|
 |
 |
|
|
 |
Student Publications
Author: Mark Wellington
Title:
Intercultural Communication
Area:
Country :
Profile:
Program:
Available for Download:
Yes
Sharing knowledge is a vital component in
the growth and advancement of our society
in a sustainable and responsible way. Through
Open Access, AIU and other leading institutions
through out the world are tearing down the
barriers to access and use research literature.
Our
organization is interested in the dissemination
of advances in scientific research fundamental
to the proper operation of a modern society,
in terms of community awareness, empowerment,
health and wellness, sustainable development,
economic advancement, and optimal functioning
of health, education and other vital services.
AIU’s mission
and vision is consistent with
the vision expressed in the Budapest Open
Access Initiative and Berlin Declaration
on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences
and Humanities. Do you have something you
would like to share, or just a question
or comment? We would be happy to hear from
you, please use the Request Info link below.
For more information on the AIU's Open Access
Initiative, click
here.
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
INTRODUCTION
To broach a topic such as culture is to find oneself in an
"epistemological1 band" of
debates that may not produce any deductive logic. In fact the
concept of culture is so
dynamic that there is no fixed definition upon which all theorizing
cannot be successfully
argued.
In essence, we may best approximate culture to signify those
symbols, language and
other gestures that are understood by a group of persons to mean the
same thing. In fact,
such cultural affiliations are the facilitators of communication2
between/among human
beings.
It is therefore not hard to deduce, why communication between two
(2) persons or among
a group of persons of the same culture would be easier than
communication
between/among groups of persons of different cultures. Since
communication does not
only include the dissemination and the use of language (with
feedback) then other
variables of culture as mentioned above may interfere with effective
communication.
Robert Heller in his book; "Communicating Clearly" pointed out that
"good
communication is the lifeblood of all societies." He went on to
highlight that
communication takes many forms. He included speaking, writing and
listening as
essential variables of communication (1998;P.6). He also went on to
point out that
effective communication hinges on people understanding your meaning
and replying in
terms that move the exchange forward. Implied in Robert Hellers
argument is the fact
that meanings must be understood by all parties to the communication
process to mean
the same thing. If that is not the case then miscommunication
evolves and no foundation
for growth in any form can be achieved, be it social, political or
economic.
Inter-cultural Communication would denote communication between
cultures. It must be
understood from the outset that culture is experienced and
identified in many forms and
1 That which is philosophical and constitutes repetitive theorizing.
2 Interactive transference of meanings between intelligences.
3
at many geographical locations across the globe.
Hence to say "inter-cultural3" does not
necessarily mean the populace of Jamaica being able to communicate
effectively with the
populace of Canada for example, but would signify communication
between or among
indigenous cultures of Jamaica itself. The point to be made here is
that intercultural
communication is solely entrenched in meanings and not necessarily
geographical
locations.
Why is Intercultural Communication important?
We communicate to get things done, pass on and obtain information,
reach decisions,
achieve joint understanding and develop relationships. Hence
communication covers the
social, the political and the economic aspects of life in any
society. Since information
technology now seeks to achieve one global culture, then such
technology must also be
capable of unifying language, symbols and gestures to achieve a true
global culture. It is
considered a fact that information technology cannot capture all
variables of true
communication effectively and so we are still challenged with the
hypothesis of such
technologies being able to provide us with "one world order."
We live in a world that promotes free trade as the vehicle for
economic growth. Free
trade captures all goods and services of all societies of the free
world/democratic
societies. With such a benchmark our terms of communication to
foster relationships
(political, economic and/or social) must be created on the basis of
shared meanings. If
such exchange cannot be achieved then there will always be
inequities in trade and
relationships nationally and internationally.
Communication and culture � merged variables
John Fiske in 2000 highlighted that "communication is one of those
human activities that
everyone recognizes but few can define satisfactorily" (2000;P.1).
It is not surprising that
this assertion was made because in a new world order where the
owners of technology re-
defined communication based on the abilities of the technologies
over what the
technologies actually do, make it difficult for us to have a
unifying definition of
3 Between cultures and sub-cultures alike.
4
communication. However to keep this paper in
context, we shall agree from the outset
that communication must always denote "the interactive transference
of meanings among
intelligences." If "meaning" becomes our operational term, then
information
dissemination cannot become an active or true definition of
communication.
Let us take a look at Culture
Culture as defined by Aggrey Brown, is "that dimension of
interaction (communication)
that defines a particular group of people and incorporates symbolic,
technical and social
phenomena adopted and understood by such groups (1995;P.14). At the
outset we can
agree that culture is created and sustained through instrumental and
social arrangements
of people. As highlighted in Aggrey Browns work, technologies are
both manifestations
of culture as they are the means through which culture is created
and expressed. That
being the case, technologies have found themselves on both ends of
the debate: 1.
Technology is a form of culture and 2. It assists in creating or
re-defining cultures. Its
latter characteristics may help us to better understand how
Inter-Cultural Communication
may be achieved. Hence, technological advancements modifying
cultures may in fact
unify some cultures facilitating inter-cultural communication and
distort others by
dissemination information but not facilitating the exchange of
meanings. Hence, we may
agree to disagree on the point of intercultural communication as in
some instances
intercultural communication is achieved and at other times
communication between or
among cultures become thwarted. Intercultural communication must
therefore be
characterized by shared meanings.
DEC
ENC
SHARED MEANING
ENC
DEC
5
Communications "bridging gaps" in cultures
globally
Where cultures are similar, communications4 have the ability to
amalgamate such
cultures for purposes of common goals and outcomes. Where cultures
are dissimilar,
communications have the ability to disseminate information and the
additional task of
providing the avenue by which unified meanings may be adapted and
sustained. The
question therefore arises: Can information technology modify
cultures universally to
achieve such global harmony needed to create and sustain what is now
called a global
culture? It is obvious to a number of us that this global trend is
not yet achieved and it is
also obvious that barriers of language, symbols, customs and norms
are not easily
modified by technology in order to create one global culture.
William J. Martin puts the term information into perspective. He
pointed out that; "When
considering the nature and role of information, from what ever
perspective, meaning
becomes central" (1995;P.22). He made it clear that the concepts of
information and
meanings had distinct and separate characteristics [1995;P.22].
Information he said is an
intrinsic property of various systems that exist irrespective of
whether any human or any
forms of intelligences perceive it or utilize it. The above
assertion brings "home" the
point we have been trying to explicate thus far �dissemination of
information does not
constitute communication all the time! Hence, it may be deduced that
disseminated
information is sometimes understood in a socio-cultural context and
if the culture on
either side of the equation were dissimilar then communication would
not have occurred.
A word in a foreign language say, possesses information, however,
this word may have
no meaning to the listener if the listener has no prior knowledge of
that language. The
example may be extended to include symbols and other norms not
shared by those who
disseminate information and those who receive it. It is therefore
easy to conclude that
communications can only effectively bridge gaps in cultures where
information is
interpreted and operationalized on the bases of similar meanings.
William J. Martin therefore offers us a concise definition of
communication. He states
that; "Communication is the process through which individuals in
relationships, groups,
4 The technologies used to facilitate the process of communication.
6
organizations and societies create, transmit and
use information to organize with the
environment and one another" (1995;P.26). In such an event, we can
better amalgamate
our political, social and economic imperatives for the true
development of a state or
nation.
The Use of Language in Cyber-Space
Technologies have converged in so many different forms and
structures that now we can
safely say that we have created a world evidenced in which there is
what I choose to call
Artificial Intelligence. Artificial Intelligence would seek to
connote the fact that
Information Technology (IT) can perform some human tasks in a way
that replicate
almost seamlessly the intelligent activities of human beings.
William J. Martin points us to the fact that; "the integration of
the voice and data
communications continue unabated with digitally coded data being
exchanged on the
basis of established protocols and standards" (1995;P.65). The above
point is evidenced
in Cable Networks, Satellite, Microwaves, Mobile Networks and
Asymmetrical Digital
Subscriber Lines. All this continues to be very complicated for the
"ordinary man" to
explicate. However, one thing we can appreciate is that a single
cable line is capable of
transmitting voice, data and graphics in real time. In such an
event, we are saying that we
can, process data, involve ourselves in verbal communication and
visualize individuals
simultaneously, regardless of where on the globe such persons are.
In other words, we
are operating in Cyber-space5.
What then is Cyber-Space?: Cyber-Space is that broadband of space
(global space) in
which human beings operate in real time. So for example, one can sit
in his house and
"visit" Hollywood!! During that time of interconnection a kind of
virtual reality sets in
and persons can literally move across the globe mentally through
Cyber-space. This is
where proponents of the term "virtual reality" have their greatest
strength in terms of
making the claim that "virtual reality" is not reality. However, the
great debate will
5 Digital technology amalgamatiing social, political and economic
transactions through high speed
transmission of data in space.
7
never end as most aspects of operations in
Cyber-space have produced socio-economic
and political advancements, never before experienced without
convergence of
technologies.
The Asymmetrical Digital Subscriber Line (ADSL) offers considerable
potential for the
delivery of video on demand at home. Williams sensitized us to the
fact that computer
applications and demands for such would increase thus making room
for greater
bandwidth in the years to come. In fact, Williams was writing in
1995 and we can
confirm today that his vision and predictions have come true! The
fact is that we all have
Broad Band Internet Services [BBIS] to our disposal in the Twenty
First Century.
Hence, the world has now seen and is experiencing networks which are
really circulatory
systems which provide mechanism for moving data and messages from
one computer to
another, from one mobile phone to another and information include
voice and graphics.
Once human beings "log into" those networks we avail ourselves of
and become co-opted
into Cyber-space. The growth in such technological investment grew
in 1992 from
74million dollars and by the end of 1997 was more than US $ 2
billion. Today, it is a
multibillion-dollar industry. We also have the Integrated Services
Digital Network
(ISDN) and the Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) of technologies. ATM
has been
described as ... the definitive technology for high-speed digital
networks. ATM is
capable of sending large quantities of data, voice and video
conferencing simultaneously
over networks [Williams; 1995]. This phenomenon certainly explains
how our ATM
machines installed by our banks for example, work. Since the
technology has the ability
to interconnect with other networks, we are able to avail ourselves
of Internet banking for
example. This and other examples make the realities of Cyber-space
"real" and not
"virtual reality" and so our modified cultural approach to
Cyber-space continuously
amaze us but nonetheless, those of us who can are locked into
Cyber-space in real time.
We may summarize the above by highlighting three (3) broad
categories of value added
benefits derived from (IT). Williams highlighted them for us;
8
1. Enhanced Communication Services: electronic
mail, messaging, managed data
network services, tele and video conferencing.
2. Transaction Services: electronic data interchange; electronic
funds transfer at
point of sale, home banking (ATM), teleshopping, ticket reservations
etc.
3. Information Services: Online databases, electronic publishing
services.
He pointed out that this list is not in anyway exhaustive but he
highlighted that the above
are "already established" services (1995;P.78).
Against the concepts stated above, which are factual, we are fully
cognizant that our
world has changed or is changing as to some degree technologies must
be communicated
to cultures through language for its effective and widespread use!
It then follows that
language and economic barriers can sometimes affect the widespread
use of such nascent
technologies capable of associating and integrating us in
Cyber-Space.
The Role of Language
To put a global slant on Cyber-space, we are confronted with some
harsh realities. We
are aware that the world is composed of various and varying
cultures, languages and
attitudes. If we consider all the languages of the world and all
cultures (natural and
indigenous alike) we can deduce via common sense that IT built
predominantly on the
English Language would lack the scope to effectively reach those of
us who speak other
languages. This is not to say that there are not translations of the
Internet from English to
some other language, however, the universal scope of its "reach" is
substantially limited.
We must recall who physically own websites! They are the sole
possession of
transnational organizations6 that set up their business on the World
Wide Web and we
access such websites by connecting to the mainframe computer
containing the data we
require. Since we already know of North Americas ownership of
technologies and E-
commerce, we find most of these websites advertised in English. What
about people who
speak Hindu, Arabic, Japanese, and creoles of different
nationalities? Is the Internet so
6 Profit entities so designed to utilize technologies as a means of
selling goods and services.
9
designed to reach them? Or is it that they
would require a translator/translators for their
connections to Cyber-space? Considering the stated questions, we my
want to agree that
if the Internet to a large degree is American owned and the
principal language used for
information dissemination is English then we might not be
experiencing the global
communication of which some communication philosophers speak. Again
we are co-
opted into the realm of epistemology as we sometimes define the
globalization of
communication in different ways and different contexts.
Language is the principal recipe of culture. That being accepted, we
can further posit that
communications cannot be effective in its global reach if it is
skewed negatively towards
most other languages but English. It is often said that English is
the Universal Language!
Is this true? Who created such prominence for English? Our best
suspicions would lead
us or cause us to believe that a large percentage of the worlds
population maybe exempt
from this adoption of new IT due to the barrier of language. I may
want to relate a simple
yet applicable story to this discourse. I became a resident of
Canada in September of
2004: I have also been a licensed driver for over 15 years. On
entering Canada, I had to
do a written Road Test in order to secure a Canadian Drivers
License. The fact is that, I
failed the written exam 3 times. The most troublesome part of the
exam had much to do
with interpreting accurately what the road signs signify. Even
though we were working
in the same cultural context of language [English], signs used in
Jamaica for driving
purposes were to some degree different in the Canadian context and
so I found myself on
a "steep learning curve" almost to the point of frustration. The
point I am making is that
culture, entrenched in language, symbols and norms has to be
harmonious, to foster
relationships. Hence, intimacy with new global technologies must be
built first and
foremost on the uniformity of languages, symbols and norms.
More on Language and Technology
Williams J. Martin points us to the fact that communication networks
and the information
flow that they support, have enable companies to completely
reconceptualize their
operation, facilitating new forms of functional structure. The
operations he said operate
both intra-organizational and inter organizational in order to
facilitate a range of alliances
10
among companies (1995; P.190). Now this fact is
not unfamiliar to us as we very well
know that the spread of global communications have much to do with
(Center-Center &
Center-Periphery7 connections of global communications. What is of
central concern to
this discourse is the dynamic ways in which transnational industries
are modifying their
business policies and by extension the working policies of their
human resources, without
the individuals (in some instances) being able to conceptualize such
changes. We are
therefore saying that the language barriers and other cultural
variables maybe streamlined
by transnationals across the globe for the purposes of commerce.
However, those who
fall directly in their employ are sometimes confused and frustrated
by policy changes that
affect them so negatively as their "technological capabilities"
become hindered by
cultural differences. Hence, the majority of our global societies
living on the periphery of
"peripheral" and "center" societies are left "out there" as
technophobes. Diversification
of the language of the technologies as well as affordability i.e.
the cultural and the
economic would to a large degree shrink the gap between those Neil
Postman describes
as technophiles8 and those who are technophobes.
Structuralism, Language and Semiotics
According to John Fiske Semiotics is a form of structuralism for it
argues that we cannot
know the world on its own terms, but only through the conceptual and
linguistic
structures of our culture [2000;P.115]. In that same chapter he
quoted Saussure who
defines semiotics as that concept that examines the cultural
specificity of representations
and their meanings by using one set of methods and terms across a
full range to signify
gesture, dress, writing, speech, photography, film, television and
so on. [2000]. The
central theme of his argument is that signs create meanings and such
signs may create
varying meanings depending on the culture of context in which signs
exist. Signs then
move from the signifier to the signified. The signified is the
mental concept referred to
by the signifier. So for example, the word "tree" will not
necessarily refer to a specific
tree, but to a culturally produced concept of ,,treeness." In this
context semiotics put
cultural meanings to language and other signs. Semiotics then
becomes apart of the
7 The connections between Industrialized countries and developing
countries i.e., The Global North and
The Global South.
8 Those who fear technologies.
11
vocabulary for cultural studies. Hence we can
conclude that culture constitutes language
as well as symbols.
Fiske as has explicated structuralism as being that ideology that
refers to systems,
relationship between systems and formal structures that create and
enable the production
of meaning [2000;P.115]. With such a definition, we can see that
structuralism was not
seen as a theory of culture but a theory of language. Hence, Fiske
points to Saussures
assertion on the theory of structuralism. Saussure claimed
structuralism to be the starting
point of understanding and creating culture. Hence, language becomes
the principal
recipe of culture. Saussure pointed out that there is no inherent
connection between a
word and an object. It has more to do with what we take such a word
to mean. This kind
of model of language poses some difficulties for communication
technologies. This is so
because words in different cultures can have different meanings. In
such an event,
varying interpretations of such meanings may pose difficulties in
light of our stance on
what communication means. Hence, the way we see the world is
determined by cultural
conventions through which we conceptualize the images received.
When Saussure insists that the relationship between a word and its
meanings is
constructed and not given, he is directing us to the cultural and
social dimensions of
language. Language then is cultural, not natural and so are the
meanings it generates.
This ideology of language poses the greatest threat to technologies
(even though
interactive) providing true global communication, as the
technologies will not be able to
capture all cultures and unify meanings.
According to John Fiske, Saussure divided language into 2
categories; (a) Langue � all
things
that
can
be
thought
and
said
and
(b)
Parole � specific utterance composed by the selection from the
Langue [2000;P.123]. He
therefore highlighted that language is the signifying system that
can be seen to be closely
ordered, structured and this can be rigorously examined and
ultimately understood.
According to him, language is also seen as a means of expression
that is not entirely
mechanistic in its functions but allows for a range of variant
possibilities.
12
Hence, such possibilities pose the challenge for communication using
communications.
Evidently, there are diverse interpretations of the realities of the
Internet. Due to the
interactive nature of the technology, diverse feedbacks are received
each day. The
feedbacks/responses to advertised Internet content will give the
owners of the technology
some insight into how differently various cultures interpret the
disseminated information.
Hence, the Internet, we may agree is capable of "global reach",
however, to achieve
global communication to the extent of achieving "one world order" is
a challenge for the
distant future.
Culture ~ Communication � Communications � Conclusion
Communication depends on the variables of culture and communication,
environments in
which its meaning can be truly operationalized. Since culture
incorporates variables of
language, symbols and norms, its manifestations are different
nationally and
internationally. Hence, it becomes an "up hill" task to create
communications capable of
facilitating global communication. Here, we make a distinction
between information
dissemination and communication. Again we focus on the central role
of "interactive
transference of meanings" in the communication process. We have also
come to the
realization that communication may not be able to unify all cultures
and sub-cultures to
achieve the communication spread its philosophers purport it to be
capable of achieving.
Culture has also incorporated in it the concept of Semiotics (that
which deals with signs)
and language. Hence uniformity of symbols i.e. to ensure their
uniformity of meanings
across cultures would be a necessary "yard stick" by which true
global communication
may be achieved.
Intercultural communication therefore may be a myth to the degree
that unified meanings
of information is not achieved. However, since culture constitutes
language, the
symbolic as well as the technological, we can/may agree that there
exists some level of
intercultural communication even by virtue of a common language.
Therefore, a nascent
13
global culture may be in the making, however,
as it evolves we may experience its true
maturity through many generations!!!
14
Reference
1. Brown; A. in Dunn; H. S. (ed); Globalization, Communication and
Caribbean
Identity; Ian Randle Publishers Ltd.; 1995.
2. Fiske; J.; Introduction to Communication Students; Routledge, 11
New Fetter
Lane, London, EC4AP 4EE; 2000.
3. Heller; R.; Communicate Clearly; DK Publishing Inc., 275 Hudson
Street, New
York, NY 10014; 1998.
4. Martin; W. J.; The Global Information Society; Aslib Gower
Publishers, Gower
House, Croft Road, Aldershot, Hampshire, GU11 3HR, England; 1995.
5. Saussure; F.; in Fiske; J.; Introduction to Communication
Studies; Routledge,
New fetter Lane, London, EC4AP 4EE; 2000.
15
|
|
 |
dd |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
