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
Summarize some of the main ideas behind Figuring Foreigners Out and the Hofstede Dimensions of Culture.
This text was really interesting in its examination of how a population thinks of itself and how that's conveyed through its language. The reading discusses concept of self (individualist and collectivist), concept of time (monochronic and polychronic), and locus of control (internal and external). These differences highlight the distinct behavioral / societal norms present in languages and the resulting importance for each culture.
Do you predominantly agree with these assessments?
Largely, yes - I think each language evolved to address the things that were important to its people, so examining the tendencies of language to agree with certain ideologies also examines what's culturally important to the people who speak it.
Are there any statements, generalizations, and opinions expressed in the reading that you find problematic?
Nothing seemed inherently problematic, but it did seem to be pretty Euro-centric, only citing one non-Western language.
How do these ideas relate both to your own native culture, and the target culture associated with the language you are studying?
My native language is English, and it's really interesting seeing how the aspects of American culture (individualist, monochronic, internal locus) play out in our language. Hebrew seems to be a bit more complex; since it's pretty inherently tied to one culture as well as the religion Judaism, from what I've seen older Hebrew texts feel more collectivist, with polychronic time, and an external locus, while modern Hebrew is reframing the style of communication.
Both texts attempt to categorize the values of different cultures. Figuring Foreigners Out goes on about building blocks of culture with opposite poles. These include personal identity (collectivism vs. individualism), the concept of time (monochronic vs. polychronic), and locus of control (internal vs. external). Dr. Hofstede on the other hand categorizes it into 6 different dimensions. These dimensions include power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, long-term orientation, and indulgence.
Yes, I do predominantly agree with these assessments of culture but do want to emphasize differences in culture even within a country. Especially in a country as vast and diverse as the United States.
I do have a concern for the ratings in Dr. Hofstede's analysis as the measurement seems very arbitrary.
I can definitely see how these ideas relate to my own native culture especially since I am Korean-American and am able to experience both cultures. Family is one thing I can easily pick out as a cultural difference. Family (collectivism) is huge in Korea and a lot of respect is given to the elderly. It is also not uncommon to live with your parents for an extended period of time. I grew up with my Grandmother so I experienced this first hand. I also learned in Korea that a lot of this is also due to just the high costs of living. More often than not, young adults just aren't able to afford their own home and will live with their parents until marriage and sometimes even after marriage. In return, it's expected that you take care of your parents as they grow old and can't live on their own. Sending them to an elderly home as many do in America is hugely frowned upon in Korea. Also, education is a huge thing in Korea as it was seen as the only way to gain power, especially during Japanese colonial rule. This emphasis on education (Long-term Orientation) has stuck around to this day.
Both texts propose criteria by which we may assess and compare the values within and between cultures. Hofstede lays out 6 dimensions of culture; power distance index, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, long-term orientation, and indulgence. Figuring Foreigners similarly suggests assessments of individualist vs collectivist mindsets, understandings of nonverbal, direct, and indirect communication, monochronic and polychronic perceptions of time allows for a more holistic understanding of culture.
I believe both sets of assessments have their merits but that neither are entirely sound. Figuring Foreigners makes a point of emphasizing the importance of the fluidity of the proposed criteria, restating several times that no culture is entirely one way or the other and how individual acceptance of such criteria is very often circumstantial. Similarly, Hoftede’s 6-D analysis provides a rating system for each criteria. My main contention lies in how the rating system functions, as in what goes into a masculinity score of 73?
Further, none of the statements felt right out problematic but I am always aware of the Euro-centric nature of these analyses and wonder how non-Eurocentric anthropologists would map out culture assessing criterias.
I found myself making note of how every one of the proposed criterions generally applied to the cultures I have varying understandings of namely French, Korean, West African, and that of the USA and its different regions. I have always been somewhat aware of how drastically concepts of individualism and collectivism can differ between eastern (i.e. Korean and West African) and western cultures, with the east generally being more collectivist than the west. Perceptions of time and relationship to our impact on the outside world however, are areas I consider much less often.
I find that with time, the increasing globalization of capitalist structures dominates perception. Time is money. The polychronic perception however feels to be much more humane to me; cite France’s 4 week PTO minimum (typically actually 5-8 weeks PTO) as opposed to the not guaranteed 2 weeks we are offered in the U.S. However, I cannot conceptualize the idea of interruptions not existing as a pure polychronic perception suggests. The evil and easily distracted capitalist in me seriously values my moments of pure focus and interruptions upset me.
Lastly when considering the internal vs. external views of the outside world, I mostly identified with the external view but found some of the statements (i.e. the laws of nature can ultimately not be manipulated) right out incorrect. However the internal view had several more statements like this and is a criteria I would categorize as capitalist and more than occasionally inhumane.
I agree with your point about bias. I think it would be interesting to see other anthropologists from different cultures and their adaptations to these ideas. I always looking at Hofstede's Insights to learn about how cultures are different from each other based on those different factors. But who decides which country gets a certain score? At the end of the day, I think it's just hard to put culture into "numbers". It is something very complex and measuring it through numbers/data can only go so far.
Figuring Foreigners Out discusses the idea that depending on what culture a person belongs to, they may subscribe to different philosophies on how an individual's value should be perceived in society. Individualists are more concerned with self sufficiency and general independence from the group. A collectivist on the other hand evaluates an individual's value based upon how much they can provide for the group. The article goes onto assert that this is just one of the ways that societies differ. They can also vary on things like mannerisms and general attitude of the citizens. The Hofstede Dimensions of Culture seemed to group different countries into where they fall in these cultural norms. I tend to agree with these assessments overall. That being said, I do not think they are specific enough and generalizations can often oversimplify bigger problems. For example, in the United States one State or a smaller municipality in that state may be very individualist while another state may be very collectivist. These ideas relate a lot to my personal culture in that I am sure being from America I have much different mannerisms and a much different world view than someone from Israel or another Hebrew speaking culture. This contrast is very interesting and makes Hebrew even more fun to learn. I look forward to speaking with my Language Partner who is from Israel about these differences and what he thinks about the cultural norms in Israel.
Summarize some of the main ideas behind Figuring Foreigners Out and the Hofstede Dimensions of Culture.
The texts touch upon interesting ideas of culture and how it works through language in terms of understanding and communicating in statements, dialogues, and scenarios. Figuring out Foreigners talks about the four building blocks of culture, which are concept of self (individualist and collectivist), personal vs. societal responsibility (universalist and particularist), concept of time (monochronic and polychronic), and locus of control (internal and external). These are cultural behaviors that highlights the differences between cultural norms and how different cultures understand each other. In all cultures, certain activities have the same meaning. Some of them have various connotations. And some have significance in one culture but none in the other.
Do you predominantly agree with these assessments?
I do agree with everything because I think that each culture has its own ways of doing things and working, and understanding those differences is important.
Are there any statements, generalizations, and opinions expressed in the reading that you find problematic?
I don’t think anything was necessarily problematic, but I do think that the perspective may be a bit biased since it is a survey.
How do these ideas relate both to your own native culture, and the target culture associated with the language you are studying?
It’s interesting to see how different cultures behave and react to different situations. As I engage with other individuals with different cultures in my own life, it will make me rethink of my own understanding. As for my target language, I will have to learn much more than just the language itself, but including cultural norms.
I agree with you that understanding these differences in culture is very important. I live in a pretty diverse neighborhood so I have been fortunate enough to experience a lot of these different cultural backgrounds. A lot of the times people are secluded from these different cultural backgrounds and often reject them when they meet them later on in life.
I also think it is interesting how language really affects culture. I would say with all languages this tends to be the case. An interesting example of this connection could be something like imperialism. When countries come to be imperialistic towards other countries and they implement language mandates, often times we see the language as well as the culture be destroyed.