English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Nowadays, intercultural communication can be considered a ‘discipline’ clearly inserted within the ‘system of science’. At first sight, this seems to be a major achievement on the way to elaborate consistent theories and effective models to be applied in the several fields in which intercultural interactions occur. Moreover, the increasing visibility and reputation of Intercultural communication within the ‘scientific community’ may be a useful step towards spreading a favourably intercultural attitude around the globe. But this does not come at no cost, as I argue in this mainly epistemologically oriented article, by showing that the process through which Intercultural communication has been institutionalised followed the usual ‘rules of the game’ coming from the traditional understanding of ‘Western modern science’, which should be instead radically put into question.

Intercultural communication: the pros and cons of being a ‘Discipline’