summary

READINGS

ReMngl

Write Before You Read Before reading "Intercultural Communicat ion Stumbling Blocks" by LaRay M . Barna, write for several minutes about what you believe are the most challenging stumbling blocks, or barriers, to communication across cultures.

Intercultural Communication Stumbling Blocks LaKay M. Barna

LaRay M. Barna, Associate Professor Emerita, Department of Speech Communication at Portland State University in Oregon, wrote "Intercultural Communication Stumbling Blocks" to report on her research undertaken M'ith U.S. and international students in her own intercultural communication course. "Intercultural Communication Stumbling Blocks" was originally published in Kentucky Speech Arts Journal, a scholarly journal for professionals in the field of communication.

Introduction

There are many viewpoints regarding the practice of intercultural communication but a familiar one is that "people are people," basically pretty much alike; therefore increased interaction through travel, student exchange programs, and other such ventures should result in more understanding and friendship between nations. Others take a quite different view, particularly those who have done research in the field of speech communication and are fully aware of the complexities of mterpersonal interaction, even within cultural groups. They do not equate contact w i t h communication, do not believe that the simple experience of talking w i t h someone insures a successful transfer of meanings and feelings. Even the basic commonalities of b i r th , hunger, family, death, are perceived and treated in vastly different ways by persons w i t h different backgrounds (Singer; Hal l , "Hidden" ) . If there is a universal, i t might be that each has been so subconsciously influenced by his own cultural upbringing that he assumes that the needs, desires, and basic assumptions of others are identical to his own (Hall , "Si lent") .

It takes a long t ime of noninsulated l iv ing ' in a new culture before a foreigner can relax into new perceptions and nonevaluative th inking so that he can adjust his reactions and interpretations to fit what's happening around h i m . The few who achieve complete insight and acceptance are outstanding by their rarity.

' noninsulated living: participating socially

Part Two Readings and Writing Assignments

After nine years of monitor ing dvads" and small group discussions between U.S. and international students, this author, for one, is inclined to agree w i t h Chades Frankel, who savs: "Tensions exist w i t h i n nations and between nations that never would have existed were these nations not in such intense cultural communication w i t h one another" (1). The following typical reactions of three foreign students to one nonverbal behavior that most Americans expect to bridge gaps - the smile - may serve as an il lustration:

Japanese student: On my \va\ to and from school I have received a smile by nonacquaintance American gids several times. I have learned they have no interest for me; it means only a kind of greeting to a foreigner But if someone smiles at a stranger in Japan, especially a girl, she can assume he is either a sexual maniac or an impolite person.

Korean student: An American visited me in my countr\ for one week. His inference was that people in Korea are not very friendly because they didn't smile or want to talk with foreign people. That's true because most Korean people take time to get to be friendly with people. We never talk or smile at strangers.

Vietnamese student: The reason why certain foreigners mav think that Americans are superficial - and they are, some Americans even recognize this - is that they talk and smile too much. For people who come from placid cultures where nonverbal language is more used, and where a silence, a smile, a glance have their own meaning, it is true that Americans speak a lot. The superficiality of Americans can also be detected in their relations with others. Their friendships are, most of the time, so ephemeral compared to the friendships we have at home. Americans make friends very easilv and leave their friends almost as quickly, while in my country it takes a long time to find out a possible friend and then she becomes your friend - with a verv strong sense of the term. Most Americans are materialistic and once they are provided with necessities, they don't feel the need to have a friend. Purposes of their friendships are too clear, and you can hardly find a friendship for friendship's sake.

A n American girl in the same class gives her view:

In general it seems to me that foreign people are not necessarily snobs but are very unfriendly Some class members have told me that you shouldn't smile at others while passing them by on the street. To me I can't stop smiling. It's just j natural to be smiling and friendly. I can see now why so many foreign people stick together. They are impossible to get to know. It's like the Americans are big bad wolves. How do Americans break this barrier? I want friends from all over the world but how do you start to be friends without offending them or scaring them off - like sheep?

One reason for the long delay in tackling the widespread failure to achieve understanding across cultures might be that i t is not readily apparent when there has been miscommunication at the interpersonal level. Unless there is overt reporting of assumptions' such as in the examples above, which seldom happens

^ dyads: groups of two people ' overt reporting of assumptions: open explanations of basic beliefs and practices

Chapter 3 Relating Reading to Experience

in normal settings, there is no chanee for comparing impressions. The foreign visitor to the United States nods, smiles, and gives affirmative comments, which the straightforward, friendly American confidently translates as meaning that he has informed, helped, and pleased the newcomer. I t is likely, however, that the foreigner actually understood very l i t t le of the verbal and nonverbal content and was merely indicating polite interest or trying not to embarrass himself or his host w i t h verbalized questions. The conversation mav even have confirmed his stereotype that Americans are insensitive and ethnocentric.

I n a university classroom, U.S. students often complain that the international members of a discussion or project seem uncooperative or uninterested. The following is a typical statement from the international point of view:

I had difficulty with the opinion in the class where peoples in group discuss about subject. I was surrounded bv Americans with whom I couldn't follow their tempo of discussion half of the time. I have difficulty to listen and speak, but also with the way they handle the group. I felt uncomfortable because sometimes thev believe their opinion strongly. I had been very serious about the whole subject but I was afraid I would say something wrong. I had the idea but not the words.

Typically, the method used to improve chances for successful intercultural communication is to gather information about the customs of the other country and a smattering of the language. The behaviors and attitudes are sometimes researched, but almost always f rom a secondhand source. The information is seldom sufficient and may or mav not be helpful . Knowing "what to expect" too often blinds the observer to all but what is confirmatory to his image or preconception. Any contradictory evidence that does filter through is likely to be treated as an exception (Bern 9).

A b e t t e r approach is to study the history, political structure, art, literature, and language of the country if t ime permits. But more important , one should develop an investigative nonjudgmental attitude'* and a high tolerance for ambiguity ' - which means lowered defenses. Margaret Mead suggests sensitizing persons to the kinds of things that need to be taken into account instead of developing behavior and attitude stereotypes, mainly because of the individual differences in each encounter and the rapid changes that occur in a culture pattern. Edward Stewart concurs w i t h this view {American 14).

The Stumbling Blocks

Language One way to reach an improved state of awareness and sensitivity to what might go wrong is to examine five variables in the communication process that seem to be

investigative nonjudgmental attitude: the objective position a researcher attempts to take toward a research subject

' high tolerance for ambiguity: willingness to accept uncertainty and complexity

Part Two Readings and Writing Assignments

major stumbling blocks when the dyad or small group is cross-cultural. The first is so obyious i t hardly needs mentioning - language. Vocabulary; syntax, idioms, slang, dialects, and so on, all cause difficulty, but the person struggling w i t h a different language is at least aware when he's in this k ind of trouble. A worse language problem is the tenacity w i t h which someone \yill cling to "the" meaning of a word or phrase in the nevy language once he has grasped one regardless of connotation or context. The infinite variations, especially of English, are so impossible to cope w i t h that they are waved aside. The reason the problem is "worse" is because each thinks he understands. The nationwide misinterpretation of Khrushchev's sentence " W e ' l l bury you"^is a classic example. Even "yes" and " n o " cause trouble. W h e n a Japanese hears, " W o n ' t you have some tea?" he listens to the literal meaning of the sentence and answers, " N o , " meaning that he wants some. "Yes, I won ' t " would be a better reply because this tips off the hostess that there may be a misunderstanding. In some cultures, also, it is polite to refuse the first or second offer of refreshment. Many foreign guests have gone hungry because their U.S. hostess never presented the th ird offer.

Nonverbal Signs and Symbols Learning the language, which most foreign visitors consider their only barrier to understanding, is actually only the beginning. As Frankel says, "To enter into a culture is to be able to hear, in Lionel Trilling's phrase, its special ' h u m and buzz of impl icat ion ' " (103). This brings in nonverbal areas and the second stumbling block. People from different cultures inhabit different nonverbal sensory worlds. Each sees, hears, feels, and smells only that which has some meaning or importance for h i m . He abstracts whatever fits into his personal wodd of recognitions and then interprets i t through the frame of reference'of his own culture.

A n Oregon girl in an intercultural communication class asked a young man from Saudi Arabia how he would signal nonverbally that he liked her. His response was to smooth back his hair which, to her, was just a common nervous gesture signifying nothing. She repeated her question three times. He smoothed his hair three times and, finally realizing that she was not recognizing this movement as his reply to her question, automatically ducked his head and stuck out his tongue slightly in embarrassment. This behavior was noticed by the girl , and she interpreted it as the way he would express his l iking for her.

The lack of comprehension of obvious nonverbal signs and symbols such as gestures, postures, and vocalizations is a definite communication barrier, but i t is possible to learn the meaning of these messages (once they are perceived) in much the same way as a verbal language is learned. I t is more diff icult to correctly note the unspoken codes of the other culture that are further from awareness, such as the handling of t ime and spatial relationships, subtle signs of respect or formality, and many others.

"We'll bury you": Nikita Krushchev, leader of the Soviet Union from 1953 to 1964, directed these words to the people of the United States. He was referring to economic competition with the West, but Americans misunderstood it as a military boast.

' frame of reference: a set or system of beliefs against which other ideas arc tested

Chapter 3 Relating Reading to Experience

Preconceptions and Stereotypes The th i rd stumbhng block is the presence of preconceptions and stereotypes. If the label "inscrutable" has preceded the Japanese guest, i t is thus we explain his constant and inappropriate smile. The stereotype that Arabs are " inf lammable" causes U.S. students to keep their distance when an animated and noisy group from Libya is enjoying lunch in the cafeteria. A professor who "knows" of the bargaining habits of natives of certain countries may unfairly interpret a hesitation by one of his foreign students as a move to "squirm o u t " of a commitment . Stereotypes help do what Ernest Becker says the anxiety-prone human race must do, and that is to reduce the threat of the unknown by making the wodd predictable (84-89). Indeed, this is one of the basic functions of culture: to lav out a predictable world in which the individual is firmly oriented. Stereotypes are overgeneralized beliefs that provide conceptual bases from which to "make sense" out of what goes on around us. I n a foreign land they increase our feeling of security and are psychologically necessary to the degree that we cannot tolerate ambiguity or the sense of helplessness resulting from inability to understand and deal w i t h people and situations beyond our comprehension.

Stereotypes are stumbling blocks for communicators because they interfere w i t h objective viewing of stimuli.^ Unfortunately, they are not easy to overcome in others or in ourselves by demonstrations of the " t r u t h , " hoping to teach a lesson of tolerance or cultural relativity.' They persist because they sometimes rationalize prejudices or are firmly established as myths or truisms by one's own national culture. They are also sustained and fed by the tendency to perceive selectively only those pieces of new information that correspond to the image. The Asian or African visitor who is accustomed to privation and the values of denial and self-help cannot fail to experience American culture as materialistic and wasteful. The stereotype for h i m turns into a concrete reality.

The Tendency to Evaluate Another deterrent to an understanding between persons of differing cultures or ethnic groups is the tendency to evaluate, to approve or disapprove, the statements and actions of the other person or group rather than to try to completely comprehend the thoughts and feelings expressed. Each person's culture, his own way of l i fe , always seems right, proper, and natural. This bias prevents the open- minded attention needed to look at the attitudes and behavior patterns from the other's point of view. A midday siesta changes from a "lazy habit" to a "pretty good idea" when someone listens long enough to realize the midday temperature in that country is 115° Fahrenheit.

The communication cut-off caused by immediate evaluation is heightened when feelmgs and emotions are deeply involved; yet this is just the time when listening w i t h understanding is most needed. I t takes both awareness of the tendency to close our minds and courage to risk change i n our own values and perceptions to dare to comprehend why someone thinks and acts differently from us. As stated by Sherif, Sherif, and Nebergall, "A person's commitment to his

' objective viewing of stimuli: the ability to look at things without making judgments about them '•' cultural relativity: the evaluation of a custom in relation to other customs of a particular group

Part Two Readings and Writing Assignments

religion, polities, values of his family, and his stand on the virtue of his way of life are ingredients in his self-picture - intimately felt and cherished" (vi). I t is very easy to dismiss strange or different behaviors as "wrong, " listen through a thick screen of value judgments, and therefore fail miserablv to receive a fair understanding. The impatience of the American public over the choice of the shape of the conference table at the Paris Peace Talks'" and their judgment of a "poor reception" for the President of the United States because there were no bands or flag-waving throngs waitmg for Nixon as he was driven through towns in New China on his historic visit"are two examples.

The following paragraph wri t ten by an international student from Korea illustrates how a clash in values can lead to poor communication and result in misunderstanding and hurt feelings:

\Vlien I call on my American friend, he had been studying his lesson. Then I said, "May I come in?" He said through window, " I am sorry 1 have no time because of my study" Then he shut the window. I thought it over and over. I couldn't understand through my cultural background. In our country, if someone visits other's house, house owner should have welcome visitor whether he likes or not and whether he is busy or not. Then next, if the owner is busy, he asks to visitor, "Would you wait for me?" Also the owner never speaks without opening his door

This example also illustrates how dif f icult i t is to bring one's own cultural norm'^ into awareness. I t is unlikely the "American fr iend" ever knew that he insulted the young Korean.

High Anxiety The fifth stumbling block is high anxiety, separately mentioned for the purpose of emphasis. Unlike the other four (language, illusive nonverbal cues, preconceptions and stereotypes, and the practice of immediate evaluation), the stumbling block of anxiety rs^^e^^distinct but undedies and compounds the others. The presence of high anxiety/tension is very common in cross-cultural experiences because of the uncertainties present. A n international student says it well:

During those several months after mv arrival in the U.S.A., every day I came back from school exhausted so that I had to take a rest for a while, stretching myself on the bed. For all the time, I strained every nerve in order to understand what the people were saying and make myself understood in my broken English. When I don't understand what American people are talking about and why they are laughing, I sometimes have to pretend to understand by smiling, even though I feel alienated, uneasy and tense.

Paris Peace Talks: talks between Vietnamese and United States representatives in the early 1970s whose purpose was to end the Vietnam War

" Nixon's historic visit: Richard Nixon was the first United States president to \'isit the People's Republic of China (1972).

'- cultural norm: a standard regarded as t\l or appropriate for a specific cultural group

Chapter 3 Relating Reading to Experience

I n addition to this, the difference in culture or customs, the way of thinking between two countries, produces more tension because we don't know how we should react to totally foreign customs or attitudes, and sometimes we can't guess how the people from another country react to my saying or behavior We always have a fear somewhere in the bottom of our hearts that there are much more chances of breakdown i n intercultural communication than in communication with our own fellow countrymen.

The native of the country is uncomfortable when talking w i t h a foreigner because he cannot maintain the normal flow of verbal and nonverbal interaction to sustain the conversation. He is also threatened by the unknown other's knowledge, experience, and evaluation - the visitor's potential for scrutiny and rejection of himself and his country. The inevitable question, " H o w do you like i t here?" which the foreigner abhors, is the host's quest for reassurance, or at least the "feeler" that reduces the unknown and gives h i m ground for defense if that seems necessary.

The foreign member of the dyad is under the same threat, wi th the added tension of having to cope wi th the differing pace, climate, and culture. The first few months he feels helpless in coping w i t h messages that swamp h i m and to which his reactions mav be inappropriate. His self-esteem is often intolerably undermined when be employs such defenses as withdrawal into his own reference g r o u p " or into himself, screening out or misperceiving st imuli , rationalizing, overcompensating, even hostility - none of which leads to effective communication.

Conclusion

Since all of the communication barriers mentioned are hard to remove, the only simple solution seems to be to tell everybody to stay home. This advice obviously is unacceptable, so it is fortunate that a few paths are being laid around the obstacles. Communicat ion theorists are continuing to offer new insights and are focusing on problem areas of this complex process (see Ruesch and Bateson). Educators and linguists are improving methods of learning a second language. The nonverbal area, made familiar by Edward T. Hall in his famous books The Silent Language and The Hidden Dimension, is getting a singular amount of attention (see, for example, Mehrabian). The ray of hope offered by Hall and others is that nonverbal cues, culturally controlled and largely out-of-awareness, can be discovered and even understood when the communicator knows enough to look for them, is alert to the varying interpretations possible, and is free enough from tension and psychological defenses to notice them.

In addition, textbooks are appearing and communication specialists are improving means for increasing sensitivity to the messages coming from others in an intercultural setting (see, for eample, Stewart, "Simulat ion" ; Kraemer; Hoopes).

" reference group: the group of people with whom one has something in common, such as nationality or native language

Part Two Readings and Writing Assignments

Professional associations are giving increased amounts of attention to intercultural communication, and new societies such as the Society for Intercultural Education, Training and Research are being developed. The International and Intercultural Communicat ion Annual has a complete l ist ing of these (Speech Communicat ion Assn.).

W h a t the interpersonal intercultural communicator must seek to achieve can be summarized by two quotations: The first is bv Roger Harrison, who says:

The communicator cannot stop at knowing that the people he is working with have different customs, goals, and thought patterns from his own. He must be able to feel his way into intimate contact with them and within them, neither losing his own values in the confrontation nor protecting himself behind a wall of intellectual detatchnient (4).

Robert T. Oliver phrases it thus: " I f we would communicate across cultural barriers, we must learn what to say and how to say it in terms of the expectations and predispositions of those we want to l isten" (154).

Works Cited

Becker, Ernest. The Birth and Death of Meaning. New York: Free Press, 1962.

Bern, Daryl J. Beliefs, Attitudes, and Human Affairs. Belmont, CA: Brooks / Cole, 1970.

Frankel, Charles. The Neglected Aspect of Foreign Affairs. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Inst., 1965.

Hall, Edward T. The Hidden Dimension. New York: Doubleday, 1966. . The Silent Language. Greenwich, CT: Fawcett, 1959.

Harrison, Roger. "The Design of Cross-Cultural Training: An Alternative to the University Model." Explorations in Human Relations Training and Research. Bethesda, M D : Natl Training Laboratories, 1966.

Hoopes, David, ed. Readings in Intercultural Communication. Vol. 1-4. Pittsburgh, PA: U. of Pittsburgh, Regional Council Ind. Educ, 1975.

International and Intercultural Communication Annual. Vol. 1. New York: Speech Communication Assoc., 1974.

Kraemer, Alfred J. The Development of Cultural Self-Awareness: Design of a Program of Instruction. Washington, D.C.: GWU. HR Research Office, 1969.

Mead, Margaret. "The Cultural Perspective." Communication or Conflict. Ed. Mary Capes. New York: Association Press, 1960.

Mehrabian, Albert. Silent Messages. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1971.

Oliver, Robert T. Culture and Communication: The Problem of Penetrating National and Cultural Boundaries. Springfield, IL: Chades C. Thomas, 1962.

Ruesch, Jurgen, and Gregory Bateson. Communication: The Social Matrix of Psychiatry. New York: Norton, 1968.

Chapter 3 Relating Reading to Experience

Sherif, Carolyn W., Musafe Sherif, and Roger E. Nebergall. Attitude and Attitude Change. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1965.

Singer, Marshall R. "Culture: A Perceptual Approach." Hoopes. Vol. 1.

Stewart, Edward C. American Cultural Patterns: A Cross-Cultural Perspective. Pittsburgh, PA: Uni\'. of Pittsburgh, Regional Council Intl . Educ, 1971.

."The Simulation of Cultural Differences." The journal of Communication 16 (1966).

Write After You Read 1 W r i t e a journal entry in response to "Intercultural Communicat ion

Stumbling Blocks" using the guidelines on page 11.

2 Summarize the reading i n one or two sentences by explaining what you perceive to be Barna's main point.

Discuss After You Read 1 Define in your own words each of the five major stumbling blocks that Barna

identifies as interfering w i t h successful communication across cultures. Then describe any experiences you have had w i t h these stumbling blocks:

a Language b Nonverbal signs and svmbols c Preconceptions and stereotypes d The tendency to evaluate e High anxiety

2 Do any of your experiences contradict what Barna is saying, or do you disapprove of the way she has presented the ideas and experiences? Explain.

3 Has Barna neglected to discuss other common cross-cultural communication barriers? I f so, what are they?

4 W h a t are Barna's solutions to the problem of intercultural communication? Do you believe her solutions wil l be successful? Based on your own experience, can you provide other solutions?

5 Examine how Barna structures her essay. Compare and contrast the introduction w i t h the conclusion. W l i i c h ideas are similar? W h i c h ideas are different? W h a t purpose does the middle of the essay serve? How does this structure help you to follow Barna's ideas?

Part Two Readings and Writing Assignments