Manual for Students
.pdf
Point of View
English is the world’s 900-pound gorilla. The most widely used language worldwide, it is becoming the lingua franca of industry, commerce, and finance. It happened independently, in the pragmatic world of commerce and competition. And it isn’t stuffy, old-British English people want to learn. it is American English. But let us not gloat.
Sure, it is wonderful to grow up speaking a language whose devilish “/” before “e” except after “c” intricacies could scare a matador. And it is a privilege to be born into the lap of world economic eminence.
So feel good. Feel lucky.
Вut do not feel too smug.
After all those people struggling with the power of the silent “e” will soon be able to call themselves fluent in a foreign language. Most of the Americans who can say that are recent immigrants [11, p. 88].
Point of View
Harumi Befu, emeritus professor at Stanford University, discusses the consequences of English domination for monolingual Americans. Instead of language enslavement and intellectual imperialism, however, one more often is told of the benefit of learning a second language, such as English. For example, non-native English speakers can relativize their own language and appreciate each language on its own terms. It was Goethe who said that one who does not know a foreign language does not know his / her own language.
Thanks to the global dominance of their country, American intellectuals have acquired the “habitus” of superiority, whereby they exercise the license of expressing their thoughts in English wherever they go instead of showing respect to locals through expending efforts to learn their language. This privileged position, however, spells poverty of the mind.
For their minds are imprisoned in a single language; they are unable to liberate their minds through relativizing English. In short, other things, being equal, monolingual Americans (not all Americans are monolingual) are the most provincial and least cosmopolitan among those who traffic in the global interlinguistic community – a price they pay for the strength of the country backing them [2, p. 1].
301
SUMMARY
–In this chapter, we explored many dimensions of language and discourse in intercultural communication. Languages exhibit many cultural variations, both in communication style and in the rules of context. Cultural groups may emphasize the importance of verbal (low-context) or non-verbal (high-context) communication.Twoimportant typesof communicationstyles are the direct / indirect and the elaborate / succinct. The context in which the communication occurs is a significant part of the meaning.
–Understanding the role of power in language use is important. Dominant groups, consciously or unconsciously, develop communication systems that require non-dominant groups (or co-cultural groups) to use communication that doesn’t fit their experiences. The effects of power are also revealed in the use of labels, with the more powerful people in a society labeling the less powerful. Individuals who occupy powerful positions in a society often do not think about the ways in which their positions are revealed in their communication.
–Another language issue is that of multilingualism. Individuals learn languages for different reasons, and the process is often a rewarding one. The complexity of moving between languages is facilitated by interpretation and translation, in which issues of equivalency and accuracy are crucial. Being a good translator or interpreter requires more than merely fluency in two languages.
–Some nations have multiple official languages, and others have no official national language. Language use is often tied to the politics of class, culture, ethnicity, and economics. The issue of what language should be spoken, when, to whom, and why becomes quite complex.
–Through globalization, English has become the new international language. But there are both positive and negative implications of English as the lingua franca.
PRACTICE
ØAnswer the Following Questions:
– What is the relationship between our language and the way we perceive reality?
302
–What are some cross-cultural variations in language use and communication style?
–What aspects of context influence the choice of communication
style?
–What does a translator or an interpreter need to know to be effective?
–Why is it important to know the social positions of individuals and groups involved in intercultural communication?
–Why do some people say that we should not use labels to refer to people but should treat everybody as individuals? Do you agree?
–Why do people have such strong reactions to language policies, as in the “English-only” movement?
ØRegional Language Variations. Meet in small groups with other class members and discuss variations in language use in different regions of Ukraine or another country which you nationally associate with (accent, vocabulary, and so on). Identify perceptions that are associated with these variations.
ØValues and Language. Although computer-driven translations have improved dramatically over earlier attempts, translation is still intensely cultural. Communication always involves many layers of meaning, and when you move between languages, there are many more opportunities for misunderstanding. Try to express some important values that you have (e.g., freedom of the press) on this Web site, and see how they are retranslated in five different languages: http://www.tashian.com/ multibabel.
REFERENCES
1.Barthes R. Elements of Semiology / Ronald Barthes. – New York : Columbia University Press, 1980. – P. 62.
2.Befu H. English Language Intellectual Imperialism and its Consequences / Hamir Befu // Intercultural Communication. – Intercultural Communication Institute, Kanda University of International Studies. – No. 57. – 2000. – P. 1.
303
3.Daniel J. L. How I Got Over: Communication Dynamics in the Black Community / Jack L. Daniel, George Smitherman // Cultural Communication and Intercultural Contact. – Hillsdale : MIT Press, 1990. – P. 129.
4.Grice P. Logic and Conversation / Paul H. Grice // Studies in The Way of Words / Paul Grice. – Cambridge : Harvard University Press, 1989. – P. 22 – 40.
5.Gudykunst W. B. Cross-Cultural Variability of Communication in Personal Relationships / William B. Gudykunst, Yang Matsumoto // Communication in Personal Relationships Across Cultures. – 1996. – P. 19 – 56.
6.Gudykunst W. B. Communicating With Strangers: An Approach to Intercultural Communication / William B. Gudykunst, Stella TingToomey. – New York : McGraw-Hill, 2003. – P. 94.
7.Hall E. T. Beyond Culture / Edvard T. Hall. – New York : Garden City, 1976. – P. 79.
8.Martin J. N. Intercultural Communication in Contexts / Judith N. Martin, Tomas Nakayama. – New York : McGraw Hill Higher Education, 2000. – P. 204.
9.Marx E. Breaking Through Culture Shock / Elizabeth Marx. – London : Blackwell Publishing, 1999. – P. 95.
10.Orbe M. Constructing Co-Cultural Theory: An Explication of Culture, Power, and Communication / Mark Orbe. – London : Thousand Oaks, 1998. – P. 82.
11.Plan to Go Global?Best SpeakEnglish-MotherTongue for Industry, Commerce and Finance / The Arizona Republic. – 2002. – No. 5. – P. 88.
12.Sauvage J.-L. Code-Switching: An Everyday Reality in Belgium / Jean-Louis Sauvage // Readings in Intercultural Communication. – New York, 2002. – P. 15.
13.Scott K.D.CrossingCultural Borders: “Girl”and“Look”asMarkers of Identity In Black Women’s Language Use / Karen D. Scott // Discourse and Society. – No. 11 (2). – P. 237 – 248.
14.Tsuda Y. The Hegemony of English and Strategies for Linguistic Pluralism: Proposing The Ecology of Language Paradigm / Yang Tsuda // Worlds Apart: Human Society and Global Governance. – New York, 1999. – P. 153.
304
-5-
NON-VERBALCODESAND CULTURALSPACE
Overview
Non-verbal elements of cultural communication are highly dynamic and play an important role in understanding intercultural communication. Reading non-verbal communication within various cultural spaces can be a key to survival, depending upon the situation. The first part of this chapter focuses on the importance of understanding non-verbal aspects of intercultural communication. We can examine non-verbal communication in terms of the personal-contextual and the static-dynamic dialectics. Although non-verbal communication can be highly dynamic, personal space, gestures, and facial expressions are fairly static patterns of specific non-verbal communication codes. These patterns are the focus of the second part of this chapter. Finally, we investigate the concept of cultural space and the ways in which cultural identity is shaped and negotiated by the cultural spaces (home, neighborhood, and so on) that people occupy.
Topics covered include: Non-Verbal Communication; Universality of Non-Verbal Behavior; Cultural Space; Cultural Identity and Cultural Space; Changing Cultural Space; Postmodern Cultural Spaces.
Key words: Chronemics, Contact Cultures, Cultural Space, Deception, Eye Contact, Facial Expressions, Monochromic, Noncontact Cultures, Polychromic, Postmodern Cultural Spaces, Regionalism, Relational Messages, Status.
—————————–—————–—————————————
5.1 Defining Non-Verbal Communication:
Thinking Dialectically
In this chapter, we discuss two forms of communication beyond speech. The first includes facial expression, personal space, eye contact, use of time, and conversational silence (what is not said is often as important as what is spoken). The second includes the cultural spaces that we occupy and negotiate. Cultural spaces are the social and cultural
305
contexts in which our identity forms – where we grow up and where we live (not necessarily the physical homes and neighborhoods, but the cultural meanings created in these places) [10, p. 236]. In thinking dialectically, we need to consider the relationship between the non-verbal behavior and the cultural spaces in which the behavior occurs, and between the non-verbal behavior and the verbal message.Although there are patterns to non-verbal behaviors, they are not always culturally appropriate in all cultural spaces. Remember, too, that some non-verbal behaviors are cultural, whereas others are idiosyncratic, that is, peculiar to individuals.
5.1.1 Comparing Verbal and Non-Verbal Communication
Recognizing Non-Verbal Behavior. Both verbal and non-verbal communication is symbolic, communicate meaning, and are patterned – that is, are governed by contextually determined rules. Societies have different non-verbal languages, just as they have different spoken languages. However, some differences between non-verbal and verbal communication codes have important implications for intercultural interaction. Let us look at the example of these differences.
Two U.S. students attending school in France were hitchhiking to the university in Grenoble for the first day of classes.AFrench motorist picked them up and immediately started speaking English to them. They wondered how he knew they spoke English. Later, when they took a train to Germany, the conductor walked into their compartment and berated them in English for putting their feet on the opposite seat. Again, they wondered how he had known that they spoke English.As these examples suggest, non-verbal communication entails more than gestures – even our appearance can communicate loudly. The students’ appearance alone probably was a sufficient clue to their national identity. One of our students explains: “When I studied abroad in Europe, London more specifically, our clothing as a non-verbal expression was a dead giveaway that we were from America. We dressed much more casual, wore more colors, and had words written on our T-shirts and sweatshirts. This alone said enough; we didn`t even have to speak to reveal that we were Americans” [ibid., p. 237].
As these examples also show, non-verbal behavior operates at a subconscious level. We rarely think about how we stand, what gestures
306
we use, and so on. Occasionally, someone points out such behaviors, which brings them to the conscious level. Consider one more example from an American student Suzanne: I was in Macedonia and I was traveling in a car, so I immediately put on my seat belt. My host family was very offended by this because buckling my seat belt meant I didn’t trust the driver. After that I rode without a seat belt.
When misunderstandings arise, we are more likely to question our verbal communication than our non-verbal communication. We can search for different ways to explain verbally what we mean. We can also look up words in a dictionary or ask someone to explain unfamiliar words. In contrast, it is more difficult to identify non-verbal miscommunication or misperceptions.
Learning Non-Verbal Behavior. Whereas we learn rules and meanings for language behavior in grammar and language arts lessons, we learn non-verbal meanings and behaviors by more implicit socialization. No one explains, “When you talk with someone you like, lean forward, smile, and touch the person frequently, because that will communicate that you really care about him or her”. In many contexts in the United States, such behaviors communicate immediacy and positive meanings [1, p. 33]. But how is it interpreted if someone does not display these behaviors?
I have a couple of good friends who are deaf, and it is evident that body language, eye contact, and visual communication are far more important in our conversations than between two hearing people. I found that both of my friends, who lived very close to me, would much rather stop by my house than call me on the relay. I can see the cultural implications of space and distance. We keep in touch mostly by using e-mail. It‘s funny because the e-mails that I get from those guys have more commonly used slang words than most of my hearing friends use. The question is: Do my friends understand the slang, make it a part of their language, and create a sign for it, or do they know the words through somewhat of a verbal exchange with the hearing? – Andrea.
Sometimes, though, we learn strategies for non-verbal communication. Have you ever been told to shake hands firmly when you meet someone? You may have learned that a limp handshake indicates a weak person. Likewise, many young women learn to cross their legs at
307
the ankles and to keep their legs together when they sit. These strategies combine socialization and the teaching of non-verbal codes.
Coordinating Non-Verbal and Verbal Behaviors. Non-verbal behaviors can reinforce, substitute for, or contradict verbal behaviors. For example, when we shake our heads and say “no”, we are reinforcing verbal behavior. When we point instead of saying “‘over there”, we are substituting non-verbal behavior for verbal communication. If we tell a friend, “I can’t wait to see you”, and then do not show up at the friend’s house, our non-verbal behavior is contradicting the verbal message. Because non-verbal communication operates at a less conscious level, we tend to think that people have less control over their non-verbal behavior. Therefore, we often think of non-verbal behaviors as conveying the real messages.
5.1.2 What Non-Verbal Behavior Communicates
Although language is an effective and efficient means of communicating explicit information, non-verbal communication conveys relational messages – how we really feel about other people. Non-verbal behavior also communicates status and power. For example, a boss may be able to touch subordinates, but it is usually unacceptable for subordinates to touch a boss. Broad, expansive gestures are associated with high status; conversely, holding the body in a tight, closed position communicates low status. In addition, non-verbal behavior communicates deception. Early researchers believed that some non-verbal behaviors (e.g., avoiding eye contact or touching or rubbing the face) indicated lying.
However, as more recent research has shown, deception is communicated by fairly idiosyncratic behavior and seems to be revealed more by inconsistency in non-verbal communication than by specific nonverbal behaviors [4, p. 113]. Most non-verbal communication about affect, status, and deception happens at an unconscious level. For this reason, it plays an important role in intercultural interactions. Both pervasive and unconscious, it communicates how we feel about each other and about our cultural groups.
308
5.2 The Universality of Non-Verbal Behavior
Most traditional research in intercultural communication focuses on identifying cross-cultural differences in non-verbal behavior. How do culture, ethnicity, and gender influence non-verbal communication patterns? How universal is found in most non-verbal communication?
As we have observed in previous chapters, it is neither beneficial nor accurate to try to reduce individuals to one element of their identity (gender, ethnicity, nationality, and so on). Attempts to place people in discrete categories tend to reduce their complexities and to lead to major misunderstandings. However, we often classify people according to various categories to help us find universalities. For example, although we may know that not all Germans are alike, we may seek information about Germans in general to help us communicate better with individual Germans. In this section, we explore the extent to which non-verbal communication codes are universally shared. We also look for possible cultural variations in these codes that may serve as tentative guidelines to help us communicate better with others.
5.2.1 Recent Research Findings
Research investigating the universality of non-verbal communication has focused on three areas: 1) the relationship of human behavior to that of primates (particularly chimpanzees); 2) non-verbal communication of sensory-deprived children who are blind or deaf; 3) on facial expressions. Researcher Irenaus Eibl-Eibesfeldt conducted studies that compared the facial expressions of children who were blind with those of sighted children and found many similarities. Even though the children who were blind couldn’t see the facial expressions of others to mimic them, they still made the same expressions. This suggests some innate, genetic basis for these behaviors [3, p. 115].
Indeed, many cross-cultural studies support the notion of some universality in non-verbal communication, particularlyin facial expressions. Several facial gestures seem to be universal, including the eyebrow flash just described, the nose wrinkle (indicating slight social distancing), and the “disgust face” (a strong sign of social repulsion). It is also possible that
309
grooming behavior is universal (as it is in animals), although it seems to be somewhat suppressed in Western societies [ibid., p. 117]. Recent findings indicate that at least six basic emotions – including happiness, sadness, disgust, fear, anger, and surprise – are communicated by similar facial expressions in most societies. Expressions for these emotions are recognized by most cultural groups as having the same meaning.
Although research may indicate universalities in non-verbal communication, some variations exist. The evoking stimuli (i.e., what causes the non-verbal behavior) may vary from one culture to another. Smiling, for example, is universal, but what prompts a person to smile may be culture specific. Similarly, there are variations in the rules for non-verbal behavior and the contexts in which non-verbal communication takes place. For example, people kiss in most cultures, but there is variation in who kisses whom and in what contexts. When French friends greet each other, they often kiss on both cheeks but never on the mouth. Friends in the United States usually kiss on greeting only after long absence, with the kiss usually accompanied by a hug. The rules for kissing also vary along gender lines.
Finally, it is important to look for larger cultural patterns in the nonverbal behavior, rather than trying simply to identify all of the cultural differences. Researcher David Matsumoto suggests that, although cultural differences in non-verbal patterns are interesting, noting these differences is not sufficient. Studying and cataloging every variation in every aspect of non-verbal behavior would be an overwhelming task. Instead, he recommends studying non-verbal communication patterns that vary with other cultural patterns, such as values.
For example, Matsumoto links cultural patterns in facial expressions with cultural values of power distance and individualism versus collectivism. Hypothetically, cultural groups that emphasize status differences will tend to express emotions that preserve these status differences. Matsumoto also suggests that within individualistic cultures the degree of difference in emotional display between in-groups and outgroups is greater than the degree of difference between the same groups in collectivistic societies [11, p. 129]. If these theoretical relationships hold true, we can generalize about the non-verbal behavior of many different cultural groups.
310