Cross-Cultural Communication Breakdown - Assignment Example

Linguistics Name Institution Date Cross- cultural communication breakdown Introduction The ability for human beings to communicate and specifically to use language is the one characteristic that distinguishes human beings from other animal species. Language is the medium through which people are able to express their feelings and share their experiences within and across generations (Leont'ev, 1977, p. 35). Vygotsky argues that language is the medium through which communication is facilitated and by acquiring language, an individual acquires system of thinking. Vygotksy, (1978, p. 26) states “Children solve practical problems with the help of their speech, as well as with their eyes and hands.” Vygotksy, (1978, p.5) indicates that language plays two fundamental roles in development of cognition; as the principal means for adults to transfer information and knowledge to children and as a powerful tool of intellectual adaptation. According to Kroeber and Kluckhohn, (1952, p. 220), language is an element of culture while culture symbolize the entirety of the created human world encompassing and not limited to arts, language, social activities, beliefs, sciences, social interactions and communication. If communication is a process of coding and decoding messages, it is apparent therefore that there are numerous instances in the communication process where communication will be broken down for failure to accurately interpret the intended meaning (Cook, 2002, p.167). Effective communication is reliant fundamentally on shared culture and even in cases where two people from different cultures communicating, even when they are sharing a common language, communication can disintegrates (Harmer, 2007, p.34). This is because, understanding a language does not automatically offer one the background knowledge which native speakers of the language have. Cross cultural differences are the primary causes of cross cultural communication breakdown and more significantly influence the learning of a foreign or a second language such as English (Crozet & Liddicoat, 1999, p.113). This forms the basis of this report which seeks to analyze cross cultural communication breakdown between English and Arabic language and examining how the causes of the breakdown can be averted to ensure effective learning of English as a second language among Arabic speakers Miscommunication between members of two different cultures Kroeber & Kluckhohn, (1952, p. 4) describes culture as the set of ideals, beliefs, practices and customs that are learned and shared and they influence how an individual think, expresses themselves, behave and perceive in a patterned way. Culture is not inert and it changes among and within people and over time and place (Kim, 2002, p.1). Significantly, no individual can be summed as a basic set of cultural customs or reduced to a set of traditional rules. Owing to differences in culture, people from different cultural backgrounds communicate using different languages which may be unfamiliar to others and failure to understand the communication differences among and between varying cultures can result in misunderstanding and cross-cultural communication breakdown (Cook, 2002, p.51). Effective cross cultural communication is crucial in generating trust, resolving conflict and enhancing good rapport among people from different cultural backgrounds (Ozcelik & Paprike, 2010, p.672). Failure to have clear and elaborate comprehension of cultural differences and the cultural systems of an individual such as the Hierarchical system demonstrated in Korean culture, then from the initial contact of a handshake and greeting words between two people from varying cultures such as an Australian and a Japanese or a Korean and an American, there are bound to be misunderstandings, misapprehensions, misinterpretations of emotions and there is more likelihood for either to lose face from the initial encounter (Kim, 2002, p.1). In a Korean context for example, their cultural way of life is entrenched in Confucionist perspectives which demands for social harmony, moral virtues and filial piety which makes all Koreans to hold fast to formal rules and forms of communication that are often unfamiliar to cultures that are non-Confucionist such as American or Australian (Oh, 2002, p.1). For this reason, cross cultural communication between speakers from Confucionist –based language culture with a speaker from non-Confucionist based language culture is characterized by violations of cultural norms and cultural customs by the non-Confucionist culture speaker. According to Cook, (2001, p. 152), there is tendency for English teachers from the Western world in China; unknowingly insulting the Confusion ethos to which Chinese culture is based. Similarly, Fageeh, (2011, p.65) indicates that cultural variations between English and Arabic are present not only in traditions and habits but also in their ideal systems, beliefs, mode of thoughts and perceptions that have permeated into the cultural aspect of language utilization in intra-cultural communication. Fageeh goes ahead to mention that these varied modal elements of thoughts in English and Arabic languages generates from the disparities in Oriental ideologies and Western philosophies of English and Arabic languages respectively where the former is objective and the latter subjective (Fageeh, 2011, p.65). (Fageeh, 2011, p.65) notes that the objectivity of the English language culture makes it paratactic, diffusive and clandestine while the subjectivity of the Arabic language makes it hypotactic, compacted and explicit in regards to how the two perceive and understand the world. The what, when, how, why of cross cultural communication breakdown Learning a second language is closely linked to culture learning (Harmer, 2007, p.8). According to Citron, (1995, p.105), learning a second language needs fundamentally intense foreign culture learning as students get to open their minds to the ways of people different from them and enhances the chances for cross-cultural understanding. This means that teaching English as a second language to students for instance, from the Arabic culture, requires teaching the Arabic students not only the terminologies, grammar and structures of English language but also enlightening them on the English culture and how native English speakers see the world and their beliefs, ideas, ideals, norms and behaviors (Cook, 2002, p.231). Differences in the social-linguistic aspects of language during cross cultural communication According to Santos & Suleiman, (1993, p.175), understanding the culture of the foreign or second language one is learning is critical since the foreign culture affects all elements of language ranging from lexical analysis, study of grammar and syntax, reading and literature and to writing compositions and essays. Primarily the socio-linguistic elements of Arabic language vary from that of English language. Owing to social linguistic elements that exists in varied cultures makes the people within these cultures to perceive, think and interact differently in varied life situations (Holmes, 2007, p.11). For instance, there exist differences in terms of the length and depth that a person can query another on personal issues such as family, health and wealth. In the same breadth, social linguistic aspects influences how certain people understand and interpret anecdotes since what may be hilarious and comical for one person might necessarily be for another. Santos & Suleiman, (1993, p.177) supports this by indicating that jokes that are amusing to Arabic might sound offensive to a westerner and vice versa. With dissimilarities such as these influences both the spoken communication and the written discourse of native speakers of various languages which for instance in Arabic language has resulted in prolix language where rational structuring of ideas seems as unfamiliar to Arabs learning English as a second language as English itself as noted by Yorkey, (1977, p.57). On the other hand, according to Crozet and Liddicoat, (1997, p.107), teaching of the English language to Korean native speakers does not apply the Inter cultural language teaching theorem which means that when cross cultural speakers such as a Korean and an Australian communicate, they are likely to counter the Confusion elements of the Korean culture and the elusiveness of the Australian culture as they speak English as supported by Beal (1992, p.39). In such a scenario, misunderstandings and misapprehensions are bound to occur where each perceive the other as rude and it leads in the Korean speaker losing face, which is a dreadful communication outcome. Beal, (1990, p.26) argues that the loss of face for a Korean which is termed Chaemyoun is significantly different from the understanding of an Australian losing face. Yang, (2002, p.73) states that "Chaemyoun and honor are more important than life and death," which means loss of face for a Korean carries more weight and meaning compared to the meaning carried by people from a different culture such as Australian or American cultures. Variations in cultures as outlined above and the varied language dialects that exist among English and Arab languages and among Korean and Australian languages contribute to cross cultural miscommunication. For these reasons, teaching English as a second language to speakers from varied cultures must take all these elements into consideration although teaching the second language and imparting cultural knowledge to students learning English as a second language generates extra load on EFL teachers, making cross- cultural communication more tasking (Holmes, 2007, p.45). In a recent incident, George, a European man was communicating with a travel agent from the Japanese culture to make arrangements for a flight from Tokyo to Yamagata-Ken and what transpired demonstrate the way differences in communication cues, communication styles and communication attitude influence effective cross-cultural communication. The communication went like this, George: I would like to book a flight from Tokyo to Yamagata-Ken Travel Agent: Okay. You would like to book a flight? George: Yes, Can i? Travel Agent: From Tokyo? George: Yeah Travel Agent: to Yamagata-Ken? George: Yeah Travel Agent: Ah George: Can I book? Travel Agent: Maybe you would prefer to go by train. George: No, I prefer to take a flight Travel Agent: Ah, you want to go using a plane? George: Yes. Travel Agent: You said from Tokyo? The conversation did take twenty more minutes and by the end of it, George was beside himself with anger and he could not understand why the travel agent could not simply tell him there were no flights from Tokyo to Yamagata-Ken instead of taking too long to do so. George was frustrated by the agent’s failure to communicate but what George did not understand is that speakers from Japanese culture communicate differently from those from Western culture such as him. Japanese are known to avoid being direct while westerners are famous for their directness which for the either may be misinterpreted and misunderstood and considered rudeness (Cook, 2002, p.144). As illustrated above, the use of the English language in communicating across cultures generates its own difficulties for the speakers. For instance when communicating in English, a Japanese speaker may use the words I see, ah, and even yes to simply say No, while a westerner simply say No just as it is without looking for ways to cover the negation that comes with saying No (Kim, 2002, p.1). Miscommunications in English among speakers from different cultural backgrounds There are tendencies for learners of foreign language to unknowingly utilize their traditions and their cultural world view and systems of thought to learn the foreign language, which leads to the learners understanding English writings inaccurately (Fageeh, 2011, p.66). Fageeh suggests that a learner, despite the amount of cultural background understanding they have learnt and acquired (Fageeh, 2011, p.66). For this reasons, teaching English as a second language should be integrated with taking into account thinking systems in order to facilitate effective understanding of English materials on English culture and facilitating effective cross cultural communication with English native speakers. There are instances when the use of English words is incorporated with native languages to come up with a new form of language that is not fully English or the native language (Kim, 2002, p.1). For instance the Koreans have Konglish where Koreans speak English using Korean syntax. Konglish are words borrowed from the Korean Language and used as regular terminology (Akmajian, 1993, p.260). Such words can generate misunderstandings and cause cross cultural communication breakdown if used with speakers who do understand it. For instance, for an American, consent refers to agreeing while in Konglish it refers to an electric power point, while a handle in Konglish refers to a handle. Additionally, eye shopping in Konglish refers to the American window shopping while fighting in Konglish is offering support and encouragement to a soccer team (Kim, 2002, p.1). This illustrates the variance the meaning of words which although in English, holds very different meaning for different cultures and more significantly, it shows that cross cultural communication breakdowns can occur in English among speakers from varying cultures by generating lexical misunderstandings (Kim, 2002, p.1). Impact of lack of emotional awareness, cultural myths and realities during cross cultural interactions Despite the efforts directed towards developing cultural awareness as a means to facilitating effective learning of foreign language and facilitating effective cross cultural communication, little emphasis is placed on enhancing people’s awareness particularly students of foreign languages on developing their emotional awareness and skills while interacting cross culturally (Ozcelik & Paprike, 2010, p.672). According to the author, gaining emotional skills are essential in helping cross cultural speakers in dealing with uncertainty, possibility of misunderstandings and conflict during cross cultural interactions (Ozcelik & Paprike, 2010, p.674). On the other hand, failure to effectively learn a foreign language and even communicate with people across cultures is influenced by the second language learners and cross cultural speaker’s lack of awareness of their individual cultural realities and myths which has the ability to hinder or ease comprehension of the foreign language and understanding the other cross cultural speaker respectively (Kramsch, 1993, p.207). Effect of pronunciation of English words generated by effects of mother tongue Effects of pronunciation of English words can cause misunderstandings and confusion for people communicating cross culturally. More often than not, those who learn English as the second language are greatly influenced by the first language in writing and communicating in the second language. According to Yamada and Tohkura, (1992, p.155) majority of Japanese have a difficult time pronouncing and differentiating between an l and r, which is the same case for Koreans. With such speakers, communicating with them in English requires greater efforts on one’s part to not only understand the words used but to do it in such a way to ensure the other does not lose face. For example, A Korean teacher may innocently tell his students that he went to Church to play and if there is a native English speaker among the students, the obvious question would be why the teacher was playing in the Church which may cause the teacher to lose face. Therefore, the English speaker or the teacher has to do repair to correct the conversation such as echoing, using non-verbal cues and using words such as pardon, sorry, and come again (Richards & Schmidt, 1983, p. 148). Majority of cases of cross cultural communications breakdowns is also as a result of misinterpreted and misunderstood non-verbal and bodily communications (Kim, 2002, p.1). According to Kim, different people from different cultures have different bodily movements or body language that means different things depending on context. It is crucial for cross cultural communicators to understand the other’s body cues and signals and interpret the intended meaning (Harmer, 2007). Most American speakers are fond of using arm movements while Japanese are more reserved and they suppress using hand movements. Other body cues that are different for different people that has an effect in communication across cultures includes the duration of a facial gaze, shaking the head to affirm or to negate, silent periods, handshaking, conversational overlaps and touching among people of the same gender and across genders (Kim, 2002, p.1). How to improve the learning of English language and avoid miscommunication in the use of English language Crozet & Liddicoat, (1999, p.116) suggest that to be an effective intercultural speaker one has to be able to operate their linguistic proficiency and are aware of sociolinguistic elements of the correlation between language and the situation in which it is used with the view of managing interaction across cultural limits and anticipate misunderstandings generated by variations in ideals, beliefs, meanings and perceptions. It is critical that for second or foreign language learners to not only learn about their own culture first prior to learning the other language culture but also, ensuring they are exposed to the foreign language culture in order to enhance their world view (Holmes, 2007). According to Fageeh, (2011, p.67), curriculum and educational resources for ELT should incorporate native speakers, culture-specific resources to assist foreign language learners in getting engaged in real cultural experiences. These materials should contain vital information on the cultural ideals, beliefs, system of thoughts and world views of the target language culture with the view of offering foreign language learners the opportunities to comprehend the linguistic codes of the foreign language and helping them communicate competently with the foreign language native speakers in a manner that simplify intra-cultural understanding and inter-cultural communication without resulting into cross cultural confusion and misunderstandings (Fageeh, 2011, p.69). For instance, Arab students learning English as a second language must be provided with curriculum materials that contain cultural specific information related to the English language such as the ideals, beliefs and perceptions of the English language culture in order to give the Arab speakers the opportunities to comprehend the linguistic codes of English language and helping them converse knowledgeably with English native speakers in a manner that simplify intra-cultural understanding and inter-cultural communication without ensuing into cross cultural uncertainties and misunderstandings. According to Ozcelik & Paprike, (2010, p.679), to ensure effective intercultural learning, there must be a comprehensive knowledge about the cultural aspects and variable of the other culture and a critical reflection of one’s individual culture. Therefore, Arab students learning English as the second language must first gain broad understanding of the English language culture and more significantly critically reflect on the Arab culture to be able to be effective intercultural and intercultural speakers. Other than that, being emotionally aware as earlier indicated is crucial. Arab students learning English can effectively acquire emotional awareness by increasing their exposure and contact with English native speakers which is not achievable through modern technologies such as video conferencing (Ozcelik & Paprike, 2010, p.672). Conclusion Language and culture are so closely intertwined such that one cannot understand one effectively without having ample knowledge about the other. For this reason, cross cultural communication is most effective among speakers who are not only aware of their culture but also comprehensively aware and understand the culture of the other person they communicating with cross culturally. In regards to learning a foreign language such as English, the most effective way to do so is by learning the English language culture such as its ideas, traditions, conduct and ideals to avoid generalizations and more importantly safeguarding against the English language learners from interpreting the English language using the cultural elements of their first language or native language which leads to miscommunications and misunderstandings when they converse, read or write in the English language. References Akmajian, A., Demers, R., Farmer, A. & Harnish, R. 1993. Linguistics. An Introduction to Language and Communication. London: The MIT Press. Beal, C. 1992. Did you have a Good Week-end? Or why there is no such thing as a simple question in cross-cultural encounters. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 15(1), pp.23-52. Citron, J. 1995. Can Cross-Cultural Understanding Aid Second Language Acquisition? Toward a Theory of Ethno-Lingual Relativity. Hispania, 78 (1), 105-113. Cook, V. 2002. Second Language Learning and Teaching, 3rd edn. , London: Arnold. Crozet, C. & Liddicoat, A.J. 1999. The challenge of intercultural language teaching: Engaging with culture in the classroom. In Striving for the Third Place: Intercultural Competence through Language Education, ed.J. Lo Bianco, A.J. Liddicoat & C. Crozet, Language Australia, Melbourne, pp. 113-125. Crozet, C. & Liddicoat, A.J. 1997. Teaching Culture as an Integrated Part of Language Teaching: An Introduction. ARAL Series S, no. 14, pp.1-22. Fageeh, A.A. 2011. At Crossroads of EFL Learning and Culture: How to Enhance Cross-cultural Awareness in EFL College Students. CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 62-72 Harmer, J. 2007. The practice of English language teaching. (4th ed.). Harlow: Longman. Holmes, J. 2007. An introduction to sociolinguistics. 3rd ed. Harlow: Pearson Longman. Kim, J.P. 2002. Korea. A cross cultural communication analyzed. Asian EFL Journal. Kramsch, C. 1993. Teaching language along the cultural fault line', in Context and Culture in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press pp. 205-232. Kroeber, A. L. and C. Kluckhohn, C. 1952. Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions. Cambridge, MA: Peabody Museum. Leont'ev, A. 1977. Activity, Consciousness, and Personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall. Oh, Y.J. 2002. 'Hong-Gul Case May Taint Kim's Legacy', The Korea Times. Ozcelik, H., & Paprika, Z.Z. 2010. Developing Emotional Awareness in Cross-Cultural Communication: A Videoconferencing Approach. Journal of Management Education, 34(5) 671–699 Richards, J.C. & Schmidt, R.W. 1983. Conversational analyses in Language and Communication. Longman: London, pp. 116-154. Santos, S. & Suleiman, M. 1993. Teaching English to Arabic-speaking students: cultural and linguistic considerations. Proceedings of the National Annual Association for Bilingual Education Conferences, Tucson, AZ, pp. 175-180. Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes, ed. James V. Wertsch. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Yang, S. 2002. Chaemyoun-saving, (face saving)" due to Korean job loss. Listening to men's voices. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, vol. 33.il. pp 73. Yamada, T. & Tohkura, Y. 1992, Perception of American English /r/ and /l/ by Native Speakers of Japanese. In Y. Tohkura, E. Bateson & Y. Sagisaka eds. Speech Perception. Production and Linguistic Structure. Tokyo: Ohmsha, Amsterdam, IOS Press, pp.155- 174. Yorkey, R. 1977. Practical techniques for teaching Arabic-speaking students. In J. Alatis & R. Crymes (eds.). The human factors in ESL: a series of six lectures, pp. 57-85. Washington, D.C.: TESOL. Read More

Similarly, Fageeh, (2011, p.65) indicates that cultural variations between English and Arabic are present not only in traditions and habits but also in their ideal systems, beliefs, mode of thoughts and perceptions that have permeated into the cultural aspect of language utilization in intra-cultural communication. Fageeh goes ahead to mention that these varied modal elements of thoughts in English and Arabic languages generates from the disparities in Oriental ideologies and Western philosophies of English and Arabic languages respectively where the former is objective and the latter subjective (Fageeh, 2011, p.65). (Fageeh, 2011, p.65) notes that the objectivity of the English language culture makes it paratactic, diffusive and clandestine while the subjectivity of the Arabic language makes it hypotactic, compacted and explicit in regards to how the two perceive and understand the world.

The what, when, how, why of cross cultural communication breakdown Learning a second language is closely linked to culture learning (Harmer, 2007, p.8). According to Citron, (1995, p.105), learning a second language needs fundamentally intense foreign culture learning as students get to open their minds to the ways of people different from them and enhances the chances for cross-cultural understanding. This means that teaching English as a second language to students for instance, from the Arabic culture, requires teaching the Arabic students not only the terminologies, grammar and structures of English language but also enlightening them on the English culture and how native English speakers see the world and their beliefs, ideas, ideals, norms and behaviors (Cook, 2002, p.231). Differences in the social-linguistic aspects of language during cross cultural communication According to Santos & Suleiman, (1993, p.175), understanding the culture of the foreign or second language one is learning is critical since the foreign culture affects all elements of language ranging from lexical analysis, study of grammar and syntax, reading and literature and to writing compositions and essays.

Primarily the socio-linguistic elements of Arabic language vary from that of English language. Owing to social linguistic elements that exists in varied cultures makes the people within these cultures to perceive, think and interact differently in varied life situations (Holmes, 2007, p.11). For instance, there exist differences in terms of the length and depth that a person can query another on personal issues such as family, health and wealth. In the same breadth, social linguistic aspects influences how certain people understand and interpret anecdotes since what may be hilarious and comical for one person might necessarily be for another.

Santos & Suleiman, (1993, p.177) supports this by indicating that jokes that are amusing to Arabic might sound offensive to a westerner and vice versa. With dissimilarities such as these influences both the spoken communication and the written discourse of native speakers of various languages which for instance in Arabic language has resulted in prolix language where rational structuring of ideas seems as unfamiliar to Arabs learning English as a second language as English itself as noted by Yorkey, (1977, p.57). On the other hand, according to Crozet and Liddicoat, (1997, p.107), teaching of the English language to Korean native speakers does not apply the Inter cultural language teaching theorem which means that when cross cultural speakers such as a Korean and an Australian communicate, they are likely to counter the Confusion elements of the Korean culture and the elusiveness of the Australian culture as they speak English as supported by Beal (1992, p.39). In such a scenario, misunderstandings and misapprehensions are bound to occur where each perceive the other as rude and it leads in the Korean speaker losing face, which is a dreadful communication outcome.

Beal, (1990, p.26) argues that the loss of face for a Korean which is termed Chaemyoun is significantly different from the understanding of an Australian losing face.

Read More