Linguistic Barriers to Cultural Assimilation in the United States - Article Example

Linguistic Barriers to Cultural Assimilation in the United States Abstract When making the transition from one country to another, each person encounters particular linguistic barriers that facilitate and hinder target cultural assimilation from citizenry of birth. However, the first and most noticeable step for all individuals is linguistic identity from which the individual affects and is affected by his or her social transmission and interaction with the exterior culture. People naturally learn how to use spoken language to save those with language impairment. This research article discusses the levels of linguistic acculturation and the difficulties non-native Arabic speakers will encounter by virtue of being in the United States or Saudi Arabia. Nevertheless, it compares perceptions of barriers to acculturation and bilingualism of Hispanic heritage speakers in the U.S. with the perceptions of obstacles to acculturation and bilingualism of Arabic heritage speakers in the U.S. The most salient and primary among such perceived barriers is language in nature, beginning with phonology, then onto the syntax, and finally pragmatic nuances of the negotiation of meaning. Linguistic conflicts and misunderstandings are not limited to the international students, but they are the ones who must bear the burden, being less than even a minority class of citizens within the United States. The article further provides insight as to why, how, when, and what kinds of problems various types of international students encounter. Introduction This research pertains to the issues facing international students studying at the university level within the continental United States. People from a vast range of countries come to the U.S. in order to pursue their degrees in higher education. When students have been in their country of origin for all their lives and then suddenly move to a new country, they face an extreme culture shock. Therefore, they should be able to make the transition to life in the U.S. Everything is so very new and it takes long time to get adjusted to the novel stimuli. The major problems that they face after moving to the U.S. are; the new styles of education and classroom behaviors, even peer relations within the classroom, but the origin of these difficulties lies in the difference between all interlocutors which are native and immigrant alike, and is of language expression and processing (Thomas, 1988). The hypothesis of this study is interlanguage-linguistic relativity determines cultural assimilation of Muslim women studying in the U.S. When attending the United States University program, international students undergo some extreme cultural isolation that inhibits their ability to perform within the scholastic society. The perceptions of them as students and peers include but are not limited to surprise, ridicule, fear, and disgust. These perceptions isolate the international student from the culture within the problems of acculturation that are not only from in their language, but also within the “interlanguage” of each student. The interlanguage is the linguistic system that is presented by the phonology, and morphology. Also, syntax, semantics, and eventually the pragmatics that each language present within the mind of the language learner uses to express meaning (Schumann, 1979). Due to the language usage over time and the stress involved with the language usage in each contextual situation, second language learning becomes a struggle of the above-mentioned aspects of the interlanguage, mother tongue (L1), and those of the target language (L2), (Skehan, 1989). Of course, these are not the only barriers to language learning either. According to leading theorists of language learning, the language learners may also be past their prime when it comes to quickly acquiring new linguistic awareness from a different language-learning source. This idea has been well established within the context of language learning theory and is known as “Universal Grammar.” Within this study, however, universal grammar (UG) will not be the focus. Instead, we will rely on the assumption that the reader is aware of the constraints presented by the theory of UG (Chomsky, 1965). The purpose of this study is to understand how language barrier affects international students pursuing studies in United States and Saudi Arabia? Does second learning affect cultural assimilation of an individual with regards to women Muslims? Moreover, how are the problems encountered and possible remedies to these challenges adjusted for better living? Literature Review It is very difficult for someone to come to a new country and to learn how to speak in a clear way without sounding like an immigrant. This difficulty usually persists due to the way people are taught the language. In the classroom more focus lies in the meaning of words, than the way they sound. The meaning is defined by the morphology, semantics (denotation of words), and pragmatics that include the social context (Scovel, 2001). If a person has never learned to use their ability to copy the sounds of another, they may have difficulty processing information as great speeds. This is according to Pagano & Vallar, 1992). Language learning in this context is often disregarded as unimportant., However, as far as the acculturation model goes, anything that can keep a person from being labeled as an outsider, will give them the opportunity to interact with more and more people. The sounds associated with most people’s speech are enough to make it difficult for others to understand what they say. Many people will just not engage another person if they cannot understand the words made out of sound symbols. This creates a social boundary between the L2 learner and the target language users as a source of information. Therefore, the L2 learner must find another data source, and since it usually comes in the form of another native speaker of their language, there is little to no linguistic acculturation (Tse, 2000). This social isolation due to noticing of language variations also happens to other kinds of language development. Another two such aspects of language difference are those of the language morphology and the language syntax. Morphology is the study of the change each word has to do in order to demonstrate the different functions, times, place, possession, among others associated with the word in context. One example of these morphological differences is that of tense. It indicates the time that is represented by the word. For example, the differences between the words “work” and “worked” is the suffix “ -ed” which shows that it happened in the past. In Arabic, there are morphological affixes to nouns that indicate possession. The sound [heb] means, “ heart” or “love” the sound [habibi] means “my loved one.” This is one of the first differences that may be noticed by a native English speaker if they went to an Arabic speaking country. Another part of the language that changes the meaning of a sentence is the syntax. Each language has a particular order in which, it is produced according to the social norms. This sentence structure is known as syntax. The syntax of English in a sentence is “Subject (I, You, He, She, and It.) + Verb (runs, write) + Object (to the store, out of the house, in a journal) i.e. SVO, but the syntax of Arabic can be SVO or VSO. “.يقرأ المدرس الكتاب,” translates to, “ reads teacher the book.” Also, it is important to point out that in Arabic the letters are read from right to left, and in English from left to right. This can lead to input problems when the students are not attending to the details. It would be very easy to make a mistake when processing language in this way, and switching back and forth would be very confusing to the mind of the reader. However, it may make matching exercises very easy. These differences make it difficult to understand meaning of words, especially when one language has been used for so long that it takes more time and energy to direct the thoughts in a different way (Schwartz, et al. 2000). This difference shows yet another social barrier to cultural assimilation, especially if the phonological processing speeds are slower, because it takes more time to understand the sounds, and then the changes of the words because they are also associated with the sounds (Papagano et al. 1992 & Tse, 2000). Any inability to process information becomes a problem with the acculturation model of language teaching (Schumann, 1979). The word order in this situation is not the only confusing part of the language. There are simple things that can mean the difference between correct understanding and incorrect understanding as much as 50% of the time. Also, greater in situations with evenly balanced variables such as those of grammatical negation between languages (Selinker & Douglas, 1985). For example, If an American student were to ask an Arabic student if he or she requested an extension from his or her professor, the American student might ask, “You didn’t get that extension did you?” and the Arabic student might reply, “No,” but in Arabic the, “No” applied to the double negative of the English question actually indicates the affirmative. In other words, “No” means “Yes,” with reference to the context of the utterance from the perspective of the Arabic student. However, the American student would not understand this, and their next utterance might ask, “ Why?” This questioning of the affirmative in the mind of the Arab and the American and would then be confusing, the conversation would ultimately end and neither interlocutor would be satisfied with any information. This is a simple and everyday example of how language syntax, semantics, and pragmatics can vary from each language and culture. Understanding the differences between the two languages is necessary for linguistic acculturation (Seliger, 1983). Rationale Acculturation and Linguistic Relativity. The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis of linguistic relativity implies that the psychological perception may be altered due to learning of language structure (Schwartz & Sprouse, 2000). In other words learning new grammatical structures, can affect the description of reality. The description of reality by language users to their interlocutors (conversation partners) generates thinking of a particular kind according to the theory of the Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky, 1936). The counterargument to this claim is that all linguistic structures are arbitrary and has no impact on thinking or perceptions of the objective reality (Pinker, 1994). This thinking may or may not come from different cultural norms previously established. If learning new linguistic structures can alter perceptions, the change should be identifiable as a change in attitude. Also, by a degree of target language and host culture assimilation (Lam, 2006; Gentner, 2001& Paige et. al. 2009). If it cannot be changed, it can be assumed that language use after a certain period of development new grammatical structures cannot affect perception, and that the level of cultural assimilation will either stay the same or decline. The problem of understanding if language usage affects cultural assimilation comes from the perspective that changes in perception may come from other psychological or social factors, and these are difficult to measure. However, there is a particular group of socially isolated people who, if they could be honestly and openly assessed over a longitudinal design, the results may prove or disprove that second language use leads to perceptual shifts that engender cultural assimilation or further isolation. This group of people is that of traditional Muslim women, who are socially isolated about gender by their society and that of the culture associated with their target language. Research Design Due to very social isolation associated with traditional Muslim women inside and outside of their culture as well as the target structure they are the perfect group serves as a population sample. The social isolation from all but other traditional Muslim women at least as much as any group can have isolation or social distance from men who are not their husbands actually serves to maximize the results of this study. It is by virtue of their isolation that gives this study internal validity. This study will use a correlation type of study whereby different groups of women in terms of linguistic capacities are related to ascertaining the difficulties arising from the language barrier. Sample. The group will have to be refined and restricted even further to include only English language teachers, but will include four groups within that set. These groups will be group A: traditional Muslim women who learned English as a second language during the critical period in the United States. Group B: Traditional Muslim women who learned English as a second language after the critical period in Saudi Arabia. Group C: Traditional Muslim women who learned English as a second language after the critical language period while studying in the United States, and Group D: Traditional Muslim women who learned English as a second language before the critical language period in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is the perfect country for this as women are more isolated there than in any other part of the world. All of these women must also be English language instructors or teachers in order to maximize the effects of cultural assimilation through language use. In order to prevent problems with sample attrition the population sample number should be as high as possible; 400 women will be enough. Instrument. Our sample will be given an initial Likert-Scale questionnaire that asks their perceptions of the English language. Their perceptions of their English language teaching ability, and their perceptions of the culture they associate with the English language. Also, their perception of themselves as Traditional Muslims, their perceptions of the traditional Muslim culture and their perceptions of Arabic as a language. In order to make this study more valid, approximately half of the sample will be given the questionnaires in English and the other half in Arabic. This will be a useful comparison of within group and outside unit reliability. In fact, it is predicted that the most significant sources of data will come from this comparison, due to the implicit nature of the language usage. It is through the language use that we are attempting to determine cultural assimilation. If language use does affect perceptions of objective reality, it should be seen most significantly in data gathered using the target language. The difference in cultural assimilation should also be seen in the group assessed in the native Arabic language. Procedure. This longitudinal study should take place over a period of at least 15 years, which will include the participant’s English language training before the age of the critical period of language learning. In addition, educator’s training, and at least four years of teaching experience will also be considered. One eighth of the total participants will also be given a questionnaire every five years. This is to minimize internal bias as the members may remember the questions, which may also direct their thinking regarding the goals of the study. After and during the study, the data will be gathered and analyzed according to the type and need for statistical comparison. Another measure of internal validity comes from the participants being asked to rate their perceptions of all categories on a Likert-Scale, in this way their perceptions can be considered quantified. Limitations. Considering that this study attempts to measure the rate of social acculturation through linguistic usage, the notion of “Salat” must be addressed. This is the most significant language and cultural confound. This is due to the fact that it uses both aspects of society to influence the mind of the prayer speaker, who is also a prayer listener, as well as a person who is physically supplicating 5 times a day for a period of 5-10 minutes each time. However, this is why the English language users were also required to be English language teachers. It is the hope of this study that these two aspects will balance each other out, and that the data will remain valid and reliable. Discussion During and after the study has concluded, the data will be analyzed and compared to data of a similar study, which analyzed the perceptions of bilingualism. Also, bilingual education of heritage Spanish speakers who attended university level Spanish courses (Parodi, 2008). Parodi, 2008 examined the perceptions of the methodology of Spanish language instruction, along with perceptions of the participants of their cultural identities, degree of language usage i.e. Spanish/English and cultural identity. He also studied the level of satisfaction with each student’s goal achievement with Spanish. As well as their preference to be in a classroom with other heritage and native Spanish speakers, or in a classroom with learners of Spanish as a second language. Worldwide bilingualism is viewed to be an asset worthy of protecting and developing (Fishman, 1982). Linguistic barriers make it difficult to break into the target culture, which only sees what its biases say is present. This study demonstrates that cultural differences while they may not be understood, are there for a reason. These differences are to be celebrated, and perhaps even protected. All societies have the right to exist as they choose to govern themselves. This is one of the primary tenants of the ideas behind the democratic Republic of the United States of America. It is my hope that this study will demonstrate to all that language is a bridge to understanding each other, which we do simply by learning how to accept our differences. This could not be shown in any better way than by studying the linguistic perceptions of a class of people so misunderstood by both the West and the East, the category of language learners. This study demonstrates that language use does not only determine our perceptions, but also by the method and age of language learning. These differences as illustrated in Gilbert, 2006 shows that there is no one way to learn a language. One does not have to absolutely understand every aspect of an utterance in order to use it appropriately, and it is not only when we use language, but how it is used that develops our minds and our cultures. References Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT Press, 1965. Fishman, J.A. (1982), Whorfianism of the third kind: Ethnolinguistic diversity as a worldwide societal asset, Language in Society 11: 1–14,  García, O. (2009) Bilingual Education in the 21st Century. A Global Perspective, Malden, MA: Wiley- Blackwell. Gentner, Dedre; Boroditsky, Lera (2001). "Individuation, relativity, and early word development". In Melissa Bowerman and Stephen Levinson. Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development. Cambridge University Press. pp. 215–256.  Gilbert A. L, Regier T, Kay P, Ivry RB, (2006). Whorf hypothesis is supported in the right visual field but not the left, Proc. Nat. Ac. Sci. January 10; 103(2): 489–494. Lam, M.B. (2006) The Cultural Politics of Vietnamese Language Pedagogy Journal of Southeast Asian Language Teaching Volume 12, No. 2, Fall 2006. Retrieved November, 2014. Paige, R.M., A.D.Cohen, B.Kappler, J.C.Chi, J.P.Lassegard (2009) Second Edition. Maximizing Study Abroad: A Students’ Guide to Strategies for Language and Culture Learning and Use. University of Minnesota: Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition. Papagano, C. and Vallar, G. (1992). Phonological short-term memory and the learning of novel words: the effect of phonological similarity and item length. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 44A, 47-67. Parodi, C. (2008) Stigmatized Spanish inside the classroom and out, en Heritage Language Education. A New Field Emerging (eds D. Brinton, O. Kagan y S. Bauckus), New York: Routledge, pp. 199-214. Pinker, S. (1994), The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language, New York: Morrow. Schumann, J. (1979), The Acculturation model for second language acquisition. In R. Gingras (Ed.), Second Language Acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Schwartz, B. and Sprouse, R. (2000). When syntactic theories evolve: consequences for L2 acquisition research. In J. Archibald (Ed.) Second Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory (pp. 156-186). Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Scovel, T. (2001). Learning New Languages: A Guide to Second Language Acquisition. Boston: Heinle and Heinle. Seliger, H. (1983). The language learner as linguist: of metaphors and realities. Applied Linguistics, 4, 179-191. Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10, 209- 231. Skehan, P. (1989). Individual differences in Second Langauge Learning. London: Edward Arnold. Thomas, J. (1988). The role played by metalinguistic awareness in second and third language learning. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 9, 235- 246. Tse, L. (2000). The Effects of Ethnic Identity Formation on Bilingual Maintenance and Development: An Analysis of Asian American Narratives." International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 3, 185-200. Vygotsky, L. (1934/1986). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. List of Appendices 1. U.S …………………………. United States of America 2. UG…………………. ………Universal Grammar 3. Heb………………………… Arabic sound meaning heart 4. Habibi……………… ………Arabic sound meaning my loved one 5. Likert-scale questionnaire…. refers to a scale which is psychometric and mostly used in research involving questionnaires in approach involving scaling responses. . APPENDIX A 1. What is your perception of English language teaching ability? 2. What is your perception of the culture you associate with the English language? 3. What is your perception of being a traditional Muslim? 4. What is your perception of the Arabic as a language? Read More