School of Foreign Studies, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an, China
Email: 1975859964@qq.com (K.Y.); wangq@nwpu.edu.cn (Q.W.)
*Corresponding author
Manuscript received November 28, 2025; accepted March 11, 2026; published May 28, 2026
Abstract—As global aging becomes an increasingly pressing issue, elderly care has emerged as a focal point in public discourse, attracting significant attention in media reports. This study employs both quantitative and qualitative analyses, both selecting 12 representative articles from
China Daily and
The Times for comparison. By utilizing corpus analysis, the research explores cultural differences in elderly care concepts between China and the UK through the lens of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory. The findings reveal that China’s approach to elderly care emphasizes filial piety and is predominantly rooted in family-based caregiving, reflecting the country’s collectivist values. In contrast, the UK emphasizes independence in elderly care, advocating for a socialized care model that aligns with its individualistic cultural values. This paper highlights the deep connection between language and cultural perceptions in media discourse on elderly care, offering insights that could inform the development of more effective elderly care systems. Additionally, it contributes to the practical application and further exploration of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory in cross-cultural contexts.
Keywords—Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory, news discourse, corpus-based analysis, concepts of elderly care
Cite: Kaijia Yan and Qian Wang, "A Study of the Differences Between Chinese and British Concepts of Elderly Care from the Perspective of Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions,"
International Journal of Languages, Literature and Linguistics, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 134-138, 2026.
Copyright © 2026 by the authors. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).