fies. Translating Cultures An Introduction for Translators, Interpreters and Mediators David Katan o STJEROMEFirst published 1999 by St. Jerome Publishing 2 Maple Road West, Brooklands ‘Manchester, M23 9HH, United Kingdom Fax +44 161 905 3498 stjerome @compuserve.com, nip mee.ae-uklstjerome ISBN 1-900650-14-2 © David Katan 1999 {All Rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. No part of this publication ‘may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, ‘mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without either the prior written permission ofthe Publisher ora licence permitting restricted copying issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency (CLA), 90 Tottenham Court Road, London, W1P 9HE. In North Amerie, registered users may contact the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC): 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers MA 01923, USA. Printed and bound in Great Britain by Bookerat (Bath) Limited, UK Tel +44 1761 419167, Fax +44 1761 417023 Cover design by Steve Fieldhouse, Oldham, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Daa ‘Accatalogue record ofthis book is availabe from the British Library. _ Contents Introduction Part t Chapter 1 Chapter 2: Chapter 3: Chapter 4: Chapter 5: Chapter 6: Framing Culture: the Culture-Bound Mental Map of the World ‘The Cultural Mediator The Influence of Culture 1.2 The Cultural Mediator 13 The Translator and Interpreter Defining, Modelling and Teaching Culture 2.1 On Defining Culture 2.2 Approaches to the Study of Culture 23 MeDonaldization or Global Localization?” 24 Models of Culture rames and Levels 3.1 Frames: 3.2 Logical Levels 3.3 Culture and Behaviour Logical Levels and Culture 4.1 Environment 42 Behaviour 423 Capabilities/Strategies/Skills 44 Values. 45 Beliefs 466 Identity 4.7 Imprinting 48 ‘The Model as a System Language and Culture 5.1 Context of Situation and Culture 5.2 The Sapit-Whorf Hypothesis 53 Lexis 5.4 The Language System Perception and Meta-Model 6.1 The Filters 6.2 Expectations and Mental Images 63 The Meta-Model 64 Generalization 65 Deletion 65.1 The Use of Deletion 65.2 Modality 65.3 Unspecified Referential Index 6.5.4 Missing PerformativesPart 2 Chapter 7: Chapter 8: Part 3 Chapter 9 Chapter 10: 65 Value Judgements 65.6 Disjuncts 66 Distortion 6.6.1 Nominalization 6.6.2 Presupposition 6.63 Mind Reading 6.64 Cause and Effect 6.7 Example Text . ‘Shifting Frames: Translation and Mediation in Theory and in Practice ‘Translation/Mediation 7.1. The Translation Process 7.2 The Meta-Model and Translation 7.3 Generalization 7.4 Deletion 75 Distortion CChunking 8.1 Local Translating 82 Chunking 8.3 Global Translation and Mediation 83.1 Culture-Bound Lexis 8.3.2 Culture-Bound Behaviour 8.3.3 Chunking and Cultural Values ‘The Array of Frames: Communication Orientations ‘Cultural Orientations 9.1 Cultural Myths 9.2 Cultural Orientations 9.3 A Taxonomy of Orientations Contexting 10.1 High and Low Context 10.2 English ~ the Language of Strangers 10.3 Contexting and the Brain 10.4 Medium 10.5 Author/Addressee Orientation 105.1 Information Load 1052 Clarity 1053 Facts 10,6 Formal/informal Communication 10.6.1 Formality/informality in the Text 106.2 Distancing Devices 10.6.3 Formality in Tiles 109 12 2 13 ng us 17 19 123 13 126 128 128 138 43 145 147 149 131 153 134 161 161 167 m 7 7 134 186 188 198 194 195 199 205 205 206 207 Bibliography Subject Index ‘Name Index Aifective Communication 11.1 Direct and Indirect Communication 11.1.1 Indirectness and Miscommunication 11.1.2 British Indirectness 11.2 Expressive/Instrumental Communication 11.2.1 Facts/Feelings 11.2.2 The Verbalization of Emotion 11.23 Under/Overstatement 124 Self Expression 11.25 Involvement 11.2.6 Non-Verbal Language 113 Action 11.3.1 Be and Do Orientations 11.3.2 Grammatical Be and Do 11.4 Conelusion 210 210 210 215 22 22 222 223 26 228 232 232 233 4 2a 243 255 267Hoaanio © day and night, bt this is wondrous strange! Haswer ‘And therefore a a stranger give it weleome. ‘There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, ‘Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. pr fans that many scholars have now adopted a ‘cultural’ perspective ... a dangerously fashionable word that almost substitutes for rigour ‘and coberence”. The aim of this book is to put some rigour and coherence into this fashion- able word, and in doing so unravel the *X’ factor involved in teaching culture to translators, interpreters and other mediators. It is an introduction to curreat understanding about culture and its importance in communication, translation and interpretation. As such, it aims to bridge the culture-gap inherent in books or courses focusing either on translation theory and practice, language or ‘institutions’. More importantly, in clarifying the "X” factor, it aims 10 raise awareness of the role of culture in constructing, perceiving and translating reality. ‘This book should serve as a framework for interpreters and translators (both actual and potential) working between English and any other language, and also for those working or living between these cultures who wish to understand more about their cross-cultural successes and frustrations. ‘The book is divided into three main pars: Part |:Framing Culture: The Culture-Bound Mental Map of the World. Part 2:Shifting Frames: Translation and Mediation in Theory and Practice. Part 3:The Array of Frames: Communication Orientations, ~snsteatreemmraa Framing Culture: The Culture Bound Mental Map of the World Part 1 begins with a discussion of the role ofthe traditional translator and interpreter. With the continuing globalization of English and the use of computes, the professions will need to change from being seen as inefficient human dictionaries to facilitators for mutual under- standing between people. The proposal is for a new role forthe traditional translator and interpreter, that of a ‘cultural mediator’ The rst ofthe book should serve as an introduction for what a mediator will ead o know. Part { continues by introducing the subject of culture. Culture is perceived throughout this book as a system for orienting experience. The first task is to sort the various definitions of culture, and approaches to tesching it, ing framework. A basic presupposition {s that the organization of experience isnot ‘reality’, but is a simplification and distortion which changes from culture (o culture. Each culture acts as a frame within which external signs or ‘realty’ are interpreted art 1 concludes with an in-depth analysis of how individuals perceive, catalogue and construct reality, and how this perception is communicated through language. The approach "The teem is taken from Bochner (1981).2 David Katan interdiseiplinary, taking ideas from anthropology, such as Gregory Bateson’s Logical ‘Typing and metamessage theories; Bandler and Grinder’s Meta-Model theory; Socio- Linguisties; Speech Act Theory; Sperber and Wilson’s Relevance Theory, and Hallidayan Functional Grammar, Shifting frames: Translation and Mediation in Theory and Practice Part 2 begins with a discussion of the strategies a cultural mediator needs {o adopt to make the frames explicit, It includes a short synchronic and diachronic description of culture and theory (of the translation process, Practical examples of translations with commentary are given. ‘Translation itself, Following Nida (1976:65), is here viewed as “essentially an aspect of a larger domain, namely, that of communication”. Steiner (1975:47) in his aptly titled After Babel takes an even wider View of translation: “inside or between languages, human commu nication equals translation", Hence, translation is discussed within the wider context of ‘communication, extending ideas put forward by a variety of translation scholars such as Baker, Bassnett, Bell, Hatim and Mason, Holmes, Honig, Newmark, Neubert, Snell-Hornby and Wilss, [Newmark’s (1995) two statements: “translation is the most economical method of explain- {ng one culture's Way to another” and “ For interpreter, there are now a number of books on national culture. The guides specifically forthe business market are among the most useful. Examples include John Mole's (1992) Mind Your Manners, ‘business-orented guide to appropriate behaviour in the individual European counties, and Christopher Englehorn's (1991) When Business East Meets Business West: The Guide 1o Practice and Protocol in the Pacific Rim. Thre ae numerous other publications, some of which will be mentioned inthe follow- ing chp. ang Cates 0 The same problem is echoed by Scarpa (forthcoming), where software program references © te baseball had to be changed to soccer. Even more difficult was the transl: of Wizard, a ture which enables the seml-afomal eration of docuents, g/94) magazine published a story entitled “The Trouble with Mergers’, which discussed ‘corporate cultures and the problems (not of international but of national mergers): “Even “complementary firms can have different cultures, which makes welding them tricky”. | Each company, indeed each branch or department has its own accepted set of priorities. is means that accepted business practices vary not only at a national level and between panies (such asthe well studied Apple Macintosh and IBM cultures) but between indi- ‘dual offices too. confident about handing over interpreting and translating tasks to their own department”. The “jenlts of University of Nottingham research repor by Carol Arjoki (1993:20) echoes the ame idea: “{Business] respondents were very much in favour of independence from inter- ____preters". Though translation and interpreting take up a substantial portion of the EU budge, in "any other areas the percentage is decining. This is particularly bad news for the traditional, | interpreter, However, there isa need for a new style of interpreter: ~ Ona technical and formal level, “business is business” and, due to scales of economy and | the exploitation of know-how, joint-ventures are becoming increasingly popular. Yet, at the “samme time, according to John Harper (1993:76): “in many instances, the evidence suggests "that between 50% and 75% of joint ventures and mergers fai, without achieving the objc- "tives for which they were formed”. His paper on cross-cultural issues andthe role of training "highlights the fact that cultre poses no problems at & technica level. However, at another level culture becomes an obstacle to communication: the researchers concluded that technical solutions were less instrumental in producing Conflicts in work relationships than the difference between the two countries in the area (of organisational behaviour .. More than 50% of the sample reported cultural differ- ‘ences at work andl management production giving rse to tensions, but reported that these ‘were often not regarded as important by headquarters management. “This is «problem of communication, but not one that a “black box" interpreter oF translator can solve. In theory, a joint venture or merger is based on cooperation anda convergence of interests | However, as Carol Taylor Torsello(1984:78) notes, conversations do not only converge: they "also diverge and are inconsistent. Even more importantly: “convergence is probably impossi- ble without cooperation, and even where cooperation exists, the work-views of the participants E iay ful to converge” This takes us to the informal or out-of-awareness level of culture, the level at which the "mediator should be abe to intervene and medizte, The next setion, in fact, discusses the | potential role of a translator or interpreter asa cetural mediator, able to mediate the non converging world-views or maps ofthe world, so allowing the participants to cooperate the | degree they wish.R Dawid Kotan 1.2 The Cultural Mediator ‘The term cultural mediator was first introduced in Stephen Bochner's (1981) The Mediating Person and Cultural Identity. The idea of a translator as 4 mediating agent, however, is not new. George Steiner (1975:45) pointed out that: “The ranslator is a bilingual mediating agent between monolingual communication participants in two different language communities.” However, the emphasis is linguistic mediation. The concept of cultural mediator, as expressed in Bochner's book is that cultural mediation is much more than translation or interpretation. The role touches that of a mediator in any other field, from arbitrator to therapist. R. Taft (1981:53), in his contribution to the volume, defines the role as follows: ‘A cultural mediator is a person who facilitates communication, understanding, and faction between persons or groups who differ with respect to language and culture. The role of the mediator is performed by interpreting the expressions, intentions, percep- tions, and expectations of each cultural group to the other, that is, by establishing and blancing the communication between them. In order to serve as a link in this sense, the ‘mediator must be able to participate to some extent in both cultures. Thus a mediator ‘must be to a certain extent bicultural According to Taft (1981:73), a mediator must possess the following competencies in both cultures: ‘+ Knowledge about society: histor, folklore, traditions, customs; values, prohibitions; the natural ‘environment and ie importace; acghbouring people, important people in the society, et + Communication Skils: writen, spoken, nov-verbal. ‘+ Teebinical skills: those required by the mediators status, e.g. compote literacy, appropriate ees, te, + Soelal ski: knowledge of rues that govern socal relations in society and emotional competence, 8: the appropriate level of self-control ‘The mediator needs not only “two skills in one skull” (Taft 1981:53) but “in order to pla the role of mediator, an inc his cultural orientation” Hence, a cultural mediator will have developed a high degree of intercultural sensitivity, and ‘will have reached the level of ‘contextual evaluation’. We will return to these issues when ‘discussing belief systems in Chapter 4, but now we should look more closely atthe translator and interpreter as cultural mediator. 1.3 The Translator and Interpreter ‘Theories of the translation process itself are discussed in Part 2. Here, we will concentrate on ‘what being a cultural mediator means for those involved in translating texts or interpreting for people. © The Interpreter ‘The interpreters role has long been thought of as a discreet, if not invisible, black-box and as a walking generalist translator of words. As a cultural mediator, be or she will need to be a specialist in negotiating understanding between cultures. ‘A move in this direction has already been made. The endless debate between literal and ting Culures by municative translation in the world of interpreting seems to be moving towards consen- Maszomi Kondo (1990:62) has written great deal on both interpreting and cross-cultural ymunication. He concludes (emphasis in the original: “essentlally speaking, the debate is ‘The word-for-word correspondence between the source and the target has virtually 6 place in our work”. © This is a first move towards the more extreme communicative role of a cultural mediator participants can then take it upon themselves “to achieve better results in interlingual and intercultural communications”. However, due to factors at the informal level of culture, any oved communication results will be through accident rather than by design. “Certain interpreters, such as Cymthin Roy (1993), suggest limited strategic intervention th regard, for example, to the organization of tum taking. However, others do suggest a | much greater active role, Richard Brislin (1981:213), a research associate at the Institute of | Culture and Communication in Honolulu, takes up the idea of the interpreter informing the | participants before the meeting to make the rues clear, However, he suggests increasing the | sole of the interpreter, His specific suggestions regarding “speculative strategies” (slightly "adapted here) revolve around the interpreter as chair or referee: - the interpreter works with all parties before the event to be interpreted. This means, for example, ‘ping through any texts to check for any posible cros-cltural problem: + inerpreters to be glven explicit permission to stop a conference If they feel a misunderstanding | causing dificuly: + Inverpreters to prepare materials for cross-cultural meetings for participants to read, including | desirable behaviour, and intercltral communication points, __Annelie Knapp-Potthof and Karlftied Knapp (1981:183), in their contribution to Boehner’s ‘volume, suggest thatthe interpreter should become a visible third party, and “within certain limits may develop his or her own initiatives, introduce new topics, give comments and ex- _planatons, present arguments, ete.” ‘This strikes against Western cultural orientations with regard to the meaning of ‘profes- ional’ in ‘professional interpreter’. As Edward Stewart (1985:53) notes in his American tural Patera, “Io some cultures the interpreters’ role may become a more active one, 0 _ the constemation of the American who is likely to interpret it as inefficiency or perhaps disloyalty”. | Nevertheless, in the business world there are those who realize that involving the inter- "preter can help in meeting negotiating goals. Gary Ferraro (1994:142), for example, underlines the importance of briefing the interpreter on objectives and that “The purposeful development 6f cordial relations with your iterpreter ean only help to facilitate the process of communi ton at the negotiation table”. The Translator | Taft (1981:58) asks whether a mediator is a translator. His own answer, as we have alreadyere 4 avid Koxon seen, is that translating is one of the skills, but that a mediator is more than a translator. Basil ‘atim and Ian Mason (1990-128, 223-224) also use the term mediation, suggesting that: “The notion of mediation isa useful way of looking at translators’ decisions regarding the transfer of intertextual reference”. ‘They continue, in the chapter entitled ‘The Translator as Mediator’, with the following: ‘The translator is first and foremost a mediator between two parties for whom mutual communication might otherwise be problematic and this is tue of the translator of patents, contracts, verse or fiction just as much as itis ofthe simultaneous interpreter, ‘who can be seen to be mediating ina very dct way. “The authors conclude with two specific ways in which a translator is @ mediator: + biseultural vision ‘The twanslator is uniquely placed 10 identify and resolve the disparity between sign and valve across cultures. ‘privileged reader’ of the SL text. S/he il have the opportunity to read the text carefully before translating, and therefore is in a postion to help the target reader by produc- ngs clear a text asthe context would warrant. Lance Hewson and Jacky Martin (1991:143), in their Redefining Translation: The Vari- ‘ational Approach, agree that the translator is also a critic. As they say, “Certain texts have been subjected fo what one might call an intense and loving scrutiny, producing a ‘hyper- reading" of the original to the extent that people might well consult a translation in order to have a better (or more complete) understanding of the original”, One particular example isthe translation of Shakespeare, which will be discussed in Chapter 7.5. Albrecht Neubert and Gregory Shreve (1992:54) go one slage further with the concept, ‘suggesting that translations should serve as “knowledge breakers between the members of ‘disjunct communities”. Edwin Gentzler(1993:77) adds to this idea with the point that a text is. always a part of history. So, the goal of translation as seen by Gentzler is to mediate between cultures as follows: “its mediating role is more than synchronic transfer of meaning across ‘cultures; it mediates diachronically as well, in multiple historical traditions”. ‘With regard to who the translator is, Hans Vermeer (1978) has described the translator as “bi-cultural”, and Mary Snell-Homby (1992) has described him or her as a “cross-cultural specialist". Hewson and Martin talk of “The Translation Operator as a Cultural Operator’ (1991:133-155, 160, 161) and discuss “the identity and motivations of the translation oper tor", Though they do not provide detail, they are clear on one point: “Our aim is simply to lunderline once again the [Translator Operator's} socio-cultural identity as being one of the ‘many factors which account for translation being what it is". Hatim and Mason (1990:11) ‘make the same point: “inevitably we feed our own beliefs, knowledge, attitudes and so on into ‘our processing of texts, so that any translation will, to some extent, reflect the translator's ‘own mental and cultural outlook, despite the best of impartial intentions”, Cultural mediators should therefore be extremely aware of their own cultural identi for this reason will need to understand how their own culture influences perception. and “The concept of ‘hyper-reading” comes from Ladmiral (1979). Is translators and interpreters will have to be fluent in cross-cultural communication. ret, as Kondo (1990) points out, an interpreter will have to tread very carefully when it in many other countries, both interpreters and translators are alneady carrying out some of ‘mediating functions. Fons Trompenaars (1993:57), who is an international consultant and iter on cross-cultural management at the Centre for International Business Studies in the therlands, notes: “The translator in more collectivist cultures will usually serve the na- sing from the culture as well as the language”. ‘What is still needed in the West isa second development working in tandem with the wider ve of the mediator: that of raising general awareness for the importance of the cultural or. There are signs that this is beginning to happen, particularly in the very pragmatic ‘tural factor, many of which will be quoted in these chapters. Secondly, there is a steady courses on culture, both in Britain and abroad. | Franslaing and Interpreting an focuses onthe need for a professional culturally aware | interpreter and professionally trained translator for successful international business. | As the business environment itself begins to realize that culture, at all levels is a funda- mental issue in the succes or failure of cross-cultural ventures, soit should be possible for | the humble, university trained, general interpreter or translator to take a more high profile tole in actively promoting understanding aross languages and cultures. Todo this, potential mediators should combine formal learning about language and culture with a sojourn abroad, ad hence, informal modelling ofthe target culture | This brings us back to the teaching of eulture for tanslators and interpreters. According to Newmark (1988:17), much of the analysis of the cultural aspect of the SL text “may be intuitive”, The following chapters wil investigate that intuition. They are intended to form | pat of the formal learning about culture and the way it guides how we communicate aChapter 2. Defining, Modelling and Teaching Culture ‘The aim ofthis chapter is t: + discuss the various definitions of culture + introduce various models of culture + discuss various approaches tothe teaching of culture + introduce the concept of ethnocentrism and culture-bound behaviour 2 On Defining Culture Whenever I hear the word “culture”. I release the safety-catch of my pistol. (Hanns Johst in Schlageter; a quotation often attributed to Goering) People instinctively know what ‘culture’ means to them and to which culture they belong, For example, in 1995, 20 years after Britain’s referendum on its membership of the European Union, nearly one in two respondents said they did not feel European.' However, even though ‘we all know fo which culture we belong, definition of the word has been notoriously difficult ‘One of the oldest and most quoted definitions of culture was formulated by the English anthropologist Edward Burnett Tylor in 1871. It is, for example, used by the Encyclopedia Britannica (1983, vol. 4:657) to introduce the topic, and Edward Sapir quoted it widely: “Culture is that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, customs and any other capsbilites and habits acquired by man as a member of society’ By 1952, American anthropologists Alfred Louis Kroeber and Clyde Kluckhohn (1961:181) had compiled a list of 164 definitions. Their lengthy (165th) contribution was as Follows: Culture consists of patterns, explicit and implicit of and for behaviour acquired and transmitted by symbols, constituting the distinctive achievement of human groups, cluding their embodiment in artefacts; the essential core of culture consists of traditional (Ge, historically derived and selected) ideas and especially their atached values. Cul- ture systems may, on the one hand, be considered as products of action, on the other hand, as conditioning elements of future action, By the eighties we have the following comment from Teaching Culture (Ned Seeleye 1984:13): “I know of no way to better ensure having nothing productive happen than for a language department to begin its approach to culture by a theoretical concer for defining the term”. And more recently, Trompenaars (1993:22) admits that "In fifteen years I have seldom. encountered two or more groups or individuals with identical suggestions regarding the con- cept of culture”. Finally, according to the 10-volume Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (Asher 1994:2001) we have further confirmation that “Despite a century of efforts to define culture adequately, there was in the early 1990s no agreement among anthropologists regarding its nature”. However, defining culture is important; not as an academic exercise, but because the definition delimits how culture is perceived and taught, Put simply, if we define culture as “a particular civilization at a particular period” (CED 1991), then we will tach history, such as England in the Nineteenth Century. This definition of culture we might call high culture or ‘culture with a capital C. High Culture is not the concern of this book. This Culture is external "The results of a BBC commissioned poll coincide withthe 20th anniversary ofthe referendum, reported on Radio 4 (4/6/95). prunslting Cultures ” the individual and relates to a particular and restricted body of knowledge learned, and 4 particular (upper) middle-class upbringing. It tends to be associated with *well- jicated’, “tefinod’, ‘aman of culture’ (rather than woman), ‘culture vulture ‘culturod’ and pon. Culture for these people is fixed in time, and ended with the death ofthe novel, Evelyn gh, ‘the old days’ or some other appropriate time marker. fon the other hand, we define culture in terms of “the artistic and social pursuits, expres- ‘and tastes valued by a society or class" (CED 1991) we will be teaching national 1, sport and hobbies. Again, this isnot the culture under review here. culture under discussion here is not visible as a product, but i internal, collective and acquired rather than learned. Acquistion is the natural, unconscious learning of language { behaviour through informal watching and hearing. Learning, on the other hand, is formal consciously taught, The eulture we are interested in is acquired before the formal tension is apt. Seeds continually absorb elements from the land, or rather the ecosystem, ‘ensure their development. In the same way, people continually absorb, unaware, vital el ments from their immediate environment which influence their development within the human system. However, the traditional teaching of culture to translators, interpreters, and to language mudents in general, has not focused on culture as a shared system for interpreting reality and “organizing experience. A course on the subject, in many institutions, includes a module on literature and history up to, but not necessarily including, the 2th century, and & grounding in "certain national bureaucratic and politcal institutions. What is fascinating is that the students | graduate more proficient in these subjects than the vast majority of people that they will be "translating or interpreting for. Whether or not they are culturally proficient is another matter. ‘The definition of culture proposed here isin terms of a shared mental model or map of the ‘world, which includes Culture, though itis not the main focus. The model is a system of con- | gnuent and interrelated beliefs, values, strategies and cognitive environments which guide the shared basis of behaviour. Bach aspect of culture is linked in a system to form a unifying context of culture which identifies a person and his or her culture. Most of the 164 definitions cited by Kroeber and Kluckhohn, infact, relate toa part ofthis definition of culture. As a first step in the organization of the various approaches to culture, Gail Robinson (1988:7-13), from the Center for Language and Crossculteral Skills in San Francisco, as grouped the various definitions into two basic levels: external and internal. ‘Culture definitions relating ton. - External behaviours - language, gestures, cxstoms/habis products literture,foltore, art, music, atefters Internat ideas beliefs, values, institution? She then suggests that each of the definitions can be seen in terms of a variety of ap- proaches. Each of these approaches will affect the teaching style and content of a course on 2 Robinson's understanding of “instiutions is eal diferent to Ut generally taught on acouse of the same name.8 David Ketan Definition Approach focuses on ‘behaviourist discrete behaviours of Sts of behaviours, shared and observed + fuetionalist, shared rules underiying behaviout, and observable through behaviour + cognitive the form of things that people have in ming, their models for perceiving, relating, and otherwise interpreting them + dynamic the dynamic interplay of internal models and extern mechanisms We will now look at each of these approaches in turn, and briefly discuss the teaching, methodology implied, 2.2 Approaches to the Study of Culture + Behavionsst "= Ethnocentrism + Punetionalist, + Cognitive + Dynaonie = Behaviourist ‘One book which exemplifies the behaviourist approach is the very popular Life in Modern Britain. The book was originally published by (emeritus professor) Peter Bromhead (1985:6) in 1962, and by 1995 was in its 18th edition, The book opens with a panorama of Britain and its people, from which the following extract is taken: ‘The British do not kill thrushes or blackbirds or sparrows. Cornish fishermen do not slaughter mackerel wholesale; nor are they happy when others deplete the sea to satisfy today's domands, In the past hundred years the British have done much to spoil their country, but they have done more to preserve its character, its green varity and its ‘modest scale. ‘This is a good example of a Behaviourist approach: selected facts about what people do ‘and do not do, This approach can load the student with facts of dubious relevance, banalities, and, of course, an implicit view that what the British choose to do, or not do, is naturally better or superior. One wonders what a Pedro Bromcabeza might have included in a possible best-selling La vida en I’Espara moderna about British lack of care for people: the elderly, the homeless, and so on, The main problem with an approach like this is that itis ethnocentric. + Ethnocentrism Ethnocentrism is the belief that the worldview of one’s own culture is central to all reality ‘(Bennett 1993:30). As a logical result, itis the belief in the intrinsic superiority of the culture {to which one belongs, and is often accompanied by feelings of dislike and contempt for other ccultures. An ethnocentric approach to the teaching of British, or any other culture, does not help the student to reason. There is litle or no contextualization of the behaviour nor an investigation as to why it does or does not take place. Boverly McLeod’s (1981:47) definition of culture in her “The Mediating Person and Cul- ‘tural Identity’ is an indication of what is at the heart of the problem in teaching ‘culture’. ‘Culture is, she says, “what seems natural and right”. Joyce Valdes (1986:vii), Director of the tng Cultures 9 jah, andthe rest of the world as made up of cultures". ‘There has, of late, been & move to pat Britain into e European context with more recent yoks, such as Profile UK (McLean 1993) with unit headings such as ‘How European is in?" Students are actively encouraged to compare their own country with Britain, but in this approach concentrates on institutions. Even more recently both the British Coun oach tends to stay locked within a judgmental frame based on one culture's dominant, or ferred, values, The bias towards one or another culture tends to be ideologically based. jana Baker (1996:13) points out that “However much they might differ in their atitudes to nd understanding ofthe meaning of culture, scholars working within cultural studies tend to ink of culture in politcal terms”. principal dheme tends co be the criticism of one culture "(or gender) for having dominated another. Culture is deeper than polities, and will orient @ _ group of people towards dominating or accepting domination. Our task isto understand rather “than argue that we, and only we, have the truth. Returning to Bromhead (1985:11), he often does state the reason for the behaviour, In | tlking about London and how it has changed since 1921, he explains: "So much imperms- "ence, change and movement have made the people more innovative, te place more lively 50 all of surprises, that noth ‘As we shall see when discussing the Meta-Model, this type of language does not help to "clarify culture. In this particular case it would seem thatthe substantive catalyst, i. “imper- - imanence, change and movement”, is also the underlying cause, However, ‘Impermanence’ in itself eannot cause London to be more lively ~ and ‘livelines” is only one of a number of “possible responses to impermanence. The reaction to change depends on other factors, such a, "A culture's tolerance of uncertsinty, whether it prefers to foeus on the future rather than the "past, and so on, Ic is these factors which form the bass of the cognitive approach, * Cognitive “This approach attempts to account for internal, mental reasons forthe links between a particu- lar cause and a particular effect. It tends to use the concepts of modelling, and talks of | mapping, underlying patterns and the culture-bound categorizing of experience. Howard jostrand (1989:51), for example, talks of a culture's ‘central code’: “The central code .. | nvolves above all the culture's “ground of meaning’; its system of major values, habitual | pattems of thought, and certain prevalent assumptions about human nature and society which the foreigner should be prepared to encounter”. Various authors have also used the analogy of computer programming to explain these 1 For a history and description of what studying British Culture now entails, see Bassnett (1997) ‘Bassnet is Professor atthe Centre for British and Comparative Cultural Studies, University of Warwick.20 David Koran bhabitual paterns of thought. For example, Geert Hofstede (1991:5), one of the most influential writers inthe field, states: ‘Culture is the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of ‘one group or category of people from another. Using the analogy of the way computers are programmed ... we will call such patterns of, thinking, feeling, and acting mental programs, or .. software of the mind. Hofstede does accept that there are differences between a human brain and a computer, in that the human brain can react and change in unexpected and creative ways. His thesis though, that each culture will have a set software which every member of that culture will | acquize, o a greater or lesser extent, This view of culture suggests that, in learning about any other culture, one needs first to learn about how one's own internal programming functions in one’s own culture. This is a ‘move away from the functionalist approach. Those who write or who are involved in inter- | cultural training at this level (in marked difference to Bromhead) explicitly state who they are, and where their own preferred patterns lie, Claire Kramsch (1993:11, 188), for example, ‘who has weitten a great deal on teaching culture, calls herself “a French woman, Germanist and teacher of German in the United States” (at the MIT). She is convinced that language students cannot be expected to fully understand another set of institutions or even authentic, ‘material such as newspaper articles because the students (almost literally) cannot see past their own culture: ‘The issue that is raised by the use of real-life materials is that culture is aneaity that is social, political and ideological, and thatthe difficulty of understanding cultural codes stems from the difficulty of viewing the world from another perspective, not of grasping ‘another lexical or grammatical code. gS of Behan, Fanconi and Cognve Approaches ‘The cognitive approach emphasizes the context and boundaries. It suggests that cult lel reality in different (rather than better or worse) ways. The teaching at this level in- ludes the presentation of generalized models of culture which all cultures are a part of. ese are very useful models for providing a general framework of culture; and indeed, much this book is devoted to explaining them. ‘However, all these models suffer to the extent that they treat culture asa frozen state. They ‘also suggest that mediation between cultures is relatively straightforward. Valdes (1986), in fact, has the following optimistic words as the subtitle to her book: Bridging the Cultural Gap jn Language Teaching. Kramsch (1993:228) categorically does not agree (emphasis in the original | ‘What we should seek in cross-cultural education ae less bridges than a deep understand- I ing of boundaries. We can teach the boundary, we cannot teach the bridge. We can talk ‘about and try to understand the differences between the values celebrated in the [Ameri- can} Coca-Cola commercial and the lack or the existence of analogous values in its Russian or German equivalents. We cannot teach directly how to resolve the conflict becween the two. wating Coltues| 2 ugh this might sound like an admission of defeat, itis in fact an acceptance that there is wher approach (0 culture, what Robinson (1988:11) terms the ‘symbolic’ definition of, giture, which isthe subject of the next section, es that “The concept of culture as a creative, historical system of symbols and meaning h Mie fourth approach to culture is to perceive it as a dynamic process. Robinson (1988:1 4 potential to fill nthe theoretical gaps let by behaviourist, functionalist and cogit “According to this theory, ‘meaning’ in culture is not an independent fect to be found by itive maps oF any other static system. Culture here is viewed as a 4ynamic process, constantly being negotiated by those involved. Its inTuenced, but not de- mined, by past meanings and it establishes procedent for future meanings. However, this rot mean that culture is constantly changing, but that it is a dialectic process between emal models ofthe world and external reality. Clearly, teaching at ths level cannot siraply bein trms of a teacher explaining facts. “Thete are two important conclusions to be drawn from viewing culture at this level. Fist, than the teacher being the only active person, students or trainees become actively ks of the need for “inter-cultural encounters”, thus making sojoums abroad an essential nent of any course on culture. Encounters can also be simulated through cultural as- ‘The second point to note is that because culture is not static, change is possible not individually but in society as a whole. In fact, many believe that, as the global village es more of a reality, so these changes in culture will lead to a levelling of difference, a hop, the traditional American diver, te Halian ster and even the Malay satay centres are ing spurned by the young in favour of the queue-to-b-served hamburger. Infact, atthe | 32nd World Sociology Congres" two of the ten sessions were dedicated to what in sociology | Saled‘MeDonaizaton ts azurding to George Rizr (1983:1 who coined the word “the process by which the principles of the fastfood restaurant are coming to dominate more and more sectors of American society as well a the rest ofthe worl” |The fast-food principles are those of rationalization: a studied programmable system which “attempts to standardize both the process and the product. According to Ritzer, there are four | major principles: ——ww—————— ‘Se, fr example, Brsin (1993:227243) | *Djalogue between Cultures and Changes in Europe and the Word’, Trieste, 37 July, 1995.2 David Karan + efficiency product ordered and consumed in minimom dine; + quantity 00d supply fora good price: + predictabiliy product range identical at home and abroad and reproducible worldwide; + contol Of both employees and customers in terms of standardized practices, eg. ‘ating and siting times, operational checklists, Rationalization also pervades the language (verbal and non-verbal) to such an extent that ccounter-staff world-wide are observed for performance down to the last discrete detail. The box below is a much shortened summary of the performance evaluation sheet used at ‘MeDonald’s for service-counter operations (Hampden-Turmer & ‘Trompenaars 1993:42-43); Greeting the customer Yes A, There is a smile 2. this a sincere greeting 3, There is eye contact ‘Assembling the order "1, The order is assembled in the proper sequence 2 Gril slips ae handed first 43. rinks are poured in the proper sequence 4, Proper amount of ice ee ee ‘ating Bo esting aye "The amount ofthe onder i tated clerly and loud enough 10 hear pe set 2. The denomination recvived is clearly stated ao 3, The change is counted out loud Le Ironslating Calures 23 | the growing significance of global communication. blurs national differences. Age and ‘ents the world over have more in common with their peers in other countries in terms of| ‘their tastes than with other age groups from the same culture later, the blurring of differences is at a visible level. What does not blur are the more le elements of what actually make up a culture. As Kramsch (1993:227, phasis in the original) says, “i is a fallacy to believe that because Russians now drink cola, Pepsi means the same for them as for Americans” Jonaldization theory according to Ritzer, and on the tight the reality in the Moscow janald’s in 1995 Reality ‘queaes of up t an hour, even in 1995, and idem for ime spent inside at the table ‘many buy tea and not the food.The average cost of a meal is above the na- tional average daily wage product range is different to daly food. Meno isnot \endeal 19 an Ameri- ‘can MeDonald’s (00 EggMeMutfia!)