Thus, myths as a method of informal communication can serve as a means of intercultural dialogue, since it is mythology that contains invaluable information about the culture of a particular ethnic group and helps to build a certain picture of its existence.
Literature
1. Absalyamov M.B. Myths of Ancient Siberia / Krasnoyar. state agrarian univ. - Krasnoyarsk, 2004. - 304 p.
2. Bibler V.S. On the edges of the logic of culture. Book of selected essays. - M.: Russian Phenomenological Society, 1997. - 440 p.
3. Grinenko G.V. Sacred texts and sacred communication. - M., 2000. - 445 p.
4. Dmitriev A.V., Makarova I.V. Informal communication: Essays on theory and practice. - M.: Modern Humanitarian Academy, 2003. - 167 p.
5. Ryazanov A.V. Structural changes in ethnic communicative spaces: dynamics and direction // Philosophy and Society. - 2006. - No. 4. - pp. 87-102.
6. Sokolov A.V. General theory of social communication. - St. Petersburg, 2002. - 461 p.
---------♦"----------
UDC 316.77 T.A. Skakunova
PROBLEMS OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION IN NATIONAL AND WORLD SCIENCE
The article is devoted to modern problems of intercultural communication in domestic and world science. Intercultural communication is considered as a complex phenomenon, the study of which is carried out by many branches of humanities. In addition, the article shows the history of the formation of intercultural communication into a separate research area.
Key words: culture, communication, intercultural communication, conflict, problem.
T.A. Skakunova ISSUES OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION IN RUSSIAN AND WORLD SCIENCE
The article is devoted to the modern issues of intercultural communication in Russian and world science. Intercultural communication is considered as a complex phenomenon studied by many branches of humanitarian knowledge. In addition, the history of intercultural communication formation as an independent research area is shown.
Key words: culture, communication, intercultural communication, conflict, problem.
The modern world is developing along the path of expanding interconnection and interdependence of different countries, peoples and their cultures. This process covered various spheres of economic, socio-political, social and cultural life of all countries of the world. Today it is impossible to find ethnic communities that have not been influenced both by the cultures of other peoples and by the broader social environment existing in individual regions and in the world as a whole. This was expressed in the rapid growth of cultural exchanges and direct contacts between government institutions, social groups, social movements and individuals of different countries and cultures.
When becoming participants in any type of intercultural contact, people interact with representatives of other cultures, often significantly different from each other, which makes these contacts difficult and sometimes even impossible. The main reason for their failures lies in differences in attitude, i.e. a different attitude towards the world and other people. The main obstacle to successfully solving this problem is that people perceive other cultures through the lens of their own culture. With great difficulty, representatives of different nations understand the meaning of words, deeds, actions,
which are not typical for themselves. We can conclude that effective intercultural communication cannot arise on its own; it needs to be purposefully learned.
It is common knowledge that intercultural contacts go back to time immemorial. Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Julius Caesar, Christopher Columbus and others are considered the pioneers of intercultural communication. Problems of interaction and mutual influence of cultures, the relationship between culture and language, as well as the search for optimal forms of intercultural communication have always attracted the attention of researchers. Long before intercultural communication formed into a separate research area, many questions that later became fundamental for it were developed by scientists such as Aristotle, G.V. Leibniz, I. Kant, I.G. Herder, W. von Humboldt, L. Spitzer and others.
The problem of intercultural communication first became acute during the Second World War, when representatives of different countries had to work together to solve problems of global significance. Americans, who had until then followed an isolationist policy, were faced with the need to engage in intercultural communication. It was then that linguists, anthropologists, communication specialists - Margaret Mead, Ruth Benedict, Jeffrey Gorer, Weston La Barre and others - were first convened at the state level in the United States in order to explain intercultural differences and the “strange” behavior of their allies (Russia and China) and enemies (Germany and Japan).
After the end of World War II, the sphere of influence of American politics, economics and culture began to actively expand. Government officials and businessmen working abroad often found themselves helpless and unable to resolve situations of misunderstanding that arose when working with representatives of other cultures. This often led to conflicts, mutual hostility, and resentment. Even perfect knowledge of the relevant languages could not prepare them for the complex problems of working abroad. Gradually, an awareness arose of the need to study not only languages, but also the cultures of other peoples, their customs, traditions, and norms of behavior.
At the same time, the United States developed an assistance program for developing countries. As part of individual projects of this program, a large number of Peace Corps experts and activists visited various countries. Often they encountered misunderstandings and conflicts there, which ultimately led to the failure of their mission. Managers and employees found themselves ill-equipped to deal with practical issues with people from other cultures. It became clear that the preparation they had undergone before leaving was insufficient. The numerous failures of Peace Corps activists raised the question of special training, in which the main focus should have been on developing practical skills and intercultural communication skills, rather than simply informing about the cultural characteristics of a particular country.
In response to this situation, the US government passed the Overseas Service Act in 1946 and created the Overseas Service Institute, headed by linguist Edward Hall. Scientists of various specialties were attracted to work at the institute: anthropologists, sociologists, psychologists, linguists, etc. However, all their attempts to understand and explain the behavior of representatives of other cultures were then based more on intuition than on knowledge and experience. Therefore, at first the efficiency of their work was low. The main conclusion that was made by the institute’s specialists was that each culture forms a unique system of values, priorities, and behavior patterns, and therefore its description, interpretation and evaluation should be carried out from the standpoint of cultural relativism.
In the course of their work, the institute staff were surprised to discover that government officials showed no interest in studying theoretical issues of culture and communication, but expressed a desire to receive specific advice, recommendations and guidance on practical behavior in another country. Since Hall invited people from different languages and cultures to work at the institute, this circumstance allowed him to observe and study cultural differences in practice. For example, he noticed that Italians often stand close to each other when talking, or that Greeks gesticulate a lot when communicating. Conversely, the Chinese use few gestures when communicating. Hall confirmed his observations through consultations with representatives of various cultural groups and gradually included them in the educational programs of the institute. To this day, most American textbooks on intercultural communication focus on practical guidelines and recommendations for communicating with representatives of other cultures.
The term “intercultural communication” first appeared in 1954, when the book by E. Hall and D. Trager “Cultureas Communication” (“Culture as Communication”) was published. In their work, the authors argued that intercultural communication is a special area of human relations. Later, the main provisions and ideas of intercultural communication were more thoroughly developed in
E. Hall’s famous work “The Silent Language” (“Silent Language”, 1959), where the author showed the close connection between culture and communication and the possibility of comparing cultures based on foundations common to all cultures. Drawing an analogy with the study of foreign languages using universal grammatical categories, Hall concluded that it is possible to master other cultures in a similar way and the need to teach them in the modern world (“if a culture is studied, this means that it can be taught”). Thus, Hall was the first to propose making the problem of intercultural communication not only a subject of scientific research, but also an independent academic discipline. And the very concept of E. Hall about the unity of culture and communication, about the cultural conditioning of the communicative behavior of individuals belonging to different cultural groups, has received wide recognition, both in the USA and abroad.
Since the early 1970s, E. Hall's intercultural ideas have been picked up by US communication sciences. As part of the theory of communication, intercultural communication received significant theoretical justification from psychological research, especially cross-cultural psychology. Thus, by the end of the 70s, a new interdisciplinary field of scientific and practical knowledge of the problems of intercultural interaction with its own subject of research and corresponding methods was formed in the United States.
Interest in the study of intercultural situations also appeared in European countries, but much later. The creation of the European Union opened borders for the free movement of people, capital and goods. European capitals and large cities began to intensively change their appearance due to the appearance of representatives of different cultures and their active inclusion in the life of these cities. The problem of mutual communication between speakers of different cultures has arisen. Against this background, the interest of scientists in the problems of intercultural communication gradually developed. Following the example of the United States, departments of intercultural communication were opened in some Western European universities at the turn of the 70-80s of the last century (universities of Munich, Jena). In 1989, a new specialization was opened at the University of Munich - “intercultural communications”. Based on the American experience of teaching intercultural communication, they developed their own educational programs based on materials from folklore, ethnology and linguistics.
In domestic science, one of the first to study problems of intercultural communication was at the Faculty of Foreign Languages of Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov. It was foreign language teachers who were the first to realize that for effective communication with representatives of other cultures, knowledge of a foreign language is not enough. The practice of communicating with foreigners has proven that even deep knowledge of a foreign language does not exclude misunderstandings and conflicts with native speakers of that language. Consequently, successful and effective contacts with representatives of other cultures are impossible without practical skills in intercultural communication.
Today, more and more Russian scientists are turning to the theory and practice of intercultural communication, since it has become clear that in order to resolve the problems of intercultural communication it is necessary to combine the efforts of representatives of different sciences. However, the current state of intercultural communication in Russia is characterized by the absence of common methodological foundations for research, unified conceptual approaches, there is no clearly defined theoretical basis, unity of terminology, and starting premises that would allow representatives of different scientific fields and directions to achieve constructive mutual understanding.
In Russian science, the following areas of research can be distinguished, based on the idea of the relationship between language and culture, which are of undoubted interest from the standpoint of intercultural communication:
1. Linguistic and regional studies, which are mostly of an applied nature and are a valuable source of information reflecting the interaction of language and culture.
2. Ethnolinguistics is a branch of linguistics that studies language in the aspect of its relationship with ethnicity and is closely related to sociolinguistics. For ethnolinguistics, according to N.I. Tolstoy, “it is important to consider not only and not so much the reflection of folk culture, psychology and mythological ideas in the language<...>“how much is the constructive role of language and its impact on the formation and functioning of folk culture, folk psychology and folk art.”
3. Linguoculturology is a science that deals with the problems of the relationship between language and culture, the formation of a linguistic picture of the world. V.N. Telia defines linguoculturology as a part of ethnolinguistics devoted to the study and description of the correspondence of language and culture in their synchronous interaction. “The object of linguoculturology is studied at the “crossroads” of two fundamental sciences: linguistics and culture.
turology". V.A. Maslova believes that linguoculturology, in its broadest sense, studies “manifestations of the culture of a people that are reflected and entrenched in the language.”
All of the above areas of linguistics are aimed at studying the nationally specific features of one particular linguistic culture. These data are invaluable for cross-cultural studies intended for comparative analysis of two or more linguistic cultures. No less important for intercultural communication is the consideration of the relationship between language and culture through the prism of psycholinguistics and sociolinguistics, as well as such interdisciplinary fields as ethnopsycholinguistics and linguosociopsychology.
In addition, it should be noted that Russian science has developed a number of concepts that are of undoubted importance for the theory of intercultural communication, but are practically unknown to Western researchers. These are concepts such as linguistic personality, concept and concept sphere. At the same time, there is also a negative trend - the erosion of the term and the science of communication in general and intercultural communication in particular.
B.S. Erasov identifies two main scientific approaches to the problem of intercultural communication: instrumental and understanding. The first approach is aimed at achieving a practical result: the successful adaptation of individuals in a foreign environment and the creation of a methodology for teaching effective intercultural communication in a specific context. The second approach makes it possible to consider changes in culture and personality that occur as a result of encounters with the “other,” and prospects for the development of human ability for intercultural communication. The basis of this approach is the idea of the need to preserve identity and at the same time the interaction of cultures. The vision of the dynamics of intercultural communication from these positions provides for the continuous development and improvement of the quality of communication, the formation of a positive attitude towards differences in order to increase mutual understanding of cultures in different areas and at different levels. Most likely, this approach to the problems of intercultural communication is the most promising.
In general, it should be noted that modern researchers working in line with the theory of intercultural communication indicate that many more issues and problems of intercultural communication have so far practically not become the subject of scientific interest among representatives of various humanities. Consequently, the theory of intercultural communication has yet to develop into a clear system of knowledge about the problems of intercultural communication.
Literature
1. Grushevitskaya T.G., Popkov V.D., Sadokhin A.P. Fundamentals of intercultural communication: textbook. for universities / ed. A.P. Sadokhina. - M.: UNITY-DANA, 2002. - 352 p.
2. Erasov B.S. Social cultural studies. - M.: Aspect Press, 1997. - 591 p.
3. Kulikova L.V. Communicative style in the intercultural paradigm: monograph. / Krasnoyarsk state ped. University named after V.P. Astafieva. - Krasnoyarsk, 2006. - 392 p.
4. Kulikova L.V. Intercultural communication: theoretical and applied aspects. Based on the material of Russian and German linguistic cultures: monograph. / Krasnoyarsk state ped. University named after V.P. Astafieva. - Krasnoyarsk, 2004. - 196 p.
5. Leontovich O.A. Russians and Americans: paradoxes of intercultural communication. - M.: Gnosis, 2005. - 352 p.
6. Leontovich O.A. Theory of intercultural communication in Russia: state and prospects // http://www.rec.vsu.ru/vestnik/program/view
7. Maslova V.A. Linguoculturology: textbook. aid for students higher textbook establishments. - M.: Publishing center "Academy", 2004. - 208 p.
8. Telia V.N. Russian phraseology. Semantic, pragmatic and linguocultural aspects. - M.: Languages of Russian Culture, 1996. - 288 p.
9. Tolstoy N.I. Ethnolinguistics in the circle of humanities // Russian literature: Anthology. -M.: Academia, 1997. - P. 306-316.
Recent advances in the field of information technology, increased interest in expanding the interrelations of different countries and peoples, are opening up more and more new types and forms of communication, the effectiveness of which entirely depends on mutual understanding of cultures, manifestation and respect for the culture of communication partners. Necessary conditions for the effectiveness of the communication process between twoor more representatives of different cultures are the following factors: knowledge of foreign languages, knowledge of the material and spiritual culture of another people, moral values, worldviews, which together determine the behavior pattern of communication partners.
According to P.S. Tumarkin, intercultural communication, as is known, presupposes knowledge of a foreign cultural communicative code, i.e. first of all, language, norms and rules of behavior (behavioral code), psychology and mentality (psychomental code), etc. We call the total action of the communicative code in the communication process the national communicative regime. The highest level of competence in the field of intercultural communication is the ability to freely switch to the appropriate communicative mode (mode switching). In the absence of such competence (or knowing only the language), people most often communicate with speakers of a different culture and evaluate them on the basis of their own national norms, which makes communication between representatives of different cultural spheres especially difficult. All this increases attention to communication issues, the main condition for the effectiveness of which is mutual understanding, dialogue of cultures, tolerance and respect for the culture of communication partners.
Considering the features of intercultural communication, one should dwell on the processes of interpenetration (convergence and assimilation) of cultures, or acculturation. In the Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary, acculturation is defined as “processes of mutual influence of cultures, the perception by one people, in whole or in part, of the culture of another people, usually more developed.” The American scientist R. Beals understood acculturation as “perception, i.e. the assimilation of a significant part of another culture... as an adaptation, that is, the combination of original and borrowed elements into a harmonious whole... as a reaction when many different counter-acculturation movements arise.
In Russia, the ideas of intercultural communication began to actively develop in the mid-1990s. Initially, they were associated with a change in the paradigm of teaching foreign languages: to effectively establish intercultural contacts, not only linguistic, but also cultural skills and abilities are required. Fundamental works have appeared in Russian science that indicate the promise of this type of research. This topic “problems of intercultural communication” is discussed in the works of T.G. Grushevitskaya, V.D. Popkova, A.P. Sadokhina, O.A. Leontovich, S.G. Terminasova. Currently, in Russia, intercultural communication has the status of an academic discipline, relies on a developing network of research centers and higher educational institutions, and has a publishing base. One of the domestic researchers O. A. Leontovich notes that when studying intercultural communication in Russia, more attention is paid than in the United States to such interdisciplinary areas as ethnolinguistics, linguistic and cultural studies, etc.
The lack of a unified theoretical and methodological approach to the study of intercultural communication in Russia and abroad is aggravated by different understandings of the terminology of this area in the Russian and English-speaking scientific traditions. In scientific and theoretical texts devoted to the problem of communication, most often the concept of intercultural communication is used to mean the interaction of two participants in a communicative act belonging to different national cultures. Within the Russian scientific tradition, the term intercultural communication (interlingual communication, intercultural interaction, intercultural communication) is associated with the exchange of knowledge, ideas, thoughts, concepts and emotions between people from different national cultures.
The scale and intensity of intercultural contacts give rise to the need for constant comprehension, interpretation and comparison of elements of one’s own and foreign culture. According to E.I. Buldakova, intercultural communication, becoming a factor in the everyday life of a modern person, has complicated his perception of the world and the process of self-identification. As a result, the author notes, the social integrity of modern man, already in a state of renewal, is increasingly fragmented.
Situations of intercultural interaction show its ambiguity and complexity. Communication partners do not always receive satisfaction from communicating with representatives of another culture. The statement that “foreign culture is always dirty” has already become an axiom of the sociology of culture and cultural anthropology. There are many reasons for this - this is the attitude towards another culture as “alien” ”, and the stereotypes rooted in our minds, and the harmful effects of ethnocentrism. Moreover, ethnocentrism not only interferes with intercultural communication, but it is also difficult to recognize, since it is an unconscious process. All this together creates difficulties in being understood and heard in the act of verbal communication.
The concept of “ethnocentrism” was first proposed by the American sociologist V. Sumner in 1906, “...defining it as the tendency to consider one’s society and its culture as a model and measure all values exclusively in relation to it.” The essence of this definition boils down to the following: the culture of one’s ethnic group is at the forefront, and the rest - other cultures are not of equal value.
The phenomenon of ethnocentrism was previously characteristic of many people. For example, European colonialists considered non-European peoples inferior and incorrect. Unfortunately, even today the phenomenon of ethnocentrism is characteristic of many nations. This is a kind of “defensive reaction” that helps members of a nation feel like they belong to their culture. However, in intercultural communication such ethnocentric ideas are accompanied by incorrect assessments in the worldview of communication partners.
In order for ethnocentrism not to destroy the process of communication between participants of different ethnic groups, it is necessary to form not only a respectful attitude towards one’s own, but also another nation. It is possible to instill a friendly, respectful attitude towards other people through activities aimed at deep acquaintance with the culture of countries. To do this, both the organization of the educational process and the construction of the entire educational trajectory of the younger generation must comply with the principles of cultural centrism and culture orientation.
From the very beginning, intercultural communication had a clearly applied orientation. It is not only a science, but also a set of skills that can and should be mastered. First of all, these skills are necessary for those whose activities are related to interaction between cultures, when mistakes and communication failures lead to other failures - in negotiations, ineffective team work, and social tension. With the development of intercultural research, new forms of training are emerging, called intercultural or cross-cultural. A new profession is emerging - a specialist in intercultural communication, and an international society for intercultural education, training and research is being created.
In conclusion, I would like to note that currently the space of intercultural communication has become almost limitless. This is facilitated by modern society, which is developing dynamically and creating new socio-cultural formations.
Bibliography
- Filipova, Yu.V. Updating the personal characteristics of communicants in the context of a dialogue of cultures / Yu. V. Filipova // Bulletin of Moscow State University. Ser.19 Linguistics and intercultural communication. – 2008.No.1.P.131-137.
- Tumarkin, P.S. Russians and Japanese: current problems of intercultural communication / P.S. Tumarkin // Bulletin of Moscow University. Ser.13. Oriental Studies.1997.No.1.- P.13-17.
- Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary.-M., 1983.- P.16.
- Beals, R. Acculturation / R. Beals // Anthology of cultural studies. St. Petersburg, 1997.- T.1.- P.335.
- Maslova, V.A. Linguoculturology / V.A. Maslova. - M.: Publishing Center "Academy", 2001. - 320 p.
- Leontovich, O.A. Russia and the USA: an introduction to intercultural communication: textbook. allowance / O.A. Leontovich. -Volgograd: Peremena, 2003.- 388 p.
- Vereshchagin, E.M. Language and culture / E.M. Vereshchagin, V.G. Kostomarov. - M.: Russian language, 1990.
- Buldakova, E.I. “Buffer-synergy zones” in the space of intercultural communication: abstract of thesis. dis…..candidate of philosophical sciences / E. I. Buldakova. – Rostov n/d, 2008.-23s.
- Goiko, E.V. Barriers in intercultural communication / E.V. Goyko // Bulletin of MGUKI. - 2011. - No. 2. - P. 47-51.
- Grushevitskaya, T.G. Fundamentals of intercultural communication: a textbook for universities / T.G. Grushevitskaya, V.D. Popkov, A.P. Sadokhin; edited by A.P. Sadokhina.- M.: Unita-Dana, 2003.-352 p.
- Krenska, N. On the issue of intercultural communication and cultural differences in teaching a foreign language / N. Krenska // Russian and foreign languages and methods of teaching them: Bulletin of the Peoples' Friendship University of Russia. - 2008. - No. 3.
- Idiatullin A.V. Cultural determinants of modernization of the system of higher humanities education in the Republic of Tatarstan // Bulletin of the Kazan State University of Culture and Arts. – 2005. – No. S3- P.81-86
A. V. Puzakov
Misunderstandings in intercultural communication are a potential problem based on cultural differences. You should understand the problems that can arise during intercultural communication and consciously try to overcome them, carefully monitor the reaction of your interlocutor and, having noticed an inadequate reaction, from our point of view, try to understand what caused it, adjust your behavior and your speech.
The processes of integration into the world community in one form or another have affected the majority of Russian citizens. Knowledge of a foreign language, especially English, is gradually ceasing to be something extraordinary. There is also a gradual realization that knowledge of only the lexical and grammatical structure of a foreign language is not enough for successful intercultural communication, which in practice is personalized in nature. And any person is not only a native speaker of the language, but also of his native culture, which has certain traditions, not to mention the fact that any personality is unique, it is characterized by such characteristics as gender, age, education, etc.
It is important that people understand the potential problems of intercultural communication and consciously try to overcome them. At the same time, it should be borne in mind that they cannot always be avoided, no matter how hard we try. Therefore, you need to be prepared for various kinds of communication complications caused by an incomplete understanding of the specifics and some of the nuances of the culture with which the communication is taking place. Excessive confidence in your knowledge in this case can lead to negative results.
You should always assume that cultural differences cause problems in communication, misunderstandings, and can cause a negative reaction from the interlocutor. Therefore, we must carefully monitor the reaction of the interlocutor and, having noticed an inadequate, from our point of view, reaction, try to understand what caused it, and adjust our behavior and speech. Perhaps you should even politely ask if you accidentally made any inappropriateness towards your interlocutor, and apologize in advance for a possible mistake. Otherwise, the attitude towards you and the atmosphere of communication may change for the worse, even to the point of hostility, even open aggression. Let us emphasize once again: in intercultural communication you cannot and should not be absolutely sure that you understand everything that is being discussed and what your interlocutor means.
At the same time, it is also important to realize that the better you know the language of a representative of another culture, the stricter he will be in his assessment of your behavior: what looks excusable for a foreigner who knows a hundred or two words of a foreign language can be regarded as an insult from a person more or less fluent in that language. This is a feature of human psychology: what often seems to us repulsive, terrible (and sometimes, on the contrary, funny) is not what is absolutely unlike us, but the combination of unconditional similarity with obvious differences (deviations).
If an unwanted conflict with a representative of another culture could not be avoided, and you feel that it was your fault, try to refrain from showing a negative response. Take your time, think about what could be the reason for the conflict that arises - in what you wanted to say and said, or in how you were understood. Often it is misunderstanding that is the source of problems.
As a means of preventing possible misunderstandings, you can use the so-called “active listening”, when you repeat in your own words to your interlocutor what you heard from him, expecting confirmation of the correct understanding of his statement. But even this does not guarantee one hundred percent correspondence between the message and its interpretation if certain extra-linguistic cultural nuances are affected.
Intermediaries who are familiar with the characteristics of both interacting cultures, for example, professional translators who are able to convey not only the essence of the statement, but also what additional shades of meaning were embedded in it, can help in situations related to intercultural communication. If necessary, they can soften inappropriately strong language that is acceptable in one culture but unacceptable in another. Interpreters can also help in matters related to organizing meetings. In some cultures, it is customary to immediately begin discussing the main issue that led to the meeting; in other cultures, the rules of decency require starting a conversation with an abstract topic in order to establish personal contact with the interlocutor. A sharp transition to the main problem without a preliminary part will be at least inconvenient for representatives of the latter culture. Finding some kind of compromise is the task of the mediator.
However, in some cases the mediator can further complicate the situation if, for example, he is a representative of one of the contacting cultures. This fact itself can be considered as capable of giving some advantage to one of the parties, even if the mediator himself behaves as neutrally as possible. At the same time, an intermediary - a representative of some third culture - will provide even more fertile ground for misunderstanding, since he himself will have to spend more time making sure that he correctly understands the meaning of what was said, and that this meaning was correctly conveyed to him and understood by another side.
Thus, during intercultural communication one should always take into account the high probability of misunderstanding, exercise patience, and be ready to adjust one’s behavior in accordance with the developing situation.
I.S. Kornilov, D.I. Zdobnikov
National Research Irkutsk State Technical University
The purpose of our article is to answer the question of what problems arise during intercultural communication, as well as to tell what intercultural conflicts are and what ways they can be resolved.
Intercultural communication is a term that appeared in the domestic humanities in the last decade of the last century, following the concepts of “mentality”, “cultural pluralism”, “dialogue of cultures” that were previously rooted in scientific and everyday consciousness. Intercultural communication involves communication between representatives of different human cultures. This communication can be either oral or written, both individual (with a small number of participants) and mass. Since the concept of intercultural communication is complex and multifaceted, it is studied at the level of fusion of several disciplines.
For example, sciences such as cultural studies, psychology, linguistics, anthropology and sociology deal with the problems of intercultural communication. Each of these sciences uses its own approaches to the study of the problems posed to it, which, by the way, are far from identical.
For example, psychology identifies patterns and trends in communication in terms of differences in the human psyche; linguistics draws parallels between representatives of different cultures by comparing and identifying common features in their languages; sociology looks at the problems of intercultural communication from the perspective of a person’s social life, his position in society and social status.
Initially, to describe intercultural communication, the classical understanding of culture was used as a stable, sustainable system of conscious and unconscious rules, norms, values and structures accepted in society.
Today, it is increasingly common to understand culture as a way of life and a system of behavior, norms or values of any social group (for example, urban culture, culture of generations, culture of an organization). This concept of culture does not imply strict stability and orderliness of the cultural system, since to a certain extent it can change and transform depending on the social situation.
Rice. 1. Scheme of intercultural conflict
All cultures are heterogeneous in their composition. Most often, a society is a fusion of different ethnic cultures and subcultures. And they all have their own ideals, values, norms of behavior, views on this or that subject. That is why people inevitably come into contradictions and conflicts with each other, namely, intercultural conflicts. There are many definitions of the concept “conflict”. In general, this means any type of confrontation or discrepancy between someone’s interests. In a narrower sense - in the sense of problems arising during intercultural communication - we will consider the conflict not as a clash, confrontation or competition of cultures, but as a violation of communication between people.
I would like to focus on those aspects that are closely related to the problem of intercultural communication. Features of communication between interacting cultures are shown in Fig. 1, which shows that depending on the translation (in the broad sense of the word - translation in this case means not only words, phrases and sentences, but also gestures, facial expressions, their interpretation, interpretation of behavior - the so-called attribution, etc. ) between representatives of different cultures there may be a complete misunderstanding (lack of anything in common) or understanding. An intermediate option would be to look for something that can unite the two sides. In cultural anthropology, there are several types of intercultural conflicts. Conflicts between:
different ethnic groups and their cultures (for example, between Armenians and Azerbaijanis, Georgians and Ossetians);
religious groups, representatives of different religions (for example, between Coptic Christians and other Egyptians professing the Muslim faith);
generations and bearers of different subcultures (problems of “fathers and sons”, “city and countryside”, etc.);
traditions and innovations in culture;
various linguocultural communities and their individual representatives (for example, “bad” in Ukrainian is “rotten”, while in Russian these are two different words with independent, albeit similar, meanings. A Ukrainian who wanted to gently express his dissatisfaction with what -either question will most likely cause a negative reaction from a Russian who does not know the language of the neighboring country).
In the process of communicating with representatives of other cultures, the causes of tension and conflict are very often errors in explaining the behavior of partners. Intercultural contacts imply that there is a clear division of roles between partners, and each subject fulfills the roles prescribed by the native or foreign (depending on which country the person is in) culture and norms of behavior. Roles are mainly divided into hosts, guests and strangers. The last category of people is called: alien, immigrant, stranger, refugee.
Often such people make mistakes only because they are unfamiliar with the norms and rules of ritual communication in another country. Ritual communication in different societies is not the same. It includes not only verbal (verbal), but also nonverbal (articulation and gestures) information. Nonverbal communication may also vary (Figure 2).
Rice. 2. Types of non-verbal means of communication
Gestures are culturally determined. They are different in every country. It may seem to us that the interlocutor is showing hostility towards us, while he is simply trying to express his approval. For example, in Tibet they stick out their tongues to do this! Needless to say, such a gesture without prior interpretation by the guide of the tourist group will at best cause surprise among representatives of our country.
In New Guinea they point to an object with their eyes and do not understand directions when they are given with their hands. Bulgarians express their agreement by shaking their heads from side to side, i.e., a movement used in Europe and America to express denial. But these are very important points, without knowledge of which it is impossible to build a correct and competent conversation! We think that the interlocutor has understood us and are trying to explain our next thought to him, while he looks at us in bewilderment and does not understand why we are talking further, because he immediately said an unequivocal “no” to our proposal.
Staying in a foreign culture, in another cultural group (studying abroad, business trips, international projects, etc.) is accompanied by situations that are regulated by two cultures. We are talking about situations of cultural intersection, or overlap, of cultures, in which any communicative act is subjectively interpreted in at least two ways. Sudden silence in dialogue, for example, can be interpreted both as a release of tension and as moral pressure, tension. Breakfast in a German hotel traditionally includes coffee and tea. The waiter’s question: “Coffee or tea?” is usually asked to each guest. From an internal (German) cultural perspective, offering a given choice represents a tradition, a custom. A culturally conditioned outsider may interpret this state of affairs as a kind of coercion, a requirement that dictates that one must order one of these drinks for breakfast. This may seem so, for example, to a guest from Africa who does not drink any of these drinks for breakfast.
This duality is due to the fact that the process of understanding reality involves, first of all, the normative value system of one’s own culture, along with which, however, at the same time there are the regulations of the guest culture, which is still little familiar and, accordingly, not significant enough. In this regard, one’s own behavior and its consequences are not assessed in the context of a specific situation, when, for example, long pauses in a conversation are perceived as impolite or, conversely, continuous speech is regarded as aggressive behavior. In these cases, the justified behavioral strategies available to communication partners that contribute to achieving success in their own culture turn out to be unexpectedly ineffective and disproportionate to the situation in someone else’s culture. No longer confident in the correctness of his behavior, one of those who enters into communication (who is not in his native culture) experiences emotional timidity due to the loss of the “normality” of his actions and due to the strange, unusual alien reality that seems to him.
In addition, a large number of disagreements arise when translating information from one language to another. Translators know that an absolutely accurate translation is impossible due to the different pictures of the world created by different languages. The most common case of such linguistic inconsistency is the absence of an exact equivalent to express a particular concept, and even the absence of the concept itself. This is due to the fact that the concepts or objects denoted by such words are unique, specific to a given culture, and are absent in other cultures and, therefore, there are no appropriate words to express them. For example, “boxing day” is sometimes translated as boxing day, since in our culture there is no concept of the day after Christmas when boxes of gifts are opened.
English expressions such as phraseological units (keep your fingers crossed), associated with the absence in Russian culture of the custom of crossing the middle and index fingers to wish someone success, can also be classified as non-equivalent, since such a custom does not exist in our country. “No reality - no dictionary expression.”
Man is created for society. He is unable and does not have the courage to live alone.
W. Blackstone
§ 1. Communication in culture
In the development of intercultural communication as a significant area of humanities, an important role was played by the interest that formed at the beginning of the 20th century in the scientific community and public consciousness in relation to the so-called “exotic” sciences and cultures. As a social phenomenon, intercultural communication arose in accordance with the practical needs of the post-war world. Awareness of the need to build a unified society based on the principles of mutual respect and tolerance towards people with different cultural characteristics; society, whose interests are aimed at maintaining peaceful coexistence with other peoples, contributed to an increase in interest in the problems of intercultural communication among linguists, ethnographers, psychologists, sociologists, cultural experts, etc.
In the modern world, issues of intercultural communication are particularly relevant. Recognition of the absolute value of the diversity of world cultures, rejection of colonialist cultural policies, awareness of the fragility of existence and the threat of destruction of most traditional cultures determine the rapid development of relevant areas of humanitarian knowledge.
Today it is obvious that contacts between different countries and peoples are becoming more and more intense, as a result of which the interconnection and interdependence of individual cultures is intensifying. This is expressed, in particular, in an increase in the number of cultural exchanges, as well as direct contacts between government institutions, social groups, social movements and individual representatives of different countries. Social, political and economic changes on a global scale have led to the migration of entire peoples and their active acquaintance with the world of other cultures. Such intensification of cultural interaction further strengthens the problem of cultural identity and cultural differences.
In the context of the cultural diversity of the modern world, representatives of most nations are concerned about the search for the preservation and development of their own, unique cultural image. As researchers note, such a tendency to preserve cultural identity confirms the general pattern that humanity, while becoming more interconnected and unified, does not lose its cultural identity. Therefore, the issue of determining the cultural identity of peoples becomes especially important, the solution of which will make it possible to establish partnerships with representatives of other peoples and ultimately achieve mutual understanding.
Openness to external influences is an important condition for the successful development of any culture. At the same time, the process of interaction between cultures contains a hidden danger of their unification. This causes a kind of “defensive reaction” in many peoples, manifested in a categorical rejection of the ongoing cultural changes. A number of states and cultures stubbornly defend the inviolability of their national identity. The values of other cultures can either simply be passively not accepted, or actively rejected and boycotted (for example, numerous ethno-religious conflicts, the growth of nationalist and fundamentalist movements).
The conditions of modern life are such that each of us is a potential participant in interethnic dialogue. And readiness for it is by no means determined solely by knowledge of the language, norms of behavior or traditions of another culture. The main difficulty of intercultural communication is that we perceive other cultures through the prism of our own, and our observations and conclusions are limited exclusively by its framework. Such ethnocentrism is unconscious, which further complicates the process of intercultural communication. People have difficulty understanding actions and actions that are not typical for them. It is obvious that effective intercultural communication does not arise on its own; it must be consciously learned.
It is impossible to imagine the isolated existence of any culture. In the process of its formation and development, any culture, firstly, constantly turns to its past, and secondly, masters the experience of other cultures. Such an appeal to other cultures can be defined as “interaction of cultures.” Obviously, such interaction occurs in different languages.
According to researchers, culture is similar to language, that is, it is possible to identify certain universal, invariant, universal features of culture, but it itself always appears in a specific ethnic embodiment. Moreover, in the process of its development, each culture creates different systems of signs that are its original carriers. Unlike animals, man creates signs consciously; they are not innate and are not transmitted genetically, but represent a form of existence realized thanks to and through man. A person’s ability to create such signs, depending on the conditions of existence of a particular culture, determines the diversity of cultures and, as a consequence, the problem of their mutual understanding.
Numerous signs and sign systems determine the appearance of the culture of a particular time and society (recall that within the framework, for example, of the semiotic approach, culture is presented as a system of communications, and cultural phenomena are considered as a system of signs).
In light of all that has been said intercultural communication can be defined as communication that takes place under conditions of significant, culturally tangible differences in the communicative competence of its participants, in which the communication process becomes effective or ineffective. Communicative competence in this context is knowledge of the symbolic systems used in communication and the rules of their functioning, as well as the principles of communicative interaction.
In the process of communication, messages are exchanged, i.e. information is transferred from one participant to another. In this case, information is encoded using a certain symbol system, transmitted in this form and then decoded, interpreted by those to whom this message was addressed.
It should be noted that the nature of the interpretation of the information received by participants in intercultural dialogue may differ significantly. Researcher on problems of intercultural communication E. Hall introduced the concepts of high- and low-context cultures, which differ in the amount of information expressed in the message. In his view, cultures are characterized by tendencies towards higher or lower context messages.
Thus, in a standard statement within low context culture(Swiss, German) the information that is required for the correct interpretation of a given message is contained in the most verbalized form. Cultures of this type are characterized by a style of information exchange in which fluency of speech, accuracy of use of concepts, and logic of presentation are of great importance.
Statements in high context cultures(Chinese, Japanese) in turn cannot be understood only on the basis of the linguistic signs they contain. Communication in Eastern cultures is characterized by vagueness, vagueness of speech, and the use of approximate forms of expression. Correct interpretation of the information received requires knowledge of a broad cultural context.
In general, Hall's observations can be represented in the following diagram:
Arab countries
Latin America
Italy/Spain
North America
Scandinavia
Germany
Switzerland
Each subsequent crop in this diagram is located higher and to the right than the previous one. A shift up and to the right means that the culture increases accordingly:
dependence on context (the lowest context culture in this classification is Swiss, the highest context is Japanese);
certainty in the presentation of information (the culture with the greatest certainty in terms of presenting information will be Swiss, with the least - Japanese).
So, communication is a complex, symbolic, personal and often unconscious process. Communication allows participants to express some information external to themselves, an emotional state, as well as the status roles in which they are in relation to each other.
