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