Intercultural Humour: The Japanese and American Cultural Differences - Essay Example

? Intercultural Humour Intercultural Humour Introduction Humour is a valuable speech act within the understanding of inter-cultural communication. Humour enhances relationships and diffuses tensions that may lurk within the discourse of communication. In order to understand the relationship between humour and the underlying cultural aspects, details of a language group, the styles in which it communicates, and its collective perspectives, it is necessary to decode the speech acts of that particular culture (Andrew, 2010). One of the challenges of understanding the place and value of humour within the multi-cultural environment is that it is not entirely translatable. In usual cases, humour is culturally-specific. A speech act with some content of humour may not apply across the cultural spectrum. In other cases, humour relates to the context and the personality of an individual. This would imply that an idea or phrase with humorous content may not be understood easily or may be distorted in the process of translating into another language or culture. Findings Case reviews have shown that humour could be used to bridge cultures by identifying some mutual linkages within the discourse of communication (Holliday, Kullman & Hyde, 2012). Andrew (2010) distinguished between humour and laughter by identifying some of the problematic areas, which define the essence of humour. In his effort, he established that humour does not necessarily translate into laughter. He sought to establish the theoretical basis on which humour is founded. In his study, Andrew identified three theories as fundamental to the understanding of humour. These include incongruity theory, relief theory, and superiority theory. He explains incongruity theory as being informed by a reaction to a logical impossibility, or to an ambiguity. This kind of humour is associated with the thinking of Kant and Kierkegaard particularly due to its drift from the conventional flow of logic. Superiority theory, according to Andrew (2010) arises out of a feeling of euphoria, which basically comes to the surface when the person making the humorous statement relates to the audience from a real or presumed higher level of seniority. Superiority theory is defended in the philosophies of Aristotle and Plato (Andrew, 2010). A third theory, which is embraced within the Freudian conception of humour, argues that the release of repressed feelings often translates in the form of humour. These theories put together provide a comprehensive framework that could be relied upon to furnish deeper connections between the element of humour and inter-cultural connections. The theories have helped in the establishment of important linkages that define life in terms of meanings and underlying meanings of words. Evidence adduced from multiple studies has established that a proper understanding of the structure of humour provides a resourceful entry point into the inner details of any given culture (Holliday, Kullman & Hyde, 2012). Humour should be understood within certain contexts, situations, origin, and other factors that situate it within some specific categories of identification. The element of humour manifests an entire corpus of ideals that are buried beneath the substance of any given culture. As such, it becomes necessary to conceptualize such evidence in light of some of the issues that attend to the general beliefs, practices, and cultural assumptions of that particular culture. Humour provides the framework of understanding the worldview of a given culture. Broadly, the study of humour involves an investigation into the various connecting points of the different genres that fall under the umbrella name. According to Andrew (2010) some of the genres that are included within the corpus of humour are satire, sight gags, stand up comedy, sarcasm, bending joke, irony, variety shows and word play. These aspects of humour usually involve various issues that work together to form a comprehensive understanding of the superstructure on which humour is understood. The characteristics of humour vary greatly from one place to another. In many cases, these variations are determined by the internal differences that distinguish between the kinds of communication of one place and another (Holliday, Kullman & Hyde, 2012). It is important to consider some of the issues that attend to cultural differences in terms of their impact on the discourse of inter-cultural communication. Relativity in cultural strength is another determining factor of inter-cultural communication. Stronger cultures may impose some of their values on the weaker culture. Discourses of cultural dominations have shown that dominant cultures affect the communication styles of the dominated cultures (Samovar, Porter & McDaniel, 2011). Therefore, the resulting relationship is one that is influenced to a significant degree by the inequalities in power balance. Associations between stronger and weaker cultures always show that weaker cultures adopt the structures of humour as developed within the dominant culture. In the course of time, migrant groups in the United States tend to buy into the kind of humour that is synonymous with the dominant Caucasian culture (Samovar, Porter & McDaniel, 2011). Cultures develop communication systems that respond to their specific needs (Pinto, 2000). Styles and techniques of communication are structured in ways that serve some specific purposes. These language and style of communication helps in expanding or clarifying certain meanings within the context of a given culture. Humour is relied upon in some cultures in the same way that proverbs, similes and other figures of speech are used. Information that would have been relayed in normal discourse is condensed and codified in the form of humour such that the impact becomes more precise (Pinto, 2000). As an element within a cultural style of communication, humour plays the important role of supplying meaning to hidden issues, which may not be perceptible to those outside the cultural boundaries. The uniqueness of a given culture could be defined by the peculiarity of its humour. When transferred into a different cultural context, humour may lose its meaning and even supply misconceptions to the general idea as originally intended. It is normal practice for some discourses to use humour as a way of enhancing the quality of communication (Asante, 2007). On this score, humour becomes an element of aesthetics within some cultural context. Cultures usually relate from the point of view of aesthetics. Therefore, humour may play the crucial role of supplying the virtual space on which the relative points of cultural aesthetics are traded. It helps compare the subject of humour within one culture to another and assess the levels of effectiveness that underpins its usage within the specific cultural understanding. On this note, humour becomes an important aspect of communication that allows for the most comprehensive assessment of the elements of cultures. The findings from multiple cases have backed the view that humour could be used to connect cultural relationships (Asante, 2007; Kuipers, 2006). Analyses of different cultural styles of communication show that some forms of humour are found in more than one culture (Asante, 2007; Kuipers, 2006). In many cases, the usage of similar elements of humour help in the clarification of concepts shared between two or more cultures. This process usually helps in determining the relationships that exist in the forms of communication between different cultures. Humour helps provide glimpses into the perspectives of certain cultures on some discourses of a universal nature. Analysing the manner in which the element of humour attends to these matters is usually an important beginning point for establishing the connections between the cultures in terms of agreement or disagreement. For instance, an analysis into the building blocks of some humour has provided researchers with insight into shared perceptions on matters of gender and sexuality. In essence, humour helps to establish the governing principles by which cultures project ideas to the dominant realities in the external world. Comparative analyses between American humour and Japanese humour, would, for instance supply some insight into the different approaches that the two cultures apply to the subject of gender (Gulas & Weinberger, 2006). The American culture would for instance manifest some qualities of balance and equity without showing open bias for or against any one given gender. On the other hand, Japanese humour would necessarily involve evidence of hierarchies where women are regarded as occupying some lower position than men on the rung of social importance. The manifestation of the different elements of humour is important in providing meaning into some of the widely held believes about the relationships between cultures. Inter-cultural communication has grown increasingly important as the world increases its points of contact. Discourses of globalization and secularization have tended to open up space for communication between cultures across vast geographical distances (Martin, 2007). The same element of inter-cultural communication has been enhanced by the rapid developments and innovations in the field of transport and communication. As people continue to tour different parts of the globe and interact on social media, they tend to dissolve some of the structural challenges that have affected the movement of humour across cultures. Social networking sites such as Face book and Twitter have emerged as some of the important elements of inter-cultural communication The impact of humour on inter-cultural communication has also been studied from the point of view of closed cultures and open cultures (Gulas & Weinberger, 2006). As compared to open cultures, closed cultures may not manifest any obvious points of connections with the dominant cultures in the form of communication. The aspect of culture strongly determines the manner in which a give culture responds to discourse of inter-cultural communications. There may be no similarities in the form of content between the closed culture and other cultures. Such similarities only occur in open cultures and cultures that share some common linguistic heritage. Language forms define the content and structure of humour to a significant degree. The origin of language often relates to the discourse of culture. It is possible to find some evidence of similarities in the structures of culture by observing the common linkages that work between two or more cultures. In this manner, the two cultures will enhance the discourse of inter-cultural communication between them. The ability of humour to operate between two cultures is significantly dependent on the subject of insider knowledge (Gulas & Weinberger, 2006). Humour operates at in cultural situations of shared knowledge. In order for humour to navigate the cultural distance between two or more cultures, there must be some connecting points that enhance the aspect of communication. This is because humour operates in situations that have similar structural elements of culture. However some elements of humour tend to operate in a universal manner. These tendencies usually operate in situations that involve common sense or matters of universal awareness. In such environments, the element of humour makes use of the synergies that are involved in communication for the purposes of establishing common knowledge and understanding of the contents of humour (Gulas & Weinberger, 2006). It would become necessary to examine some of the factors that affect the essence of culture within the backgrounds of cultural contact. Cultures with no common descent, but which manifest high levels of contact due to geographical factors, are likely to experience higher levels of connection in terms of humour and connection (Gulas & Weinberger, 2006). The movement of some elements of humour from one culture to the next could be determined to a significant degree by the levels of contact between them. Such usages may provide evidence of connection between the two cultures in terms of inter-cultural connections. In addition the purveyor of humour must consider the impact of his or her humour in light of the dynamics of time, place, context, and audience. A mismatch in these important determinants may result in poor connections between the two. Sensing the appropriate opportunity for dispensing humour is as important as good communication skills when it comes to impact of humour on the audience (Martin, 2007). Some elements of humour could evade the audience due to the inability of the purveyor to weigh and adjust to these two realities. Some of the issues that undermine the impact of humour relate to the wrong choice of vocabulary and tone of communication. Vocabulary and gestures are important non-material aspects of any culture. They act as signs, which have to be interpreted in order to discover the underlying meanings. Therefore, a good purveyor of humour must have a good grasp of vocabulary and awareness of other aspects of communication between cultures. Audience reception and subsequent interpretation of humour must manifest some level of consistency in order for the subject of humour to operate across cultures. Cognition and understanding are aspects of intelligence that depend significantly on the cultural environment (Martin, 2007). Culture shapes the patterns of the mind in a way that determines the ability and direction of interpreting phenomena. Implicitly, the capacity of an individual or group to understand and interpret humour is guided to a significant degree by environmental conditioning of their cognitive abilities. This would mean that cognition is entirely dependent on the aspect of environment. A humorous content that is derived outside the field of their cognitive abilities may have insignificant impact on such people. Findings from comparative analyses between Japanese and American humour show various levels of disparities (Katayama, 2006; Sedlar, 2008). These disparities could be understood as being symptomatic of the essential differences between Japan and America in terms of culture. In Japan humour is classified according to categories. The humour that applies for people at certain levels of the society is significantly different from the one that attends to those outside such stations in life. As such, humour becomes a defining element of matters of status. It affirms the distance between groups. On the other hand, the American context of humour applies in different situation from casual to formal zones. There is no zoning of social classes through the category of humour. As such, the forms of humour between the two cultures are significantly different both in terms of structure and categories. Unlike in the American cultural communication context, there is less presence of humour in Japanese communication. Japanese humour is largely confined within the family circles. The restrictive and suppressive nature of Japanese culture means that there is less display of raw mirth in the Japanese context (Katayama, 2006). As such, it becomes appropriate to understand the possible misunderstandings that could relate to inter-cultural communication between the Japanese and the Americans. At this level, it would be appropriate to understand some of the issues that tie into the cultural distance of the two cultures. Japanese culture is built on rigid structures that discourage open and uncontrolled socialization. Past studies have shown that the Japanese appreciate grief and anger more than humour. They readily display the first two emotions while considering humour as a sign of vulgarity or emotional extravagance. There is also a gender dimension to the differences in the humour as it applies within the Japanese and American cultural communication systems (Katayama, 2006). This difference imparts some technical challenges to the discourse of inter-cultural communication. In the cultural context of the United States, there are no specific categories that define the practice and manifestation of humour along the lines of gender. The Japanese culture, on the other hand is highly patriarchal. The restrictive and suppressive qualities of culture mean that women and men display different social habits. For instance, men are not expected by cultural norms to laugh at some content of humour. Laughter as an emotion is considered as an expression of weakness. Women are also expected to control their laughter since it is used to assess their levels of morality. The American social environment is different in the sense that it allows the sharing of humour across the categories of gender. It is more common to find American men and women in a single audience of comedy as opposed to the Japanese. Conclusion The Japanese and American cultural differences make a good illustration of the challenges that might attend to the matter of cultural differences in the society. Humour operates within some specific cultural context. Inter-cultural communication varies in effectiveness with regard to a range of factors. Geographical distance, linguistic connections, cultural contact, shared values, and levels of interactions are some of the issues that define the level of effectiveness of inter-cultural communication. The efficacy of humour to impact on inter-cultural communication is highly dependent on its ability to negotiate through the structural and essential differences that separate cultures. Other attendant factors include the ability of the purveyor to appropriate the nuances of communication skills as defined within certain cultures. Modulating the specific elements of culture is one of the important ways that determine the manner in which humour may cross the dividing line between cultures. Essentially, humour determines the nature of relationships among cultures in the context of intercultural communication. Cultures that articulate values of a universal nature are more likely to have their humour understood than cultures, which are essentially closed to outside contact. Modern discourses of globalization, liberalization, and global discourses have tended to provide synergies into the discourse of inter-cultural communication within the context of humour. Similarly, religious factors, secularization, traditions and customs are some of the important issues that attend to the subject of humour and intercultural communication. Similarly, virtual communication sites such as internet networking sites have brought unique advantages to the spread of humour across cultures. References Andrew, R. (2010). Intercultural Communication and the essence of humour. Retrieved http://uuair.lib.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/10241/7770/1/29-3-reimann.pdf Asante, M. (2007). The Global intercultural Communication Reader. London: Routledge. Gulas, C., S., & Weinberger, M., G. (2006). Humor in Advertising: A Comprehensive Analysis. New York: M.E. Sharpe. Holliday, A., Kullman, J., & Hyde, M. (2012). Intercultural Communication: An advanced resource book for students. London: Routledge. Katayama, H. (2006). A Cross-cultural Analysis of Humor in Stand-up Comedy in the United States and Japan. New York: ProQuest. Kuipers, G. (2006). Good Humor, Bad Taste: A Sociology of the Joke. New York: Walter de Gruyter. Martin, R., A. (2007). The Psychology of Humor: An Integrative Approach. New York: Academic Press. Pinto, D. (2000). Intercultural Communication: A Three-Step Method for Dealing With Differences. New York: Garant. Samovar, L., A., Porter, R., E., & McDaniel, E., R. (2011). Intercultural Communication: A Reader. London: Cengage Learning. Sedlar, J., H. (2008). The Construction of Humor in Spanish and French Comic Strips: A Sociolinguistic Perspective. Berkeley: ProQuest. Read More