이문화 9-3

Let's get back to the language problem as the factor of culturally mediated cognition in cross-cultural interpersonal communication. In some languages, different words and formats are used at different levels, such as armonific words, formal expressions, and informal words, etc. For non-native speakers, it's quite important to understand what, to whom, and when to use proper words and expressions.

which, should I admit, is not an easy thing. For instance, it's known that there are four ways to say"you" in Nepalese language, like"ta","timi","tapai", and"hajur". As we can expect, each word is only used for particular orders, and if we use the words inappropriately, it may lead to uncomfortable or unexpected situations.

I know these parts are one of the most difficult parts when we study foreign languages. Not only in Nepalese, but also in Korean language, there are so many formal and informal words and expressions. For example,"No, 당신, 그대, 야, 언니, 오빠, 누나, 형, 이모님, 여사님, 사장님, 선생님." I know it's totally complex and puzzled.

Which to choose for whom? and in what context? So difficult even for Koreans themselves for some situations. Let me show you a video clip made by a girl, probably in your age, who talks about this man in Korean language. "언니, 자신보다 한 살이라도 많은 남자면 오빠." "자신이랑 나이가 같거나 어리기만 하면 이유를 부어둬 상관이 없어요." "반대로 자신이 남자일대."

If you have a woman, a girl, a girl, a girl. If you have a girl, a girl, a girl. But if you have a girl, a girl, a girl, a brother, a brother, a brother, a brother, a brother, a brother... Well, I didn't mean it, but I'm afraid that this video might make you decide you will not learn Korean language because of this complexity in selecting our proper titles.

Please keep trying. Anyway, to conclude, depending on the language based being spoken, managers must attend to different cues and focus on different aspects of their context and message. Now let's talk about the communication barriers between native speakers and non-native speakers. Generally speaking, we should presume and accept the fact that for non-native speakers, since messages are not always clearly understood, responses and action implications

can be unclear as well. If we examine the cognition process of native speakers and non-native speakers, we can figure out many differences. Suppose you are a native English speaker working in an office where official language is English. Then you will think in English, you will have no need for translation or interpretation, and you may have no or little problems in understanding and using subtle English vocabulary and rapid English conversation.

Messages are in English, therefore, they will be usually clear to you, and therefore, your responses and action implications will be also very clear. Now, suppose you are an English native speaker who is working in an office where official language is not English but Korean. Then, you may still think in English, but you shall need to speak in Korean throughout the interpretation process in your brain.

You may have problems in understanding and using very subtle differences in nuance of Korean vocabularies and as well rapid Korean conversation. Since messages in Korean is not always clear to you, your response and action implications can be also unclear. Let's get back to the first situation. In an office where official language is English.

In this environment, native English speakers may have negative conclusions about non-native English speakers, such as they are less educated, less intelligent, less committed, more obstinate. How come? Well, mainly because of their poorer English, because of their communication problems in English. However, as you can reason,

Their poor language does not necessarily mean that they are full. At the same time, the non-native English speakers may face numerous frustrations and conclusions when they try to hear, understand, and speak English language. When the non-native English speakers talk together in English, frustration and confusion they feel, maybe even worse.

Therefore, for these reasons, both the native and non-native speakers should understand and expect these potential barriers and problems when they communicate each other. In this regard, some communication experts recommended several ways to improve communication with non-native speakers. If you are a native speaker, or not a non-native speaker, but a fluent speaker,

You'd better slow down the pace of conversation and use familiar words. You'd better refrain from dominating the conversation. You'd better ask if others understand what you're saying and listen actively. If you're a less fluent non-native speaker, you'd better resist read-to-read-to-wall-other-avoidance behaviors. You'd better refrain from revert-to-your-native language.

You'd better ask if others understand what you are saying. If you don't understand others, you'd better ask them to repeat themselves or explain. If you are a team leader who leads a team of which members are mixed of fluent speakers and less fluent speakers, then you'd better monitor participants and strive to balance their speaking and listening. Actively draw contributions from all participants.

Solicite participation from less fluent speakers. Be prepared to define and interpret content. Well, they are rather descriptive suggestions I would judge, but in some sense, very practical and deserved to pay attention, I think. This case might give us a good opportunity to think about practical understandings and preparations that are required when we work with non-native speakers.

Suppose your company team has been asked to work with a second company team from Costa Rica to develop a new market plan for your Latin American market. Your team does not speak Spanish, and the English fluency of the Costa Rican team rise from poor to moderate. Then, how will you structure your conversations when the two teams meet so that everyone can maximize their level of understanding?

What actions will you take formally? What actions will you take informally? What should we be monitoring to ensure the success of this team meeting? What will success look like for each team? Wow, by now, we've talked about languages for so long time and with so many cases. Yes, because of its utmost importance in cross-cultural communication, language.

Now, let's jump to the second sector of culturally mediated cognition, selective perception, according to eyes of the behold, which means the mental choice of what to focus on and what to ignore. People tend to focus on immediate demands and tend to ignore less immediate demands. Indeed, people often see only what they want to see.

or what they expect to see. As an aware, numberable messages can be sensed easily in some cultures, while they can be easily missed or ignored in other cultures. Actually, commonly in both cultures, numberable communications can convey significant information. However, evaluation of the numberable messages may be quite different from culture to culture, as we can be aware from these two sayings.

사이런스, 이는 불의의 불의, 사이런스는 언어의 말입니다. 그래서, 안전하지 마세요. 많은 공유의 공유의 가능성을 볼 수 있을까요? 그리고, 다양한 문화에 대한 공유의 방법을 어떻게 하십시오.

When we heed a certain call, together as one Oh, when it's time to lend a hand to life

So, to repeat, commonly posing high and low context cultures, non-bobble communications can convey significant information, and thus, they should not be missed or ignored. Speaking of non-bobble messages, let me introduce a few examples of gestures that convey different meanings across cultures.

A simple hand gesture may mean different things in different gestures. You may consider this hand gesture as an OK sign. And this may be commonly used by people all around the world with the same meaning. However, it's not actually. It means"number zero" or"nothing" in Russia. And it means"money" in Japan. However, you'd better not use this sign in Latin America because with this hand gesture, you mean to insert the person in front of you.

With making fingers to shape the English letter L, in China, it just means the number 8. But in the United States, the same sign delivers an offensive meaning that you are the loser. This is a lovely Korean hand gesture that has recently arrived across the world, especially among young generations or K-culture fans.

It makes a heart shape with two fingers, and that means"I love you" or"I devote myself to you." Therefore, please do not confuse if you got this hand sign from others, and you also try to show your love with this cute hand gesture. However, there is the unintended use of gestures or normal body languages from not knowing the meaning of them that causes a serious problem sometimes.

Let's take an example of it. Offensive Behavior To repeat, selective perception and number-by-communication can be seen in many different ways. One may be uncomfortable to one person, may be offensive to another. Consider the plight of a visiting British professor who was reading to his poetry class.

at the Ayn Shams University in Cairo, Egypt. Reflecting on what he was reading, he became so relaxed that he inadvertently leaned back in his chair and crossed his legs. Thereby, the sword of one of his shoes was revealed to his students. In much of the Muslim world, obviously, this is the worst insult that anyone can inflict on another.

which the professor might not know. The following morning, the Cairo newspaper carried headlines about the student demonstration that resulted. The students denounced what they saw as British arrogance, and demanded that the professor be sent back home immediately. It's a famous case that happened in long time ago, but I think we are still living in the world not too much different from those days, with respect to selective perception and number of our communications.

So what do you think? In this example of Egypt, is anyone at fault here, or is this just one of those misunderstandings that often occurs across cultures? What could both sides, the British professor and the Egyptian students, have done in order to avoid an escalation of this conflict? Cognitive evaluation, the way people interpret words and actions.

It's about how people attach meanings to messages, or in other words, how people process what they see or hear. Let's enjoy another funny episode that, using real names of famous politicians, hilariously describes how communication barriers can arise due to the differences in cognitive evaluation. Mr. President, Condoleezza Rice is here to see you.

Good, send her in. Yes, sir. Good morning, Mr. President. Oh, Condoleezza, good to see you. What's happening? Well, Mr. President, I have the report here about the new leader in China. That's great, Condi. Let's hear it. Mr. President, who is the new leader of China? Well, that's what I want to know. But that's what I'm telling you, Mr. President. Well, that's what I'm asking you, Condi. Who is the new leader of China? Yes. I mean the fellow's name. Who?

The guy in China. Who? The new leader of China. Did you enjoy the video? Well, as for our cognitive evaluation, people tend to categorize the information in order to judge its authenticity, accuracy, and utility. And this tendency is quite differ from culture to culture. For example, in individualistic cultures, when people meet others for the first time, they tend to discern others by individual characteristics, such as men or women.

Black or white, white color or blue color, something like that. By contrast, in collectivistic cultures, people tend to tell others by collectivistic characteristics, such as membership or particular group, clan or organization, like working for Samsung, from Busan or 광주, Kim or Lee, something like that. Lastly,

cultural logic, assumptions about shared meanings, or, in other words, the process by which people attribute meanings to the words and actions of others on the basis of the local meaning that are embedded within their own culture. People tend to interpret messages they got based on their own assumptions about normative behavior. Therefore, if both parties in communications share same cultural logic, or if both parties at least mutually understand it, then, between them, simplified and rapid communication would be available.

However, if not, if two parties have different cultural logic, thus they do not understand each other's assumptions about the local meanings, then the cultural logic will work as a communication barrier. Country countries not only simplify their rapid communication, but also efficient and effective communication could not be expected between them. For example, Korean people frequently say this instead of saying goodbye: Let's have a dinner sometimes or let's have a drink sometimes. 언제 밥이나 같이 먹읍시다. 언제 술이나 한잔합시다.

However, cultural logic embedded in these expressions is not the same as their literal meanings. It's just a part of etiquette to tell others when farewell. Unlike Koreans, if you don't understand the cultural logic here, you might open up your smartphone to schedule for dining, which would make puzzled your Korean counterpart. To conclude,

A common knowledge in one culture may not be common in other cultures. Cultural logic regarding time is also varies across cultures. Let me provide a video clip that explains it. I guess we all believe that time is pretty constant. But around the world, attitudes to it differ greatly. While you can set your watch by Swiss trains, not all cultures break the day down into minutes and seconds.

for other cultures punctuality is a very different matter a German sales executive trying to open doors in a number of African countries scheduled two meetings a day for him quite easy going his first meeting didn't even take place till a day later by the end of his trip he was so stressed out he could hardly operate he mistakenly thought his hosts would look at time like he did

So, let's take an example of differences in cultural logic in Brazil and Canada with respect to the assumption of time, which was well explained in the video. A Canadian sales representative Sara and a Brazilian customer Sergio, they were attempting to schedule a meeting appointment. Sara scheduled an appointment to meet him at her office at 9am.

and said you agreed on it. However, different cultural logics worked here. For most Canadians, 9 o'clock means 9 o'clock sharp and not later. For them, time is money. But for most Brazilians, 9 o'clock means only a targeted or approximate time and not sharp time. Using their own cultural logics, the Brazilians appeared pretty later after 9, while the Canadians expected punctual time.

What's the result, can you guess? Probably, both should have been disappointed at each other. Or, even though they could meet at 9, they should have frustrated when they meet. What do you think? How could both Sara and Sergio have prevented a potential misunderstanding with respect to time? If the meeting was disaster we predicted,

What should both Sarah and Selija do next? How could each of them save the business relationships? Have you personally experienced a similar event in which cultural logic led to conflict or confusion? How did you handle it, and what is the result? Is there any way you could have been more effective?