As the reach of our daily activities expands to the global level, many people find themselves asking the question: “What is the best way to enjoy interacting with other cultures in this global world, while ensuring that our own local, regional, and national culture is still valued?” In the last two decades, in the face of rapid technological change and with the impact of mass communications, people of all nations began to fear the decline of their national languages and identities and the emergence of a homogeneous global culture. Satellites, computers, the Internet, or email can override any attempt by a government to protect its cultural and national heritage.
Critics of globalism want a revival of cultural pluralism, and many have joined movements with a renewed appreciation of traditional religion, local language, and ethnic origin. For example, interest has grown in preserving dialects such as Gaelic and Welsh. In French Polynesia there is heightened pride in the Tahitian language, and now it is taught formally in local schools, which was not true a generation ago. But extreme ethnocentrism is not what critics of global culture want to preserve in the movements to promote cultural pluralism.
Rather, direct interaction with people from other cultures has become a day-to-day reality for many of us. Those fearful of cultural domination misjudge the ability of national culture to survive under the assault of globalism. Learning another culture does not necessarily make us lose our own. To communicate, we can make adaptations to another culture without changing the fundamental premises that we value in our own cultures. In fact, our enculturation* from birth is so thorough that we cannot usually rid ourselves of our culture even when we will to do so.
People should not fear the intercultural exchanges that have historically contributed to robust societies. We can benefit from what we learn from other cultures. In today’s multicultural, global society, we need to learn to adapt to other cultures in order to survive. A successful Japanese executive once said that to be effective in two cultures is like handling two swords at the same time. In one culture you must be assertive, quick, and to the point. The other culture may require you tube unassertive, patient, and indirect. You have to learn to shift styles, like handling two swords.
Nations can have different interests, and their perspectives often diverge and contradict each other. To improve relations, nations should recognize why they differ instead of pretending that the differences are a product of misperception.
A people should be sensitive to the importance of undesirable events in their history with another culture; it is important to acknowledge what happened in the past. But in acknowledging this history, it will help communication if one culture does not blame current generations of the other for past transgressions. There are times when we need to forgive and forget. To overcome cultural differences, we should strive to conduct our relationships in the present. We need to evaluate one another as individuals based on personal and direct experience, regardless of culture or nationality, and independent of the impersonal and stereotypical expectations instilled in us by history. Ethnocentrism and empathy are opposites. The point to be emphasized here is that neither nations nor cultures communicate, but that people do.
Research in the field of intercultural communication clearly shows that often we do not have empathy toward people who seem different, which makes it difficult to evaluate a person from another culture as an individual. Most people try to avoid the unfamiliar. The key challenge that we encounter in intercultural communication is cultural difference between persons who interact and the stress that results from such encounters.
Our culture inculcates our behavior in us from birth, and we learn it so well that we internalize it at a subconscious level. To communicate across cultures, we need first to raise our own internal rules to the level of a conscious, externalized map. This will allow us to interact more through conscious choice, so that we can examine differences in behavior rather than automatically reacting negatively. We then need to study the culture we are targeting in order to cross cultural barriers and achieve successful communication.
Clearly, a dual approach is necessary to deal with intercultural communication obstacles. The obstacles that we can identify from an external perspective of a target culture may only be overcome by internal study of the culture, there by gaining understanding of the perspectives that the culture provides.
An external approach should be used to first sensitize people to their own concept of culture and to foster appreciation of cultural diversity. We need to become conscious of what is in our heads and how we behave. We also need to be aware that how we see ourselves may not be how others see us. Looking into the face of a person from another culture may show you your own. Viewing a target culture through this external frame helps one to anticipate pitfalls and deal with unfamiliar situations, thereby greatly increasing ones adaptability.
Internal cultural information about the target culture should then be examined; for example, you may want to look at the differences between Japan and the United States. This type of culture specific information is useful for persons from either of these two cultures in attempting to communicate with persons from the other. One needs to look internally at the historical background of a culture and its major institutions (such as religion, government, and family) as part of the cultural frame. One must learn the rules of behavior for specific situations in a culture. A practical approach for obtaining target cultural information is to consult travel guides, to read current publications, and to watch videos on the country. When in the country it is valuable to attend local cultural events, and businesspersons should also endeavor to join some kind of business group.
Fortunately cultural norms do not exist for every situation that individuals face in life. We can consciously evaluate new situations and make decisions about how to handle them. Thus, we can and do act to transcend the binding fetters of our cultural norms. People who communicate effectively between their own and a target culture seem to create a third culture perspective neutral zone into which they step to communicate. There they retain their basic native culture while partially adapting to traits of the target culture. If they are fortunate, they will communicate with others who can do the same and will meet them in this third zone.
Cultural differences are impossible to avoid and, for many of us, daily intercultural encounters are here to stay. Understanding and adapting to others do not require us to change the aspects of ourselves that we consider essential, but rather can enrich us.
The raising of one’s culture consciousness through education gives the intercultural communicator the freedom to consciously choose behavior and attitude in personal interaction, rather than submitting to the control of subconscious cultural norms and just reacting, usually negatively, to any deviation from these norms. Such consciousness also then gives the communicator personal responsibility in the interaction between cultures.
コメントを残す