Translation and Interpretations

Judith Martin and Thomas Nakayama define translation as: "the process of producing a written text that refers to something said or written in another language"(243). However that is notably different from interpretation which is "the process of verbally expressing what is said or written in another language"(243).  An example of this would be my friend who is learning Arabic. If he misunderstands a phrase, he would go to an online website to rewrite the phrase in Arabic and then go to google translate to have the phrase translated. The translation is made word for word rather than the interpretation causing the sentence to make no sense. For example, he looked up what "حروف شمسيا" was. On google it was translated as "ABC SOLAR". When he showed me this I laughed because in Arabic there is no such thing as a ". What the question meant was find the letter "ش" . This shows how limited and unreliable translations can be. With this in mind, when we do not know someone who speaks the language, how much can we fundamentally understand?

Language is not a prison house, it is a means of escape, escape from our thoughts, our ideas and our own personal perceptions. It is limiting, surely but as it is our only means of communication, it should be appreciated despite its flaws.

Language is not a barrier but can be used to express everything that a person is thinking, allowing humans to link with others. Without language, our perceptions of the world would be even more biased and limited than they are now with any bias language gives us. Without the ability to interact with others, humans would not be able to share their unique perspectives, and would be stuck assuming that their own viewpoints were the only ones.

Nonetheless, language has its own flaws, which should be acknowledged. Because I have studied three languages, I can see that each would influence me to think about the world in a slightly different way. For instance, the subjunctive tense in French and Spanish causes me to think about the world as less factual and clear-cut and instead as having more shades of grey. Another example is that, in French and Spanish, they label items as being masculine or feminine. One noticeable thing about this is that it influences the way that people see the objects and which adjectives they would use to describe the object.

Therefore, while language builds a framework for bias in our ways of viewing the world, it also provides a way of discussing how other people see the world, and gives us ways to expand our views.

Being Biracial...

One part of the reading that really intrigued me was the majority, minority and biracial identity development stages. My mother is American, born in upstate NY; while my dad is Moroccan, with American citizenship since he was born in Boston. At the age of 3, my father's family moved back to Morocco and lived there until he moved back to the United States for university. 

What did that result to, years after my parents met? Me. I'm half-American, half Moroccan; holding passports for both Morocco and the United States. 

By reading the biracial identity development stages, I came to realize that I was reading about myself. As a kid, my friends would frequently come up to me and tell me which I preferred being more, American or Moroccan. I was offended, because I am both. Even in our school yearbook I would make sure that for my nationality, they stated both countries. 

Yet, growing up things were difficult. I could never really "fit" in. I really did not care if Morocco lost its soccer game, or that the Patriots lost. While those who were "full American" or "full Moroccan" would go biserck.  I never felt fully devoted to one country; but over the years I became proud of this. Now, I am proud to be from both nations, having two drastically different cultures. I feel like I have an easier time making friends from other nations. Also, I'm proud to tell anyone who asks about both cultures. 

All in all, although I still get the frequent question "So do you prefer being American or Moroccan" I don't get offended but instead state that both are part of who I truly am. And, as in "Intercultural Communication in Contexts" states, I've reached the third level -- self acceptance.

Language is significant in cross-cultural communication!

So learning another language like adopt or learning another culture, it is not easy. As in the article "How does our language shape the way we think?" by Lera Borodisky, "learning a new language (especially one not closely related to those you know) is never easy; it seems to require paying atention to a new set of distinctions." It is similar how we recognize a different culture through language. When we comunicate we have to share our ideas, thoughs and feeling or perceive informations by using language. Language will help us less misunderstanding each other. Such as when I first came here to the U.S. I had a big issue in communication with people. Because the way I speak English is the way how my culture is and that is different with people speaking English in the U.S. . I created my own way to use English and people have misunderstood about me. Now I have been living here in U.S. for four years. I am trying to learn the way Americans speak and use English so that they can have a better understanding when I want to say something; or I would be able to share my thoughts and ideas. I realize that I am adopting U.S. culture through learning English and using it everyday. But it is extremely difficult at first as well as having long term to be able to use English as Native people.

Jewish Identity in Southern Society

Growing up in the south, the "Bible Belt" to be exact, it was not encouraged to be different and by the standards where I was, I am. I'm Jewish, fairly liberal, open-minded, not a supporter of the Confederacy, etc. But in order to have friends in high school, different aspects of my "identity" appeared at different times. You could say that impression management was a constant part of my life.

I attended a private Christian school where I was one of 3 Jews from grades 7-12, so religion was not a topic I would discuss with many people, though I did guest lecture in the religion classes every year. My religious identity was one that was well-hidden at school, especially when people were trying to convert me at least once a week.

Around certain friends I was able to truly be myself and talk about world events, gossip, fashion, or anything else that I am interested in. When I was with certain other people, I felt that I had to hide the fact that I am an intellectual, a major part of my own identity.

At home, I still hid various aspects of my identity. Since my father died in 2006, I have had to hide aspects of my identity that are attributed to him in order to not upset my mother. Other aspects that I didn't reveal to my mother included political identity (since she is conservative), true religious identity (she converted and I am much more religious than she is), and cultural identity (music, movies), though we do share a love of literature.

At college, I feel that my identity is still forming. It is true that your identity is influenced by the people around you- my mother has even commented on certain mannerisms of mine that have changed since arriving here. I am still deciding which aspects to reveal and which ones to keep hidden, though I feel that I am becoming much more comfortable with who I truly am.

Identity is influenced by those around you but also by yourself. You decide how you want to be perceived, though you cannot always control other people's perceptions. It is important to be conscious of who you want to be and think about how you are perceived by others. In high school, I was an outsider, a Jew who was not a fan of the South. Here, I feel that I am welcomed for who I actually am.

U.S. Health Care Reform in This Summer!

The identity conflict in the debate in this summer has deteriorated to inject ethics as in article " Debate on U.S. Health care Reform should Emphasize Ethical and Moral Obligations, Says Researchers" by Richard Saltus. So, as everything else that deals with Government, identity plays a big role in Health Care Reform creates a distinction between a health campaign based on caring for others and one for economic self-interest. Debates held across the country highlight the problems of conflating interests. The conscious of American people are being tested. A mojority of Americans are really concerned about the unisured population; largely, the Latino population. We should all agree that human dignity should motivate the health care reform and that all should be able to afford the necessary treatement in time is sickness. The Health Care Reform messages being conveyed to the American people are implicit to say the least. Those crafting the reforms need to adopt the right frames across the full spectrum of the public in order to gain their support.

One idea that fascinated me about last week's reading was the idea of spin control. People are always telling us to "be true to yourself" and "follow your heart", but in reality, every single one of us conforms to society and masks those parts of ourselves that we deem to be embarrassing or out of the ordinary. I think this demonstrates the fact that other people will always have a huge influence on our identity, no matter how much we like to believe that our "self" is our own creation.

Our interactions with other people are the main influence on our identity. Through interactions with our friends, family, and even the media, we learn what is considered to be good or bad behavior. If the theory of spin control is true, then we change our behavior to highlight the things that people have told us, either implicitly or explicitly, are good things. Thus, the interactions we have with other people determine our behavior.

Behavior is the basis of who we are because it establishes the ascribed piece of our identity, which in turn influences our avowed identity. As humans, we are always trying to determine how other people see us. Therefore, the identity ascribed to us by others will continually shape the way that we view ourselves.

I understand the desire to take credit, and also responsibility, for who you are and all that you have accomplished but the fact of the matter is that everything you have done has been encouraged or influenced by the people who surround you. Nobody has the willpower to completely block out the culture around them and so as a result, everybody is shaped, at least in part, by the interactions they have with others.

Power and Communication in Morocco

Skimming through the textbook pondering on what to write, I was interested in the intertwining of power and communication. Although power is "not always evident or obvious... or what kinds of meaning are constructed" it is found universally, especially in Morocco. 

Living in a monarchy, the influence of power is quite evident. Even though we have a parliament, the King has the last words. On a primary dimension, gender is an issue. Men and women are still not fundamentally equal, and in the rural areas the conception of a "house wife" still stands today. On a secondary dimension we cannot speak ill of the King no matter what our socioeconomic status-- we'd all end up in prison. 

Although Orebe claims that the "power is not a simple one-way proposition". In comparison to Morocco, that is false. Not only is there a constraint on speech, but there is censorship in our newspapers. Accidents, or murders are rarely published, thus we citizens perceive our nation to be free of crime. This alludes to the question how much good does this bring to an individual?

Moving to the United States for university, where there is a democracy is a culture shock. You may disagree with the President openly, yet how much good does that bring? Or constantly listening to the news about deaths, crimes and murder... its weary to hear such sad stories day after day. Would more power within the government actually do some good to the average American?

Collective Secrets

September 14, 2009

Weaver's idea of culture makes me curious about things that are hidden in our world. His belief that behavior is the only observable part of culture made me wonder what collective secrets our behavior in the United States is masking. The only problem with that is, we may have conflicting ideas of what that unspoken secret is.

When I explained to my roommate Weaver's theory of culture, and asked her for some ideas of what to write about, she mentioned the US tradition of watching TV. In recent years, everyone watches it all the time. So, according to Weaver, this habitual behavior is based upon a shared belief.

When I told my roommate, "Yes! People watch TV and it demonstrates the value of entertainment in the United States and the belief that entertaining yourself is a good way to spend your time," she stared at me in disbelief.

"What are you talking about? TV is not based on entertainment. It's a way of staying informed about the world around you. TV is the only way I have time to get my news in the morning."

I couldn't believe it. We both come from the United States, we both watch about 10 hours of TV a week and we both agree that life without TV would be unimaginable. With such similar backgrounds on the exact same behavior, how on earth did we come to such completely opposite conclusions about the values TV entails?

And so I did some more digging. Some behaviors, such as that of studying led us to the same conclusions about beliefs (we both believe that studying is a result of the belief that everyone should be an informed world citizen). But even such basic behavior as eating we believed symbolized different beliefs and values. My roommate thinks that eating is merely a biological necessity whereas I believe that, as a part of culture, eating a meal is more meaningful. I think that we eat with other people because Americans believe in the importance of community and value the company of other people. Yet my roommate and I are both are part of the same culture and attach completely different significance to the daily act of eating.

The fact that two such similar girls, who take part in the same activities daily, could view the meaning of those activities so differently made me question Weaver’s theory. If the beliefs and values that behaviors are based upon are never spoken aloud or discussed, how are we to be sure that they hold the same meaning for everyone?

week 2- chapter 4- History influnces to culture!

I am interested in chapter 4 about history and how it is important to culture. According to the article “Tea-a Chinese way of life and culture” tells us about the origins of tea in Chinese history has giving me an understanding better how history influences and becomes important to culture and communication. Tea in China as coffee in Western; of which the “appreciation was a major hallmark of a well-to-do lifestyle,” but “sometimes even was deemed to define the characteristics of a highly cultured person.” So tea as a best friend as they say “rather than go without salt for 3 days than without tea for a single day.” As custom of old Chinese people, they said that: “scholars and gentry identical would not have been able to entertain their guests without tea or the teahouse.” As well as today, even though in China “almost every family has radio, colour TV sets, a personal computer and there are a lot of coffee bars, such as Starbucks, in every big city, many people [but] people still like to go to tea especially businessmen and elderly people.” For a reason that they believe that the teahouse is a good place to meet their old friends and a place to communicate to each other, instead of being a silence or out-of-the-way spot for the achievement of their scholar.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090911/ap_on_re_eu/eu_germany_arctic_passage

The Digital Divide

At my high school, we had a senior thesis project. Part of it was to write your senior thesis but the other part was a group project. We were put into groups in which we chose a topic that was facing the world today that needs to be solved. My group chose the digital divide, specifically in the Middle East. The digital divide is a term that refers to the inequality of access to the Internet and other forms of technology that have become ever important in today's technological age.

Israel is seen as one of the leaders in technology yet its surrounding countries are definitely lacking in the technological field. The reason is some regions, including Afghanistan and Iraq, have opposed technology because they believe that it represents western culture. Others just don't have the funds. Countries in other parts of the world have set up government run Internet cafes so that citizens can use the Internet in order to communicate with possible employers and send their resumes, which is the case in eastern Europe. Others have given government issued cell phones. In these cases and others, the point is that there are solutions to helping bridge the digital divide.

Another example is $100 laptops- you can buy one for yourself, but you also have to purchase another which will be given to a student in need. This program is prominent in parts of Africa in which they are used in schools but the students also take them home, which helps teach the older generation how to use computers.

Though when discussing the digital divide, most assume that it just occurs in foreign countries, but the digital divide is also occurring within the United States. As the book pointed out, certain ethnic groups, along with people with household incomes less than $30,000, are less likely to have broadband Internet access than whites.

The digital divide itself is important because of the access to information. Information is a powerful thing- it has the ability to education people about anything from other cultures to how to use a certain computer program and everything in between. Those without such access are at a disadvantage when applying for jobs because they are not familiar with certain forms of technology. Because of its relation to jobs and therefore income, the digital divide widens the gap between the rich and the poor.

With the changing demographics within the United States, including the increase in minorities and the economic situation we are currently in, it is important for all to have access to technology so that we can all have equal access (in terms of technological background) to jobs and to provide access to other areas of the world so that we might learn to understand other cultures and regions of the world.

CCC in "Gran Torino"

Last week, I attended a screening of the film "Gran Torino", starring Clint Eastwood as a grumpy World War II veteran who overcomes his prejudices and ethnocentric beliefs to befriend a Hmong family and protect them from a neighborhood Asian gang. I had already seen the film, so I wasn't as caught up in Eastwood's racial epithets or the shocking twists and turns of the plot as my friends who had never seen the film before. The night before, I had just finished chapters 1 & 2 of "Intercultural Communication in Contexts" and I was amazed at how many of Martin and Nakayama's ideas in the book I spotted in the film. I will specifically discuss the self-awareness, demographic, and peace imperatives for studying intercultural communication.

Clint Eastwood's character, Walt Kowalski, is very similar to many Americans in his ignorance and reluctance to learn anything about people of other cultures. He views foreigners as intruders to his country who ruin the "American way of life" he has grown up in and been used to. By the end of the film, he is a changed man, one who considers his Hmong neighbors his only friends. The textbook's imperatives for why one needs to study intercultural communication are featured in the film quite prominently. Peter Adler's theory of the self-awareness imperative was correct, in the idea that studying intercultural communication begins with another and ends with one's own. By learning about the values and lifestyles his neighbors possessed, Walt is able to gain a deeper understanding of the world he lives in and his place in society.

The demographic imperative is essential to Walt's closure at the end of "Gran Torino". Whether he likes it or not, Walt's world is becoming more and more diverse and his whitewashed memories of the 1950s are no longer the same. Martin and Nakayama introduce the idea of nativism and Walt embodies that concept. In an early scene, the audience is told that Walt worked at a Ford company his entire life, only to be shown two seconds later that his materialistic son and his family are driving Japanese cars. Walt values "American" values to the point that he sees everyone who does not believe in them to be a traitor to the country. The book discusses assimilation and how some disapprove of the "melting pot" metaphor, and I agree that America is not a melting pot at all. Just look at any high school cafeteria, even TDR here at American! Walt's experience with the Hmongs increases his knowledge of other people, which is absolutely necessary in a world where nearly everyone is an "other type of person".

The peace imperative comes into play when Walt protects one of the Hmongs, a teenaged boy named Thao, from a gang that wishes to recruit and convert him to a life of crime. Although the book connects the peace imperative to more worldwide issues, it is still an idea that can be apply to neighborhoods, families, schools, churches, etc. Although Walt's understanding of intercultural communication cannot stop the presence of gangs and violence itself, it can help him figure out why certain people behave in certain ways. During a conversation with Thao's sister Sue, Walt realizes that many Hmong male immigrants feel incredibly isolated when they first move to America and that they tend to stick together. Since most Hmong boys have little to no support structures (Thao and Sue are an exception), they end up in a life of crime. By understanding the complex multicultural world we live in today, one gets closer to understanding the roots of the atrocities that occur on a daily basis.

Intercultural communication can be found anywhere and everywhere. It can be found in a global basis, it can be found in our dorm rooms (especially with the high number of international students here at AU), it can be found in movies, television, radio, music, sports, politics, economics, business, you name it. The ethical imperative is what I feel applies to us, as students. We can spend all day on Facebook or Skype chatting with people all over the world, but it is our duty to step back and think about the implications of this type of technology on our society. We can sit in our dorms all day with our two best friends from home, but we must also go out and meet people of all different ways of life. Martin and Nakayama write about self-reflexivity, understanding the self as well as one's place in the world. Walt Kowalski gained his own cultural self-reflexivity, but if you look at "Gran Torino" as a whole, it appears that it happened by accident. As students who deliberate study a world that has shaped us and that we shape in return, imagine what we can accomplish.

September 6th, 2009

Of the three approaches used to analyze other cultures, I view the social scientific paradigm as the most exact and most useful.

Because the social scientific approach uses data the results will have little bias. Statistics, while they can be biased, are the most objective method of analysis yet presented. In the interpretive paradigm, because the researcher has immersed themselves in the culture, they have also immersed themselves in subjectivity and increased the chance that they will have a bias. The critical approach, which analyzes media and text, is also subjective because the members of a culture are not only influenced by the media but also through their own individual experiences, which makes it difficult for this approach to understand an entire community. With the social science aspect however, because they are collecting data and statistics, rather than stories and anecdotes, there is less chance for bias to enter. Therefore, when it comes to learning about the current situation of a culture, the social science aspect is the most exact.

Another advantage of this aspect is the fact that it can be used to predict future behavior which is not something that any other aspect can do. The ability to predict behavior can help in business negotiations, solving conflicts, and economic disparities. Though the other two paradigms can describe current behavior, only the social science approach can predict the behavior of cultural groups in the future.

The social scientific world view also gives precise figures, which make the comparisons of different cultures quantitative, and therefore significantly easier because difference can be measured. The same subject can be studied from difference cultures, which allows researchers to see how each culture sees a particular occurrence or situation.

The social scientific method of studying cultures is the most objective and the most useful. It eliminates a significant amount of bias because it uses number rather than words, which can more easily be skewed. Also, this paradigm can be used to predict future behavior, something which cannot be achieved using the other two world views. It is also the easiest to use when directly comparing different cultures to one another.

Week 1 - Chapter I- Immigrants

I am interested in Changing Immigration Patterns in Chapter I of Intercultural Communication in Contexts by M&N. It gives me the idea of how “cultures can change over time and become more or less homogeneous.” (M&N 9) We also can understand it as cross-cultural adaptation as Tsekouras said that cross-cultural movements have become a common place of over time.(URL)
Because the motivation of adaptation which depends on the how large of new comers; as well as the permanently of the immigrants who move from their original culture to the host society. In which, it is very similarity to their relationship that involve to the environment. It will be affected by the condition of the communication between cultural patterns and individual’s identity.
So the immigrants have to learn the communication patterns of its host. It is called acculturation. Also some of communication patterns of immigrants’ original home culture have to be deleted. It is called deculturation. Therefore, culture is changing by over time and have similar culture in group or population by new comer or new environment.