Introduction

　Abundant studies from different disciplines have indicated that culture and communication have an interdependent and reciprocal relationship (Becker, 1986; Chen, 1995a; Gudykunst & Nishida, 1984; Harnett & Cummings, 1980; Hofstede, 1980; Nakanishi, 1987). According to Chen and Starosta (1998a), while communication serves as a carrier of culture, what, where, and how we should talk is regulated by culture. Thus, culture not only conditions our thinking, but also is manifested in our communication patterns. 

　The impact of culture on communication behaviors was further examined by scholars. For example, Hsu (1953) found that in interaction Americans tend to be more individualcentered and emotiondisplayed, while Chinese are more situationcentered and emotionconstrained. Ma (1990, 1992) also reported that Chinese are much less explicit to show their emotions in communication than northern Americans. In addition, studies consistently indicate that a major difference in communication style between Chinese and Americans is that Chinese tend to be less confrontational and direct (Lindin, 1974; Schneider, 1985; Wolfson & Pearce, 1983; Yang, 1978).  Finally, Gudykunst and TingToomey (1988) and Hall (1976) summarized the differences of communication behaviors between highcontext and lowcontext cultures.  According to the authors, people in highcontext cultures: (1) less emphasize explicit verbal messages,  (2) transmit important information through contextual cues, (3) highly value harmony, (4) tend to be more silent and use ambiguous language, and (5) tend to avoid saying "no" directly to their counterparts.  People in lowcontext cultures: (1) do not emphasize the situational context, (2) transmit important information through explicit verbal messages, (3) highly value selfexpression, verbal fluency, and eloquent speech, and (4) tend to express opinions and intentions freely and directly in order to persuade others to accept their viewpoints. 

　These studies indicate that in order to understand a person's communication behavior or effectively communicate with a person from a different culture, it is necessary to first understand the person's culture.  In other words, in order to reach "transcultural realities" people are required to understand a single culture through interaction and dialogue with the culture (Epstein, 1995). The ability to establish "transcultural realties" is similar to intercultural communication competence that demands the ability of intercultural awareness, intercultural sensitivity, and intercultural adroitness (Chen, 1989; Chen & Starosta, 1996, 1998b, 1999, 2000). This chapter aims to delineate the core values of Chinese culture to help people reach transcultural understanding while interacting with Chinese.  Although research attempting to help people better understand and communicate with each other by focusing on the study of cultural traits of a specific culture has been increasing over the past years (Benedict, 1946; Broome, 1996; Condon, 1984, 1985; Kapp, 1983; Stewart & Bennett, 1991), very few of them systematically deal with Chinese cultural traits from the communication perspective. To fill this gap, in this chapter the author develops a harmony theory based on cultural traits that can be used to understand Chinese communication behaviors.

Ontological Foundations of the Theory

　To understand Chinese communication, it is necessary to recognize the ontological assumptions that guide Chinese beliefs and behaviors.  According to Cheng (1987) and Wilhelm (1979), Chinese consider "change" as the only constant phenomenon of the universe. "Change" is based on the dialectic interaction of two opposite but complementary forces: yin and yang.  Yin represents the amiable, yielding or submissive attributes, and yang unyielding or dominant attributes. The interaction of the two forces produces more opposite but interdependent pairs of change, such as emptiness vs. tangibility, brightness vs. darkness, motion vs. tranquillity, large vs. small, more vs. less, high vs. low, distance vs. closeness, and so on. Thus, the universe is forever changing  alteration, movement without rest, and flowing, rising, and sinking without fixed law. In order to successfully carry out an interaction, individuals must bring continuity into the process of change, because "when a change runs its course, it will alter; through alteration one achieves continuity; and through continuity one achieves duration. This is the key to being blessed by heaven and bringing in good fortune" (Chu, 1974, p. 106).  

　Based on the concept of "change," Chai and Chai (1969) generated three ontological assumptions that guide Chinese communication behaviors. First, the universe is a great whole in which all is but a transitional process, with no fixed substance of its substratum. Human communication is then ever in a state of change and transformation.  Second, the transforming process of the universe does not proceed onward, but revolves in an endless cycle. Human communication is then changing according to this cycle of the universe like the succession of day and night and the periodical ebb and flow of the tide (Liu, 1990, 1992). Third, there is no ending for the transforming process of the universe. The process of human communication is then never absolutely completed or finished. In this transforming, endless and cyclic communication process, the role of human beings is vital. The process shows a spirit of enlightenment in which human beings communicate with dignity and influence in a mutual and interdependent network. The process forms a continuous chain of natural sequences without consciously devaluing the dignity of communicator and communicatee (Cheng, 1987; Fang 1981).  

　These ontological assumptions provide a foundation for reaching a more dynamic, interactive and responsive notion of human communication.  Human communication from the Chinese perspective is then requires individuals to develop and keep a harmonious relationship between interactants in a continuously transforming process of mutual dependency.  Thus, three theoretical statements in the form of assumptions can be made to summarize the Chinese ontological thinking that serve as fundamental definitions and descriptions upon which subsequent theoretical axioms and theorems can be assumed or inferred:

　Assumption 1: Human communication is a changing and transforming process.  

　Assumption 2: Human communication is changing according to the endless but orderly cycle of the universe.

　Assumption 3: Human communication is never absolutely completed or finished. 

Formulation of the Harmony Theory

　According to Hawes (1975), to constitute a substantive theory it must consist of a primary statement and a theorem as a secondary statement that can be added to the primary statement. Axiom is a primary statement that is assumed to be true with a general scope. From the axiom a theorem is inferred or derived that is also general in scope and empirically valid.  Concepts in a theorem should be observable and operationally definable and if necessary a series of hypotheses can be derived from the theorem.  In other words, a hypothesis is a statement that specifies the necessary conditions of a prediction and it can be tested directly. These guidelines are followed in this chapter for the development of the harmony theory of Chinese communication.  

Harmony

　The Chinese approach to the study of human communication differs from Western approaches in three ways (Chen, 1993). First, it holds that harmony is the end rather than the means of human communication.  Conflicts are then considered to be harmful to harmony in the process of communication. Second, while many Western scholars treat human communication as a process of the communicators striving to direct the interaction in their own favor, Chinese view it as a process in which the communicators continuously adapt and relocate themselves towards interdependence and cooperation. Third, the Chinese approach suggests that the process of human communication includes an ethical appeal that induces a sense of duty for cooperation between interactants, not by interactants' strategic words or behaviors but by the sincere display of wholehearted concern between each other (Chen, 1993). 

　These distinct differences indicate that harmony is the core value of Chinese culture that guides Chinese communication behaviors. As Legge (1955) indicated, Chinese consider that only when harmony prevails can human society be nourished and flourished. Harmony is then the most important element Chinese people use to regulate the transforming, cyclic, and never ending process of human communication. As a result, the ultimate goal of Chinese communication is to pursue a conflict free interpersonal and social relationship (Chen & Chung, 1994). 

　Thus, the ability to reach a harmonious state of human relationship becomes the main criterion for evaluating whether an individual is competent in the process of Chinese communication. In other words, to Chinese, communication competence is an individual's ability to develop and keep a harmonious relationship between interactants in a continuously transforming process of mutual dependency (Chen, 1993). An assumption based on the concept of harmony and an axiom from it can be inferred:

　Assumption 4: Chinese communication aims to reach a harmonious state of human relationship.

　Axiom 1: An increase in the ability to achieve harmony in Chinese communication will increase the degree of communication competence.

　In order to achieve harmony or competence in the process of communication, Chinese develop three sets of guidelines (Chen, 1997; Chen & Chung, 1997; Chen & Starosta, 19978; Hwang, 1987; Shenkar & Ronen, 1987; Wu, 1964; Yum, 1988): (1) intrinsically, individuals must be able to internalize three principles: jen (humanism), yi (righteousness), and li (rite); (2) extrinsically, individuals must be able to accommodate three components: shih (temporal contingencies), wei (spatial contingencies), and ji  (the first imperceptible beginning of movement); and (3) strategically, individuals must be able to exercise three behavioral skills: guanxi (interrelation), mientz (face), and power. 

Jen (humanism) 

　Jen is an inner force that establishes the close connection between two persons. Chen and Chung (1994) pointed out that selfrestraint and selfdiscipline foster this inner force by which people naturally show love, affection and benevolence to others. It is the heart of seeing all human beings as brothers and sisters.  Jen not only helps to develop and maintain ourselves, but also develop and maintain others (Fung, 1983). Thus, being empathic is a prerequisite for showing the likehearted feeling towards others and reaching the state of jen (Chang, 1992; Chung, 1992; Yum, 1988). 

　Applying to the daily interaction, Chen (1987) summarized that jen demands selfdiscipline towards oneself, filial piety towards one's parents, humanity towards people, respect towards the elder, commitment towards one's work, and trust towards one's behaviors. In other words, jen is a collective virtue of showing love or being humane in interactions. Moreover, in order to reach a harmonious state of human communication, the practice of jen must be based on the principle of reciprocity. Only through a mutually dependent process can the light of jen be fully emitted. Thus, the ideal of harmony is sustained by the principle of reciprocity that requires interactants to show mutual responsibility in the process of communication (Chen & Xiao, 1993). The violation of reciprocal principle, such as the lack of returning a goodwill or showing an indifferent attitude, often leads to uncooperation in Chinese communication. 

　Axiom 2: The higher the degree of jen, the higher the likelihood that harmony will be developed in Chinese communication.

　Axiom 3: The higher the degree of being humane, the higher the likelihood that jen will be maintained in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 1: The more reciprocal a person is, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 2: The more empathic a person is, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

Yi (appropriateness)

　Yi, equivalent with appropriateness or righteousness, is the internal criterion of communication behaviors that stipulates what we ought or ought not to do in the process of social interactions (Chen & Chung, 1994). Chen (1987) indicated that yi provides three functions for human communication.  First, it guides individuals' behaviors in communication process. Second, it regulates individuals' behaviors by preventing them from deviating from social norms. Third, it penetrates into all the behaviors that are within the boundary of social norms.  That is, all appropriate or righteous behaviors are guided and regulated by the principle of yi. 

　These functions denote that the state of yi can be achieved only through appropriate behaviors in the process of communication. Therefore, appropriateness becomes the criterion for examining whether an individual's behavior is fit to the demand of yi.  At the same time, appropriate behaviors also refer to the ability of flexibility and adaptability towards the situation. In other words, yi aims to reach the best outcome of human interactions by adopting the most appropriate reaction towards external stimuli that include time, space, people, and situation (Chen, 1987). Thus, in human communication the characteristics of situational orientation embedded in yi allows us to look beyond personal profit and contribute to the betterment of common good from the perspective of original goodness of human nature (Yum, 1988). 

　In sum, to Chinese, a harmonious state of human communication cannot be reached without the guidance of yi that is reflected in appropriate actions, and the appropriate actions are carried out through the ability of flexibility and adaptability.

　Axiom 4: The higher the degree of yi, the higher the likelihood that harmony will be developed in Chinese communication.

　Axiom 5: The higher the degree of appropriateness, the higher the likelihood that yi will be maintained in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 3: The more flexible a person is, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 4: The more adaptable a person is, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

Li (rite)

　Li, holy rite or sacred ceremony, is used as a metaphor to represent the specifically humanizing form of the dynamic relation among people. This form produces a pattern of human behaviors that in turn coordinates social interaction into a civilized society. Thus, through the image of li we realize that the rites and ceremonies are an emphatic, intensified and elaborated extension of everyday civilized interaction (Fingarette, 1972). In other words, li symbolizes the formality of human interaction. Chinese culture treats this formality not only as a human character, a linguistic character, but also a moral and religious character. 

　In the process of human communication li also refers to norms and rules of proper behaviors in a social context.  It is an external means to achieve the ideal state of harmony by showing a feeling of respect or reverence for social norms. Yum (1988) indicated that Li is "the fundamental regulatory etiquette of human behavior" (p. 378). It connects an individual character and social duties by following the rules of conduct and speech in communication. Thus, individuals ought to follow li in social interactions and to actively adjust to the harmonious and hierarchical order of society.  

　This formality can be easily found in the use of honorific language in the Chinese daily interaction and in the sense of order, propriety, and appropriate behavior between parents and children, inferiors and superior, teachers and students, elders and youngsters, and between friends (Condon & Yousef, 1975; Chen & Starosta, 1998a). It is also reflected in one of the Chinese characters: keqi. This phrase not only denotes the meaning of "politeness," but also includes personal attributes such as being courteous, modest, humble, understanding, considerate, and wellmannered in the process of human communication (Wei, 1983). Hence, showing aggressive behaviors and being unable to subdue or control one's emotion in public indicate impoliteness that not only violates the principle of harmony but also produces an insult not easily forgiven (Eberhard, 1971). 

　An example of lacking aggressive behaviors is the Chinese reluctance to engage in an argument in social interactions. When challenged, Chinese may just keep quiet without rejoining or discussing a point even they feel they are right, hoping to save each other's face and keep the harmonious relationship between the two parties (Chen & Xiao, 1993). According to Shenkar & Ronen (1987), this kind of formality of social life is a way of avoiding embarrassing confrontations and a means to handle socially ambiguous situations and to uphold the group control over egocentric tendencies.  

　Axiom 6: An increase of the practice of li will produce an increase in the development of harmony in Chinese communication.

　Axiom 7: The higher the degree of formality, the higher the likelihood that li will be maintained in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 5: The more skillful a person is in managing honorific language, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 6: The more skillful a person is in dealing with the hierarchical social relations,   the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 7: The more polite a person is, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 8: The more skillful a person is in controlling emotion, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 9: The less aggressive a person is, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

　The three concepts form the foundation of the inner structure of interactants in the process of Chinese communication. They are the basis of reaching harmony and communication competence.  Individuals are required to internalize these elements in order to become a successful communicator in the Chinese cultural context. However, as the intrinsic and preliminary elements of Chinese communication, jen, yi, and li must coordinate three extrinsic elements: shi, wei, and ji. The integration of the intrinsic and extrinsic elements will determine whether a successful Chinese communication in the transforming process can be reached (Wu, 1964).  

Shih (temporal contingencies) 

　Shi refers to temporal contingencies in human interactions. Chinese use eight symbols, accompanied with the 24hour time period, to portray the eight stages of the cyclic process of human relationship development through the process of communication (Wilhelm, 1979; Chen, 1998). "Thunder," paralleling with four thirty to seven thirty of the morning hours, symbolizes the arousing power for burgeoning a relationship with others. "Wind," seven thirty to ten thirty in the morning, symbolizes the continuation of relationship development by a gently penetrating effort. "Fire," ten thirty to one thirty at noon, symbolizes the desire of interactants to be clinging to each other.  "Earth," one thirty to four thirty in the afternoon, symbolizes the reception of each other's relationship. "Lake," four thirty to seven thirty in the evening, symbolizes the joyous relationship developed by the interactants.  "Heaven," seven thirty to ten thirty at night, symbolizes the sublime stage of success of relationship. "Water," ten thirty to one thirty at midnight, symbolizes the deterioration of relationship. Finally, "mountain," one thirty to four thirty of the early morning hours, symbolizes keeping still without further endeavoring to develop or continue the relationship. 

　Knowing the temporal relations and appropriately perform what one ought to act in different stages of human interaction is the function of shi. In other words, knowing shi requires the ability to decide when is the appropriate time to initiate, maintain, and terminate an interaction. This element is an application of the principle of appropriateness that is embedded in yi. It is to explain the importance of knowing the influence due to the change of temporal contingencies in the process of human communication. Chinese consider that being unable to recognize the change of temporal contingencies in interactions is detrimental to the achievement of harmony and therefore leads to a failure of communication.  

　Axiom 8: An increase of knowing shi will produce an increase in the development of harmony in Chinese communication.

　Axiom 9: The higher the degree of knowing temporal contingencies, the higher the likelihood that shi will be maintained in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 10: The more a person knows when is the appropriate time to act, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

Wei (spatial contingencies)

　Wei refers to spatial contingencies in human interactions, i.e., the static aspects of human interactions, including social context and communication environment. Wei is like a container carrying li. In other words, the application of rites will vary due to the change of social context and communication environment. To Chinese, wei is typically reflected in the hierarchical structure of human relationship called "the Five Code of Ethics" that traditionally specifies the relationships between ruler and subject, father and son, husband and wife, older brother and younger brother, and between friends (Lin, 1988). This hierarchical structure not only ensures a unequal and complementary relationship in the Chinese society, but also provides a specific context for Chinese communication. It maximizes differences in age, sex, and role or status, and encourages an interdependent relationship between interactants (Condon, 1977). 

　Thus, knowing spatial contingencies and appropriately perform what one ought to act in different contexts of human interaction is the function of wei. In other words, knowing wei requires the ability to realize and distinguish who, what and where in order to initiate, maintain, and terminate an interaction. Like shi, wei integrates the principle of appropriateness to show the impact of spatial contingencies on human communication. Therefore, wei also serves as a criterion for measuring the degree of harmony and competence in Chinese communication.

　Axiom 10: An increase of knowing wei will produce an increase in the development of harmony in Chinese communication.

　Axiom 11: The higher the degree of knowing spatial contingencies, the higher the likelihood that wei will be maintained in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 11: The more a person knows the communication environment, the more  competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 12: The more a person knows the social context, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

Ji (the first imperceptible beginning of movement)

　Ji is the first imperceptible beginning of movement that shows the trace of possible consequences of the ongoing interaction (Wilhelm, 1990). Chinese consider that being competent in communication means that one should know what is hidden and what is evident during the interaction. This requires the ability of sensitivity by which one can develop a positive emotion towards understanding and appreciating the potential differences due to the variations of temporal and spatial contingencies, and further take an appropriate action in the process of communication (Chen & Starosta, 1996). Thus, the ability to recognize the trace of movement is a necessary condition for individuals to develop harmony and gain a feeling of complete security in interactions (Chen, 1993). 

　The development of sensitivity or the ability of knowing ji is based on sincerity that represents the internal consistency of individuals by holding a sincere and honest mind to themselves and others. A sincere and honest mind not only helps individuals figure out the trace of movement and know the right time to behave appropriately in order to fit in with the environment, but also unites the two interactants as one (Wang, 1989; Wu, 1976). Sincerity is then the force integrating shi, wei, ji and the bridge connecting the three elements with jen, yi. and li. 

　Axiom 12: An increase of knowing ji will produce an increase in the development of harmony in Chinese communication.

　Axiom 13: The higher the degree of knowing the trace of possible consequences of an interaction, the higher the likelihood that ji will be maintained in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 13: The more a person knows the trace of possible consequences of an interaction, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 14: The more sensitive a person is, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 15: The more sincere a person is, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication. 

　Jen, yi, and li, as intrinsic elements and the latitude of Chinese communication, and shi, wei, and ji, as extrinsic elements and the longitude of Chinese communication, together weave the contextual network of Chinese society. In the soil of this contextual network Chinese develop a variety of strategic behaviors to deal with their daily interactions. Among them, three cardinal and interdependent skills or strategies are found to be most prominent: guanxi, mientz, and power (Chang & Holt, 1991; Chen, 1997; Chiao, 1988a; Chu, 1991; Hwang, 1987, 1988, 19978; Jia, 19978; Jocobs, 1979; Ma, 1992). The achievement of harmony in Chinese communication is ultimately based on the exercise of these three concepts.

Guanxi (relationship)

　Guanxi refers to the relationship between two parties.  Jocobs (1979) found that at least nine basic patterns of interrelation exist in the Chinese social network. They are formed by the sharing of common background based on geography, blood, work, classmate, sworn brotherhood, surname, teacherstudent, economy, and public affairs. Leung (1988) indicated that Chinese are more likely to pursue a conflict with a stranger than with a friend. To Chinese, maintaining these interrelations is necessary for fulfilling the principle of li, because a proper interrelation between people is treated as a way to avoid serious conflicts and embarrassing encounters in daily interactions. Moreover, guanxi can also be employed as a social resource to resolve conflicts or to produce functions of persuasion, influence, and control in the Chinese society (Chang & Holt, 1991; Chung, 1991).

　According to Yum (1988), because Chinese people emphasize a hierarchical social structure based on the Five Code of Ethics, those particularistic human relationships specified by Jocobs are much more likely to be developed in the process of social interaction. Moreover, particularistic relationships are governed by a set of specific communication rules and patterns that give individuals a direction concerning to whom to talk, where, when, and how (Chen & Chung, 1997). As a result, Chinese develop a clear distinction between strangers and friends in the social network.  Chinese people would feel more restrained when dealing with strangers and acquaintances, but more free and open to express themselves to intimate friends (Chen, 1995b). The ability to distinguish the levels of hierarchical relationships in a social interaction then functions to develop a more supportive communication climate and to tightly keep a harmonious relationship between the interactants. 

　The emphasis of particularistic relationships also leads to the development of a clear boundary between ingroup and outgroup members.  Chinese tend to distrust outgroup members. The "we feeling" among ingroup members often affects the outcome of Chinese communication (Gu, 1992). Pye (1982) pointed out that in the case of social, political or business negotiation any intention for personal gains is considered threatening to or jeopardizing the group's hierarchy and harmony.  

　Therefore, knowing how to make a good guanxi is a prerequisite for the achievement of harmony and competence in Chinese communication.  According to Shenkar and Ronen (1987), keeping frequent contacts, developing mutual understanding, giving gifts or favors, and establishing personal trust and mutual interests with one's counterparts are several examples for making a good relation with Chinese people. 

　Axiom 14: An enhancement of guanxi will produce an enhancement in the development of harmony in Chinese communication.

　Axiom 15: The higher the degree of establishing particular relationships, the higher the likelihood that guanxi will be maintained in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 16: The more a person knows how to establish interrelation with others, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 17: The more skillful a person is in distinguishing ingroup from outgroup members, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 18: The stronger the "wefeeling" a person has, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

Mientz (face)

　Mientze refers to reputation, selfesteem, or face gained from the respect of other persons in interactions. It represents an individual's social position and prestige gained from the successful performance of one or more specific social roles that are well recognized by other members in the society (Chu, 1988; Hu, 1944). In the Chinese society, in order to keep a harmonious atmosphere competent communicators must know how to show a due respect for other parties' feeling, or to save their face. Any conscious act of making others lose face in the Chinese society will not only cause an emotional uneasiness of others, but also lead to the damage of one's own image or selfhumiliating (Hwang, 1987; Jin, 1988). Thus, to maintain one's and other's face means to maintain friendship between each other in the network of quanxi. For example, losing the control of facework in the process of Chinese negotiations will mean the loss of bargain power and the denial of any offer (Jia, 19978). 

　The importance of saving each other's face can explain, especially in a unavoidable conflict situation, why Chinese people would show courtesy before using force to solve a problem. Moreover, Chinese often use an intermediary to help them solve the problem in order to save face. This indirect communication pattern leads Chinese to pursue a smooth verbal and nonverbal exchange in social interactions. It also allows Chinese to avoid saying "no" openly or directly to other's request, or showing aggressive behaviors that are considered to be detrimental to the harmonious atmosphere of interaction and relationship.  Consequently, Chinese people would use all possible means to "earn face" or to "make face" for their counterparts to establish a harmonious atmosphere of interactions (Chiao, 1981; Chu, 1983). Communication competence can then be assessed by evaluating the degree of appropriateness or skillfulness a person can earn or make face for others (Chen, 1993).

　According to Silin (1981) and Pye (1982), as a behavioral skill in daily interactions, face saving is not only frequently used by Chinese to manage a modern social organization, but also to reach a successful business transaction, especially in negotiations.  

　For example, Shenkar and Ronen (1987) found that Chinese negotiators are likely to make concessions at the end of a negotiation so that they can save each other's face and keep the harmonious relationship. Facework therefore becomes one of the most influential elements in the Chinese power game (Wang, 1992).  

　Strategically, to find or create an opportunity to express renqin (i.e., doing a favor) to one's counterparts is the most common method Chinese people employ to "make face" (Hwang, 1988). Through this process a network of guanxi will be developed gradually. However, the practice of renqin is regulated by the principle of reciprocity in the Chinese society.  Hwang (1988) indicated that Chinese often consciously or unconsciously expect to have something in return when they are doing a favor (e.g., gift giving) to others. Without returning a favor to the sender will lose both parties' face, and in turn jeopardize their guanxi and further disturb the harmonious atmosphere. 

　As mentioned previously, the principle of reciprocity requires people to show mutual responsibility in social interactions. This kind of reciprocally obligatory relationship develops a feeling of "indebtedness" in which Chinese are always preparing to return a favor to those who give them a favor. As a result, a great dilemma or anxiety often occurs in the process of Chinese communication, because it is usually difficult to predicate when, how, and in what situation one's counterparts will return the favor to oneself (Hwang, 1988). Based on the discussion, we can fairly conclude that mientz, guanxi, and the interdependent relationship between the two concepts determine largely the success or failure of Chinese communication. 

　Axiom 16: An enhancement of mientz will produce an enhancement in the development of quanxi in Chinese communication.

　Axiom 17: An enhancement of mientz will produce an enhancement in the development of harmony in Chinese communication.

　Axiom 18: The higher the degree of respect towards others, the higher the likelihood that mientz will be maintained in Chinese communication.

　Axiom 19: The higher the degree of renqin towards others, the higher the likelihood that mientz will be maintained in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 19: The more a person knows how to increase others' mientz, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 20: The more skillful a person is in doing a favor to others, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 21: The stronger the "indebtedness" feeling a person has, the more competent the person will be in Chinese communication.

Power

　Power refers to the control of resources valued by other parties.  It is granted by members of a society in which they believe that they should obey the commands and seek the favor and support from specific members (Conrad, 1994). The power one exerts usually sustains moves and countermoves of the participants in social interactions (Folger, Poole, & Strutman, 1993). The basis of power in the Chinese society is built on two sources: guanxi and the hierarchical structure of the social network.  

　Conrad (1994) indicated that people with good interrelation are more likely to comply to each other's wishes or requests and tend to perceive each other as being more expert, trustworthy, and powerful. In addition, as previously discussed, guanxi not only functions to avoid conflicts and embarrassing encounters, but also can be used as a social resource to produce influence and control in the process of Chinese communication.  Chiao (1988a) indicated that guanxi has penetrated into every aspect of the Chinese life. For example, guanxi helps people gain what they desire to get in the areas of marriage, funeral, job, housing, medicare, entertaining, and other social, cultural, political, and economical activities.  

　The Five Code of Ethics in the Chinese society dictates a hierarchical and particularistic structure of human relationship. According to Chen (1997), this specific structure of social network ascribes power to the seniority one holds and authority one possesses.  Seniority is considered as the locus of power and knowledge in Confucianism influenced societies. The elders in the Chinese society continue to receive a high status and respect not only in the family, but also in community and work place (Bond & Hwang, 1986; Carmichael, 1991). In addition, the seniors also enjoy relative freedom in initiating and terminating an idea or decision in social interactions. For example, Chung (1996) indicated that the elders tend to receive a wide range of prerogatives in the situation of conflict resolution and negotiations, and their seniority is treated as being equivalent to credibility that may determine whether a cooperative or competitive stance will be taken in an interaction and often causes changes in social relationships, including control over the interaction process and acceptance of others' influence (Griffin, 1967; Nadler, Nadler, & Broome, 1985). 

　The hierarchical structure of particularistic relationships also ascribes the superior, father, husband, older brother, and those in high status with authority to receive more power or control over their counterparts. Thus, it is not surprising to find that in the process of Chinese communication authority often overpowers knowledge and expertise in making the final decision. For example, Cai and Gonzalez (19978) found that although knowledge and expertise can serve as powerful tools in persuading the opponents of the Three Gorges Project in China, the final decision was still made by the political leaders who are culturally accepted as the decisionmakers and problem solvers. In other words, in the Chinese society persons with a higher status in the particularistic relationship structure are considered to be more knowledgeable in the process of problem solving or conflict resolution. Power in the form of seniority and authority therefore works with guanxi and mientz to reinforce the ultimate goal of harmony in the Chinese communication. 

　Axiom 20: An appropriate exertion of power will produce an enhancement in the development of harmony in Chinese communication.

　Axiom 21: An increase in guanxi will produce an increase in the development of power in Chinese communication.

　Axiom 22: An increase in the degree of seniority will produce an increase in the development of power in Chinese communication.

　Axiom 23: An increase in the degree of authority will produce an increase in the development of power in Chinese communication.

　Theorem 22: The more senior a person is, the more competent the person will be perceived in Chinese communication. 

　Theorem 23: The more authority a person possesses, the more competent the person will be perceived in Chinese communication.

　Taken together, harmony is the axis of Chinese communication that is sustained by nine spokes: jen, yi, li, shi, wei, ji, guanxi, mientz, and power.  The functions and interrelationships of these concepts form a holistic system of the ideal Chinese communication. The interaction and integration of them brings continuity into the endless transforming process of Chinese communication. Based on this theory, we understand that, to Chinese, harmony is a state of equilibrium representing the fulfillment of competent communication by which four ultimate goals of human communication can be reached: a feeling of security, a feeling of togetherness, a joyful feeling of interacting, and being benefited from the interaction (Chen, 1993; Hsu, 1987).  

Discussion and Conclusion

　The theory proposed in this chapter is an initial attempt to formally state a general theory of Chinese communication based on the concept of harmony. As a cardinal element of Chinese culture, harmony is the ultimate goal Chinese people pursue in the process of human interaction.  It is also the main criterion used to assess communication competence in the Chinese society. The principle of harmony is regulated by three holistic ontological assumptions of Chinese culture, including transformation, orderly cycle, and endless movement. The achievement of harmony requires individuals to internalize the principles of jen, yi, and li, be able to accommodate shi, wei, and ji, and to appropriately exercise guanxi, mientz, and power. [JP+2]

　A total of four propositions, 23 axioms and 23 theorems were generated.  The first three propositions state the ontological foundation of Chinese culture. They lead to the fourth proposition that specifies harmony is the basis of Chinese communication behaviors.  Except for the first axiom specifying the relationship between harmony and competence that in turn serves as the basis of generating more axioms and theorems, all axioms, as primary statements with a universal scope in the Chinese society, posit a positive relationship between harmony and the nine concepts.  Except for theorem 9, all the theorems, as secondary statements with a general scope and being empirically valid, posit a positive relationship communication competence and concepts inferred or derived from the nine concepts. In order to directly test the relationship between concepts to understand Chinese communication, future research can derive a series of hypotheses indirectly from axioms or directly from theorems (Hawes, 1975).

　The harmony theory developed in this chapter stipulates a complete approach Chinese people use to bring continuity into the endless transforming process of human communication. This harmony perspective of Chinese communication is quite different from the Western approach.  While effectiveness or goal attainment is considered as the main element of communication competence in Western cultures, Chinese place much more emphasis on appropriateness and reciprocity through them harmony can be reached (Chen & Starosta, 1996). This theory not only serves as a mirror that can reflect potential problems occurring in the intercultural communication, but also provides a great opportunity for people to better understand Chinese communication in order to reach transcultural understanding while interacting with Chinese.[JP]

　Nevertheless, the theory proposed in this chapter should not give readers an impression that culture and communication is a linear process. The dynamic and complex nature of culture suggests that human communication is a multiplefacet process in which a prominent cultural value can be consciously or unconsciously used as a tool to implicitly or explicitly shaken other core values.  For example, power may be abused in the time of social and political turmoil and produces a negative force that seriously challenges the ethical mandate of harmony (Chen & Starosta, 19978). Powers' (19978) study on conflict genres and management strategies during China's ten years of turmoil vividly demonstrates how people's behaviors deviate from the ethical principle of Chinese communication. Chen's (1997) study also reflects how the culturally endowed superiority based on seniority can be used for personal gains in the process of decision making.  

　In addition, the structure of hierarchical and particularistic relationship consequently leads Chinese to develop a very different attitude and behavior towards outgroup people. In other words, it is not uncommon to see that the principles of jen, yi, and li are not followed in the process of Chinese communication.  For example, face saving usually becomes a victim of competition with outgroup members for scare resources. An abundant record in Chinese literature on compliancegaining strategies used to achieve one's goal in daily interactions illustrates the opposite side of Chinese communication in which harmony does not play an influential role[JP+2] in regulating Chinese behaviors (Chen, 1995c; Chen & Zhong, 1996; Chiao, 1988b, 1989; Chu, 1991; Cleary, 1988; Li, Yang, & Tang, 1989; Senger, 1988; Wang, 1976). This contradictory phenomenon provides a great opportunity for future research to help people better understand Chinese communication behaviors. [JP]

　Finally, an intriguing aspect of Chinese communication also deserves a further investigation in future research. When Chinese feel powerless in controlling their destiny, they tend to adopt a deterministic attitude and behavior in the process of communication. Ming (fate) and yuan (destined affinity) represent this aspect of Chinese character (Chen, 1996; Chen & Starosta, 19978). In this situation, to Chinese, to be or not to be connected with others or in other areas of daily life is the function of one's predestined fate (ming). In the development of relationship, for example, if one is predestined to be together with the other, they will consider it as "yao yuan" (having destined affinity). On the other hand, if they are unable to connect each other, they will consider it as "wu yuan" (having no destined affinity). Ming and yuan continue to show a great impact on the process of developing guanxi in the Chinese society (Chang & Holt, 1993; Wen, 1988).  To further pursue this line of research will prove to make a contribution to the understanding of Chinese communication.  

References

Becker, C. B. (1986). Reasons for the lack of argumentation and debate in the Far East.  International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10, 7592.

Benedict, R. (1946). The chrysanthemum and the sword: Patterns of Japanese culture.  Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle..  

Bond, M. B., & Hwang, K. (1986). The social psychology of Chinese people.  In M. H. Bond (Ed.), The psychology of Chinese people (pp. 213226). Hong Kong: Oxford University Press. 

Broome, B. J. (1996). Exploring the Greek mosaic. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

Cai, B., & Gonzalez, A. (19978). The Three Gorges project: Technological discourse and the resolution of competing interests. Intercultural Communication Studies, 7, 101112.

Carmichael, C. W. (1991). Intercultural perspectives of aging. In L. A. Samovar & R. E. Porter (Eds.), Intercultural communication: A reader (pp. 128135).  Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. 

Chai, C, & Chai, W. (1969).  Introduction. In J. Legge (trans.), I Ching: Book of Changes.  New York: Bantam.

Chang, HC. (1992, November). From words to communication: Some philosophical implications for Chinese interpersonal communication. Paper presented at the annual convention of Speech Communication Association, Atlanta, Georgia.

Chang, HC., & Holt, G. R. (1991). More than relationship: Chinese interaction and the principle of Guanhsi. Communication Quarterly, 39, 251271.

Chang, HC., & Holt, G. R. (1993). The concept of yuan and Chinese interpersonal relationships. In S. TingToomey & F. Korzenny (Eds.), Crosscultural interpersonal communication (pp. 2857).  Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Chen, D. C. (1987).  Confucius thoughts.  Taipei: Cheng Chuong.

Chen, G. M. (1989). Relationships of the dimensions of intercultural communication competence. Communication Quarterly, 37, 118133. 

Chen. G. M. (1993, November). A Chinese perspective of communication competence.  Paper presented at the annual convention of the Speech Communication Association, San Antonio, Texas.

Chen. G. M. (1995a, August). A Chinese model of human relationship development. Paper presented at the 5　th　 International Conference on CrossCultural Communication: East and West.  Harbin, China.

Chen, G. M. (1995b). Differences in selfdisclosure patterns among Americans versus Chinese: A comparative study.  Journal of CrossCultural Psychology, 26, 8491.

Chen. G. M. (1995c, November). A classification of Chinese persuasive communication strategies.  Paper presented at the annual convention of the Speech Communication Association, New Orleans, Louisiana.

Chen, G. M. (1996, November). Feng shui: The Chinese art of space arrangement. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Speech Communication Association, San Diego, California.[JP+3]

Chen, G. M. (1997, November). An examination of PRC business negotiation styles. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Speech Communication Association, Chicago, Illinois.[JP]

Chen, G. M. (1998). A Chinese model of human relationship development.  In B. L. Hoffer and H. H. Koo (Eds.), Crosscultural communication East and West in the 90's (pp. 4553). San Antonio, TX: Institute for CrossCultural Research.

Chen, G. M., & Chung, J, (1994). The impact of Confucianism on organizational communication. Communication Quarterly, 42, 93105.

Chen, G. M., & Chung, J. (1997). The "Five Asian Dragons": Management behaviors and organizational communication. In L. A. Samovar and R. E. Porter (Eds.), Intercultural Communication: A reader (pp. 317328).  Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. 

Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (1996). Intercultural communication competence: A synthesis.  Communication Yearbook, 19, 353383.  

Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (19978). Chinese conflict management and resolution: Overview and implications. Intercultural Communication Studies, 7, 116.

Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (1998a). Foundations of intercultural communication. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (1998b). A review of the concept of intercultural sensitivity. Human Communication, 1, 116.

Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (1999). A review of the concept of intercultural awareness. Human Communication, 2, 2754.

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. 116). New York: Peter Lang.

Chen, G. M., & Xiao, XS (1993, November). The impact of "harmony" on Chinese negotiations. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Speech Communication Association, Miami Beach, Florida.

Chen, G. M., & Zhong, M. (1996, November). Dimensions of Chinese compliancegaining strategies. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Speech Communication Association, San Diego, California.

Cheng, CY. (1987). Chinese philosophy and contemporary human communication theory. In D. L. Kincaid (Ed.), Communication theory: Eastern and Western perspectives (pp. 2343). New York:  Academic.

Chiao, C. (1981).Chinese strategic behavior: Some central principles.  Paper presented at the Conference on Content of Culture, Claremont, California. 

Chiao, C. (1988a). On guanxi. In K. S. Yang (Ed.), The Psychology of Chinese people (pp. 105122).  Taipei: Kuei Guan.

Chiao, C. (1988b). An establishment of a model of Chinese strategic behaviors. In K. S. Yang (Ed.), The Psychology of Chinese people (pp. 431446).  Taipei: Kuei Guan.

Chiao, C. (1989). Chinese strategic behavior: Some general principles. In R. Bolton (Ed.), The content of culture: Constants and variants (pp. 525537).  New Haven, Conn: Hraf.

Chu, CN (1991). The Asian mind game.  New York: Rawson.

Chu, J. L. (1988). The Chinese social interaction: a face perspective. In K. S. Yang (Ed.), The Psychology of Chinese people (pp. 238288). Taipei: Kuei Guan.

Chu, R. L. (1983). Empirical researches on the psychology of face. Doctoral dissertation, Taipei, Taiwan: National Taiwan University.

Chu, S. (1974). The interpretation of I Ching.  Taipei: Wen Hua.

Chung, J. (1991, April). Seniority and particularistic ties in a Chinese conflict resolution process.  Paper presented at the annual convention of Eastern Communication Association, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Chung, J. (1992, November). Equilibrium in the Confucianisminfluenced superiorsubordinate communication system. Paper presented at the annual convention of Speech Communication Association, Chicago, Illinois.

Chung, J. (1996). Avoiding a "Bull Moose" rebellion: particularistic ties, seniority, and thirdparty mediation. International and Intercultural Communication Annual, 20, 166185.

Cleary, T. (1988). The art of war.  Boston, MA: Shambhala.

Condon, J. C. (1977). Interpersonal communication.  New York: Macmillan.

Condon, J. C. (1984). With respect to the Japanese: A guide for Americans.  Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

Condon, J. C. (1985). Good neighbors: Communicating with the Mexicans.  Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

Condon, J. C., & Yousef, F. (1975). An introduction to intercultural communication. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs Merill. 

Conrad, C. (1994). Strategies organizational communication. New York: Harcourt Brace College Publishers. 

Eberhard, W. (1971). Moral and social values of the Chinese  collected essays. Washington, DC: Chinese Materials and Research Aids Service Center.

Epstein, M. (1995). After the future: The paradoxes of postmodernism and contemporary Russian culture. Amherst, MA: The University of Massachusetts Press.

Fang, T. H. (1981). Chinese philosophy: Its spirit and its development.  Taipei: Linking.

Fingarette, H. (1972). Confucius: The secular as sacred. New York: Harper & Row.

Folger, J. P., Poole, M. S., & Strutman, R. K. (1993). Working through conflict.  New York: Harper Collins.

Fung, Y. L. (1983). A history of Chinese philosophy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 

Griffin, K. (1967). Interpersonal trust in smallgroup communication.  Quarterly Journal of Speech, 53, 224234.

Gu, Y. J. (1992). Distinction of ingroup and outgroup.  In C. Yiao (Ed.), The Chinese renqin and mientz (pp. 2433).  Beijing: Chinese Friendship.

Gudykunst, W. B., & Nishida, T. (1984). Social penetration in close relationships in Japan and the United States. In R. Bostrom (Ed.), Communication Yearbook, 7.  Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Gudykunst, W. B., & TingToomey, S. (1988). Culture and interpersonal communication.  Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Hall, E. T. (1976).  Beyond culture.  Garden city, NY: Anchor.  

Harnett, D. L., & Cummings, I. I. (1980). Bargaining behavior: An international study.  Houston, TX: Some.

Hawes, L. C. (1975). Pragmatics of analoguing: Theory and model construction in communication.  Reading, MA: AddisonWesley.

Hofstede, G. (1980).  Culture's consequences: International differences in workrelated values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Hsu, F. L. K. (1953). Americans and Chinese: Two ways of life.  New York: AbelardSchuman.

Hsu, W. (1987). The modernization of Chinese management. Hong Kong: Hsin Lien.

Hu, H. C. (1944). The Chinese concept of "face." American Anthropology, 46, 4564.

Hwang, K. K. (1987). Renqin and face: The Chinese power game. American Journal of Sociology, 92, 944974.

Hwang, K. K. (1988). The Chinese renqin relationship.  In C. Y. Wen and S. H. Xiao (Eds.), The Chinese: Their perception and behaviors (pp. 4370).  Taipei, Taiwan: Ju Lieu.  

Hwang, K. K. (19978). Guanxi and mientze: conflict resolution in Chinese society. Intercultural Communication Studies, 7, 1740.

Jia, W. (19978). Facework as a Chinese conflictpreventive mechanism: A cultural/discourse analysis. Intercultural Communication Studies, 7, 6382.

Jin, Y. J. (1988). An analysis of face, shame, and Chinese behaviors. In K. S. Yang (Ed.), The Psychology of Chinese people (pp. 319346). Taipei: Kuei Guan.

Jocobs, B. J. (1979). A preliminary model of particularistic ties in Chinese political alliances: Kanching and Juanhis in a rural Taiwanese township.  China Quarterly, 78, 237273.

Kapp, R. A.. (1983) (Ed.). Communicating with China. Chicago, IL: Intercultural Press.

Legge, J. (1955). The Four Book.  Taipei: Wen Yo.

Leung, K. (1988). Some determinants of conflict avoidance. Journal of CrossCultural Psychology, 19, 125136.

Li, S. J., Yang, S. J., & Tang, J. Z. (1989). Sun Tze Bin Fa and business management.  Hong Kong: San Lien.

Lin, Y. S. (1988). The social philosophy of Yin Chuan's Yi Chuan.  Taipei, Shen Wu.

Lindin, O. G. (1974). Harmony with nature in Chinese thought and opposition to nature in Western thought. The Journal of Intercultural Studies, 1, 59. 

Liu, C. L. (1990).  The cyclic view of I Ching and Chinese thinking. China Yi Studies, 123, 1416  & 124, 1318. 

Liu, C. L. (1992). Chinese wisdom and system thoughts. Taipei:  Shen Wu.

Ma, R. (1990). An exploratory study of discontented responses in American and Chinese relationships. The Southern Communication Journal, 55, 305318.

Ma, R. (1992). The role of unofficial intermediaries in interpersonal conflicts in the Chinese culture. Communication quarterly, 40, 269278.

Nadler, B. N., Nadler, M. K., & Broome, B. J. (1985). Culture and the management of conflict situations. In W. B. Gudykunst, L. P. Stewart, and TingToomey (Eds.), Communication, culture, and organizational processes (pp. 87113).  Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Nakanishi, M. (1987). Perceptions of selfdisclosure initial interactions: A Japanese sample. Human communication Research, 13, 167190.

Powers, J. H. (19978). Conflict genres and management strategies during China's ten years turmoil. Intercultural Communication Studies, 7, 149168.

Pye, L. (1982). Chinese commercial negotiation style. Cambridge, MA: Oelgechlager, Gunn & Hain.

Schneider, M. J. (1985).  Verbal and nonverbal indices of the communicative performance and acculturation of Chinese immigrants. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 9, 271283.

Senger, H. (1988).  The book of stratagems: Tactics for triumph and survival.  New York: Viking.

Shenkar, O., & Ronen, S. (1987). The cultural context of negotiations: The implications of Chinese interpersonal norms. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 23, 263275.

Silin, R. H. (1981). Leadership and values: The organization of largescale Taiwanese enterprise. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.  

Stewart, E. C., & Bennett, M. J. (1991). American cultural patterns: A crosscultural perspective. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

Wang, B. S. (1989). Between Confucianism and Taoism.  Taipei: Han Kuan.

Wang, J. D. (1976). Sun Tze Bin Fa.  Taipei: Chuon Wen.

Wang, Y. L. (1992). Renqin and mientz. In C. Yiao (Ed.), The Chinese renqin and mientz (pp. 3445).  Beijing: Chinese Friendship.

Wei, Y. (1983). The importance of Being KEQI: A note on communication difficulties.  In R. A. Kapp (Ed.), Communicating with China (pp. 7176).  Chicago, IL: Intercultural Press.

Wen, C. I. (1988). An investigation of Chinese national character: A value orientation perspective. In I. U. Lee and K. S. Yang (Eds.), The Chinese character (pp. 4990). Taipei: Kwei Kwan.

Wilhelm, R. (1979). Lectures on the I Ching: Constancy and change.  Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Wilhelm, R. (Trans.) (1990). The I Ching. Princeton, NY: Princeton University Press. 

Wolfson, K., & Pearce, W. B. (1983). A crosscultural comparison of the implications of selfdisclosure on conversational logics.  Communication Quarterly, 31, 249256.

Wu, Y. (1964). The concept of change in I Ching. Chuon Kuo Yi Chou, 754, 1921.

Wu, Y. (1976). The philosophy of Cheng in Chuon Yuon. Taipei: Don Da.

Yang, H. J. (1978). Communicative competence in Formosan sociable events: A participant observation study. Dissertation Abstracts International, 39, 2622A.

Yum, J. O. (1988). The impact of Confucianism on interpersonal relationships and communication patterns in East Asia. Communication Monographs, 55, 374388.