Intercultural Communication as an academic discipline

Intercultural communication as a human activity is ancient. Intercultural communication as an academic discipline is relatively new. Global communication, diplomacy, and business after World War II created a need for practical frameworks of communication. The first steps in came from Freudian psycho-analytical theory. Then the work of American anthropologist Edward T. Hall revolutionized the field with the publication of The Silent Language in 1959. The main elements of Hall’s paradigm for Intercultural Communication were:

v systematic empirical study and the classification of nonverbal communication;

v emphasis on the out-of-conscious level of information exchange;

v a non-judgmental view and acceptance of cultural differences;

v methods of participatory training in Intercultural Communication.

The beginning of «Intercultural Communication» as an academic discipline was for applied purposes rather than for theoretical skills. The first official university class and workshop was offered at Pittsburgh University in late 1960s. After the 1980s intercultural communication became more developed, as researchers developed theories and measurement scales to investigate cross-cultural characteristics of different nations and cultures.

The discipline is based on the comparative studies in a wide range of areas, such as anthropology, psychology, sociology, international management, and linguistics.

Look through the following definitions of culture. What do you think of the academic background of their authors? What is the focus of their studies?

ü Culture is communication (E.T. Hall)

ü Culture is the collective programming of the mind (Geert Hofstede)

ü Culture is how things are done here (John Mole)

ü All communication is more or less cross-cultural (Deborah Tannen)

ü Culture is a kind of storehouse or library of possible meanings and symbols (Ron Scollon)

Within each of these areas intercultural researchers have focused on the following issues: identity, intercultural communication competence, and adaptation.

Intercultural communication and identity. Modern scholars propose different types of identity, such as ethnic, sexual, gender, personal, religious, political identity, social identity, cultural identity.

Adaptation. The processof cultural adaptationis of paramount concern for researches, policy makers, communities nations, and individuals. Scholars have produced a rich body of work on how this process takes place. In intercultural communication four strategies the most attention: assimilation, separation, marginalization, and integration. The choice of the strategy depends on the desire to maintain the native or heritage culture, and the desire to adopt the dominant culture. Assimilation is when a newcomer decreases the significance of their original culture and attempts to identify with the new culture. Separation is when the newcomer keeps the original culture and avoids interaction with the new culture. Marginalization is when the newcomer shows little interest in either culture. Integration is when the newcomer shows interest not only in keeping their original culture but also in learning new culture.

What cultural strategies can be chosen for Ukraine in 2015? What strategies have to be avoided?

Intercultural Communication competence (ICC)

According to recent research, intercultural competence involves the appropriate management of shared meanings and effective achievement of desired goals. It has three major criteria: effectiveness, appropriateness, and satisfaction. Appropriateness refers to the degree to which behaviours match the expectations generated by the culture. Effectiveness refers to the desirable outcomes of the communication in a given situation.

Intercultural competence can be affected by various factors. Cultural sensitivity (motivation to accept and respect intercultural differences); knowledge (information gained through learning cultures, personal experiences, and observations); communication skills (observation, listening, sensitivity, empathy, flexibility etc.)

Thus, Intercultural Communication competence refers to an integrative theory-practice approach enabling us to mindfully apply the intercultural knowledge which we have learned in a sensitive manner.

To be interculturally competent we have to transform our knowledge of cultural theories into appropriate effective performance.

According to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, the intercultural competence includes:

ü ability to bring the culture of origin and the foreign culture into relation with each other;

ü ability to identify and use a variety of strategies for contact with those from other cultures;

ü capacity to fulfil the role of cultural intermediary between one’s own culture and the foreign culture;

ü ability to deal effectively with intercultural misunderstanding and conflict situations;

ü ability to overcome stereotyped situations.

 

Language and Culture

Where did language come from?

What about the pre-linguistic thought of babies? How can babies acquire language without thought?

Since its inception in the 1920s and 1930s, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis has caused controversy in a variety of disciplines including linguistics, psychology, philosophy, anthropology, and education.

Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf brought attention to the relationship between language, thought, and culture. Neither of them formally wrote the hypothesis nor supported it with empirical evidence, but through a thorough study of their writings about linguistics, researchers have found two main ideas:

· a theory of linguistic determinism that states that the language you speak determines the way that you will interpret the world around you;

· a theory of linguistic relativism that states that the language you speak influences your thoughts about the real world.

Both Sapir and Whorf agreed that it is our culture that determines our language, which in turn determines the way that we categorize our thoughts about the world and our experiences in it.

For more than eighty years researchers have tried to design studies that will support or refute this hypothesis.

The main problem with the hypothesis is that it requires a measurement of human thought. Measuring thought and one’s world view is nearly impossible. Another problem with the hypothesis is that languages and linguistic concepts are highly translatable.

The problem still remains a mystery. Language can imprison us. It can also set us free. But today researchers have found more proofs of the link between a language and a culture. As Stella Ting-Toomey puts it, «language is taken-for granted aspect of our cultural lives. We acquire meanings and underlying values in symbolic world of the culture». While language can easily create misunderstandings, it also fortunately can clarify them. Sensitive language usage is a pivotal vehicle in reflecting our mindful attitudes in communicating with dissimilar ones.

Each human language reflects a logical, coherent system which implies patterns, rules, and structure. A language is an arbitrary, symbolic system which names ideas, feelings, experiences, events, people, and other phenomena developed by a particular speech community. (That is whychildren in many cultures acquire speaking and comprehending skills first, then reading and writing skills). All human languages are structured according to the following sets of rules: phonology; morphology; syntax, semantics, and pragmatics.

We shall consider the pragmatic rules of a language as they refer to the situational rules that govern language usage in a particular culture. Pragmatic concerns the rules of «how to say, what to say, to whom to say, and under what situational conditions to say». Thus, a speech community is defined as a group of individuals who share a common set of norms and rules regarding proper communicative practices.