Christian Perspective on Intercultural Communication
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Volume 35 Number 4 Article 1 June 2007 Christian Perspective on Intercultural Communication Emmanuel Ayee Dordt College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcollections.dordt.edu/pro_rege Part of the Christianity Commons, and the Communication Commons Recommended Citation Ayee, Emmanuel (2007) "Christian Perspective on Intercultural Communication," Pro Rege: Vol. 35: No. 4, 1 - 9. Available at: https://digitalcollections.dordt.edu/pro_rege/vol35/iss4/1 This Feature Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University Publications at Digital Collections @ Dordt. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pro Rege by an authorized administrator of Digital Collections @ Dordt. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Editor’s Note: This paper is a revision of a four-year paper presented by Dr. Ayee to the Faculty Status Committee at Dordt College. A Christian Perspective on Intercultural Communication 2001; Rogers & Steinfatt, 1999). As history has proven, intercultural communi- cation is essential if one culture is to understand and respond rightly to another. As history has also proven, a culture must be educated in intercultur- al communication. Only a Christian approach to teaching intercultural communication considers the cause and remedy of all that prohibits intercul- tural communication. The History of Intercultural Communication Intercultural communication started as a field of academic study after World War II. At that time, the United States Department of State established by Emmanuel S.A. Ayee the Foreign Service Institute (FSI) to help retrain its diplomats, who, it had become obvious, were in- effectual in their work—few of them knew either the culture or the language of the country to which they were assigned. Attempts to improve interna- tional communication between U.S. diplomats and Intercultural communication has been taking technicians and their host country counterparts led place since the dawn of recorded human history. to a focused study on intercultural communication It occurred through trade, religious missionaries, (Rogers & Steinfatt, 1999, p.68). Cummings (2006) war, romantic relations, or other forms of interac- also observes that “Intercultural communication tion when people from one tribe or ethnic group as an academic discipline developed because of interacted with others whose cultures were differ- our (America’s) oblivion to other people’s cultures, ent (Samovar & Porter, 2004; Samovar & Porter, even as guests in their country” (p. 48). Edward T. Hall, an anthropologist who led the training courses in intercultural communication Dr. Emmanuel S. A. Ayee is Assistant Professor of com- munications at Dordt College. He leaves this summer at the Foreign Service Institute, is regarded as the to take a position at Geneva College, in Beaver Falls, founder of the field of intercultural communica- Pennsylvania, as Associate Professor of Communication. tion. Even though the intellectual roots of inter- Pro Rege—June 2007 1 cultural communication were in anthropology, lin- 2006, p.54). This paper will use both terms syn- guistics, and psychiatry, the first edition of Edward onymously. T. Hall’s book The Silent Language (1959) was a key A number of scholars have pointed out the document that facilitated the process of its being importance of intercultural communication to a recognized as a specialty field in communication country. For example, Hybels and Weaver (like studies (Rogers & Steinfatt, 1999). Since the mid- Martin and Nakayama before them) observe the 1960s, intercultural communication has become a changes effected by immigration: recognized discipline in a number of university de- Many white students in college today have been partments of communication in the United States. raised in predominantly white environments with The Importance of the Study of Intercultural/ little personal interaction with people of color, ex- Cross-Cultural Communication cept, perhaps, the one or two who may have lived on their street or gone to their high school. Times Intercultural and cross-cultural communication are changing. The chances of contacts with people can be used interchangeably. However, a slight dif- from other cultures have increased dramatically ferentiation between the two is helpful for clarity. with changes in the workplace; U.S. businesses Intercultural communication involves interaction expanding into world markets in a process of glo- between people from different cultures whose cul- balization; people now connected – via answering tural perceptions and symbol systems are distinct machines, faxes, e-mail, electronic bulletin boards, enough to alter a communication event (Samovar and the Internet – to other people whom they have & Porter, 2004, p.15). Intercultural communica- never met face-to-face; the ever increasing mobil- tion is also characterized by the fact that the people ity of U.S. families; and the changing demograph- are simultaneously similar to and different from ics within the United States and changing immi- each other (Martin, Nakayama & Flores, 2002, gration patterns as well. (Hybels & Weaver, 2004, p.65). For example, the cultures differ in values, p.68; Martin & Nakayama, 2001) language, nonverbal behavior, and conflict resolu- tion, etc. However, similarities also exist in the cul- The twenty-first-century result of changing demo- tures involved, for example in human experiences graphics, according to Ting-Toomey and Chung, and in the fact that people communicate. This is is “direct contact with culturally different people why emphasizing only differences can easily lead in our neighborhoods, community, schools, and to stereotyping and prejudice. Emphasizing only workplaces” as “an inescapable part of life. With similarities, however, can lead people to ignore immigrants and minority group members repre- important cultural variations that exist (Martin et senting nearly 30 percent of the present workforce al., 2002, p.65). While we consider the countries in the United States, practicing intercultural com- involved, we must keep this dialectic in mind. For munication flexibility is especially critical in today’s example, Curtis DeYoung points out that the Bible global world” (Ting-Toomey & Chung, 2005, p.2). begins with the unity of humanity but that God As American workplaces employ people from dif- values the diversity that emerges within the human ferent backgrounds and cultures, we must learn family as society evolves. The Bible has numerous to communicate effectively with a wide variety of examples of how “God honors by inclusion people people if we are to survive as a nation. This in- who represent the wide range of cultural expres- creased contact makes studying intercultural com- sions that continue to develop in this one human munication essential. family. This rich mosaic of people is acknowledged As an African proverb states, “The child who and celebrated by the biblical authors” (1995, p.2). has never had a meal outside his own home thinks Cross-cultural communication, on the other that only his mother can prepare a good meal.” hand, involves a comparison of interactions among Cross-cultural interaction and experience enable people from two different cultures, such as how us to see what other cultures can teach us about people in the United States communicate differ- God’s world. Our own cultural experience is not ently from people in China (Lustig & Koester, enough to conclude that the way we do things, the 2 Pro Rege—June 2007 way we think, the values we adhere to, and the way In other words, studying intercultural communica- we communicate are the best and the standards tion with an open mind and a genuine desire to that everyone else should adopt. know other people allows us to witness and appre- Therefore, while the study of intercultural ciate the rich diversity of humankind (Rothwell, communication should begin as a journey into an 2004, p.92). unfamiliar culture and end as a journey into our Diversity of humankind introduces matters own culture, we should understand that the study of evaluation and direction. Dordt College com- munications professor Charles Veenstra, in his discussion of culture and communication, states, In our efforts to identify and “…given the fact that culture is directional, we must face the question of relativism in culture: Are understand the religious all cultures equally good? And to what extent may direction of various cultures, we evaluate elements of culture?” (1986, p.18). To answer, he suggests that “Even though the ways of then, we must not forget living of one set of people may not be superior to the way of living of another set of people, we need that all cultures express to discern the religious direction of each culture and portray the depravity within the larger picture of culture being for or against God.” Albert Wolters explains the concept and rebellion of human of cultural direction: nature, though they do so in Direction…designates the order of sin and re- demption, the distortion or perversion of creation different ways. through the fall on the one hand and the redemp- tion and restoration of creation in Christ on the other. Anything in creation can be directed either of cultures is actually the study of people, people in toward or away from God – that is, directed either specific cultural contexts. Further, to lose sight of in obedience or disobedience to his law. (1985, the humanity at the core of the topic is to lose sight p.49) of something fundamentally important in under- standing communication between people from In our efforts to identify and understand the reli- different cultures. It is easy to study culture and gious direction of various cultures, then, we must intercultural communication from a theoretical, or not forget that all cultures express and portray the abstract and technical, perspective and to ignore depravity and rebellion of human nature, though the fact that we are dealing with human beings they do so in different ways. Even though the reli- with personalities, feelings, histories, struggles, gious direction of all cultures is not towards serv- hopes, and dreams.