Cultural identity and intercultural communication in multicultural context A project report Submitted by Minglei Wang Master program of Culture Communication and Globalization At Aalborg University Supervisor: Heidrun Knorr 17th November 2011 1 Table of contents Title page ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 4 Methodological framework ……………………………………………………………………………………………5 1. Research consideration ………………………………………………………………………………………………5 2. Brief introduction of the research methodology …………………………………………………………5 3. Summary of the research method ………………………………………………………………………………6 3.1 Reason for choosing Australia ……………………………………………………………………………………6 3.2 Interviewees …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 7 3.3 Interview questions ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 7 Main theories in the project ……………………………………………………………………………………………8 1. Identity negotiation theory from Ting-Toomey ……………………………………………………………8 2. The dialectical approach from Judith Martin and Thomas Nakayama………………………… 9 Literature review ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………10 1. Definitions ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 10 1.1 Intercultural communication …………………………………………………………………………………… 10 1.2 Cultural identity ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 11 1.3 Multiculturalism ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 12 1.4 Globalization …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 12 2. History and background of intercultural communication ……………………………………………12 2.1 The origin of intercultural communication ……………………………………………………………… 13 2.2 Previous theories of intercultural communication ……………………………………………………13 2.3 Previous views of identity …………………………………………………………………………………………14 3. Current issues and ideas regarding cultural identity and intercultural communication…15 Interviews ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 17 1. Interview one …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 17 2. Interview two …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 18 3. Interview three ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………19 2 4. Interview four ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………19 5. Interview five …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 20 Analysis …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………21 1. Analysis regarding the expression and carrying of cultural identity/identities ……………21 2. Analysis regarding the benefit of cultural identity/identities through intercultural communication ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 22 3. Analysis regarding the difficulties of cultural identity through intercultural communication ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 23 4. Analysis on the comparison of the interviewees …………………………………………………… 24 Discussion on the analyses …………………………………………………………………………………………… 25 Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 30 Appendix 1 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 33 Appendix 2 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 36 Reference ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 37 3 Introduction With the rise of the contemporary globalization trend and international mobility, contacts between cultures are becoming pretty more frequent and involve a greater number of people than before. The old living pattern for an individual or a nation of being independent and isolated could no longer be fitted into the modern world since this increasing interdependency has brought us into a much closer relationship between different cultures. Although, this unprecedentedly exciting and novel picture does shine the world in front of us; this greater cultural contact in the meantime has also led to misunderstandings and conflicts through intercultural communications, as in the cultural identity issue between the Aboriginals and white people in Australia, cultural conflicts between Muslim and western world, and etc. In order to be more confident in working and living under this circumstance, it is of great importance for us to have a better knowledge of both ourselves as well as the people with whom we are trying to communicate through intercultural communications and encounters. It has long been noticed and discussed that there is a profound relationship between identity and intercultural communication (Martin and Nakayama 2007); both of them could have significant influences on each other. However, majority of the research and study have been dwelling much more on a theoretical level, therefore, still only a handful of people could practice it into the real life. The lack of combinations of both theories as well as much closer and vivid explanations might be the reason why these theories could not be widely applied among average people. Hence, the aim of this project is to explore how cultural identities could influence intercultural communication and encounter, and in what way we could have a better understanding to the others from different cultural backgrounds. Besides, it is tentatively trying to figure out the possible aspects and solutions of how to better and smooth intercultural communications. With both of the relevant literature (theories) and lively examples as well as explanations (interviews, analysis and discussion), the project will not only display the scholarly ideas of this issue, but also give us the guide of how to implement. Questions of 1) in what ways do issues of cultural identity affect communication between people from different cultures and 2) how do we achieve effective 4 communication between different cultures have been brought up and discussed. This project is based on a qualitative research method with both of the relevant literature as well as five interviews. With a view from both of theoretical and practical perspective, it will be helpful to those people (with multicultural identity) who are first stepping into a new cultural context; and who have constantly been confused by their multicultural identity to become aware of and utilize their cultural identities through intercultural communication. However, since the complexity of this field, it is extremely hard to cover all types of interviewees. In this sense, the choice of the interviewees has been narrowed down to the students from 18-25 years old (the reason of the choice will be elaborated later in the methodology part). Therefore, it will be possible for us to get some indications and implications from the empirical evidence. Methodological framework 1. Research considerations In this project, it has been constantly predicated on an epistemological position through the whole research. It is believed that people’s cultural identity have been formed and reflected through certain social and cultural contexts; it will be identified and acknowledged when we put them into certain or different cultural contexts. In this sense, it will be of great meaning and importance to understand cultural identity through intercultural communication (which is supposed to be the context that it has been mentioned above) rather than discuss it with an isolated setting. Also, since it is firmly believed that 1) human experience is subjective; 2) human behavior is not determined and hard to predict; 3) culture is dynamic (Martin and Nakayama 2007), it seems that we should take this interpretivism thought when we are trying to understand and describe human behavior in a certain cultural context. In this sense, we could have a more comprehensive picture of cultural identity through intercultural communication and generate more convincing interpretations as well as explanations in this particular area. 2. Brief introduction of the research methodology The methodology approach of this project is based on a qualitative research method and proceeded by reviewing the relevant literature and five different interviews. Since 5 the definition and degree of certain cultural issues could be tremendously hard to measure. Therefore, in this project, in order to understand and explain the certain questions of cultural identity and intercultural communication, the project should be conducted by a qualitative method; besides, for the sake of the integrity and comprehensiveness of the research, the project also reviews the relevant literature from a historical and developing perspective, which hopefully could provide a more objective view for the research. The aim of this project is to explore how different cultural identities could affect intercultural communication; and in what way we would keep the intercultural communications and encounters smooth by utilizing our cultural identities appropriately. 3. Summary of the research method In order to explore and try to find the answers of the project, five interviews were conducted, and all the interviewees are coming from Australia. The first three interviews were conducted in Australia; the questions were formulated beforehand, and asked to the interviewees through the interviews. Each interview lasted for approximately twenty to thirty minutes. The form and atmosphere was quite relaxing and flexible; however, these very first three interviews were not taped since some of the interviewees might feel nervous and uncomfortable. In order to create a soothing atmosphere, only notes had been jotted down while the interviews. But, in this way, it might miss some of the very detailed parts compared with the taped interview contents. The last two interviews were conducted through questionnaires (since the interviewees are not currently in Denmark; one of the interviewees is in Australia now, and the other one is currently on a cultural exchange in Japan). With their agreements, the formulated questions (the same questions as the previous ones) were sent to them respectively by email. After getting back the answers (all in their own words) from them, they were transcribed into the written texts in this project (answers from the interviewees could be found in appendix). The main components of this process are as follow: 3.1 Reason for choosing Australia: Since I was studying in Australia, there was a huge 6 amount of good opportunities for me to communicate and keep in touch with students from different cultural backgrounds; besides, Australia is a relatively ideal country for studying and understanding multiculturalism since its formation, composition of the citizens, and the vast number of immigrations around the world. 3.2 Interviewees: The interviewees were the students studying together with me, the ages of them range from 18 to 25. The most salient character of these interviewees is they all have multiple cultural backgrounds. Although lots of immigrants have been coming into Australia through the recent migration trend, it is to some extent hard to find the multicultural identity on the first or even the second generation of those immigrants, since they came into Australia with a firmly fixed cultural identity from their home country already, also, they are not willing to blend or assimilate their cultural identity with the local people, so, it is in this sense a bit meaningless to focus much on this group of people; however, It is not surprisingly to notice that most of the current young generation of the previous immigrants (which are supposed to be students in senior high school or university) tend to have more chance to blend into the local dominant culture while they are being at school or university and meanwhile maintain their home culture when they go back home. Therefore, they are the group of people who are most likely to have a multicultural identity since they either came in an early age without a full awareness of their cultural identity or were born in Australia; at the same time, they have a better multicultural context to form and experience their identities. 3.3 Interview questions: In order to collect the information of 1) what is/are the cultural background/backgrounds of the interviewees; 2) how could the interviewees benefit from fully knowing and properly utilizing their cultural identity/identities through intercultural communication/encounter; 3) what is/are the most frequently-happened obstacles related to cultural identity/identities for the interviewees while being though the process of intercultural communication/encounter, the following interview questions were designed: 3.3.1 What is the history of your family background, and what is/are the cultural background/backgrounds do you think you may carry with you? 7 3.3.2 What is/are the most advantageous aspect/aspects do think you have got from your cultural identities? 3.3.3 What is/are the difficulty/difficulties regarding different cultural identities have you noticed through intercultural communication/encounter, and how would you normally like to deal with it/them? Main theories in the project In this project, it has largely applied two main theories in the analysis part. The first one is the identity negotiation theory from Ting-Toomey; and the other one is the dialectical approach from Martin and Nakayama. Both of the theories have studied and explained cultural identity and intercultural communication from social constructive and interpretive views. They help us understand the cultural issues from different angles and under various cultural contexts. Also, they criticize the way to analyze cultural identity and intercultural communication in a fixed pattern. In a word, the theories emphasize and advocate the application of a kaleidoscopic perspective when we are trying to discuss and analyze cultural issues. Therefore, it is, theoretically speaking, firmly supporting the main ideas of this project, which are that we should know more about different cultures, show our respect to all of them; meanwhile, try to understand and appreciate different cultural issues with a flexible and compatible mind. These two theories will be elaborated here in this following part: 1. Identity negotiation theory from Ting-Toomey The identity negotiation theory emphasizes particular identity domains in influencing our everyday interactions (here is the stress on the aspect of the relationship between cultural identity and intercultural communication and encounter), the identity or self-conception is viewed as the explanatory mechanism for the intercultural communication process; also, the theory focuses on the ways to obtain accurate knowledge of identity domains of the self and others in the intercultural encounter; in a nutshell, the theory assumes that human beings in all cultures desire both positive group-based and positive person-based identities in any type of communication situation, so in this sense, how we can enhance identity understanding, respect, and mutual affirmative valuation of the other is the essential concern of this approach 8 (Ting-Toomey 2005). Based on this theory, it pinpoints the importance of mutual understanding and respect in a smooth intercultural communication and encounter. Various obstacles appearing through communications between different cultures are ascribed to the misleading information that generated by the failure of recognizing and acknowledging others’ identity appropriately, therefore, it hinders further communication process and causes intercultural conflicts. Also, it is pointed that the failure to meet the basic human needs of security, predictability/trust, and inclusion can lead to diffuse anxiety and frustration in our everyday life (J. H. Turner cited in William, B, Gudykunst 2005, p. 217). So it indicates that any danger or damage to those above-mentioned three dimensions will lead to potential conflicts or impair the coherency of a smooth intercultural communication or encounter. 2. The dialectical approach from Judith Martin and Thomas Nakayama Developed from the three interconnected approaches, which are social science, interpretive, and critical approaches, a more integrated perspective of understanding culture and communication has been explained by Martin and Nakayama. It is claimed by Martin and Nakayama that the dialectical approach emphasizes the processual, relation, and contradictory nature of intercultural communication, which encompasses many different kinds of intercultural knowledge (Martin and Nakayama 2007, p. 69). Furthermore, three more detailed explanations are given in order to elaborate the theory: first, with regard to the processual nature of intercultural communication, it is important to remember that cultures change, as do individuals; second, a dialectical perspective emphasizes the relational aspect of intercultural communication study, it highlights the relationship among various aspects of intercultural communication and the importance of viewing these holistically rather than in isolation; last but certainly not the least, the dialectical perspective involves holding contradictory ideas simultaneously, it advocates a new way of thinking which could be transcending dichotomous thought in studying and practicing intercultural communication (Martin and Nakayama 2007, p. 70). More specifically, the theory also gives us six aspects of dialectics of intercultural communication, which are: cultural-individual dialectic, personal-contextual dialectic, differences-similarities dialectic, static-dynamic dialectic, 9 history/past-present/future dialectic, and privilege-disadvantage dialectic (Martin and Nakayama 2007, p. 70). This theory provides us a new view of how to understand and explore the problems in intercultural communication, it suggests us to keep looking and thinking from various angles and perspectives. Besides, it is significantly important for us to consider and understand intercultural communication with a deeper analysis under the superficial level of culture itself since each particular case has its own dynamic situations and contextual circumstances. Literature review 1. Definitions In this project, it is mainly discussing about the issue of cultural identity through intercultural communication. In order to be able to proceed with the research, it is of great significance for us to have a better understanding of what cultural identity and intercultural communication are. However, it is globalization that boosts the development of intercultural communication, and leads us to a more multicultural world; in this sense, we may find that multiculturalism and globalization are two other terms which are as well important to be defined and understood here. 1.1 Intercultural communication Intercultural communication is a form of global communication. It represents various related terms like interethnic, interracial and intergroup communication, that refer to encounters in which individual participants differ, and/or perceive themselves to be different, in group-based experiential backgrounds (Kim 2007). But in order to explore and define the term intercultural communication in a more accurate and obvious way, it is of great importance to define two other terms, which are culture as well as communication respectively. It is claimed by the interpretivists that culture is learned and shared; however, they tend to focus on contextual patterns of communication behavior, rather than on group-related perceptions (Martin and Nakayama 2007). On the other hand, culture is also viewed as heterogeneous and dynamic from the recent critical perceptions. Based on these two ideas, culture could be perceived as the socially constructed patterns of perception, values and behaviors, shared by a group of people, that involves our sense 10 of belonging (identity) and emotional attachment (loyalty) to the group. Furthermore, in terms of communication, it is defined as “a symbolic process in which people create shared meanings” (Lusting and Koester 1996, p. 29). It could contain both of the linguistic as well as cultural aspects through this dynamic exchanging process. Based on the above-mentioned definitions, intercultural communication could refer to the encounters in which individual participants differ, and/or perceive themselves to be different in group-based experiential backgrounds (Kim, Y, Y 2007, pp. 237-253). 1.2 Cultural identity The concept of cultural identity could be basically viewed in two different perspectives, which are supposed to be sociologically and psychologically respectively. First of all, it could be applied as a reference to the collective self-awareness that a certain given group embodies and reflects. This is the most prevalent use of the term. Based on definition from Stephen Bochner (1973, pp. 23-37), “Generally, the cultural identity of a society is defined by its majority group, and this group is usually quite distinguishable from the minority sub-groups with whom they share the physical environment and the territory that they inhabit." With the stress on the particular group, the concept is becoming an equivalent to the thought of a national or social attribute which describes and explains a series of characters that members of an exclusive community or group share with the peers above and beyond their individual distinctions. Such traits nearly always incorporate a collection of values and attitudes towards life, death, birth, family, children, god, and nature. Used in its collective sense, the concept of cultural identity includes typologies of cultural behavior, such behaviors being the appropriate and inappropriate ways of meeting basic needs and solving life's essential dilemmas besides, the concept of cultural identity includes the shared premises, values, definitions, and beliefs and the day-to-day, largely unconscious, patterning of activities (Adler, P 1977). Seen from another perspective, it is more specifically used aiming at mirroring the identity of the individual concerning their own culture. Cultural identity, in this sense that it is a functioning aspect of individual characteristic as well as personality, is a 11 rudimentary and essential symbol of a person's being existent. Predicated on the theory from Erik Erikson (1959, p. 101), “identity is an elemental form of psychic organization which develops in successive psychosexual phases throughout life.” Meanwhile, he (Erikson 1959, p. 101) also pointed out, “Identity takes a variety of forms in the individual and maybe at one time, it will appear to refer to a conscious sense of individual identity.” 1.3 Multiculturalism As defined by the Government of South Australia, “multiculturalism” indicates that policies and practices that recognize and respond to the ethnic diversity of the community and their primary objects; the creation of conditions under which all groups and members of the community may fully and effectively participate in, and employ their skills and talents for the benefit of, economy, social and cultural life of the community; the three dimensions of multiculturalism should be focusing on cultural identity, social justice as well as productive diversity (Government of South Australia 2001). It is also announced by Christine Inglis (1995) that multiculturalism could be viewed and explained as a demographic-descriptive usage, which is indicating the existence of ethnically or racially diverse segments in the population of a society or state. 1.4 Globalization It is suggested by Robin Cohen and Paul Kennedy (2007, p. 44) that globalization is best understood as a set of mutually reinforcing transformations that occur more or less simultaneously, no single one of these is necessarily more important and significant than the others. Therefore, globalization could be identified and explained at least from the following six components: changing concepts of space and time, an increasing volume of culture interactions, the commonality of problems facing all the world’s inhabitants, growing interconnections and interdependencies, a network of increasingly powerful transnational actors and organizations, the synchronization of all the dimensions involved in globalization (Robin Cohen and Paul Kennedy 2007, pp. 44). However, for the purpose of the subject of this project, globalization here is more focusing on the increasing volume of culture interactions. 12 2. History and background of the intercultural communication 2.1 The origin of intercultural communication The origin of the term intercultural communication dates back to the year between 1940 and 1950. It was firstly founded and coined by Edward T. Hall, who was creating this term predicated on the following four main aspects, which are cultural anthropology, linguistics, ethology and Freudian psychoanalytic theory (Hall 1992). However, the roots of the study of intercultural communication can be traced to the post-World War Two era, when the United States increasingly came to dominate the world stage, but government and business personnel working overseas often found they were ill equipped to work among people from different cultures, the language training they received, for example did little to prepare them for the complex challenges of working abroad (Martin and Nakayama 2007, p. 44). In this sense, the very original paradigm for intercultural communication took form in conceptualizations by Hall and others at the U.S. Foreign Service Institute in the early 1950s (Rogers, Hart, Miike 2002). 2.2 Previous theories of intercultural communication Although being explored ever since such an early time, the real theorization work of intercultural communication did not take place until 70s-80s of last century. It was theorized and categorized by Kim and Gudykunst (1988) that all the theories pertaining intercultural communication could roughly sorted into three aspects, which are: how do individuals communicate in different cultures?; how do individuals experience intercultural communication activities?; and What are likely consequences of intercultural experiences? Constructivist theory of Appegate and Sypher (1988) that describes the influence of culture on individual communication behavior; the theory emphasizes the interpretive nature of communicators and the interrelatedness of culture and the individual’s cognitive construction of reality. Also, theory by Cronen, Chin, and Pearce (1988) about the interactive process of “coordinating” and “managing” communicative meaning between individuals is based on a critical perspective on the study of communication and culture, it points out that analyzing meaning structure and action of individual communicators that occur in intercultural 13 encounters; in this sense, the theory tries to illuminate cultural differences and to generate a critical perspective on intercultural behavior. Similarly, theory of Collier and Thomas (1988) mentioned that in which cultural identity is viewed not as “fixed” by an external criterion but as dependent on the communication competence of the interacting individuals. Besides those mentioned theory which are more focusing on the difference of cultures, Gudykunst pointed that the individual experiences of intercultural encounters, namely uncertainty and anxiety have also play some important roles through the process of intercultural communication (Kim and Gudykunst 1988). In another point of view, a series of theory related to changes as well as adaptation that occur in individuals as a result of intercultural communication experiences as in, network theory, was mentioned and concluded (Kim and Gudykunst 1988). 2.3 Previous views of identity The study of identity are basically perceived and explored in three perspectives, which are the social science perspective, the interpretive perspective as well as the critical perspective (Martin and Nakayama 2007, p. 155). From Erik Erikson’s point of view, individual identities are pretty much self-formed and developed through the crisis and conflicts that taking place when different identities come together (Erikson 1950; Erikson 1968). In this sense, the social science perspective emphasizes that identity is created in part by the self and in part in relation to group membership, the self is composed of multiple identities, and these notions of identity are culture bound; so the way to understand who we are depends on our own cultural background (Martin and Nakayama 2007, p. 155). However, the interpretive perspective emphasizes that identities are negotiated, co-created, reinforced, and challenged through communication with others; they emerge when messages are exchanged between persons (Ting-Toomey, cited in Martin and Nakayama 2007, p. 158). From this point of view, it indicated that the individual identity is expressed communicatively in core symbols, labels as well as norms, we form our identity by and through the culture values we believe, the particular aspects of our own and other’s identities, and finally associate our particular identities with the behaviors we act to others (Martin and 14 Nakayama 2007, p. 159). Similar with by slightly different from interpretive perspective, the critical perspective of identity emphasizes more on the social structures and institutions that restrict and confine identities and are normally the most primary factor of injustice and oppression (Collier 2005). The driving force behind a critical approach is the attempt to understand identity formation within the contexts of history, economics, politics, and discourse (Martin and Nakayama 2007, p. 159). In order to understand and explore this view of identity, it seems more significant for us to quest the reason why people affiliate themselves with a certain group instead of the other ones. 3. Current issues and ideas regarding cultural identity and intercultural communication Communications among different cultures have always been a subset or one of the ways in which human beings communicate. However, limited and constrained by heaps of factors as in, technology, location, economy and etc, such kind of communication did not seem to be “intercultural”. But ever since the booming trend of globalization, the pattern of the human being communications has been changed into an unprecedented situation, this trend has increased the interdependence among different societies and cultures rather than simply by contact. Contributed to global mobility as well as improved communications, contacts among cultures now are not only much more frequent and involve a great number of individual than ever before, but also embed with and need a much deeper thought of understanding and awareness. On the one hand, this increased interdependence has led to increasing contacts between cultures; it provides us a brand new world in front of us. We have got chances to see people different from us; we are available to visit places we have never been before; we could also have opportunities to know various values, perspectives and so on. We broaden our horizon, enrich our life and experiences, however, this greater cultural contact has also led to different degree of conflicts at the same time. It seems even more important for us to pay much more attention on conflicts since it is becoming inevitable. Conflicts between different cultures are generated by the failure of recognizing and/or understanding the counterparts positively and appropriately. It is noted by Martin and Nakayama (2007, p. 400) that 15 understanding intercultural conflict is especially important because of the relationship between culture and conflict; culture differences can cause conflict, and once conflict occurs, cultural backgrounds and experiences influence how individuals deal with it. Since culture has been playing such a dominant role in cultivating one’s identity, it is also noticeable to see that conflicts occur when diverse cultural identities meet and have issues regarding getting along with each others. But, we should admit that both examples of success and failure take place when different cultural identities meet together through intercultural communication. No matter they want to fit in or maintain themselves, we could always observe dramatically opposite outcomes and issues caused by various views on and ways of dealing with different cultural identities. Here are two examples showing extremely different pictures of how identities influence intercultural communication and encounter: Example one James was born in a small township near Johannesburg in South Africa. He is a cultural “bitzer”, black in color, but with an ancestry that includes Zulu, Indian, South African and Scottish forebears. Under Apartheid, this ethnic mixture was labeled “colored”, a term with strong negative connotations… Given these alternatives … James migrated to Britain and was a very successful student. When he completed his Ph.D., he was offered a lecturing position at one of the top British universities. James has dual South Africa/British citizenship and finds it amusing that in Britain he is identified as “black”, while in South Africa he is still regarded as “colored”. He feels at home in both South Africa and Britain and adjusts easily to unfamiliar cultural contexts. James is a confident cultural code switcher, something which gives him a decided advantage over his monocultural academic colleagues, who feel uneasy as soon as they are out of their cultural comfort zones. At a time when there is an increased emphasis on the need to supplement Government funding for universities with offshore education initiatives and international consultancies, James is constantly in demand as a consultant in the same countries from which he fled many years ago (Campbell, A 2000:31-39). Example two 16 The French believe that multiculturalism would only privilege individuals by association with their ethnic, religious or racial roots. There is no such concept as Algerian French. By contrast, one can be Chinese-Canadian and still be considered a full citizen. Before immigrants to Canada become equal in the economic sense, their culture is already considered equal in the theoretical sense. The one helps lead to the other. Canada is no bed of roses for thousands of recent immigrants toiling at minimum-wage jobs, but history suggests that, in the long run, many of them will enter the lower middle class. And, as the French riots suggest, no jobs are worse than bad jobs. Multiculturalism embodies a massage of hope and puts a high ideal in our sights. France tells newcomers that their past belongs in another country. Most Canadians see immigrants in a positive light, they add diversity to the culture sense, they spice up our cuisine, they make important economic contributions, they will help pay for the boomer’s pensions. In the context of chronic high unemployment, a large chunk of the French-born majority sees immigrants as threats to its share of a limited system of spoils (Smith, B, T 2005). Seen from the above examples, it is not hard to notice that issues of intercultural communication to a large extent depend on how we deal with or perceive different cultural identities. There is no doubt that, provided we would be able to understand and utilize identity in a proper way, it could definitely support us to cross the boundaries between cultures; however, it may also at the same time jeopardize the fluidity of intercultural communications and encounters. In this sense, it is not surprising for us to bring up the questions that how does cultural identity have an influence on intercultural communication, is it supposed to be positive or negative? Furthermore, how could we try to achieve a smooth intercultural communication or encounter with a decent perspective or/and utilization of cultural identity. Interviews 1. Interview one Kate was born in Lebanon; the black hair and brown skin make her look typically like an Asian girl, she came to Australia with her family when she was a child. We were in the same course when I was studying in Australia. Born in Lebanon, she was involved in a completely cultural group which takes west 17 Asian culture as a dominant one. She gradually acquired local language, social norms as well as beliefs. But after the immigration to Australia, she found all the neighbors were different from her, they were blonde hair, blue eyes and white skin, besides everybody considered her as an outsider of this country. Since they did not share the same language, culture and religion with their neighbors, her family did not have close and frequent interactions with the local community. When they gathered home, all the family members retained the traditional norms, values and practices of a Muslim household. People recognized her as a foreigner, and she identified others as an insider of this culture community. Back to those times, all the playmates she got in touch with are from Lebanon or other west Asian countries. Some years later, Kate found herself was changed. After high school, she fitted herself into the dominant culture far better than she used to do. Since she could speak English fluently and coherently and had known and accepted most of the social protocols in Australia, she found that she could switch herself easily no matter if she was in the university or the daily social life. She felt herself a confident cultural code switcher, she could identify herself as a Lebanon girl when she was living or communicating with people came from her birth country or other west Asian countries which had the similar or same cultures as hers; also, she would like to change to be another person with some Australian identity when she was talking with local people. She had found something which gave her an absolutely advantage over her mono-cultural friends, who always tended to be nervous and even stuck when they were out of their own cultural community. Surprisingly, she found that she could even use her dual cultural identity to help people either from and Asian or a western cultural background. 2. Interview two Jack was born in Tasmania, Australia. He moved to Sydney with his family when he was a kid. He admitted that he was not comfortable when he first stepped into the school, since all the other white children always stayed away from him and stared at him sneakily. Because of his aboriginal background, it gave him a feeling as if he were not good enough to be here; he felt that it was offensive to be labeled as an abnormal from most of the time. He felt disappointed and marginalized back to the school time. 18 However he never gave up turning this situation and making a difference. After he left school, he kept learning and getting to know more about this multicultural society of Australia, he enriched himself in cultural diversity and variation through different educational systems. Finally, he was eligible enough to work as a consultant in non-aboriginal and indigenous Australians affair. He had been feeling happy and excited in the course of the work; besides, he realized that it was the multicultural identities had given him the capability to think from different stands comprehensively as well as settle issues down smoothly. He had also decided to go back to university for improving his academic degree as well as prolonging his education experience. He believed this would give him more space and freedom in this field; also, he felt proud and grateful for his cultural backgrounds and identities. 3. Interview three Amenda was born in Hong Kong; she went to Australia with her parents when she was young. Ever since arriving in Australia with his family, she had been studying very hard under a strict family background. With her inherent Chinese cultural background in her mind, she always studied actively and devotedly. Meanwhile, she was not only able to speak English fluently and coherently, but also maintain her Cantonese as well as Mandarin. As time had passed by, she gradually realized that, in order to be capable of fitting into this foreign society, she had to blend herself with the local people and try to take their point of view when thinking and behaving through daily life. It was more important to learn the culture which was lying under different social behaviors and values rather than only to speak fluent English. She had been bearing this thought in her mind all the time she lived in Australia, and gradually became sophisticated in dealing with both Chinese and Australian cultures. By the time Amenda stepped into the university, she could switch her different cultural identities decently and easily. She realized that she could clearly know that when the Chinese or Australian identity should be fitted into the current setting. She also contributed her success of crossing over these two cultures to her parents’ encouragements as well as the experiences of this bicultural background. 19 4. Interview four Anne was born and raised in Australia. However, since the fact that her parents and both sets of grandparents were of Russian/Ukraine background and were all born in China, she considered herself as a multicultural person with both of Russian and Australian cultural identities. When she was a kid, her parents attempted to teach her Russian so that she would be able to interact with her grandparents (who did not speak English quite well), the other senior generations of the family, and the ethnic church community. Under this multicultural family background, it gave her a feeling that she had experienced a world very different from many Australians who were not 2nd generation, who did not have any other language background besides English, who did not have Christian beliefs. Also, she felt herself an Australian when she was communicating with non-Australians; and fell back to the home Russian background when she was interacting with Australians, especially those who behaved in ways she was not used to. Sometimes, it prevented her from further embracing the Russian cultural background since she could not speak Russian fluently (Although her parents taught her Russian at home when she was a kid, she went to local schools and universities with a completely English educational system, so she could speak so limited Russian). She was also viewed as an “outsider” by the people in Russian community churches; some senior generation from the church would think her as a pitiful Russian who had lost her “roots”. Since time passed by, she became more interested in culture and cultural diversity. She had been studying other languages and courses like intercultural communication at university. She felt so willing and excited to interact with people from various cultures. Also, she felt no barriers to interact with people who were both coming from her own cultural community as well as the “authentic” Australians. She had been proud of being a multicultural girl with Russian and Australian cultural identities. 5. Interview five Ricky was born and raised in New Zealand. After living there for a while, he then moved to Australian with his family. Since New Zealand has a close geographic location and the same language with Australia, he did not think about himself as belonging to 20 one or the other. Internally, he also felt that he could assume both an Australian and a New Zealander identity. However, externally speaking, his dual cultural identities were still challenged by both of the Australians and New Zealanders. While in Australia, he was always considered as a New Zealander; but when he came back to New Zealand, he was recognized as an Australian. This became to be really hard especially during times of sporting events when country representation was usually of great importance. Besides, taking this multicultural identity also brought him the problem of identity assumption. People would often assume him prefer being one or the other or that he should be an Australian or a New Zealander (In fact, this was something he did not even think about that much.). Also, some accent and different language usage (as in six/sex, fish/fush, flip-flops/jandals, eski/chilly bin) made him more easily to be identified as an outsider. Seen from another way regarding Ricky’s multicultural identity, he felt himself benefited from different levels since he did not feel reluctant to switch his identities and fit into different cultural groups. Just as he said, “Well, certainly my favorite part is that most governments don't recognize Australia and New Zealand to be an international threat and so therefore, I can travel very easily. Also during intercultural communication, it is easier for me to relate to other's experiences as I have two communities and two geographical points of reference. So for the most part I can both sympathize and share my thoughts with others easier. ” Analysis 1. Analysis regarding the expression and carrying of cultural identity/identities We may sometimes wonder what the first clue should be to recognize or identify a person who is coming from another cultural community, or how we could realize that we are/are going to engage into an intercultural communication/encounter. However, it might be hard for us to give the answer instantly, but we do have our evidence to judge if the encounter is intercultural or not. Also, it is interesting to see that we always obtain this kind of information under an unconscious process which is supposed to be predicated on certain subtle points. Based on all the five examples above, we may notice that their cultural identity/identities is/are assumed and 21 identified by their particular social norm, religious affiliation, physical appearance, skin color, and home language through communications with others around them. So, all of this information could give other people a first image of their cultural identity and background. It is pointed by Ting-Toomey (2005) that the core dynamics of people’s group membership identities (e.g., cultural and ethnic memberships) and personal identities (e.g., unique attributes) are formed via symbolic communication with others. Also, symbolic communication could include variety of different forms and ways both through verbal and non-verbal channel, as in our language, sound, expression, gesture wearing and etc. In this sense, it is indeed possible and reliable for us to recognize and identify people from various cultures through all these evidence. 2. Analysis regarding the benefit of cultural identity/identities through intercultural communication Seen from Kate, she finally got herself blended into the local cultural community by being able to speak English fluently and understand the social norms and protocols of where she lived in; based on Jack, he could be successfully changing his identity among others and dealing well with intercultural issues and affairs by studying and gaining a comprehensive knowledge of both the Australian culture as well as the indigenous one; as for Amenda, the fact that she could eventually became a sophisticated ‘intercultural person’ was largely contributed to her effort in learning the local culture and maintaining her own with a positive perspective. If we take a look at the reasons of that why there could be a huge change (from negative to positive) regarding fitting into the dominant culture from those five interviewees, we may notice there are some common aspects. First, they are all willing and passionate to try to fit into another culture (by picking up another cultural identity and utilizing it decently), which might be dramatically different from their own though; secondly, their successes are based on a possibility of being skilled in the language that used by the culture community which they are trying to fit in, and knowledgeable in the culture of those certain communities; furthermore, they are all maintaining their inherent culture background very well so that they will not lose their original cultural identity. Suggested by Ting-Toomey (2005), individuals in all cultures or ethnic groups 22 have the basic motivation needs for identity security, inclusion, predictability, connection, and consistency on both group-based and person-based identity levels; however, too much emotional security will lead to right ethnocentrism, and, conversely, too much emotional insecurity (vulnerability) will lead to fear of out-groups or unfamiliar strangers (this point of view is also transferrable and extrapolated to identity inclusion, predictability, connection, and consistency), thus, an optimal range exists on the various identity negotiation spectrums. Besides, it is also pointed out by a study (Miller, Watling, Staggs, Rotheram-Borus cited in Martin and Nakayama 2007, p. 199) that the vast majority of biracial respondents did not express feelings of marginality as suggested by traditional theories of bicultural identity, instead, these youth exhibited a clear understanding and affiliation with both groups’ cultures and values. Since human beings are a group of animals which is supposed to be living gregariously, it indicates that we need to be socialized and acknowledged by the peers around us. This sense of belonging has to some certain extent given us a huge significance in our daily life. However, living under a social community which has a different culture from one’s original one seems much tougher since we are taking the risk of being isolated from the society because of the intercultural difference. But, dual or multiple cultural identities, at this point, could definitely satisfy our basic desire of being included into the social circle since we carry extra/an extra identities/identity (language/cultural values and etc). In this sense, it seems far beyond reach or extremely difficult for other people who only have single cultural identity to fit into another culture (although they may even have a strong will and passion to blend themselves in). 3. Analysis regarding the difficulties of cultural identity through intercultural communication When came to the topic of the difficulties of cultural identity and intercultural communication, it seemed that all the five interviewees had been through the pretty identical situation when they came into another culture or got involved into different cultural contexts. It is obvious to see that, when they came into another unfamiliar culture or experienced different cultural communities as a child, they were identified 23 as “outsiders” of the dominant culture. Lacking of the ability to communicate with the new cultural community’s language, understand the unfamiliar cultural background, this kind of people became marginalized (especially for Kate, Jack and Amenda). As Ting-Toomey (2005) said, individuals tend to experience identity emotional vulnerability, identity differentiation, interaction unpredictability, identity autonomy, and identity change (or chaos) when they undergo culturally unfamiliarity, the stigmatization of their desired group membership identities, and relation separation. As a result, just as Martin and Nakayama (2007) pointed, for some of the people who lives between or among different cultures, or “on the borders” of two more cultures, they sometimes have to struggle to reconcile two very different sets of values, norms, worldviews, and lifestyles. Seen from the above point of view, it seems that cultural identity/identities could definitely hinder the smooth process of intercultural communication and encounter. Cultural, personal, and situational variability dimensions have a significant influence on the meanings, interpretation, and evaluations of the identity-related issues (Ting-Toomey 2005), meanwhile these identity-related issues will negatively affect the progress of intercultural communications. 4. Analysis on the comparison of the interviewees If we study at these five interviewees more carefully, we may easily category them into two different groups. The first group of them is those who were born outside of Australia and had a dramatically distinct home cultural background from the Australian local one (Kate, Jack and Amenda); and the other group of people is those whose cultural background and identity are much closer to an Australian one; either of them shared a pretty similar cultural identity and background with Australia (Ricky) or was born and raised inside Australia (Anne). Although they (all the five interviewees) are all carrying a multicultural identity, Anne and Ricky (the second group of the interviewees) might mislead us to consider them as the locals, since they have been living in a more Australian way when compared with the other three interviewees; since they could speak English as a native speaker; since they have a more similar physical appearance with the local Australian people. However, why it seems they still have problems when 24 they are trying to fit into different cultural communities (home and local) as Kate, Jack and Amenda do; furthermore, surprisingly to see that the identity problems for Anne and Ricky through intercultural communications are pretty identical as the other interviewees’ (Kate, Jack and Amenda). It is pointed out by Martin and Nakayama (2007) that focusing solely on someone’s nationality, place of origin, education, religion, and the like, can lead to mistaken conclusions about the person’s identity. It has indicated us that cultures as well as cultural identities are not always staying on the superficial level of what we have seen through daily life; and in order to know and understand people’s culture and identity, it is more significant to have a comprehensive view rather than these stereotypical minds. Besides, claimed by Ting-Toomey (2005) that, people in all cultures form their reflective self-images, such as cultural identity and ethnic identity, via their enculturation process such as the content of their cultural, ethnic, and family socialization experiences. She (Ting-Toomey 2005) also indicated that, people acquire the values, norms, and core symbols of their cultural and ethnic groups. It emphasizes more on the importance of having a deeper understanding of people’s cultural backgrounds rather than dwelling on the outside factors when we are analyzing culture and cultural identities. In this sense, since Anne and Ricky still have an intensive cultural influence from their home culture, it is no wonder that they will still be recognized and identified as “less authentic” Australian people; also, it is natural for them to have problems when they are dealing with intercultural encounters without decently utilizing their dual identities. Discussion on the analyses Seen from the first part of the analyses, the expression and carrying of the cultural identities of the five interviewees have been carried out through symbolic communication, as in social norm, religious affiliation, language, and physical appearance. Also, the identification of their cultural identities is processed by the “feedback” from what they have shown to other people with whom they are communicating. Sometimes, we may even feel reluctant to be identified or labeled as one of some certain cultural group. Just as Jack, he could not fit himself into the dominant culture and had been marginalized for 25 so long a period of time even though he had the strong will to be blended in. Therefore, it indicates that people always form their salient cultural identities (values/norms) through their own cultural, ethnic and family socialization experiences, and display all of these reflective self-images to other people from dissimilar cultural groups via intercultural communication and encounter (Ting-Toomey 2005). Based on all the interviewees’ personal experiences, they all have their own cultural background which is different from the dominant one, and they would definitely more or less carry and express their backgrounds while there are communicating with the local people. So, this should be the reason why they were marginalized or taken as “outsiders” in the first place, and also, had difficulties in fitting into the dominant culture. Drawing on the first part of the analyses, we may also come to the idea of the possible and feasible way for us regarding this issue. In order to understand the person with whom you are communicating, or to achieve a relatively good beginning of the intercultural communication, it is extremely essential for us to know or have some knowledge of the corresponding part’s significant identity domains. For instance, if she strongly values her cultural membership identity and gender membership identity, you need to find ways to validate and be responsive to her cultural and gender identities; or if he strongly values his personal identity above and beyond his cultural or gender group membership, you might need to uncover ways to affirm his positively desired personal identity (Ting-Toomey 2005). As a matter of fact, this work could be done from the very first image of people’s symbolic communication; thus, it is indeed of great importance to pay more attention in the expression and carrying of a person’s symbolic communication or cultural identity since it may to a large extent lead us to a halfway success in intercultural communications and encounters. On the other hand, when we are trying to fit into another cultural community, it is as equally important as the previously stated point that we need to “watch out” the cultural identity issue which is displayed by our symbolic communication as well as self-images. However, since for this particular situation, we are the minority part and trying to blend ourselves in, it is more emphasized to pay attention on our expression or display to the others belong to the local community, thus, avoidance of the own salient cultural identity and enhancement of the dominant culture identity would be effective to accomplish a smooth intercultural 26 communication and build a more closer relationship between you and the one you are communicating with from the dominant culture. From the facts in the second part of the analyses, we could obviously notice that all the five interviewees had finally benefited from their different cultural identities. The benefits are of various ways as in fitting into the dominant culture or finding a job and etc. Also, the characters of bicultural or multicultural identities are as well displayed via different channels as in linguistically or culturally. Seen from Kate, her finally fitting into the dominant cultural might contributed both on the aspects of language as well as the cultural norms; she knows exactly when and where it is the right time to switch her cultural identities in order to be easily included or involved into the current situation. On the other hand, Jack may depend more on his knowledge of both the dominant one as well as his own; therefore, his flickering over different cultural boundaries relies much on a culturally level. While for Amenda, the situation is pretty much similar to Kate’s; and it is no doubt for Anne and Ricky to be benefited as well. However, no matter what slight difference it is from each of the individuals, we may find two common points based on the above interviewees: 1) the need and desire to be included and blended into the dominant culture; 2) the favor from their different cultural identities. The finding from the analysis gives us an idea that even though it is sometimes really hard for an “outsider” to squeeze into another cultural community, these efforts have never been stopped from this kind of people; besides, the relevant or similar cultural identity will absolutely gives some help to us through intercultural communications and encounters. It seems that there is also a logic which is embedded in this case: since we human beings have the very basic need to be involved and acknowledged by the society we are living in (no matter if or not we have the same cultural background), so people try to fit themselves in by different efforts, then there will lead to two different ways of trying to get into the dominant culture: 1) try it still by their own cultural identity which might be incompatible or completely out of tune; 2) try it by switching into another cultural identity which could be close or identical to the dominant one. After that, these two ways will definitely cause two dramatically distinct outcomes: 1) it might be a disaster through the intercultural communication and encounter ascribed to the extremely different or even opposite point of views and cultural 27 perceptions; 2) it will set up a close and bonding relationship since the same or similar cultural identity could be kind of a lubricant in the process of intercultural communication and encounter. This simple logic has shown us a clear picture of how significant cultural identity is and what the benefit it could bring us through the communication process. It is claimed by Ting-Toomey (2005) that several aspects would contribute to a smooth intercultural communication as in identity security, inclusion, predictability, connection and consistency. It is also noticeable to see that all those aspects are based on a foundation of sharing a same or at least similar cultural background or identity. Cultural identity will be tremendously supportive through intercultural communication and encounter provided the two parts of the communicators could have or share a matching one (cultural identity) to each other. Therefore, it will seem to be amazingly beneficial for the multicultural identity person how just have one of their identities which could be matching to the cultural community which he or she is trying to communicate with or fit in. As for the last part of the analyses, it has been pointed out that although these interviewees had eventually achieved the success of switch over different cultural contexts spontaneously, they still have pretty much the same problems with their more-than-one-identity issues through intercultural communication. Based on the interviews, it seems all the difficulties were taking place when the interviewees trying to step into another culture by carrying their own cultural background at the same time. For this point, as Ting-Toomey (2005) noted, individuals tend to experience identity consistency in repeated cultural routines in a familiar cultural environment, and they tend to experience identity chaos in a new or unfamiliar cultural environment. Therefore, it looks like that sometimes our tightly-bonded original identity could be a hurdle in terms of fitting into another cultural context. It will be relatively easier for the newcomers to blend in if the dominant culture has a favorable and compatible mind; however it will be really drastic for the strangers if the hosts act more unreceptive and even a bit xenophobic. In another perspective, cultural identity could also become a problem even after we have got bicultural or multicultural identity through intercultural communication. It might seem to be skilled and easy for a multicultural identity person to cross the cultural boundary 28 single-handedly, it would sometimes be hard for them to feel the real sense of belonging. Although they could speak more than one language, understand various cultural norms, avoid conflicts from different cultural taboos, they always could not be taken as the “authentic member” of either or any of the cultural groups that they have flickered over. This phenomenon will gradually turn to person into a status of being “culturally rootless”, they may even ask themselves who I am and which side I should take, and also, they probably lose their most salient cultural character. So, from this part of the discussion, we should consider and utilize our cultural identity/identities decently while we are involved in intercultural communications and encounters. We should bear in mind that although cultural identity/identities could do us a favor through communication with people from different cultures, it will definitely cause troubles to ourselves if we misuse it with an ill-considered thought. Also, here, some heads-ups could come up with the discussion: 1) our originally fixed cultural identity could be an obstacle of getting into another cultural community through intercultural communication and encounter; 2) multicultural identity could also negatively influence people through communication among different cultures since it might get people blinded and weaken one’s sense of belonging; 3) decently using cultural identity/identities through intercultural communication since different culture has its different view and degree of cultural compatibility and receptiveness. In this sense, we had better have a much deeper thought about our cultural identity/identities as well as the corresponding culture that we are trying to deal with, try to optimize the utility of our cultural identity/identities among different cultural contexts. However, seen from the interviews as well as the above analyses, we should also notice some limitation of this project. Firstly, since the complexity of this study area, it should be aware that there are so many other factors could have influences on individuals’ cultural identity and the process of intercultural communication. It has been pointed by John Berry (1997) that cultural adaptation could be identified as three interrelated aspects, which are psychological, socio-cultural, and economic. It is also claimed by John Berry (1997) that the individual acculturation process could be influenced both externally (society of origin as in political context/economic situation/demographic factors) and internally (as in age/gender/education/religion and etc). In this sense, the choice of the interviewees (five 29 students) will not be able to cover and explain all the phenomena of this massive and rapidly changed study area. Secondly, it should be admitted, we are unable to generalize so much only based on five interviews. But in order to find some indications and implications, we have to narrow down interviewees into a more specific group (this is also the reason why it has chosen five students). Finally, it is interestingly to see that we could generate some valuable points and indications from the consistency of these five interviewees. Conclusion In this project, it is tentatively exploring how cultural identity could influence (positively/negatively) intercultural communication and encounter; also, how we could have a mutual understanding between different people among various cultural backgrounds. Meanwhile, questions like in what ways do issues of identity affect communication between people from different cultures; and how do we achieve effective communications between different cultures have been discussed by an investigation of the relevant literatures as well as the conduction of five interviews. Based on all the investigation and the analysis of the material, we might now be able to come to the conclusion of the project questions. First, cultural identity/identities is/are kind of a double sword, it could sometimes bring us great benefits through intercultural communication since it allows us a sufficiently amount of space and possibility to flicker over different cultural boundaries more easily; however, it could as well hinder us from intercultural communications and encounters provided that 1) we fail to have a mutual better understanding towards both the cultural identity domains of ourselves and the people with whom we are trying to communicate; 2) we overuse/misuse our cultural identity/identities in different cultural contexts since it will cause identity chaos or crisis and make us lose our sense of belongings. Furthermore, regarding the way of how we could achieve effective intercultural communication, it is somehow based on and derived from the first question. In order to build up a smooth atmosphere through communication between different cultures, it is of great significance for us to 1) have a mutually comprehensive knowledge background of the culture from each other, so we may feel more comfortable through the 30 communication as we might be able to avoid the cultural forbidden areas and emphasize more on the salient aspects in each other’s culture and identity; 2) view our cultural identity/identities decently in a positive way, because they could satisfy our basic desire of being acknowledged by the others and the society, also, bring us tremendously huge amount of benefits such as the feeling of security, inclusion, predictability, connection and consistency, which are supposed to be some primarily important prerequisites of a smooth and successful intercultural communication; 3) accordingly with the previous point, cultural identity/identities should be taken into consideration in a dialectical perspective. Inappropriately overuse of the cultural identity identities should not be applied into the practical life since it may get us blinded and lost as a “cultural nomad” in the “vagrant” life of finding who you are and where your identity is. As mentioned in the discussion part, the limitation of the project makes the indications and conclusions focus more on the specific group of students (who have multicultural identity). It might not be able to apply the findings into all the other groups in a society because of the other different social and individual factors. Since cultural identity and intercultural communication are extremely complicated and profound, it needs more comprehensive and in-depth empirical evidence to make further generalizations. A larger scale and more diverse groups of interviewees will be needed in order to have more findings in the future; also, a combination of qualitative and quantitative study method might be tried for the future new research. Last but certainly not the least, as an international student as well as a culture explorer like many others, it is sometimes ourselves who are involved into this intercultural context and acting as a “victim” of being misunderstood and marginalized. It is in this sense firmly believed that this particular area of study is full of practical worth. Since this inevitably globalization trend, it is our youth generation’s responsibility and obligation to think more about how to deal with people from different cultural background, and our own cultural identity, because this will reduce the potential conflict and generate a much more comfortable setting all around the world, and it will indeed become a mutual beneficial circumstance in the near future. However, there will be difficulties along the road when we think and apply all these theories and ideas, so it is not only about talking and 31 discussing on a theoretical level, but also about exercising it in person in the future. Although we will be stumbling, wobbling or even stumped through the exploration, it will be worthwhile and rewarded when we see the light at the end of the tunnel. 32 Appendix 1 Interview answers from Anne 1. What are your cultural backgrounds? How many cultural identities do you think you have? Hmmm… Well, for me, although I was born in Australia, I think the fact that my dad and both sets of grandparents are of Russian/Ukraine background and were all born in China makes me feel like I am less of a ‘true’ Australian than others. As a small kid, my parents attempted to teach me Russian - the language they were forced to learn from their parents (which didn’t really happen since my parents only tried to do this for the sake of their parents). So… growing up, and interacting with my family, grandparents and ethnic church community a lot, I feel like I’ve experienced a world very different from many Australians who aren’t 2nd generation, who don’t have any other language background besides English, and, especially, who don’t have Christian beliefs. So… Yeah, I definitely feel I have two cultural identities. When I’m interacting with non-Australians - especially when I am outside Australia, I definitely feel Australian, and I’m proud to call myself an Aussie. But when I’m interacting with other Australian people who behave in ways different to what I’m used to (eg. different clothing, ways of talking, consumption habits [cough -- BEER]), I just feel like an alien, and this is when I’m proud to fall back on my family background. 2. How do you think you could benefit from fully knowing and properly utilizing your cultural identities through intercultural encounters? I mentioned that my parents attempted to teach me Russian. This failed miserably, although I have grown up consistently using one or two Russian words instead of the English counterparts (for example, ‘halut’ instead of ‘bath robe’, and ‘cabusca’ - the baby version of ‘capalsa’ for Polish sausage - haha). But I regret not being able to fluently speak the language, because I know so many other people my age who can. This is the only thing which has prevented me from further embracing my family background - and it’s certainly prevented me from having deep and meaningful conversations with my grandparents, who don’t speak English quite so well. If I could speak Russian, I think I’d definitely be viewed as being less of an Australian by others if 33 they heard me using it. But… I think the cross between both worlds would be so much more complete and real. I’ve mastered English, and feel completely comfortable using it around anyone else who can speak it. But when I’m with people - even family members - who are using Russian, I’m suddenly an outsider again, because I can’t communicate and I don’t understand the language. My parents sometimes use Russian to speak to each other in broken English, but only when they have something private or personal (or secretive) to say. I can often guess by some words and the body language if it relates to me or not, which is all I really care about. But in my Russian church community, I might as well be from Mars because I’m viewed by them, especially the older generation, as a pitiful Russian who has lost her ‘roots’. Actually, some people get really excited when I tell them I have a Russian background, and they immediately ask, “Can you speak it?” Haha, they’re disappointed when I say no - I guess because the Russian accent can sound sexy to some people. This could be another reason why I’d want to learn it, haha! 3. What is the most frequently-happened obstacle (regarding cultural identity/identities) for you through intercultural communication? Intercultural communication…? Umm… Well, I’ve mentioned the language issue when with people/friends/family who can speak Russian fluently. But… let me think… Well, in terms of my Australian identity, I think when speaking with people who aren’t Australian, I feel like they can have stereotypical views of ‘Australian’ in their mind which makes them feel like Australia is a place to be made fun of, and that makes me feel really embarrassed and annoyed. For example, when my mum’s friend from Canada came to visit with her children, I saw that they were always trying to imitate the accent, and were, I guess, hoping to see kangaroos in our backyard and sharks at the beach… You know, silly stuff like that. And they were comparing television commercials and road signs, saying lots of negative things about Australia in a joking kind of way. I was surprised to find I was so sensitive to this. Another girl I met from America last year had friends who said similar things, and who made fun of every little difference they could find, as though their country was the ‘superior’ one. I guess people tend to do this naturally. Even me - when I was China, I couldn’t help but 34 constantly compare everything to life in Australia - but I didn’t do it to be rude or cocky, I was just genuinely fascinated. But… I guess when it’s flipped around, and it’s my country, or even my town being made fun of, I feel like… I have to suddenly become a good representative, and I become hyper-sensitive to the fact that the person I am speaking with is judging Australia based on my interaction with them. It’s really daunting! Hmm… I admit, this doesn’t happen frequently, but it’s the most memorable thing I can take from intercultural encounters. 35 Appendix 2 Interview answers from Ricky 1. What are your cultural backgrounds? How many cultural identities do you think you have? Since I lived in New Zealand for little over half my life and then Australia recently, I share these cultural backgrounds. As similar as they are. The thing about cultural identity is that personally I don't assume it myself. I don't often think about myself as belonging to one or the other. Internally, I often presume that I can assume both identities. However externally, my identity is often challenged by Australians and New Zealanders. While in New Zealand I am often considered to be Australian and while in Australia I am often considered to be a New Zealander. This is more so challenged during times of sporting events where country representation is often important. 2. How do you think you could benefit from fully knowing and properly utilizing your cultural identities through intercultural encounters? Well certainly my favourite part is that most governments don't recognize Australia and New Zealand to be an international threat and so therefore I can travel very easily. Also during intercultural communication it is easier for me to relate to other's experiences as I have two communities and two geographical points of reference so for the most part I can both sympathize and share my thoughts with others easier. 3. What is the most frequently-happened obstacle (regarding cultural identity/identities) for you through intercultural communication? Identity assumption. People often assume I prefer being one or the other or that I am one or the other. However I do not feel this way. And of course dealing with everyday cultural stigmas however funnily enough while abroad I am more often mistaken as American. Also at first there was a slight language barrier but it did not last long such as the words; six/sex, fish/fush, flipflops/jandals, eski/chilly bin. 36 Reference 1. Adler, P 1977, ‘Beyond Cultural Identity: Reflections on Multiculturalism’, in Brislin, R (eds), Culture Learning, East-West Center Press, Honolulu, Hawaii, pp. 22-41. 2. Applegate, L, J and Sypher, E, H 1988, ‘A Constructivist Theory of Communication and Culture’, in Y, Y, Kim and W, B, Gudykunst, Theories in Intercultural Communication, Sage, CA. 3. Berry, J 1997, ‘Lead Article Immigration, Acculturation and Adaptation’, Applied Psychology: An International Review, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 5-68. 4. Bochner, S 1973, ‘The Mediating Man and Cultural Diversity’, Topics in Culture Learning Series, Vol. 1, pp. 23-37. 5. Campbell, A 2000, ‘Cultural identity as a social construct’, Intercultural Education, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 31-19. 6. Cohen, R and Kennedy, P 2007, Global sociology, 2nd edn, Palgrave Macmillan, NY. 7. Collier, J, M and Thomas, M 1988, ‘Cultural Identity An Interpretive Perspective’, in Y, Y, Kim and W, B, Gudykunst, Theories in Intercultural Communication, Sage, CA. 8. Collier, J, M 2005, ‘Theorizing cultural identification: Critical updates and continuing evolution’, in W, B, Gudykust, Theorizing About Intercultural Communication, Sage, CA. 9. Cronen, V, Victoria, Chen and Pearce, B, W 1988, ‘Coordinated Management of Meaning A Critical Theory’, in Y, Y, Kim and W, B, Gudykunst, Theories in Intercultural Communication, Sage, CA. 10. Erikson, E 1950, Children and society, Norton, NY. 11. Erikson, E 1959, ‘The Problem of Ego Identity’, Psychological Issues, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 101-164. 12. Erikson, E 1968, Identity: Youth and crisis. Norton, NY. 13. Government of South Australia 2001, What is multiculturalism? , viewed 9 Oct 2011, <http://www.multicultural.sa.gov.au/about/multiculturalism.htm>. 14. Gudygunst, B, W 2005, Theorizing About Intercultural Communication, Sage, CA. 15. Hall E, T 1992. An Anthropology of Everyday Life, Doubleday/Anchor Books, New York. 16. Inglis, C 1995, Multiculturalism: a policy response to diversity, Management of Social Transformations Program, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural 37 Organization, viewed 9 Oct 2011, <http://www.unesco.org/most/sydpaper.htm>. 17. Kim, Y, Y and Gudykunst, B, W 1988, Theories in Intercultural Communication, Sage, CA. 18. Kim, Y, Y 2007, 'Ideology, Identity, and Intercultural Communication: An Analysis of Differing Academic Conceptions of Cultural Identity', Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 237 — 253. 19. Lustig, M, W & Koester, J 1996, Intercultural Competence: Interpersonal Communication Across Cultures, HarperCollins College Publishers, NY, USA. 20. Martin, J and Nakayama, T 2007, Intercultural Communication in Contexts, 4th edn, McGraw-Hill, New York. 21. Rogers, E, M, Hart, W, B and Miike Y 2002, ‘Edward T. Hall and The History of Intercultural Communication: The United States and Japan’, Keio Communication Review, no. 24, pp. 1-24. 22. Smith, B, T 2005, ‘France could learn from Canada’, The Globe and Mail (Toronto), 8 November, viewed 15 October 2011, <http://www.freedominion.ca/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=47812&view=previous>. 23. Ting-Toomey, S 2005, ‘Identity Negotiation Theory: Crossing Cultural Boundaries’, in W, B, Gudykunst Theorizing About Intercultural Communication, Sage, CA. 38