequently by lovers, followed by parents to children, grandparents to grandchildren, spouses, children to parents, grandchildren to grandparents, siblings, friends, cousins, and acquaintances (see Table 1). Chi-square tests were used to determine any differences across gender, nationality, age, marital status, and education with frequency of love declarations in relationships. While no significant differences were found across gender, marital status, age, and levels of education there were significant differences across the category of nationality (see Table 2). American nationals were more likely to indicate a frequent (48%) use of declarations of love whereas German nationals were more likely to indicate that they would never (52.3%) use such declarations. Closer examination of the data revealed that this difference translates into a pattern, where—for most relationships—the majority of German respondents chose a frequency that was one step below that of American respondents. If the American reported a frequent use of the declaration “I love you,” the German reported an occasional use; if the American reported an occasional use the German reported a rare use, and so on. For example, where the majority of Americans reported a frequent (55.9%) use of love declarations for spouses, German nationals were more likely to indicate an occasional (54.1%) use. Where American nationals were more likely to indicate a rare (46.1%) use of love declarations for siblings, most Germans chose never (56.8%). Frequency indicators for both cultures were the same only for the relational types of lovers (frequently) and acquaintances (never).

Table 1 How often is the declaration “I love you” made in these relationships? Relationship

N

Mode

Frequently

Occasionally

Rarely

Never

Romantic lovers Parents and their children Grandparents and their grandchildren Spouses Children and their parents Grandchildren and their grandparents Siblings Friends Cousins Acquaintances

213 213 213 213 213 213 213 213 213 213

Frequently Frequently Frequently Occasionally Occasionally Occasionally Rarely Never Never Never

79.8% 39.0% 34.7% 39.9% 22.5% 20.7% 8.5% 11.7% 5.2% 4.7%

14.6% 35.2% 29.1% 44.6% 37.6% 32.4% 16.9% 24.9% 8.9% 2.8%

2.8% 16.0% 16.0% 12.2% 25.8% 25.8% 38.0% 31.5% 27.7% 15.5%

2.8% 9.9% 20.2% 3.3% 14.1% 21.1% 36.6% 31.9% 58.2% 77.0%

Table 2 How often is the declaration “I love you” made across relational types by nationality? Nationality

Frequently (n = 60)

Occasionally (n = 54)

Rarely (n = 34)

Never (n = 65)

Total

American national (n = 102) Row 48.0% Column 81.7%

34.3% 64.8%

10.8% 32.4%

6.9% 10.8%

100%

German national (n = 111) Row 9.9% Column 18.3%

17.1% 35.2%

20.7% 67.6%

52.3% 89.2%

100%

Total

100%

Note. 2 (3, N = 213) 72.808, p = .000.

100%

100%

100%

312

E. Gareis, R. Wilkins / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (2011) 307–319

Fig. 1. Frequency of nonverbal versus verbal love declarations by nationality.

4.2. Verbal versus nonverbal love expression When asked which was more common, verbal or nonverbal declarations of love, 63.5% of respondents indicated that nonverbal declarations of love are more common, 20.4% indicated that verbal and nonverbal declarations are about equal, and 16.1% indicated that verbal declarations of love were more common. Taking nationality into account, chi square analyses (3, N = 213, 31.132, p = .000) revealed significant differences as to the degree of crystallization over whether verbal or nonverbal declarations of love are more common. German respondents indicated overwhelmingly (80.7%) that nonverbal declarations of love are more common, whereas the Americans were less crystallized on this matter (45.1%). The following stacked bar chart represents these differences in terms of crystallization (see Fig. 1). The differences were most significant across females and the age groups 16–20 and 21–25. When asked what reason(s) might explain the frequency with which verbal or nonverbal declarations of love occur, informants asserting that verbal declarations are more common mentioned in free-response mode that verbal declarations are quicker, easier, clearer, and can be made long-distance (via telecommunications). Informants asserting that nonverbal declarations are more common, provided the following reasons. (1) People are embarrassed or too shy to express themselves verbally; words require courage. (2) People have nonverbal familial traditions. (3) Verbal love declarations connote commitment, and lovers avoid them when they are not sure how they feel. (4) Actions speak louder than words and are purer, more sincere expressions of love; verbal declarations can be cliché and inflationary. (5) Nonverbal declarations are more private. While the frequency with which reasons 1–3 were given was relatively equal between U.S. and German informants, responses 4–5 were provided mostly by Germans. Informants who thought that verbal and nonverbal declarations are equally common, highlighted that both verbal and nonverbal declarations occur naturally in close relationships and that a combination makes people most comfortable and secure. 4.2.1. What should accompany a verbal declaration of love Again, in free-response mode, respondents were asked what should accompany a verbal love declaration. They listed the following accompaniments: hugs, kisses, other physical signs of affection (e.g., arm on shoulder, holding hands), a smile, eye contact, a profession of commitment, and abstract notions (e.g., sincerity, trust, loyalty). Noticeable was that U.S. informants overwhelmingly stressed physical complements of love declarations; 56.1% mentioned hugs and 40.2% kisses (compared to 19.6% and 15.2% Germans, respectively). On the other hand, German informants cited abstract notions and eye contact more often; 32.1% mentioned abstract notions and 20.5% eye contact (compared to 7.5% and 7.5% of the Americans, respectively). 4.2.2. Examples of nonverbal declarations of love Also in free-response mode, respondents were asked to give examples of stand-alone nonverbal love declarations. They listed the following: hugs, kisses, other physical signs of affections, eye contact, thoughtful and selfless actions (including support during illness and other crises), gifts, writing a letter or card, remembering special days (e.g., birthdays), spending quality time, and lovemaking. Most often mentioned by both U.S. and German informants were thoughtful and selfless actions. The following quotes are a cross-section of the responses. • Putting the other person’s needs ahead of your own—serving your child or friend something you’d like for yourself. (U.S.) • When you’re not having a good day and your partner tries to make you laugh or smile. (U.S.)

E. Gareis, R. Wilkins / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (2011) 307–319

313

• To get up when the baby cries, and enjoy doing it. (German) • A neighbor takes care of an elderly neighbor, who is unable to go shopping by herself anymore and who doesn’t have anybody else to talk to. (German) 4.3. Use of “I love you”: past versus present Respondents were asked whether the locution “I love you” is used more in the present than the past. There were close to significant differences across the two nationalities (p = .07), with both groups suggesting that the declaration is used more often now than in the past, but the Americans being more emphatic in that claim. Significant differences occurred across American women and German women (p = .039) again reaffirming the female American perspective that the declaration “I love you” is becoming a fashionable thing to say and hear. Altogether, 61% of Americans and 46% of Germans indicated that the locution “I love you” is used more often than in the past; 14% of Americans and 19% of Germans indicated that it is used less often. The rest believed the frequency to be unchanged.

4.3.1. Explanation for increased use Respondents who indicated an increased use in the locution “I love you” were asked what, in their opinion, explains this change. Five core reasons emerged: 1. People are more open with their feelings. (U.S. N = 34; German N = 32) Informants cited a conscious (often generational) decision or changing social norms as the cause of this greater openness. The following quotes are representative. • When [my parents] came to the States and then met and started families, they, like many immigrant families, wanted to do things differently than their parents. including child raising and affection and communication support. • In the past people were more inhibited in their public displays of affections, even [using] phrases such as “showing a child too much love will spoil them.” I believe these ideas were beginning to change with WWII, and then of course the 60s definitely finished them off. (U.S.) • More frequent verbal declarations are the zeitgeist. (German) • Pop psychology has taught us to use this phrase often, especially for men to use it. (U.S.) • People are more evolved in their thinking—declarations of love are not seen as a weakness or vulnerability. (U.S.) 2. Verbal love expression has experienced inflation. (U.S. N = 12; German N = 16) Some informants held the increasing relational spread and category width of the locution “I love you” responsible, frequently deploring a concomitant loss of meaning. Quotes: • Love is a word that is thrown around now between good friends to show admiration or fondness, where in the past it was only exchanged between lovers or family. (U.S.) • Until the 50s, a love declaration was binding. It was a kind of marriage proposal. One contemplated for a long time, whether one wanted to declare one’s love verbally. There had to be clarity of emotions; one was responsible. Only lovers and spouses said “I love you” to each other. Today, “I love you” is said with less care. It may be nice and come from the heart, but it isn’t binding anymore, not as serious. (German) • Nowadays, people just say it to satisfy his/her spouse, without really meaning it. (U.S.) • Especially young people use it as if it was “please” and “thank you.” [It has become] a fashionable, empty phrase without meaning. (German) • [There is] a general pressure due to film, TV, and periodicals, which makes the words omnipresent and overly inflates them. (German) 3. People realize that life is short. (U.S. N = 11; German N = 0) Only U.S. respondents attributed the more frequent use of the expression to the realization that life is short. For some, it was a matter of personal life experience: “As you get older, you realize that death has no age limit and you never know when you or anyone else is going to go so you need to let people know while you can.” Others saw a connection with the rise of terrorism: “We are living in a more threatening world due to terrorism.” 4. Relationships have become less pragmatic. (U.S. N = 0; German N = 5) Some Germans, reaching into the not-so-recent past, attributed the greater frequency to the change from arranged to love marriages. • In the past (17th, 18th century), marriages were more frequently arranged for pragmatic and political reasons—today, one is together with someone because one loves him/her. • In the past, people were married because their parents wanted it. Today, almost everyone can choose their partner, which, of course, is based on true feelings and results in the need to tell the loved ones how important they are. 5. More communication channels are available. (U.S. N = 2; German N = 2) • We communicate with one another more often on more channels and thus there is more frequent short-term leavetaking. (U.S.) • SMS, e-mail, and chatting make verbal declarations easier because they are more anonymous. (German)

314

E. Gareis, R. Wilkins / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (2011) 307–319

4.3.2. Explanation for decreased use While the majority of U.S. and German informants perceived a greater frequency of verbal declarations, some felt the expression “I love you” was used less often now than in the past. When asked what explains this decrease, most of the respondents cited that the world has become “more impersonal” and people are “more self-centered and less romantic,” possibly due to the rapid pace of life.

4.4. Love declaration settings We asked respondents for comments on places where love is declared, examples of incidents, and tension related to incidents.

4.4.1. Places When asked where love is typically declared, respondents listed the following places most often: anywhere at home, in the bedroom, at the front door, at special events (e.g., weddings, birthdays, graduation), on the phone, in a restaurant, at a transportation hub (e.g., airport, bus station, train station), in the park or in nature. Americans most commonly mentioned home, bedroom, special events, and phone; Germans mentioned most often home, bedroom, transportation hub, and park or nature. We may speculate that verbal love expressions are considered more private in Germany and are therefore not as common in public settings, such as special events. With family and friends in Germany often living within the same home region than family and friends in the United States, it may also be that phone conversations take on different roles. Likewise, the more frequent occurrence of love declaration at transportation hubs in Germany may be a function of the greater availability of public transportation there. Finally, taking walks together in nature has a long tradition and seems to be a favorite pastime in Germany. The prevalence of verbal love declarations in parks and nature is likely a reflection of this habit and the serenity that accompanies many of these walks.

4.4.2. Incidents Informants described a large variety of incidents, evoking a palette of motives and effects ranking from appreciative to comforting, from festive to nostalgic, and from romantic to ethereal. Quotes: • Every time when I leave my parents on the weekend to go back to college, we hug. This gives us strength and a good feeling. (German) • I realized recently that most of my Mother’s summer clothes were stored in a place where she physically couldn’t search for them. So I made an effort to find them and hang them where she could get to them. It truly made me feel that I was showing love to her by doing something like this. (U.S.) • When my son was little, four or five he decided it was too much trouble to be interrupted to say I love you so we had a secret code, I would hold out my hand and he would squeeze it three times or he would hold out his hand and I would squeeze it three times. Well he is 27 and when we were riding in the car a few months ago, he was driving and he held out his hand to be squeezed three times. I was touched he remembered. (U.S.) • My wife and I were at an orchestra concert and were taken with the performance. The declaration occurred during the intermission. (U.S.) • A friend is always with me as I dine after the death of my partner. (U.S.) • When my dad was in the hospital I made sure to tell him that I loved him for fear of regret later on. (U.S.) • The first kiss with an ex-girlfriend, under sparkling night sky on a swing. (German) • On Valentine’s Day, I came home after work and my husband surprised me with a candle-lit bath and chocolate-covered strawberries. He tidied up my things and pampered me; I didn’t have to move a finger. (German) • After 30 years of marriage with 5 children and father-in-law in the house, . . . my husband gave me a small bouquet of roses in the middle of the week. (German) • My boyfriend made be laugh during breakfast with some nonsense; then it overcame me . . . and I told him how much he means to me. (German) • Me and my romantic lover were watching television, and she just blurted it out of nowhere. (U.S.) • I had been dating a girl for over 6 months and was never shy about saying it. Additional I know that most females have a preconception that males fear the word love like kryptonite to superman. I decided to capitalize on that by declaring it to her after a special evening dining. (U.S.) • A funny occurrence: Our 7-year-old neighbor boy, took the guitar and said, “I’ll sing you a song: ‘Mrs. G., I love you; Mr. G, I like you.” When we asked him why he made a difference, he said because Mr. G. always cheats during card games. (German) • Declarations of love occurred when my eyes met his and something in the air prompted it; nothing tangible, riding on an emotional high. (U.S.)

E. Gareis, R. Wilkins / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (2011) 307–319

315

4.4.3. Tension related to love declarations Participants were asked whether there had been incidents in which the issue of love declaration created tension with a person either of their own or a different cultural background. 27.1% of Americans and 38.4% of Germans reported having experienced tension; 32.7% of Americans and 20.1% of Germans answered in the negative. The rest were not sure. Respondents indicated that tensions were mostly due to personal, cultural, and gender difference or due to issues of mutuality. Quotes: • Since I am quite used to declaring feelings to people I care about, I have spouted out “I love you” to acquaintances who were not comfortable hearing it! (U.S.) • At first I felt that he over-displayed his love for me, this is typical of Spanish and Arab cultures because they are very expressive people. It was actually a turn-off . . . because I am Asian and I am usually more reserved about my feelings. (U.S.) • When I was in a relationship with a Brazilian, there where mutual misunderstandings related to the type, frequency, and intensity of signs of affection. She thought, why does he not declare his love more often? (German) • My husband is from Swabia (Southwest Germany)—you have to pull verbal declarations out of him. Franconians (Southeast Germany) have more wit and charm. (German) • In my youth, older people found it unseemly when young people kissed in public. (German) • I had a friend from Africa (Kenya). I hugged and kissed him on the cheek (as a goodbye) and he thought this meant I was interested in him romantically. (U.S.) • In the south among southerners, use of . . . terms of endearment may or may not be a show of love, but merely a force of habit. Taken from a non-southerner, they are seen as verbal expressions of affection, if not love. (U.S.) • One time I was going out with someone whom I liked, I told him that “I love you” and he was taken aback. My experience and what I see/read about relationships is that the woman cannot say “I love you” first, otherwise it puts a damper on the relationship. (German) • I think the only times that there are any tensions is if the person says they love me but if I don’t feel the same towards them. (U.S.) • Yes, especially when you say “I love you” first and the person does not say it back, is hesitant or thinks you rushed by saying it too early. (U.S.) • I think the issue of love declaration generates tension no matter the cultural differences. Everybody is usually nervous about it. (U.S.) 4.5. Foreign language use Respondents were asked whether they use foreign languages for verbal love declaration. No differences were found in the two groups as a whole and their use of a foreign language. German and American men did differ significantly however (p = .047) in their report on the use a foreign language for verbal love declaration. 65.5% of American males reported that they would never use a foreign language for verbal love declaration. 10.3% reported a rare use, 20.7% an occasional use and 3.4% reported that they would always use a foreign language for verbal love declaration. More German males than expected (29.4%) report a rare use of a foreign language and fewer than expected (35.3%) report that they would never use a foreign language for verbal love declaration. As to languages, U.S. respondents used Spanish most frequently, followed by French; German respondents used English most frequently, also followed by French. U.S. respondents cited family background and “because it’s fun” as most prominent reasons for foreign-language use; German respondents mostly cited the partner’s or friend’s background and “because it sounds nice or sexy.” 5. Discussion When relationships are ranked according to overall use of the declaration “I love you,” U.S. and German patterns are identical: Lovers in both cultures use the locution most, followed by spouses, parents/children, grandparents/grandchildren, children/parents, grandchildren/grandparents, friends, siblings, cousins, and finally acquaintances. Americans and Germans also agreed that the locution “I love you” is used frequently among lovers and close to never among acquaintances. For the rest of the relationships, however, Germans ranked verbal love declarations consistently one frequency step lower than Americans; that is, if American spouses used verbal love declarations frequently, German spouses used them only occasionally, and so on. The results match the finding by Wilkins and Gareis (2006) that verbal love declarations—especially in the context of family and friendship—are used more freely in the United States than in a variety of other cultures. If we treat emotions as cultural artifacts whose meanings are symbolically constructed, historically transmitted, and expressed by individuals in instances of situated communication (Carbaugh, 1996; Fitch, 1998; Philipsen, 1992), then a study of emotion expression can yield anthropological knowledge about the social structure and cultural values of a people (Lutz, 1988). Considering known U.S. and German cultural dimensions, the greater frequency of the locution “I love you” in most U.S. relationships seems perplexing at first. German communication style is typically characterized as more lowcontext, direct, and explicit than U.S. communication style (Hall & Hall, 1990; House, 1996), leading one to expect a greater preference for verbal declarations among Germans.

316

E. Gareis, R. Wilkins / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (2011) 307–319

An explanation may be found in comparative semantics. As Osgood, May, and Miron (1975, p. 17): “[Translation] equivalence is a goal to be sought but never really achieved [since the] semantic spheres of translation-equivalent terms overlap to varying degrees but probably never coincide in perfection.” Translatability further declines as one moves away from basic, concrete terms, such as dog or sun, into abstract domains, such as emotions (Donovan & Rundle, 1997). In other words, “translation can only occur when points of separate speech communities’ lexical maps overlap on both the dimensions of referential denotation as well as affective connotation” (Donovan & Rundle, 1997, p. 228). One of the focal points of this study was the locution “I love you” and its German version “Ich liebe dich.” Translation is difficult since “I love you,” however, has a broader category width than “Ich liebe dich.” As one informant put it: I love you in the US culture is used for so many situations, and different relationships. While other cultures may have different words for different kinds of love, the English language has only one. Thus, it is amusing to see an athlete come out of a game with the broadcaster announcing, “You gotta love ‘im.” In German, by contrast, a variety of other verbal declarations are common, including “mögen, gerne haben, lieb haben, lieben” [like, be fond of, hold dearly, love]. Results of this study indicate that the actual “Ich liebe dich” continues to be largely used in romantic relationships, specifically committed ones. An informant writes: “My Turkish boyfriend wanted to get married, but I didn’t want to. Maybe he thought that my “Ich hab’ dich lieb” [I hold you dearly] meant the same as “Ich liebe dich” [I love you].” Another respondent adds: In my German family, I never heard “Ich liebe dich!” It was always “Ich hab’ dich lieb.” This is not just a different way of saying the same thing. “Ich liebe dich” was reserved for romantic love while “Ich hab’ dich lieb” was for close family members. When I was dating, I could easily say “Ich hab’ dich lieb!” but the “Ich liebe dich” was reserved for my future husband since the level of commitment expressed in this phrase is so much higher. A respondent from the German South asserts that the locution “Ich liebe dich” is avoided altogether when one speaks dialect, as many Germans do: “The high German ‘Ich liebe dich’ is perceived as stilted and theatrical and, in South Germany, replaced by other expressions, [such as] ‘I mog di’ [I like you].” The same sentiment is expressed by a number of young respondents who claim that “Ich liebe dich” sounds old-fashioned and too solemn. One respondent writes: “The language use has changed; ‘Ich liebe dich’ seems square and conservative to me . . . young people want to be cool.” The finding that Germans use the locution “I love you” less frequently than Americans across most relationships, therefore, should be seen in light of differing category widths and connotations. A second explanation lies in the discovery that, although Germans seem to avail themselves of a number of alternative verbal love declarations, their overall use of verbal declarations is lower than that of Americans. While both Americans and Germans indicate that nonverbal declarations are more common than verbal ones, Germans did so much more emphatically, citing that nonverbal declarations are more dependably sincere and more private. Sincerity also emerged as a theme when respondents were asked what should accompany a verbal love declaration. Whereas Americans stressed physical accompaniments, such as hugs and kisses, Germans focused on abstract notions, such as sincerity and loyalty. Lewin (1997) was first to notice that public and private realm in U.S. and German culture differ. Whereas Americans, for example, are more likely to self-disclose even to strangers and in public contexts, Germans tend to have a greater sense of privacy. In a similar vein, Hall and Hall (1990) describe Germans (as well as other Europeans) as leaning toward deep relationships which take a long time to solidify. In contrast, Americans are inclined toward easy familiarity. House (1996) adds that Germans prefer ad hoc formulations, together with requests for firm and immediate commitment, whereas in U.S. culture, verbal routines are more common and not necessarily binding. To provide an example, House quotes an informant (1996, p. 354). In the States, it’s typical just to trade phone numbers, and if you don’t call, you don’t call, and it’s no big deal. But here [in Germany] I feel if someone is giving me her phone number and if I don’t call, she gets seriously offended. The underlying value that Germans seem to place on commitment and predictability correlates with a relatively low tolerance for uncertainty in German culture (Hofstede, 2001). As a result of these differences, Germans often appear reserved and serious to Americans, and Americans enthusiastic and easy-going (albeit also superficial) to Germans (Hall & Hall, 1990). While one has to be careful with national images—they may not hold up to rigorous examination (Terracciano et al., 2005) and are prone to change over time—the emerging pattern matches some of our findings: Americans use the locution “I love you” freely and with ease in many contexts, including in those that are somewhat routine, like at the end of phone conversations. Germans, on the other hand, tend to view the locution as a symbol of deep love to be shared in private and only when fully committed . . . at which point, however, the relationship may be so solid that love manifests itself more through actions than words and makes verbal expression redundant. But usage is changing. Both Americans and Germans reported that the locution “I love you” is used more now than in the past. The majority of respondents view this increase as a positive result of greater emotional openness and freedom. Although more Americans than Germans reported the increase (especially among women), the change is not causing a public debate in the United States—perhaps because it grows organically out of traditional American informality. Germany, on the other hand, appears to be experiencing a more drastic value change, as signified by a noticeable transformation in the ways of speaking.

E. Gareis, R. Wilkins / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (2011) 307–319

317

For example, the dramatic spread of the use of the “familiar” form of address (du, as opposed to Sie), and the decline in the use of titles . . . point to significant changes in interpersonal relations, in the direction of more egalitarian informality (Wierzbicka, 1998, p. 245). The use of the locution “I love you” in nonromantic settings seems to be another function of this culture change. German public discourse has two terms that provide insight into the phenomenon: Spaßgesellschaft [fun society] and neue Herzlichkeit [new affection or cordiality]. In Germany, traditional reservation and earnestness seem to be making room for greater playfulness and a fading of gravity and public/private demarcations. This new paradigm, however, is not embraced without debate and reservations. Arguably having its early roots in the 60s, Adorno (1962, p. 44) critiques it as follows: Instead of taking off their hat, they greet each other with the hello of familiar indifference; instead of sending each other letters, they send interoffice communications devoid of salutations or signatures. These are random symptoms of a disease of contact. Alienation reveals itself among humans in that distance falls away. Echoing Adorno, one of our respondents expresses a mixture of approval and wariness in the face of similar changes concerning verbal love declarations: If the feelings are genuine, then it’s o.k. to use verbal declarations more often. But the words “Ich liebe dich” should mean something. The word love should mean that one is dependable and loyal. It shouldn’t be a commonplace word that everyone says to everyone else, without true meaning . . . Today, everybody has his/her own definition and the side effect is that love declarations are uttered lightly and love starts to lose meaning . . . Nowadays, everything is too short, has no duration, no commitment. It is therefore important to evaluate what a person does. Doing is more important than talking. While most informants approve of the increase in verbal love declarations (at least to some degree), there are also some respondents in both cultures who deplore the change as inflationary. Informants regret that nowadays, the locution “I love you” is used “casually,” just to “satisfy [one’s] spouse,” “to do [people] a favor,” or “when love [isn’t] that great . . . as a means to cement brittle relationships.” Again, in Germany the issue is raising alarm in public discourse, especially from conservative guardians of the German language, who blame English for the inflation: Some imports enrich, some impoverish the language. Even elementary verbs, such as lieben [to love] and hassen [to hate] have undergone a shift in meaning due to the influence of English; they used to indicate strong emotions, but today mean only like and not like, with the result that the German language is losing the ability to differentiate (Zimmer, 1997, p. 37). A historical analysis of love declarations in English lies beyond the reach of this study. If love declarations in 19th century, however, were tantamount to marriage proposals (South Shore Weddings, 2009) and, as one of our informants says, in the more recent past verbal love declarations were extended to lovers and family but not beyond, we can speculate that the broad spread of the locution “I love you” in present-day U.S. culture is indeed a forerunner of the development in Germany and other cultures (Wilkins & Gareis, 2006). The United States may be some years ahead, but with the help of technology, others seem to be catching up. While face-toface verbal expressions may still not be the preferred mode of expressing one’s love or affection in Germany, one informant reports that “the abbreviation ILD [Ich liebe dich] is becoming standard when sending an instant message. Likewise Roesler (2003) found that the abbreviations hdl (“hab dich lieb”) [hold you dear], with the variations hdal (“hab dich auch lieb”) [hold you dear, too] und hdgdl (“hab dich ganz doll lieb”) [hold you very dear] are popular electronic leave-taking formula. It appears that love declarations are becoming routine in personal telecommunication and are thereby losing in depth and clarity. A U.S. informant observes: Nowadays love doesn’t mean as much as it used to since I can playfully say it while talking online or whatever. It just doesn’t have the seem meaning verbally since I can say “I love my fraternity brothers” but I don’t mean “I love them” in the same way. When respondents mentioned tensions in connection with verbal love declarations, the causes were doubt about mutuality of feelings, differing expectations (concerning frequency, gender appropriateness, or location), and misinterpretations based on the semantic ambivalence. This ambivalence, spurred by the ever-broader category width of the locution “I love you,” is leading to attempts of differentiating between substantial and insubstantial declarations. Specifically, the derivative “luv ya,” with its missing personal pronoun and reduced vowel pronunciation (perhaps the oral equivalent for online leavetaking abbreviations), signifies laid-back informality and contrasts with the more weighty full articulation. As a respondent ponders, however, even then confusion persists: “Many young people end a phone conversation by saying ‘luv ya.’ It’s hard for the listener to discern whether it is genuine or just a cliché.” Applying dialectical theory (Baxter & Montgomery, 1996) to the study results, a number of contradictory forces seem to be at play: formality versus informality, singularity versus routine, verbal versus nonverbal expression, a desire to declare love versus a fear of inflation, and concerning Germans, a welcoming of U.S. cultural imports versus a fear of cultural and linguistic loss. An additional source of tension in Germany is the perception of ethnic uniqueness versus a sense of postmodern anomie. While some German respondents asserted that a differentiation between the less expressive and low-contact North Germans

318

E. Gareis, R. Wilkins / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (2011) 307–319

and the more expressive and higher-contact South Germans should be made when considering love expression (see also Hall & Hall, 1990), another muses: I believe that “the” German culture doesn’t exist anymore, especially with respect to love relationships. Too great are the differences between the age groups, the educational backgrounds, and between the many people, who are influenced by different cultures during their vacations, foreign sojourns, or foreign partners. This perception echos Landis and O’Shea’s (2000) finding that, “in even a presumably homogeneous group, there will exist consistent subgroups of subjects who will see the world in fundamentally distinct patterns from each other” (p. 769). In a study of the experience of passionate love, they determined that the experience differed more intraculturally between rural and urban subgroups than when rural or urban subgroups were compared across cultures. If dialectical tensions are indicative of significant personal or cultural events (Erbert, Pérez, & Gareis, 2003), the tensions could be a sign of saturation and blending of different domains in the United States and a sign of cultural transition and value change in Germany, both containing positive and negative aspects. As one U.S. respondent sums up the U.S. scenario: Verbal declarations have been commercialized within the U.S. culture where people can express it freely without any real implications behind it. However, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it is less meaningful or important because as human beings we still need to hear words of affection and encouragement. With respect to Germany, Maase (2006) theorizes that the many signs in daily life that serve as rationale of today’s 60-year-olds for claiming that we have all become Americans mean something different for the younger generation; that is, they mean cosmopolitanism, life in cultural globality, and international modernity. 6. Conclusion Conceptions of love often reflect a culture’s beliefs about the nature of humanity and—as they change through the ages—about humanity in different time periods (Beall & Sternberg, 1995). If culture is a shared consensual way of life that is shared and developed through communication (Haslett, 1993), and if the way in which we interpret emotions depends on the lexical grid provided in our language (Ekman, 1994), the study of love declarations allows insight in the culture of a people at a point in time. The study at hand was able to determine difference in the use of love declarations in the United States and Germany and pinpoint likely cultural causes. What the study was not able to determine is whether these differences in communication and culture also indicate emotional experiences unique to these cultures (Donovan & Rundle, 1997) or whether the observed changes in the frequency and spread of love declarations over time correlate with a regulation of emotions matching the changed conceptions of love (Beall & Sternberg, 1995). These questions would make interesting topics for a study in crosscultural psychology. A further limitation was our reliance on respondents to provide general answers about their native cultures. It would be of interest to survey a larger pool of informants and focus only on the specific experiences of each individual. Additional research ideas include a comparison of other cultures for insight into a potential globalization effect with respect to emotion expression, and a look at love declarations in other cultures over time. No matter what the focus, love declarations are at the core of interpersonal relations and allow rich insight into essential cultural values and change. References Adorno, T. W. (1962). (Minima moralia: Reflections on a damaged life) Minima moralia: Reflexionen aus dem beschädigten Leben. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Suhrkamp. Ankenbrand, H. (September 2003). McDonald’s Kampagne: Ich wiege esTM [McDonald’s campaign: I am weighing itTM]. Spiegel Online. Retrieved from http://www.spiegel.de Autorengruppe. (2001). Leitlinien. In H. Zabel (Ed.), Denglish, nein danke! [Denglish, no thanks!] (pp. 223–228). Paderborn, Germany: IFB Verlag. Badinter, E. (1986). The opposite sex: The end of gender battle (B. Wright, Trans.). New York: Harper (original work published 1986). Baxter, L. A., & Montgomery, B. M. (1996). Relating: Dialogues and dialectics. New York: The Guilford Press. Beall, A. E., & Sternberg, R. J. (1995). The social construction of love. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 417–438. Bierhoff, H. W. (1991). Twenty years of research on love: Theory, results, and prospects for the future. German Journal of Psychology, 15(2), 95–117. Carbaugh, D. (1996). Situating selves: The communication of social identities in American scenes. State University of New York Press. Deutsche Sprachwelt. (2005). 40 Tage quasselfrei: Verzicht auf die Fast-Food-Sprache [40 days twaddle-free: Foregoing fast-food language]. Retrieved from http://www.deutschesprachwelt.de Dion, K. K., & Dion, K. L. (1996a). Cultural perspectives on romantic love. Personal Relationships, 3, 5–17. Dion, K. K., & Dion, K. L. (1996b). Individualistic and collectivistic perspectives on gender and cultural context of love and intimacy. Journal of Social Issues, 49(3), 53–69. Donovan, J. M., & Rundle, B. A. (1997). Psychic unity constraints upon successful intercultural communication. Language & Communication, 17(3), 219–235. Ekman, P. (1994). All emotions are basic. In P. Ekman, & R. J. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of emotion: Fundamental questions (pp. 15–19). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Erbert, L. A., Pérez, F. G., & Gareis, E. (2003). Turning points and dialectical interpretations of immigrant experiences in the United States. Western Journal of Communication, 67(2), 113–137. Fink, H. (2001). Echt cool: Überlegungen zur Amerikanisierung der Allgemein- und Jugendsprache in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland [Really cool: Reflections on the Americanization of popular and youth language in the Federal Republic of Germany]. In H. Zabel (Ed.), Denglish, nein danke! [Denglish, no thanks!] (pp. 33–50). Paderborn, Germany: IFB Verlag. Fitch, K. (1998). Speaking relationally: Culture, communication, and interpersonal connection. New York: The Guildford Press.

E. Gareis, R. Wilkins / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (2011) 307–319

319

Flanagan, J. C. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin, 51, 327–357. Gesellschaft für deutsche Sprache. (June 2008). Wie denken die Deutschen über ihre Muttersprache und über Fremdsprachen? [What do Germans think about their mother tongue and about foreign languages?]. Retrieved from http://www.gfds.de Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine. Hahn, K., & Burkart, G. (Eds.). (1998). Liebe am Ende des 20. Jahrhunderts [Love at the end of the 20th century]. Opladen, Germany: Leske & Budrich. Hall, E. T., & Hall, M. R. (1990). Understanding cultural differences: Germans, French, and Americans. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press. Harré, R., & Secord, P. F. (1973). The explanation of social behavior. Totowa, NJ: Littlefield, Adam. Haslett, B. (1993). Communication with language acquisition within a cultural context. In S. Ting-Toomey, & F. Korzenny (Eds.), Language, communication, and culture (pp. 19–34). Newbury Park, NJ: Sage Publications. Hatfield, E., & Rapson, R. L. (1996). Love and sex: Cross-cultural perspectives. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Hendrick, S. S., & Hendrick, C. (1995). Gender differences and similarities in sex and love. Personal Relationships, 2(1), 55–65. Herbst, D. (September 2003). Wer liebt schon seinen Arbeitgeber? [Who actually loves their employer?] Der Tagesspiegel. Retrieved from http://www.tagesspiegel.de Hofstede, G. H. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hönicke, C. (September 2003). Meine Pommes und ich [My French fries and I]. Der Tagesspiegel. Retrieved from http://www.tagesspiegel.de House, J. (1996). Contrastic discourse analysis and misunderstanding: The case of German and English. In M. Hellinger, & U. Ammon (Eds.), Contrastive sociolinguistics (pp. 345–361). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Hymes, D. (1974). Foundations of sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Junker, G. H. (2001). Der Zeitgeist spricht English [The zeitgeist speaks English]. In H. Zabel (Ed.), Denglish, nein danke! [Denglish, no thanks!] (pp. 113–142). Paderborn, Germany: IFB Verlag. Kline, S. L., Horton, B., & Zhang, S. (2008). Communicating love: Comparisons between American and East Asian university students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32, 200–214. Landis, D., & O’Shea, W. A. (2000). Cross-cultural aspects of passionate love: An individual differences analysis. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 752–777. Lee, J. A. (1973). The colors of love: An exploration of the ways of loving. Don Mills, Ontario: New Press. Levine, R., Sato, S., Hashimoto, R., & Verma, J. (1995). Love and marriage in eleven cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 26(5), 554–571. Lewin, K. (1997). Some social-psychological differences between the United States and Germany. In K. Lewin (Ed.), Resolving social conflict and field theory in social research (pp. 15–34). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. Lutz, C. A. (1988). Unnatural emotions: Everyday sentiments on a Micronesian atoll and their challenge to western theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Maase, K. (2006). Entamerkanisierung des Amerikanischen? [De-Americanization of Americana?] In A. Stephan, & J. Vogt (Eds.), America on my mind: Zur Amerikanisierung der deutschen Kultur seit 1945 [America on my mind: On the americanization of German culture since 1945] (pp. 237–255). München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Murstein, B. I., Merighi, J., & Vyse, S. A. (1991). Love styles in the United States and France: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 10, 37–46. Osgood, C. E., May, W. H., & Miron, M. S. (1975). Cross-cultural universals of affective meaning. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Philipsen, G. (1992). Speaking culturally: Explorations in social communication. State University of New York Press. Pogarell, R. (2001). Woran sterben Sprachen? [Why do languages die?] In H. Zabel (Ed.), Denglish, nein danke! [Denglish, no thanks!] (pp. 185–200). Paderborn, Germany: IFB Verlag. Roesler, A. (2003). 160 Zeichen der Liebe: Zur Kommunikation eines Gefühls im SMS-Format [160 signs of love: On the communication of an emotion in the instant-message format]. In B. Burkard (Ed.), liebe.komm: Botschaften des Herzens [love.come: Messages from the heart] (pp. 182–189). Heidelberg, Germany: Wachter Verlag. Schafrinna, A. (December 2007). Alle lieben Liebe [Everyone loves love]. Design Tagebuch. Retrieved from http://www.designtagebuch.de/alle-lieben-liebe Seki, K., Matsumoto, D., & Imahori, T. T. (2002). The conceptualization and expression of intimacy in Japan and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33, 303–319. Sick, B. (2006). Der Dativ ist dem Genitiv sein Tod [The dative is the genitive its death] [sic] (Vol. 3). Cologne, Germany: Kiepenheuer & Witsch. Simmons, C. H., von Kolke, A., & Shimizu, H. (1986). Attitudes toward romantic love among American, German, Japanese students. Journal of Social Psychology, 126(3), 327–336. South Shore Weddings. (2009). Why a proposal? Retrieved from http://www.southshoreweddings.com/articles/101.shtml Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. Sprecher, S., & Metts, S. (1999). Romantic beliefs: Their influence on relationships and patterns of change over time. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 16, 834–851. Stark, F. (2001). Vom Anglizismenfieber der Deutschen [On the Anglicism fever of Germans]. In H. Zabel (Ed.), Denglish, nein danke! [Denglish, no thanks!] (pp. 81–109). Paderborn, Germany: IFB Verlag. Stephan, A. (2006). Culture clash? Die Amerikanisierung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. In A. Stephan, & J. Vogt (Eds.), America on my mind: Zur Amerikanisierung der deutschen Kultur seit 1945 [America on my mind: On the americanization of German culture since 1945] (pp. 29–50). München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Sternberg, R. J. (1986). A triangular theory of love. Psychological Review, 93, 119–135. Terracciano, A., Abdel-Khalek, A. M., Ádám, N., Adamovová, L., Ahn, C. K., Ahn, H. N., et al. (2005). National character does not reflect mean personality trait levels in 49 cultures. Science, 310(5745), 96–100. Wierzbicka, A. (1998). German “culture scripts”: Public signs as a key to social attitudes and cultural values. Discourse & Society, 9(2), 241–282. Wilkins, R., & Gareis, E. (2006). Emotion expression and the locution “I love you”: A cross-cultural study. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30(1), 51–75. Zabel, H. (2001). Ziele und Aktivitäten des Vereins [Goals and activities of the organization]. In H. Zabel (Ed.), Denglish, nein danke! [Denglish, no thanks!] (pp. 243–290). Paderborn, Germany: IFB Verlag. Zifonun, G. (2002). Überfremdung des Deutschen: Panikmache oder echte Gefahr? Sprachreport, 3, 2–9. Zimmer, D. E. (1997). (German and others: The language in modernization fever) Deutsch und anders: Die Sprache im Modernisierungsfieber. Hamburg: Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag.