Download Migration and intercultural communication and more Assignments Communication in PDF only on Docsity!
GURUKUL LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL COLLEGE AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE
KILPAUK, CHENNAI-
PROJECT PAPER
Class- MTh II SUBJECT: Migration (Interdisciplinary Course) Topic: Migration and Intercultural Communication
Presenter: Johana (Communication) Faculty in-charge: Revd. Dr. Songram Basumatary Reg. No. AB424719 Date: The 12th^ December, 2020.
Introduction
Globalization, demographic shifts, conflicts, income inequalities and climate change encourage many more workers and their families to cross borders in search of employment and security. Migration itself is a process of communication. One of the most important needs of the migrants is communication. Each migration brings along different problems - sociological, cultural, economic, religious, communication problems, and so on. Migrants have to undergo heavy psycho-social cultural, religious and communication trauma for being migrants. The new living space filled with foreign elements is perceived as an unrecognized place, which is further always accompanied by the arousal of fear and insecurity. At the same time, people in the receiving side are also cautious and even sceptical against the migrants, which of course is somewhat natural. This leads to difficulties the evolution of communication between the two groups. Hence, Sereci opines, “Communication is the greatest need of migrants”.^1
Most of the problems faced by migrants, whether emigrants or immigrants, have their roots in the differences in culture between the migrants and the hosts, and also the migrants among themselves. Wherever and wherever migration takes place intercultural context arises. Culture is a complex and fluidic term, and is dynamic. A multicultural context arises where one or more two monocultural contexts meet. In such a situation there arises the new context called intercultural context where the cultures which meet.
(^1) Sedat Cereci, “The Most Important Problem of Immigrants in Modern Era: Communication,” in Özet Kitabi (Nisan/2019): 1.
Culture encompasses all walks of human life, hence, the migrants come to their new place with all the things that they lived with in their previous inhabitation. Migrants come to their new places with their language, religion, food habit, dress codes, etc., which are new to the host culture. At the same time, the culture of the host culture is also new to the migrants as well.
At this juncture, there arise the need to procure a proper intercultural communication between the two cultures in order to acquire a community where there is the real communication. The core aim of communication is ‘commonality’ where there is a community where God reigns. It is the community which is also called ‘Shalomic Community’ where there is commonness among each of the members of the whole community. It is a community not of alienation or discrimination, it is a community for all.
This paper attempts to deal with the importance of intercultural communication for the prevalence of commonality among the migrants and the hosts. The writer sees the core problem faced by the migrants elsewhere in the world as due to miscommunication among the two parties. Hence, attempt will be made as to how to cope up with the problems that arise due to migration which are faced by the migrants and the hosts viewing the problems form humanitarian perspective with suggestive theoretical proposition made by scholars.
It sounds apt to first deal with the major terms and their concepts relating to the topic so as to give us better understanding of the context and the topic.
1. Migration
The word ‘Migration’ has been derived from the Latin ‘ migrate’ which means to change one’s residence. Literally it means the settlement or shifting of an individual or a group of individual form one cultural area or place of habitation to another, more or less permanently.^2 The term migration can be defined as, “moving away from traditional place to a new place.” It can be temporary or long term; voluntary or forced. According to concise Oxford dictionary, “migration means to move from one place country or town to another, Thus migration is the movement from one place to another within the country or outside it”.^3
The United Nations defines an international migrant as,
(^2) S. C. Joshi, Sociology of Migration and Kinship , (Anmol Publications: New Delhi, 1999), 2. (^3) Barbara Lüthi, “Migration and Migration History,” Version: 2.0, in: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte, 06.07.2018: 3 http://docupedia.de/zg/Luethi_migration_v2_en_
literally to ‘ make common ’ – that is to create in a receiver’s mind an idea or image similar to the one in the mind of the sender”^8
Denis McQuail defines communication as “ a process which increases commonality, but also requires elements of commonality for it to occur at all ”^9
Communication is also a derivative of the Latin word ‘communicare’ which means ‘to share, to impart or to have something in common.’^10 In everyday use of the term, communication means making common or sharing something by two or more people or group of people. Literally, communication, according to Gulley, is to make something common, that is, to create in the mind of the receiver of an information or message an idea or image similar to what is in the mind of the sender.^11 Most of the scholars in this field see communication basically as sharing of information and ideas for the purpose of affecting the receiver in some predetermined ways.
“Communication can be described simply as the process by which individuals share information, ideas, and attitudes. A key word in this definition is share, which means to give or receive a part of something or to enjoy or assume something in common.”^12 Communication is dynamic as it is an ongoing process which encompasses various components that interact with one another, causing specific consequences.
Communication is a process which increases commonality among people involved in the communication. In communication as sharing, it involves sharing meaningful messages. So, human communication is the sending from one person to another of meaningful messages.
3. Culture:
Edward B Taylor defines culture as, “that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art morals, law, customs, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man (cit.) as a member of society.”^13 Kroeber also defines culture as, “the mass of learned and transmitted
(^8) As quoted in Daniel Kirubaraj, Gospel, Culture …, 7. (^9) As quoted in Daniel Kirubaraj, Gospel, Culture …, 7. (^10) As quoted by Raphael A. Idialu, “ Communication in Theological Enterprise,” in Methodist Journal of Theology, MEJOTH, 11 2/1, (May, 2015): 31. 12 Idialu,^ Communication in Theological ...,^ 30-40. James R. Wilson and Stan Le Roy Wilson, Mass Media Mass Culture: An Introduction, (New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2001) 7. 13 As quoted in C. Lalhlira, The Role of Intercultural Communication in Christian Witness, (Delhi: ISPCK, 2010) 16.
reactions, habit, techniques, ideas and values – and the behaviours they induce.”^14 Kluckhohn defines culture as, “the total life-way of a people, the social legacy the individual acquires from the group.”^15 Luzbetak defines culture as, “a dynamic system of socially acquired and socially shared ideas according to which an interacting group of human beings is to adapt itself to its physical, social, and ideational environment.”^16
From the above statements of different scholars we can come into a conclusion to say that ‘Culture is all the ways of life, which is dynamic in nature, that human beings possess which are formed and moulded by the society or community where and which they belong. Culture can include morality, ethical values, laws, knowledge, beliefs, customs, habits, ideas, behaviours, which are socially induced, learned and shared’.
Communication plays an important role in acquiring cultural behaviour and ideas that culture exists through communication and communication could also be said as an expression of culture or as culture in progress.^17
Culture is a way of life. The food we eat, the clothes we wear, the language we speak in and the God we worship all are aspects of culture. In very simple terms, we can say that culture is the embodiment of the way in which we think and do things. It is also the things that we have inherited as members of society. All the achievements of human beings as members of social groups can be called culture. Art, music, literature, architecture, sculpture, philosophy, religion and science can be seen as aspects of culture. However, culture also includes the customs, traditions, festivals, ways of living and one’s outlook on various issues of life.
From the above definitions, it could well be assumed communication in itself is relational that it cannot happen within oneself alone, it happens in relationship with other in a particular cultural milieu.
4. Intercultural Communication
Intercultural communication in its simplest form “designates the interactions between two or more cultures”^18 “Intercultural Communication” credit is often given to American
(^14) As quoted in C. Lalhlira, The Role …, 16. (^15) As quoted in C. Lalhlira, The Role …, 16-17. (^16) As quoted in C. Lalhlira, The Role .., 17. (^17) C. Lalhlira, The Role ..., 19. (^18) Tim O’Sullivan, et al, Key Concepts in Communication (London and New York: Methuen, 1983),
call misunderstanding, misconception, misinterpretation are all due to lack of proper communications. As much as we differ in our skin colour and our languages, so are our preferences and values. The theoretical framework will give a better understanding on the causes of problems and will look into the possible solution for the problems related to migration.
2. Theoretical Framework:
The theoretical framework used here to understand and work with intercultural communication is the Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity (DMIS) developed by Milton Bennett (1986, 1993).^24 This model was shaped as an elementary framework to explicate the reactions that people have to cultural dissimilarities. Using concepts from intellectual mind-set and constructivism, Milton Bennett formulated his opinions into six stages of increasing sensitivity to cultural difference.
The basic assumption of the model is that as one's experience of cultural contrast turns out to be more unpredictable and complexed, one's capability in intercultural relations increases. Each stage demonstrates a specific psychological structure that is communicated in particular sorts of perspectives and conduct identified with social distinction. By perceiving the basic intellectual direction toward social contrast, expectations about conduct and mentalities can be made and education can be made use to enhance development into the next stage.
According to DMIS, stages are divided into two main stages called ethnocentric and ethnorelative stages. Both of the stages are further subdivided into three stages.
5.1. Stage 1. Ethnocentric Stage meaning that one’s own culture is experienced as central to reality in some way. The term “ethnocentric,” according to Bennett, “is... defined in the simplest possible way as assuming that the worldview of one's own culture is central to all reality”.^25 The stage is called ethnocentric because things are looked from one’s own culture
(^24) Milton J. Bennett, “Towards Ethnorelativism: A Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity.” In Education for the Intercultural Experience, edited by R.M. Paige. (2nd edition. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press, 1993) 22. 25 As quoted by Sandra L. Mahoney and Jon F. Schamber, “Exploring the Application of a Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity to a General Education Curriculum on Diversity” in The Journal of General Education, 53/3-4 (2004): 315.
only and are measured from the same only. Ethnocentric Stage assumes that “the worldview of one's own culture is central to all reality”^26 :
5.1.1. Denial of cultural difference
This stage is the state in which one’s own culture is claimed as the only real one from the subjective knowledge of a person or group of persons. In this stage people tend to avoid other cultures and tend to negate their presence as well. This led people to maintain psychological and physical isolation from differences. At this stage, people do not have the tendency to create any communication with other culture at all. People of both the parties usually behave as if there is no other culture in their world. “In the extreme, power may be used to exploit others without sensitivity to their feelings of degradation.”^27
5.1.2. Defence against cultural difference
This is the state in which people claim their own culture as the only good one. People feel threatened by the emergence of the new culture at the realm, hence, they tend to be highly critical of other cultures regardless of whether the other cultures are the hosts or the guests. People in this stage are captivated by the fear of enculturation, assimilation and polarization of their society because of the new cultures. Hence, they tend to play defensive strategies against the new cultures. This stage of cultural encounter is still a distant one and is barred by the “we” and “they” concept of isolation mostly followed by hostilities which are always accompanied by the claim of one’s cultural supremacy to the others. “They see other cultures as threatening and construct individuals outside of their own culture as ‘Others.”^28 People of other cultures or immigrants are seen as threats to their culture which will manipulate and loot their culture.
5.1.3. Minimization of cultural difference
This is the state in which people claim their cultural elements as universal. They tend to trivialize other cultures and claim their own culture to be good enough and expect similarities from other cultures to match their culture.
(^26) Bennett, “Towards Ethnorelativism...,” 30. (^27) M. Bennett, “Intercultural Communication” in Multicultural America: A Multimedia Encyclopedia edited by C. Cortes (New York: Sage, 2013) 578-581. 28 Frank Hernandez and Brad W. Kose, “The Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity: A Tool for Understanding Principals’ Cultural Competence” in Education and Urban Society 44/4 (2012): 516.
differences” and being “curious about cultural differences”.^31 Acceptance does not necessarily imply agreement, yet judgment upon cultural difference is no longer ethnocentric. But, negative judgementalism still can persist at this stage. People at this stage have acknowledge and accept the presence of other cultures as much as their own culture, and are inquisitive about and considerate toward cultural dissimilarity.
At this stage people have realised and acknowledge the presence of other cultures. Such acknowledgement vastly shape their perception of the society. At the same time, people still suffer from being stigmatized for being of a particular culture. So, this stage is still a bit far from integration in the society even though cultural disparity is highly acknowledged.
5.2.2. Adaptation to cultural difference
This stage has been the outcome of experiencing other cultures. At this stage people have the tendency to comply with other cultures and are aware of the tastes, values and natures of other cultures. Adaptation to difference incorporates the ability “to shift cultural frames of reference” and change communicative behaviour accordingly.^32 One’s perception is expanded to be inclusive of other worldviews.
People at Adaptation stage have got a better and more inclusive worldview, even able to see the world from the perspective of other cultures and are prone to intentionally alter their perceptions and actions to communicate more efficiently in another culture. But this stage still tries to maintain reservations from other cultures. It is a stage where people acknowledge the presence of other cultures and have learned how to be with other people. But, it does not necessarily see people of other cultures as equal yet.
5.2.3. Integration of cultural difference
This is the state in which people’s perception of self is highly savoured by different cultural worldviews. People at Integration often are more concerned with their own cultural idiosyncrasy. Integration of difference operates as a shift in “cultural perspective” such that perceiving oneself as a member of a combination of cultures “becomes a normal part of
(^31) J. M. Bennett, M. J. Bennett, & W. Allen, “Developing Intercultural Competence in the Language Classroom” in Culture as the Core: Integrating Culture into the Language Curriculum. Edited by R. M. Paige, D. L. Lange, & Y. A. Yershova, (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition, 1999): 25-26. 32 J. M. Bennett, et. al., “Developing Intercultural Competence...” 26.
self”.^33 This stage is not necessarily better than Adaptation in most situations demanding intercultural competence, but it is common among non-dominant minority groups, long-term expatriates, and “global nomads.”^34
5.3. Critical Evaluation of the Theory:
Bennet also propounded the same theory for academic development which he named “Developing Intercultural Competence in the Language Classroom”.^35 Here, in this DMIS, “Bennet theorizes that acquiring intercultural sensitivity is a developmental process, in which a person moves from”^36 one stage to another and finally reaches to adaptation, and then to Integration stages.
But the question that arises out of the theory is what are the factors that play roles in the development of cultural competence? Is it just a process which everyone has to develop naturally? What could be done to attain the top stage faster? Why are many countries, even though they have been in the context of migration for half centuries, still seem to be lagging in the early stages of this development stages?
The Theory seems to try to generalize all the intercultural communication patterns or process of intercultural development in relation to migration. At the same time, the theory seems to be a little bit more host sided.
Even though there seem to be some discrepancies in the theory, the theory sounds apt enough to study the developmental stages of migration issues in most of the countries as there could hardly be a foolproof theory for this study. Migration issue is a vast and complex issue which differs according to the context of the society where it happens. Even though many societies still seem to be lagging in the early stages of the theory, they seem to approach in the proper pattern of the theory.
One of the most important aspects of the issue of migration is the intercultural problems that arise between the migrants and the hosts. Since people fail to accept themselves as being one of the cultures, yet claim to be the higher cultures and expect others to adhere or assimilate
(^33) J. M. Bennett, et. al., “Developing Intercultural Competence...” 27. (^34) Mahoney and Schamber, “Exploring the Application of ...” 317. (^35) J. M. Bennett, et. al., “Developing Intercultural Competence...” 13-45. (^36) Shahila Zafar, Shabistan Z. Sandhu and Zaved Ahmed Khan, “ A Critical Analysis of ‘Developing Intercultural Competence in the Language Classroom’ by Bennett, Bennett and Allen” in World Applied Sciences Journal 21/4 (2013): 567 (565-571).
just a part of the whole creation of God, who are not complete without others. Only then there will be a better society of all. We need to see the whole world as a big community where we are only a part of it. All these differences in culture, race, languages, and soon are just the part to complicate other to make a complete whole world.
Conclusion
Communication requires genuine understanding between the people who take part in it. It demands a community where commonality prevails. The “I We” relationship has to be submerged by “We” relationship which includes everyone, including the whole creation. Then, there will be no more need of Intercultural Communication, but only a Universal Communication, hence, Universal Community.
Bibliography
A. Books Bennett, J. M., M. J. Bennett, & W. Allen. “Developing Intercultural Competence in the Language Classroom.” In Culture as the Core: Integrating Culture into the Language Curriculum. Edited by R. M. Paige, D. L. Lange, & Y. A. Yershova. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition,
Bennett, M. “Intercultural Communication” in Multicultural America: A Multimedia Encyclopedia edited by C. Cortes. New York: Sage Publications, 2013.
Bennett, Milton J. “Towards Ethnorelativism: A Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity.” In Education for the Intercultural Experience, edited by R.M. Paige. 2nd edition. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press, 1993.
Dodd, Carley H. Dynamics of Intercultural Communication. Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown Publishers, 1982.
Cereci, Sedat. “The Most Important Problem of Immigrants in Modern Era: Communication.” In Özet Kitabi (Nisan/2019): 1-15.
Joshi, S. C. Sociology of Migration and Kinship , Anmol Publications: New Delhi, 1999.
Lalhlira, C. The Role of Intercultural Communication in Christian Witness. Delhi: ISPCK,
Samovar, Larry A. and Richard E. Potter. Intercultural Communication: A Reader. Belmont, C.A.: International Thomas Publishing Inc., 1991.
Tim O’Sullivan. Et. Al. Key Concepts in Communication. London and New York: Methuen,
Wilson, James R. and Stan Le Roy Wilson. Mass Media Mass Culture: An Introduction. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2001.
