Summarize some of the main ideas behind Figuring Foreigners Out and the Hofstede Dimensions of Culture. Do you predominantly agree with these assessments? Are there any statements, generalizations, and opinions expressed in the reading that you find problematic? How do these ideas relate both to your own native culture, and the target culture associated with the language you are studying?
You need to be a member of The SDLAP Ning to add comments!
Replies
Figuring Foreigners Out aims to define cultures through five metrices: notions of personal identity, use of non-verbal communication, perception of time, individual’s belief in destiny and sense of personal control, and directness in communication. While this article primarily categorizes the metrices into two distinct types (individualist vs. collectivist, monochronic vs. polychronic etc.), the author repeatedly emphasizes the fact that no culture exclusively falls under one category. Instead, he presents the categories as two opposing ends or extremes, where each culture leans more towards one category than the other and most individuals lean towards the same side as their culture. This means it is difficult to conclude whether a culture is exclusively individualistic, but we can say that the culture is more individualistic than collectivist and majority individuals of the culture tend to be mostly individualistic. The author also talks about how different orientation in these five metrices can lead to confusion and barriers during inter-cultural interactions. On the other hand, Hofstede’s Dimensions of Culture attempts to define cultures by quantifying five primary dimensions: power distance index (degree of equality among people), individualism, masculinity (degree of traditional masculine role enforcement), uncertainty avoidance index (level of tolerance for uncertainty), and long term orientation (long term devotion to forward thinking values). One of the biggest differences between Figuring Foreigners Out and Hofstede’s Dimensions of Culture is that while Figuring Foreigners Out focuses on individual cultures, Hofstede uses country as a proxy for culture, which is not always accurate because several cultures can coexist within a single country. In fact, it is possible to have more differences within cultures of a single country than between cultures of two neighboring countries. This is probably the biggest issue I have with Hofstede’s model. Other than that, I find myself agreeing with most of the dimensions presented in both the readings. I find it particularly fascinating how both authors have chosen mostly different dimensions to define cultures. For example, Hofstede’s model uses masculinity index which does not even exist in Figuring Foreigners Out. I wonder how these authors decided on particular dimensions/ aspects of culture to be more integral to its identity over other aspects.
I was pleasantly surprised to find my native culture Nepali on Hofstede’s country comparison tool because is very rare to come across data on Nepal in bigger international studies. The comparison tool gave the following results for Nepali culture: Power Distance(65), Individualism(30), Masculinity(40),and Uncertainty Avoidance(40). There was no data available for long term orientation and indulgence. I agree with all the scores, except for the one about power distance. A score of 65 makes it seem like the power distribution is not too skewed in Nepal. From my personal experience, Nepal is an extremely hierarchical society and a score of 65 downplays the extent of inequalities present there. The hierarchies exist is terms of caste, age, and wealth, and upward mobility is minimal. So, I think Nepal’s power distance should be at least 85 as compared to the 65 given by Hofstede’s tool. In regards to my target culture associated with ASL, I was very conflicted about using the US as a proxy for Deaf culture. This is where the shortcoming of Hofstede’s country comparison tool really stands out. From my own research and couple interactions that I have had with my Deaf language partner, I do not feel comfortable clumping Deaf culture under the US culture. In fact, this article (https://www.westerninterpreting.net/win_deafculture.cfm#:~:text=In%....) talks about how the US is highly individualistic whereas Deaf culture is more collectivist, where an individual’s identity is primarily defined by the group’s identity. Another big difference that I can think of is how non-verbal cues are not emphasized in English conversations whereas they are the heart of Deaf culture.
Overall, both Figuring Foreigners Out and Hofstede’s model show how difficult it is to define something as abstract as culture. It is important to acknowledge that no models will be perfect, but they can still serve as a guiding introductory framework to understand cultures different than our own.
There are certain different and opposing thoughts that cultures have depending on their type of culture. These things are usually how individualistic the culture is, how lenient they are (also on time), how strict to traditions they are, how patriarchal they are, how they read each other nonverbally, and how indulgent they are with their desires. I generally agree with these categories and how they assess countries especially on the individualistic versus collectivist, and long-term orientation, and uncertainty avoidance or rather how lenient they can be and also how direct and direct they can be. Power distance index is a little harder to use as an assessment in my opinion because all over the world I believe there is a growing distance between the 1% and the average and the poor. I think it is becoming more polarizing all over the world and not just in one country and that what was once achievable and in America for example is no longer the case. While there certainly are countries in which mobility is a BIT more probable, it is still very difficult and unlikely that that will happen or the case really severe.
These assessments are fairly relatable to Korea, my ethnicity and also the assessments also are usable and relatable to the American culture too. But how they come out of the assessments are different from each other. They are pretty much polar opposite, South Korea is slowly adapting to the Western values like America, but they are still fairly different from each other.