Language and civilization are elaborately interlacing and inseparable. This paper tries to show that linguistic communications have important effects on civilizations and linguistic communications besides are under impact of civilizations. To show this common relationship, sociological and anthropological positions in this relation are provided in this paper. It surveys the importance of civilization in lingual communicating and in foreign linguistic communication acquisition and explains about cardinal constructs in linguistic communication usage and cultural cognition.
Keywords: Language, civilization, address Acts of the Apostless, intercultural communicating, sociological position
Language is an of import issue in sociableness. Language as a proficient, societal and cultural tool plays a important function to acquire cultural cognition which, harmonizing to national Center for Cultural Competence, is defined as “ incorporate form of human behaviour that includes ideas, communications, linguistic communications, patterns, beliefs, values, imposts, courtesies, rites, manners of interacting and functions, relationships and expected behaviours of racial, cultural, spiritual or societal group and the ability to convey the above to wining coevalss ” ( Goode, Sockalingam, Brown & A ; Jones 2000 ) . Language is in fact, non merely portion of how we define civilization, but besides it reflects civilization.
Language is a medium to pass on and interchange information creatively and freely, by utilizing different signifiers of linguistic communication, idioms, speech patterns and speech Acts of the Apostless. This communicating at micro-level includes symbolic societal exchanges and at macro-level involves human civilisation, cultural ideas and inherits.It besides transfer scientific and cultural cognition, cultural and societal individuality from one coevals to wining one. And aid people develop their mental and cultural beliefs through ages. Furthermore, it reflects cultural values of the society in which the linguistic communication is spoken.
Therefore, the civilization associated with a linguistic communication can non be learned without cultural cognition of jubilations, folk vocals or imposts of the country in which is the linguistic communication is spoken. Language scholars need to be cognizant of cultural context of twenty-four hours to twenty-four hours colloquial conventions. It means they should cognize what is appropriate to state to whom, in what state of affairss and it means understanding beliefs and values represented by linguistic communication. Because behaviours and purpose forms that are appropriate in their community may be perceived otherwise by members of mark Language community. So, linguistic communication usage in association with other culturally appropriate behaviour is of primary importance to hold a successful communicating. Therefore, survey of civilization is indispensable for foreign linguistic communication acquisition and instruction. Language is such interlacing with different facets of our day-to-day life that one can non presume a civilization without linguistic communication or linguistic communication without civilization. Linguists, sociologists and anthropologists study relationship between linguistic communications and civilization and their impact on each other from different positions.
2. Language and Culture from Sociological View
2.1. Language and societal communicating
The people of a community communicate each other via linguistic communication. Language is used to show all human demands from physical demands to mental desires. Peoples communicate experiences, cognition, ideas, imposts, values and societal and cultural norms via linguistic communication. Language allows people to do civilizations, experiences and garner them to reassign socially same behaviours from a coevals to the following 1s. Language is a communicating symbol which connect yesteryear, present and future and gather cognition and reassign it from past to show and from present to future. Symbolic communicating among people is accomplished by three linguistic communication signifiers:
Spoken linguistic communication which facilitates communicating
Written linguistic communication which maintains cultural inherits
Semiotic linguistic communication
Intercultural communicating is one of the related affairs which presents many challenges and one of them refers to the demand to make consciousness about the importance of understanding address acts a s spoken linguistic communication and besides gestures as semiotic linguistic communication.
2.2. What is speech act?
We perform speech Acts of the Apostless when we offer an apology, salutation, petition, ailment, invitation, compliment, or refusal. A address act is an vocalization that serves a map in communicating. A address act might incorporate merely one word, as in “ Regretful! ” to execute an apology, or several words or sentences: “ I ‘m regretful I forgot your birthday. I merely allow it steal my head. ” Speech Acts of the Apostless include real-life interactions and necessitate non merely cognition of the linguistic communication but besides appropriate usage of that linguistic communication within a given civilization. The acknowledgment of the significance of a peculiar address act in a given cultural scene is at the bosom of successful intercultural communicating. Here are some illustrations of speech Acts of the Apostless we use or hear every twenty-four hours:
Greeting: “ Hi, Eric. How are things traveling? ”
Request: “ Could you go through me the mashed murphies, delight? ”
Ailment: “ I ‘ve already been waiting three hebdomads for the computing machine, and I was told it would be delivered within a hebdomad. ”
Invitation: “ We ‘re holding some people over Saturday eventide and wanted to cognize if you ‘d wish to fall in us. ”
Compliment: “ Hey, I truly like your tie! ”
Refusal: “ Oh, I ‘d love to see that film with you but this Friday merely is n’t traveling to work.
2.3. Are speech Acts of the Apostless cosmopolitan?
Address Acts of the Apostless are considered cosmopolitan, nevertheless researches show that they can attest otherwise across linguistic communications and civilizations that this cross-cultural difference in linguistic communication usage is declarative of broader socio-cultural differences that underline linguistic communication in usage internationally and surely it is at this degree that much intercultural misinterpretation has its beginning. For illustration, address Acts of the Apostless are hard to execute in a 2nd linguistic communication because: address Acts of the Apostless are so closely tied to the civilization and Learners may non cognize the idiomatic looks or cultural norms in the second/foreign linguistic communication or they may reassign their first linguistic communication regulations and conventions into the second/foreign linguistic communication, presuming that such regulations are cosmopolitan because the natural inclination for linguistic communication scholars is to fall back on what they know to be appropriate in their first linguistic communication. What is of import for these scholars to cognize is that: a ) They should cognize there are important countries of intersection between linguistic communication and civilization that the two are elaborately intertwined. B ) They should understand precisely what they do in that first linguistic communication in order to be able to acknowledge what is movable to other linguistic communications.
Something that works in a linguistic communication possibly ca n’t be used in another linguistic communication. An illustration of address act in this relation is: When an English scholar wants to interrupt into a conversation between the indigens of a foreign linguistic communication for illustration Irani:
He needs to place and mobilise those linguistic communication structures that are appropriate for demoing a desire to interrupt in.
Besides, it ‘s necessary for him to cognize it ‘s culturally acceptable to interrupt into the conversation of those two people and if so, when and how.
Are certain discourse conventions used when trying to fall in a conversation?
Do gender, position, rank, and other factors make a difference?
So, this illustration shows, when executing address Acts of the Apostless in every linguistic communication, there are some societal and cultural conventions that should be considered which these norms will condition what you say, play a function in taking the appropriate degree of niceness and etc. for illustration some cultural norms contributed to speech Acts of the Apostless in Iranian are:
A ) Your most of import concern as talkers is to see “ who is the addressee? ” you must see the listener ‘s age, societal place and the degree of acquaintance between you and the listener:
– The function that you and your middleman drama ( such as pupil vs. instructor )
– The position difference that comes with the function ( such as comparatively lower position for a pupil, comparatively higher position for a instructor )
– The degree of acquaintance or familiarity that is whether you are close or merely acquiring acquainted.
B ) Besides, you need to take linguistic communication signifiers that express regard and unimportance, for illustration utilizing the formal signifier of reference ( Shoma ) instead than an informal signifier of reference ( To ) for demoing regard.
As you see, speech Acts of the Apostless are so closely related to the civilization and ignoring such societal and cultural conventions in intercultural communicating could easy take to misinterpreting the address Acts of the Apostless by the talkers. An illustration of possible misinterpretation for an English scholar of Persian would be what is said by a dinner invitee in Iran to invitees that may good apologise a figure of times ( for illustration, Persian people say to their host that: “ Sorry to problem you/ to do you problem /make a perturbation to you ” in add-on to utilizing an look of gratitude: “ Thankss ” for case, for the invasion into the private place, the disturbance that they are doing by acquiring up from the tabular array and besides for the fact that they put their host out since they had to cook the repast, function it and will hold to make the dishes once the invitees have left. but the English invitees that are incognizant of the societal and cultural conventions, might believe this to be ill-mannered or inappropriate and alternatively take to congratulate the host on the fantastic nutrient and festive ambiance, or thank the host for ask foring them.Although such regards or look of thanks are besides appropriate in Iranian, they are non plenty for native talkers of Persian without a few apologizes!
Gestures are one portion of non-verbal communicating. McNeill ( 1992 ) defined gestures as the motions of the custodies and weaponries that occur at the same time with address. Nespoulous, Perron and Lecours ( 1986 ) defined gestures as the motions of the organic structure or any portion of the organic structure, that express ideas and feelings during interaction with others. Gestures are learned innately, non consciously, as unsighted people gesture even though they have ne’er seen gesture ( Iverson & A ; Goldin-Meadow, 1998 ) . However, there are similarities and differences in gesture production across civilizations. Additionally, gestures may take different signifiers for different cultural groups ( Feyereisen and Lannoy, 1991 ) . For illustration, the gestures conveying information about emotions, athleticss, playing musical instruments and utilizing tools are indistinguishable in many parts in the universe. Or, Persian immigrants to America differ in their usage of gestures with Americans. For illustration the Americans show more bodily action when speech production than Iranians do. But Iranians tend to gesticulate more than Americans in sad and happy state of affairss. Besides, the Persian immigrants frequently spoke close to or while touching their spouse, whereas the Italians maintained greater inter-individual distances.The difference in gesture production may be one beginning of miscommunication between the two civilizations.
So, we can understand that cultural consciousness is indispensable for those who want to go able to utilize a foreign/second linguistic communication communicatively and have an appropriate usage of linguistic communication or appropriate address Acts of the Apostless in their intercultural communications. Here, we will discourse more about the cultural consciousness, but at first presenting the different cultural classs seems to be appropriate. Nowadays, the range of cultural surveies includes the ego, the group and the communicating state of affairs, that harmonizing to at that place, three cultural classs can be introduced:
Multiculturalism describes a general state of affairs ( part, state, community ) of “ cultural contact ” . Normally, the term comprises three visions of diverseness:
Culture as state-nation ( multicultural= different nationalities )
Culture as faith ( multicultural = different faiths )
Culture as cultural groups ( multicultural= different cultural groups )
Consequently, any state, part, community or group is multicultural by definition, as different civilizations interact at the same time at any degree, so, multiculturalism would be used for the description of contexts where civilizations are in contact, non restricted to states, spiritual or cultural groups.
In pluriculturalism, individuality is the byproduct of experiences in different civilizations, therefore multiple designations create our alone personality more than a inactive “ individuality ” . Pluriculturalism implies an attack to the ego and the other as complex, rich existences which act and react from the position of those multiple designations.
Interculturality is, for our position, closely related to communicating: it is the nexus between linguistic communication and civilization, so it is doubtless, one of the cardinal impressions in linguistic communication acquisition at the minute. Bing intercultural is a manner of take parting in communicating in which middlemans:
Are cognizant of the relevancy of civilization in communicating.
Participate actively in communicating.
React critically to communicating.
3. Awareness of civilization
Harmonizing to what mentioned supra, the linguistic communication scholar must be cognizant of three beds of civilization: multi-cultural, pluricultural, and inter-cultural.
3.1. Awareness of civilization from a multicultural position implies
The linguistic communication scholar must be cognizant of diverseness in society and how societal groups including states, create, usage and manage civilizations, which are intermingled in a complex matrix of societal contact.
3.2. Awareness of civilization from a pluricultural position implies
To specify individuality as a composite, flexible, dynamic complex in which any state of affairs can follow an seemingly definite layout for a certain intent with a peculiar middleman.
3.3. Awareness of civilization from an intercultural position must be displayed in two waies
First, the scholar must be cognizant or the pluricultural individuality of his or her middleman, as defined above.
Second, the linguistic communication scholar must be cognizant of the cultural conventions of the linguistic communications they may utilize: a ) Language is a culture-bound phenomenon and there are conventions governing any communicative act, written or spoken. B ) Awareness of these cultural conventions can smooth communicating.
4. Language and cultural Identity
Language affects cultural individuality because of its infinite creativeness and versatility. These characteristics make a linguistic communication as a medium for accomplishing societal ends. Cultures are affected by each other via linguistic communications. Interactions between linguistic communications make civilizations expanded and developed. Besides changes within civilizations make linguistic communications developed. For illustration: spliting societal plants accompanied with development of engineerings lead to conceptual development of linguistic communications. If linguistic communication of a state alterations, conceptual and semantic – matter-of-fact system of that linguistic communication which is related through phonological, morphological and syntactic construction will besides alter. Language is besides one of the common human elements of a group and this common component, in political and national motions
For illustration, in George Orwell ‘s book “ 1984 ” a new linguistic communication named “ newspeak ” is created to alter is the manner people think about authorities. The new vocabulary given was created to command their heads. Undoubtedly, to do a united linguistic communication is one of the first agreements to stand for a state ‘s individuality. For illustration, Persian Turk people are biased about utilizing merely Turkish linguistic communication in their mundane life, because they know that Turkish linguistic communication is a representative of their cultural individuality. Making a united linguistic communication besides helps geographical and humanistic enlargement of that state. For illustration, settler states tried to rule the cultural individuality of the districts they occupied, destructing the related state ‘s linguistic communications. Sociologists consider other cultural factors of import in lingual usage. These societal factors are as:
-Education: surveies know that less educated people are more interested in utilizing high-educated speech production signifiers.
-Job: any occupation that it is specific linguistic communication, registry which is apprehensible among people of that occupation
-Age: the younger people are more interested in utilizing modern words.
-Gender: female talkers are more polite than male 1s.
-Race: immigrants specially new coevalss of them which have been born in the new immigrated state and have been brought up socially at that place, see their female parent lingua as bad talking signifier and do n’t accept it, because they are non useable in that part. They besides use different grades of niceness from really formal to really informal which is related to intimacy grade of people in the community.
Sociologists see besides bilingualism as an of import factor which affects civilization, because in a bilingual community, both linguistic communications have hierarchy of societal functions which are specific: one linguistic communication is high category linguistic communication used in formal and of import stances and other one as a low category linguistic communication is used in informal stances.
As we discussed before, sociolinguists define lingual community by some standards such as: common linguistic communication and communicating medium. Linguistic community in fact, includes a group of people interact via linguistic communication and in this position, all mental activities are erupted from linguistic communication. So, lingual society is the most of import societal group.
5. Language and Culture from Anthropological View
In this point of position, linguistic communication is seen as an evolutionary phenomenon which can be studied diachronically and synchronically and anthropologists assume linguistic communication has an intermediary function within which civilization transportations from one coevals to another one and linguistic communication has specified our speech production ability and physical revolution. This position believes linguistic communication makes cultural and societal developments we can cognize dances, imposts, traditions, nutrient, music, etc of a community via cognizing its linguistic communication and linguistic communication alterations are based on societal, economic, political and spiritual demands. They believe that each linguistic communication has its ain affinity words, its ain tabu words, speech patterns and idioms.
6. The importance of civilization in linguistic communication acquisition
Linguistic competency entirely is non plenty for scholars of a linguistic communication to be competent in that linguistic communication ( Krasner, 1999 ) . Language scholars need to be cognizant, of the cultural context of twenty-four hours to twenty-four hours colloquial conventions such as: salutations, farewells, giving or having regards, reference people, express gratitude, make petitions, and agree or disagree with person. It means they should cognize what is appropriate to state to whom, and in what state of affairss, and it means understanding the beliefs and values represented by the assorted signifiers and uses of the linguistic communication. They should cognize that behaviours and modulation forms that are appropriate in their ain address community may be perceived otherwise by members of the mark linguistic communication address community. They have to understand that, in order for communicating to be successful, linguistic communication usage must be associated with other culturally appropriate behaviour. So, through enterprises such as the national criterions for foreign linguistic communication acquisition, integrating the survey of civilization into linguistic communication acquisition is indispensable. Cultural cognition is one of the five end countries of the national criterions.
Through the survey of other linguistic communications, scholars gain a cognition and apprehension of the civilizations that use that linguistic communication ; In fact, scholars can non truly maestro the linguistic communication until they have besides mastered the cultural contexts in which the linguistic communication occurs ( National Standards in Foreign Language Education Project, 1996: 27 ) .
In many respects, Culture is acquired implicitly, imbedded in the lingual signifiers that scholars are larning. To do scholars cognizant of the cultural characteristics reflected in the linguistic communication, instructors can do those cultural characteristics an expressed subject of treatment in relation to the lingual signifiers being studied. For illustration, when learning capable pronouns and verbal inflexions in Persian, a instructor could assist scholars understand when in Iranian it is appropriate to utilize an informal signifier of reference ( To ) instead than a formal signifier of reference ( Shoma ) -a differentiation that English does non hold. An English as a foreign linguistic communication instructor could assist scholars understand socially appropriate communicating, such as doing petitions that show respect ; for illustration, “ Hey you, come here ” may be a linguistically right petition, but it is non a culturally appropriate manner for a scholar to turn to a instructor. Learners will get the hang a linguistic communication merely when they learn both its linguistic and cultural norms.
So, Culture must be to the full incorporated as a critical constituent of linguistic communication acquisition. Foreign linguistic communication instructors should place cardinal cultural points in every facet of the linguistic communication that they teach. Learners can be successful in communicating and in talking a foreign linguistic communication merely if cultural issues are an built-in portion of the acquisition.
6.1. Theories proposed by some scientists
6.1.1. Fishman ( 1991 ) Categorizes linguistic communication as follows:
Language as a portion of civilization: linguistic communication is an inevitable portion of civilization who wants to understand and civilization, must get the hang its linguistic communication. Of class, this relationship is mutual.
Language as an index of civilization: it is by-product of its function as oat of civilization.
Language every bit symbols to mobilise populations to support and to further civilizations associate with them. This relationship is mutual.
6.1.2. Kramsch ( 1998 ) categorizes relationship between linguistic communication and civilization as:
Language expresses cultural world: words people utter refer to common experiences. They express thoughts, facts or events that are catching. Because they refer to a stock of cognition, approximately universe that other people portion. This position is near to Fishman ‘s class 2. But Fishman thinks more of grammatical classs.
Language embodies cultural world. Members of a societal group create looks through linguistic communication. They give intending to it through the medium they choose to pass on with one another, like talking face or composing a missive or construing a graph.
Language symbolizes cultural world ; linguistic communication is a system of marks. It is close to Fishman ‘s class But Kramsch thinks more of lingual instructions at micro-level.
Sapir ( 1921 ) thinks that people are affected by confines of their linguistic communication. He believes that people are mental captives and unable to believe freely of limitations of their vocabulary. Language is non voicing thoughts, but shapes thoughts. One can non believe outside confines of their linguistic communication.
Whorf ( 1956 ) to the full believed in lingual determinism ; that what one thinks is to the full determined by their linguistic communication. He besides supported lingual relativity, which states that the differences in linguistic communication reflect the different positions of different people. In Whorf ‘s position, cross cultural communications which be barrier-free, is about impossible.
But we see that non every word of communicating between people of different linguistic communications. Communities are expressed, but messages are acquiring across. Using cosmopolitan linguistic communications of jurisprudence and scientific discipline, people are working together with no major barrier.
Lexicon of a specific linguistic communication is mirrors whatever the gestural civilization emphasizes. Aspects of a society which are non associated straight with linguistic communication seem to hold a direct impact on formation of linguistic communication.
Language users sort out their experiences otherwise harmonizing to classs provided by their linguistic communications. One civilization considers a tree an inanimate object and another linguistic communication as a life thing which is reflected in grammar of theses linguistic communications. A personal experience in confines of one linguistic communication may be physically same as one happening in another linguistic communication group, but people are cognizant cognitively of what is go oning, but their readings and value of what happened, may be different based on cultural guidelines set away by their linguistic communications.
Cultural cognition is non merely transferred by linguistic communication, but besides someway created by linguistic communication. Culture affects linguistic communication through whatever is within a community. There are different word representations for an of import construct based on assorted demands. And linguistic communication signifiers civilization instead than reflects it, because people react against stimulations and other people ‘s actions. But some experts like Sapir believe that assorted spoken signifiers make assorted ways of thought. In other words, linguistic communication words reflect civilizations and people use them in their civilizations and do them compatible with civilization. Although they are different in utilizing linguistic communications, they use linguistic communication within a individual civilization. By and large talking, linguistic communication can command human behaviours can do abstract constructs, mental experiences and scientific disciplines.