The Cultural Similarities or Differences - Essay Example

CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION Name: Course: Tutor: Date: INTRODUCTION The question which arises here is whether teachers should concentrate on cultural similarities or differences. As it has been observed in the recent past it is important for language teachers in educational systems to emphasize what unites individuals across cultures as every one shares the same basic human needs and will be in a better position to understand each other once they match the forms. Ever since human beings existed they found a way in which they could relay information and personal ideas as a means of building and maintaining societies. This brought about the idea of cross cultural communication This method come to be known as communication and it is also referred to as the exchange and flow of information and ideas from one individual to the next, involving a sender who is responsible for transmitting an idea, feeling or information to a receiver (Wierzbicka, 1997, pp.78). For communication to be considered effective and for it to be made possible there has to be a wide range of skills in interpersonal and intrapersonal processing, evaluation, speech, questioning, analysis, observation and listening (Samovar, Porter & McDaniel, 2009,pp.34). It is rather unfortunate that people tend to take communication for granted and in the process miss very subtle and important truth about themselves. In this day and age individual perception has become the foundation of how people see and interpret their moment to moment experiences that lead to the manner in which they respond to or interact and communicate with each other (Kress, 1985, pp.45). Communication goes hand in hand with language. Language can be defined as a tool used to communicate ideas and thoughts as well as forging cultural ties, economic relationships and friendships (Byram, 1995, pp.23). It is a body of words or sounds and the systems for their use common to a people who are of the same country or community, cultural tradition or geographical region (Jenks, 2006, pp.145). Without the existence of language one would have to talk to another individual by means of signs. Language is therefore important for communication as one is able to convey what she or he sees and what she or he thinks to another individual. Discussion Considering the fact that the world today consists of diverse cultures, cross-cultural communication is practices on a day to day basis as different people from different backgrounds come together and interact for a common cause. Culture is considered to be an integral part of every society as it is a learned pattern of behavior and ways in which an individual lives their lives (Stern, 1992, pp.282). It also refers to subconscious manners and whatever people perceive as being inherent and normal. Cultures tend to be different and that may be the reason to why one culture may perceive another as being a little odd despite the fact that distinct cultures are what form the backbone of the society (Stern, 1992, pp. 287).Societies incorporate different cultures in which individuals share a common tradition, language, behavior, beliefs and perceptions considered different and unique from people of other cultures. Even though every society is distinct and unique from others there are particular elements of culture that are considered universal and these are known as cultural universals (O’Sullivan, 1994,pp.180). With the understanding of cultural universals there are particular patterns and behavioral traits similar to all cultures globally for instance differentiating between good and bad, classification of relations based on marriage and blood relations, use of jewelry and having some form of art (Holmes, 2009, pp.50).When cultures come together it is important that they find a common way in which they can communicate and understand each other in order to achieve their specified objectives. Cross-cultural communication refers to an area of study focusing on the manner in which individuals from differing cultural backgrounds communicate in different and similar ways among themselves and the manner in which they endeavor to communicate across cultures (Samovar, Porter & McDaniel, 2009, pp.62). In educational institutions, teachers or educators are always encouraged to formulate curricula that cater for all manner of students regardless of their cultural background especially in the modern day diverse populations. Students are also expected to possess a certain level of global competence in order to be able to understand the world in which they live in and the manner in which they fit into this world (Fantini, (ed.) 1997, pp.56). Achievement of this global competence begins at ground level, that is, the educational institution and its faculty by the way they generate as well as transmit cross-cultural knowledge and information to their students. Every activity that takes place within a school especially in a classroom incorporates communication where students and teachers share information. This communication can sometimes involve the use of oral or written verbal symbols or on other occasions involve a number of nonverbal symbols that include body language (O’Sullivan, 1994, pp.128). On a general outlook majority of educated individuals already have their own opinion regarding language. They are aware of the fact that it is man’s most important cultural invention and an example of his competence to apply symbols in a biologically unprecedented event thus making him different from other animals (Crozet and Liddicoat, 1999, pp.115). Such people are also aware of the fact that children learn to talk from caregivers and role models and that grammatical sophistication used to be nurtured in educational institutions even though sagging educational standards as well as the debasement of popular culture have resulted in frightening decrease in the ability of an average individual to construct grammatical sentences (Holmes, 2009,pp.65). Language is a rather complex but specialized skill that tends to develop in a child spontaneously without any formal instruction or conscious effort and deployed without awareness of its underlying logic (Kress, 1985, pp.65). It is also quite similar in every person but different from general abilities to process information or behave in an intelligent manner. This is perhaps one of the reasons as to why some cognitive scientists have defined language as a mental organ, computational module, a psychological faculty and a neural system (Byram, 1995, pp.38). Language itself tends to change with the course of time and as per the place where its use varies according to the linguistic repertoire of each user. Communication and language are put to use in society as a way of carrying out certain functions and this is done through expression of people’s individuality and reflection of their cultural background. It is therefore important that people are made aware of the fact that they each belong to a number of speech communities in their everyday lives and this is determined by who they are interacting with (Crozet and Liddicoat, 1999, pp.117). It is believed that each speech community has its own beliefs, values as well as cultures. Educational institutions should consider incorporating programs meant to teach students and teachers how to communicate in a foreign language considering the fact that modern day schools, colleges and universities are a culturally diverse population. Cross-cultural communication and learning in educational institutions The emphasis should be in relation to an anonymous poem that was cited in Clayton in the year 1984 which had the words, ‘You see, And hear, And laugh and cry, And sleep and eat and speak and sing, And walk and run, And love, And so Do I”.In an effort by Communicative Language Teaching to teach students to communicate in foreign language, it not only overlooked the connection between culture and language but also overlooked the importance of understanding communication between native speakers and non-native speakers who are also the language learners as intercultural communication rather than communication in the target language (Crozet and Liddicoat,1999,pp.116). Students are expected to develop a cultural position mediating between two cultures that is their own and that of the target language (Kramsch, 1993, pp.222). Socio-cultural understanding is the main idea that is commonly used in the literature on language teaching as well as textbooks even though it is seldom defined for language teachers. According to O’Sullivan, (1994,pp.165) culture is best understood as an interrelated configuration of residual, emergent and archaic cultures where residual culture represents the present still effective lived patterns of behavior (O’Sullivan, 1994, pp.169). On the other hand, while archaic culture carries the traditional historical patterns which possess a symbolic value even if no longer considered relevant, emergent culture is a representation of new ways of being or thinking in a culture which is evident for example in the application of new forms of expression (Wierzbicka, 1997, pp.56). When analyzing written or oral texts in the target language as a way of accounting for both the personal and cultural variables in communication, language teachers are expected to encourage their students to always ask questions concerning who the individuals interacting or writing are, for what particular purpose the language is used and in what manner of context. In this way language texts will be better understood within the students’ personal, circumstantial and cultural dimensions (Kress, 1985, pp.78). Students should be taught how to become intercultural speakers where an intercultural speaker is defined by Bryam (1995,pp.35) as an individuals capable of operating their linguistic competence as well as their sociolinguistic awareness of the relationship between language and the context in which it is used (Byram, 1995, pp.26). This is done as a way of managing interaction across cultural boundaries, coping with the affective as well as cognitive demands of engagement with otherness and as a way of anticipating misunderstandings brought about by differences in beliefs, meanings and values. In the recent past there has been a commonly held belief suggesting that the best way in which a student or an individual can learn about a foreign culture is to be exposed to it through studying abroad or other means (Kramsch, 1993, pp.215). However, a number of sociolinguists tend to argue that culture is not learned by osmosis and thus requires and intellectual effort since it is not readily accessible to be analyzed, noticed and taught (Kramsch, 1993, pp.210). Global knowledge in a foreign culture corresponds to what has traditionally been referred to as teaching culture. Global knowledge encompasses the teaching of the general cultural characteristics and ways of life of a given society which includes critical literacy, institutions, the arts, literature, geography and history (Crozet and Liddicoat, 1999, pp.119). Speech also tends to reflect culture in the manner by which it has been framed. Learning about culture and the way it is related to language is a rather complicated task and therefore requires language teachers to re-think the content of their subject matter. It has recently been implied that language teaching is no longer just teaching about another lingua-culture but rather teaching language students about their native lingua-culture by contrasting it to the target lingua-culture (Crozet and Liddicoat, 1999, pp.120). Traditional boundaries of language teaching have been expanded through positioning of language learning as a dual endeavor where students not only learn the invisible cultural characteristics of a foreign language but also learn how they can distant themselves from their native language or culture environment to view it from a third person’s perspective and see it for the first time as what it really is being one possible world view and not the only global view (Crozet and Liddicoat,1999,pp.115). People’s native cultures tend to neutralize the world and lead them to presuming that the world is the way their culture influences them to perceive it. However, Intercultural Language Teaching (ILT ) being one of the approaches to the study of foreign languages makes culture visible while emphasizing that every person has an ethnicity which is to be valued and which is not limited to those outside the dominant culture (Kress, 1985, pp.47). The truth of the matter is that every individual has an ethnic background. Intercultural ability is currently a wide ranging idea which encompasses all the plans and approaches any given individual might use to shift from a mono-cultural to a more multicultural perspective of any subject matter (Jenks, 2006, pp.145). Majority of interculturalists believe that intercultural competence can develop without having to learn a foreign language (Jenks, 2006, pp.123). Language teachers who traditionally have their basis on linguistics to define their subject matter have not yet been in a position to fully explore the manner in which intercultural competence can be achieved through language learning (O’Sullivan, 1994, pp.178). Such individuals need to understand that intercultural competence is more than learning about cultures and differentiating them. Individuals who tend to interact with non-native speakers do not usually expect the latter to be exactly like native speakers despite the fact that native speakers expect some form of recognition of differences in the first instance then negotiation of these differences which allow both parties to be comfortable (Samovar, Porter & McDaniel, 2009, pp.48). The responsibility of language educators for third dimension of language learning is that of being supportive where they can be able to help language students articulate as well as resolve conflicts that will be encountered in trying to reconcile the sometimes opposite values between the students’ native and target language or cultures (Kramsch, 1993, pp.207). An effective approach that addresses the needs of students in cross-cultural communication As previously mentioned, an effective approach where teachers use various methods and languages to address the needs of students in regards to cross cultural communication is that of Intercultural Language Teaching or the ILT. Even though the objectives of this approach may seem to be quite overwhelming the persuasive nature of culture in language means that culture is presented in all manner of language from simple to elaborate texts (Crozet and Liddicoat, 1999, pp.116). This makes language a 3-dimensional complex cultural exploration from the start. Different groups of individuals possess their own norms of linguistic behavior for instance a particular group may not encourage their group members to talk for the sake of talking. Members of such a group may be perceived to be quite aloof to outsiders who enjoy talking irrespective of the subject matter or may feel overwhelmed by the demands made on them if those others insist on talking (Kramsch, 1993, pp.225).It is therefore important for language teachers to help their students understand how different groups of individuals use their language(s) if they are to achieve a complete understanding of the way that particular language is related to the society using it. It is important for students to learn some of the ways in which a number of individuals around the world use talk or sometimes silence to communicate. When students learn to use a language they learn how to use it in order to perform certain tasks that individuals do with that language (Wardhaugh, 1998, pp.237). Communicative competence incorporates both knowledge and expectation of who may or may not speak under certain circumstances, when to speak and when to remain silent, whom one may speak to, the manner by which one may talk to persons of different roles and statuses, the kind of routines for turn taking in conversation and what nonverbal behaviors are appropriate given particular situations. In learning to speak, students and people in general learn to talk in the sense of communicating in ways deemed appropriate by the groups in which they are doing that learning (Wardhaugh, 1998,pp.239). Practical ideas for actually teaching these theories in a language classroom For effective understanding of cross cultural communication teachers should strive to ensure that students have a clear understanding of the modern branch of socio-linguistics referred to as Ethnography. Ethnography is important mainly because it has its focus on the day to day conversation as well as the vital role of cultural know-how in the sustenance of ordinary talk and the manner in which this know-how is dependent upon commonsense knowledge and practical reasoning (Wardhaugh, 1998, pp.242). Teachers should ensure that students gain a practical understanding of Commonsense knowledge which refers to the understandings, definitions and recipes employed in daily living as people go about their daily chores for instance knowing that there are different types of individuals, events and people, knowing how to make a phone call and knowing the fact that thunder usually accompanies lightning . On the other hand, practical reasoning is the way in which individuals make use of their commonsense knowledge and how to employ this knowledge in their day to day living (Kramsch, 1993, pp.207). The shift in what constitutes cultural understanding is the one which apparently forces language teachers to teach about communication in much more depth as compared to how it was in the past when language teaching was limited to teaching of linguistic functions or forms (Kramsch, 1993, pp.220). Language teachers are expected to reflect on what the far reaching vision of ILT approach entails in regards to new guidelines for practice in addition to being given the support they seldom find in language teaching materials to change new rhetoric into successful practice in the classroom. Mentioned earlier, culture is not acquired through osmosis and therefore needs to be taught explicitly. Language teachers need to identify culture as being an explorative process capable of being undertaken with learners rather than solely relying on research in cross cultural communication. Students adopt a more multicultural perspective of the world through the practice of multiculturalism in what can now be truly referred to as the language classroom, one in which students learn about language and its relation to culture (Wardhaugh, 1998,pp.254). CONCLUSION Communication and language are two most important basic requirements of human beings without which they cannot progress or even survive. Modern day societies are becoming more and more culturally diverse and so is the case with educational institutions and it is therefore important for teachers to consider teaching their students foreign languages in order to help them understand other cultures distinct from their native ones and in the process embrace these differences in cultures. REFERENCES Byram, M. (1995). Intercultural Competence and Mobility in Multinational Contexts: A European View. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, pp.23-38. Crozet, C., and 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, ed. J. Lo Bianco, A. J. Liddicoat and C. Crozet. Language Australia: Melbourne. Pp. 113 – 125. Fantini, A. E. (ed.) (1997). New Ways in Teaching Culture. USA: TESOL, pp.56 Holmes, J. (2009). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. 3rd Edition. London: Longman, pp.50-65 Jenks, C. (2006). Culture. 2nd Edition. New York: Routledge, pp.110-145. Kress, G. (1985). Linguistic Processes in Sociocultural Practice. Melbourne: Deakin University Press, pp.45-78. Kramsch, C. 1993, 'Teaching language along the cultural faultline', in Context and Culture in LanguageTeaching, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 205-232. O’Sullivan, K. (1994). Understanding Ways: Communicating Between Cultures. Sydney: Hale & Iremonger, pp.125-180 Samovar, L. A. , Porter, R. E., and McDaniel, E. R. (2009). Communication Between Cultures. 7th Edition. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning, pp.34-68 Stern, H. H. (1992). The Intralingual-Crosslingual Dimension. In Issues and Options in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pp. 279 – 299. Wardhaugh, R. (1998). Ethnography and Ethnomethodology. In An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blackwell. Pp. 237 – 254. Wierzbicka, A. (1997). Understanding Cultures Through Their Key Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.20-78 Read More