The problem of understanding in intercultural communication
The essence and mechanism of the perception process.
There are quite a few reasons for misunderstanding and conflicts. All of them are in one way or another connected with the psychological process of perception and formation of intercultural competence.
A person’s perception of the world is determined by many factors: upbringing, socio-cultural environment, education, character, worldview, personal experience etc. Usually, several types of perception are distinguished - ordinary, conscious, sensory perception (when we are talking about what a person perceives, understands and knows).
The communication process begins with observation of a person, his appearance, voice, behavioral characteristics, during which, based on a number of external manifestations, we try to understand the inner world and personality traits, the logic of actions and thinking.
All information enters the brain through the sense organs in the form of sensations. This information is given one or another meaning, i.e. it is interpreted based on past experience, motivation, emotions. A person systematizes and organizes the information received in a form convenient for himself, dividing things into classes, groups, types, etc. This process is called categorization and allows you to make reality understandable and accessible, as well as cope with the growing volume of information. In addition, it makes it possible to make assumptions and predictions, since, in fact, any category represents a typical example of a phenomenon or object. Connections are established between classes and groups, making it possible to compare different objects.
If a phenomenon or object cannot be categorized, then a person has a feeling of uncertainty and anxiety, therefore, in order to cope with a changing reality, the boundaries between categories must be flexible.
Usually there are four main factors that influence the perception of one person by another: the first impression factor, the “superiority” factor, the attractiveness factor and the attitude factor.
First impression factor.
The first impression helps to choose a strategy for further communication. The important question is whether he is faithful or unfaithful. First impressions are often deceptive and sometimes difficult to change. Appearance (neatness, clothing) can serve as information about a person’s social status, his profession (tunic, office suit, robe, white coat), life events (wedding dress, hospital clothes...). Clothing can attract attention, create a favorable impression, help you get lost in the crowd, ruin everything (a T-shirt and ripped jeans - for an interview / evening dress - for the store, etc.).
In nonverbal communication, the color of clothing and the manner of wearing it matter.
Research shows that almost every adult who has sufficient and varied communication experience is able to more or less accurately determine almost all the characteristics of a partner - his psychological traits, social affiliation, etc.
The superiority factor.
The first impression only creates the basis for further communication, but it is not enough for constant and long-term communication. In this situation, the factor of “superiority” begins to operate, according to which the status of the communication partner is determined. There are two sources of information to determine it:
A person’s clothing, including all the attributes of a person’s appearance (silhouette (high social status - “strict”, classic cut, many vertical lines), price of clothing, glasses, hairstyle, jewelry, etc.);
Behavior (how a person sits, walks, talks, looks - arrogantly, confidently (relaxed posture), looking out the window/at his hands - boredom, superiority, a lot of foreign words, special terms - strives to draw attention to himself, no matter what he was understood).
Nowadays, when such strict regulations and restrictions have disappeared in almost all cultures, the role of clothing in coding a person’s social status still remains significant. We can probably talk about the existence of an unofficial symbolic system of clothing and external attributes of a person, the elements of which are at the same time signs that determine the formation of the first impression of a person’s status.
Attractiveness factor.
There are objective grounds for perceiving and understanding a person by his appearance. Details of a person’s external appearance can carry information about his emotional state, attitude towards people around him, his attitude towards himself, the state of his feelings in a given communication situation.
Each nation has its own, different canons of beauty and types of appearance approved or disapproved by society. Attractiveness or beauty is subjective, depending on the ideal existing in a given culture.
A significant sign of the attractiveness factor is a person’s physique. Three main types of physique and the characters attributed to them: hypersthenics - people prone to obesity (sociable, love comfort, good-natured, changeable in moods; normosthenics - slender, strong, muscular physique (active, often sanguine, love adventures); asthenics - tall, thin , fragile figures (restrained, silent, calm, sarcastic). The character often does not coincide, but in the ordinary consciousness of people these connections are fixed quite firmly. Body types themselves are not of fundamental importance for communication.
Factor of attitude towards us.
It is quite obvious that the question of the partner’s attitude towards us during communication is also important: people who love us or treat us well seem to us much better than those who treat us badly. The factor of attitude towards us manifests itself during communication in feelings of sympathy or antipathy, in agreement or disagreement with us.
There are a large number of indirect signs of agreement (head nods, approving and encouraging smiles in the right places, etc.). The basis of this factor is the idea of so-called subjective groups that exist only in our minds (people of the same profession, place of residence, especially outside it, etc.).
The action of the mentioned factors occurs constantly in the process of perception, but the role and significance of each of them in a particular situation is different. The most important factor governing this process is the degree of significance of the object for the perceiver.
Culture and perception
The mechanism of the perception process is the same for all people, and the processes of interpretation and identification are culturally determined. The world is perceived as determined by a system of views, beliefs, cultural traditions, moral values, beliefs, prejudices and stereotypes. A person’s attitude to the world is also influenced by many subjective factors, ranging from the visual acuity of the individual, his height, mood in life, attitude towards the perceived object and ending with the depth of knowledge about the world. As a result, a simplified model of the surrounding reality (picture of the world) is formed, which helps the individual navigate in a complex world: our actions are to a certain extent determined by the way the world is Seems us.
The influence of culture on perception can be seen especially clearly in communication with people belonging to other cultures.
A significant number of gestures, sounds and acts of behavior in general are interpreted differently by speakers of different cultures. For example, a German gave his Russian friend eight beautiful roses for his birthday, i.e. even number of roses. But in Russian culture, an even number of flowers is usually brought to the deceased. Therefore, such a gift, according to this cultural interpretation, will be at least unpleasant for a Russian. Here we greet people with bread and salt, but in Finland a loaf of bread, especially black bread, is a common birthday gift.
Another cultural determinant that determines a person's perception of reality is the language in which he speaks and expresses his thoughts. Long years Scientists were interested in the question: do people from one linguistic culture really see the world differently than from another? As a result of observations and research on this issue, two points of view have emerged - nominalist and relativistic.
The nominalist position is based on the assertion that a person’s perception of the world around him is carried out without the help of the language we speak. Language is simply the outer “form of thought.” In other words, any thought can be expressed in any language, although some languages will require more words and some will require fewer. Different languages do not mean that people have different perceptual worlds and different thought processes.
The relativistic position assumes that the language we speak, especially the structure of this language, determines the characteristics of thinking, perception of reality, structural patterns of culture, behavioral stereotypes, etc. This position is well represented by the previously mentioned hypothesis of E. Sapir and B. Whorf, according to which any language system acts not only as an instrument for the reproduction of thoughts, but also as a factor shaping human thought, becoming a program and guide for the mental activity of an individual. In other words, the formation of thoughts is part of a particular language and differs in different cultures, sometimes quite significantly, as does the grammatical structure of languages.
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis challenges the basic premise of the nominalist position that everyone shares the same perceptual world and the same sociocultural reality. Compelling arguments in favor of this hypothesis are also the terminological variations in the perception of colors in different cultures. Thus, representatives of English-speaking cultures and Navajo Indians perceive colors differently. The Navajo Indians use one word for blue and green, two words for two shades of black, one word for red. Thus, the perception of color is a culturally determined characteristic. Moreover, the difference between cultures in the perception of color concerns both the number of colors that have their own names and the degree of accuracy in the difference between shades of the same color in a given culture. There may be different connotations: in one culture, red means love (Catholic countries), black - sadness, white - innocence, and for representatives of another culture, red is associated with danger or death - (USA). We have the color of stupidity, blood, anxiety (traffic light).
In everyday life, we often encounter the fact that we are “not understood.” Students and teachers, children and parents, business partners and casual acquaintances, and guests from abroad do not understand. What is the problem? Why are our attempts to explain something or understand others sometimes unsuccessful?
We often blame others for this, but isn’t this the reason for our inability to see not only the material, but also the immaterial plane of existence, to fully perceive both the physical and mental world, that is, what is hidden behind external signs, texts, and a demonstrated style of behavior? .
Of course, there are objective factors that complicate understanding, such as a change in the type of culture, and, consequently, a change in languages. During periods when “the connection of times falls apart,” the problem of understanding is always actualized. The acceleration of history towards the end of the twentieth century, and therefore the faster renewal of language, also interferes with the mutual understanding of generations.
When preparing an answer to a question in a seminar lesson, you should keep in mind that the term “understanding” is used in two senses: as an intellectual, cognitive factor, but also as empathy, feeling. The complexity of understanding is due to the fact that perception and behavior are determined by ideological, national, class, and gender stereotypes formed in a person since childhood. Understanding is apperceptive, that is, new information is assimilated by correlating with what is already known, new knowledge and new experience are included in the system of knowledge already available, on this basis the selection, enrichment and classification of material occurs.
Consequently, the problem of cultural language is a problem of understanding, a problem of the effectiveness of cultural interaction both “vertically”, between cultures of different eras, and “horizontally”, that is, “communication” of different cultures existing simultaneously.
The most serious difficulty lies in translating meanings from one language to another, each of which has many semantic and grammatical features. It is no coincidence that science has formed an extreme point of view, according to which meanings are so specific to each culture that they cannot be adequately translated from language to language. Agreeing that sometimes it is really difficult to convey the meaning, especially when we are talking about unique works of culture (for example, foreigners who have read A.S. Pushkin only in translations are surprised that in Russia they honor him as a genius), we note that it is not so attempts to identify universal human concepts, which are mental phenomena of the inner world of human thought, are ineffective. Description of the meanings encoded in language, systematization, analysis of this “alphabet of human thoughts” is one of the main tasks of cultural studies.
Thus, we are dealing with two main ways of achieving understanding: within the framework of the structuralist school, this is a method of strict logic; it requires the detachment of the object of study from the person. Another method is hermeneutic, when the main task is to eliminate the distance between the object and the researcher. However, despite the apparent opposite, we do not consider it impossible to combine both approaches in the consideration of sign-symbolic systems.
Culture in this case is understood as a field of interaction between these systems. Establishing semantic connections between the elements of this system, which give an idea of the universal model of the world, is possible only when approaching the language of culture as a text that has some internal unity.
Intercultural communication is the communication of linguistic individuals belonging to different linguistic and cultural communities. Thus, it becomes clear that for successful communication with speakers of other languages, it is necessary to master not only the verbal code (foreign language), but also extra-code, background knowledge. Therefore, interfering with communication communication failures, can be caused not only by ignorance (or insufficient knowledge) of the code (language), but also by the lack of extra-code knowledge. [Vereshchagin, 1990].
The concept of communicative failure turns out to be closely related to the concept of error, since it is the errors of a foreign speaker in the generation and perception of speech that are the main source of communicative failures in communication between a foreign speaker and a native speaker. Arustamyan D.V. suggests highlighting the following foreign language errors:
I. "Technical" errors , caused by incorrect phonetic or graphic design of speech. The reason for these errors is poor knowledge of foreign phonetics, graphics and spelling (corner - coal, plate - beans, hut - heart, ship - sheep).
II. "System" errors, caused by poor command of the system of linguistic meanings of various levels and methods of their expression.
III. "Discursive" errors. These errors are caused not by ignorance of the language system, but by incorrect use of this system, which is determined by the foreigner’s lack of knowledge of the system of cultural norms and values (in the broadest sense) of the community in whose language communication is conducted. “Discourse” errors can be divided into the following groups:
- 1) "Label" errors caused by ignorance of the rules of speech etiquette, social and role aspects of communication (for example: American students addressing Russian teachers using diminutive names - Dima, Masha, etc.)
- 2)"Stereotypical" errors.
They can be divided into two groups:
- a) Errors caused by lack of knowledge of sociocultural stereotypes of speech communication, leading to the incorrect use of stereotypical speech formulas. For example, a Russian, stopping a taxi, before getting into it, negotiates with the driver about the route and price, and a Western European, transferring a stereotype of speech behavior in a given typical situation from his native culture, immediately gets into a taxi and gives the address. These kinds of differences can lead to communication failure.
- b) Lack of mastery of mental stereotypes (cf. in Russian and English), differences in the use of zoomorphic characteristics of a person. So, among the Japanese, a pig is associated with uncleanliness, and not with obesity, a puppy for a Spaniard is an angry and irritable person, a cat for the English is a freedom-loving animal, etc.;
- 3) "Encyclopedic" lack of knowledge of background knowledge, which is known to almost all speakers of another culture (for example: a German student who speaks Russian well did not understand at all why her Russian acquaintance called his friend Lefty, although he was not left-handed at all). The name “encyclopedic” is more than conditional.
IV. "Ideological" mistakes , caused by differences in the system of social, ethical, aesthetic, political, etc. views, which are basic and invariant for a particular culture. For example, the meaning of the story “The Death of an Official” by A.P. Chekhov was perceived by Japanese students as follows: the author laughs at Chervyakov and condemns him for trying to step over established social boundaries and in the theater sitting next to people at the highest level of social stairs, when he should have taken a place appropriate to his position.
Consequently, in order to avoid communicative failures, to successfully master a foreign language and culture, acculturation is necessary: “the assimilation by a person who grew up in one national culture of the essential facts, norms and values of another culture.” While maintaining national and cultural identity, respect for other cultures and tolerance.
The interaction of participants in intercultural communication should not imitate or be built solely on the rules of communication adopted in the culture being studied. It is built according to the rules of intercultural communication, which is different from communication in specific cultures and has its own goals and characteristics. [Arustamyan 2014: 734].
Adequate communication within a particular linguistic and cultural community is possible only with knowledge of both linguistic and non-linguistic semiotic systems of this community.
So, if we summarize all of the above, we can say with confidence that overcoming the language barrier is not enough to ensure effective communication between representatives of different cultures. Failures and misunderstandings in the process of intercultural communication are primarily associated with cultural differences.
Intercultural communication has its own patterns that radically influence the interaction of the subjects of such communication.
The textbook is intended for students of humanities specializing in the study of issues of intercultural communication. It discusses wide circle issues reflecting the specifics of modern cultural exchange and intercultural communications, their main forms and directions. The book covers intercultural communications in the field of music, theater and cinema, sports, scientific and educational relations, festivals and exhibitions. Separate parts of the manual are devoted to the problem of images, images and stereotypes, in particular, the problem of images of modern states. The book will be useful not only for students, but also graduate students, teachers, and anyone interested in issues of culture and intercultural relations.
* * *
by liters company.
Theoretical approaches to the problem of intercultural communication
The concept of intercultural communication. Historical aspect of intercultural communication. Intercultural communications in the era of Antiquity, the Middle Ages, New and Contemporary times. The problem of intercultural communications in the research of foreign and domestic scientists. A modern view of the features of intercultural communications by leading historians, political scientists, and philosophers. Social and psychological aspect of intercultural communications. History and current state problems in socio-psychological discourse. The linguistic aspect of intercultural communications. The role of language in the process of intercultural communication. The problem of preserving linguistic diversity at the state and interstate level. Features of the linguistic aspect of intercultural communications and the main approaches to analyzing the problem of intercultural communication. Intercultural communications in international relations. International relations as an important factor in intercultural dialogue. Features of intercultural communications in international relations in the era of Antiquity, the Middle Ages, New and Contemporary times. Multilateral and bilateral aspect of intercultural communications in international relations. Problems of dialogue of cultures in the activities of authoritative international organizations and foreign cultural policy of modern states. Intercultural communications as the basis for the professional activity of an international specialist.
§ 1. The concept of intercultural communication
Intercultural communication is, of course, a distinctive, independent branch of communication, which includes methods and scientific traditions of various disciplines, but at the same time is part of the general theory and practice of communications.
A feature of intercultural communication is that within the framework of this direction, the phenomenon of communication between representatives of different cultures and the associated problems that arise are explored.
It can be noted that for the first time the term communication was established in studies adjacent to such sciences as cybernetics, computer science, psychology, sociology, etc. Today, real sciences demonstrate a steady interest in communication issues, which is confirmed by a significant number of studies devoted to this problem.
In the English explanatory dictionary, the concept of “communication” has several semantically similar meanings:
1) The act or process of transmitting information to other people (or living beings); 2) Systems and processes used to communicate or transmit information; 3) Letter or telephone call, written or oral information; 3) Social contact; 4) Various electronic processes by which information is transmitted from one person or place to another, especially through wires, cables or radio waves; 5) Science and information transfer activities; 6) The ways in which people build relationships with each other and understand each other's feelings, etc.
In English-language linguistic literature, the term “communication” is understood as the exchange of thoughts and information in the form of speech or written signals; in Russian it has the equivalent of “communication” and is synonymous with the term “communication”. In turn, the word “communication” denotes the process of exchange of thoughts, information and emotional experiences between people.
For linguists, communication is the actualization of the communicative function of language in various speech situations, and there is no difference between communication and communication.
In the psychological and sociological literature, communication and communication are viewed as overlapping, but not synonymous concepts. Here the term “communication”, which appeared in the scientific literature at the beginning of the 20th century, is used to refer to means of communication of any objects of the material and spiritual world, the process of transferring information from person to person (exchange of ideas, ideas, attitudes, moods, feelings, etc. in human communication), as well as the transmission and exchange of information in society with the aim of influencing social processes. Communication is considered as the interpersonal interaction of people in the exchange of information of a cognitive (cognitive) or affectively evaluative nature. Despite the fact that communication and communication are often considered synonymous, these concepts also have certain differences. Communication is mainly assigned the characteristics of interpersonal interaction, and communication has an additional and broader meaning - information exchange in society. On this basis, communication is a socially conditioned process of exchange of thoughts and feelings between people in various spheres of their cognitive, labor and creative activities, implemented using predominantly verbal means of communication. In contrast, communication is a socially determined process of transmitting and perceiving information, both in interpersonal and mass communication through various channels using various verbal and non-verbal communication means. Since human existence is impossible without communication, it is a continuous process, since relationships between people, as well as the events occurring around us, have neither a beginning, nor an end, nor a strict sequence of events. They are dynamic, change and continue in space and time, flow in different directions and forms. However, the concepts of “communication” and “communication” can be considered as interrelated and interdependent. Without communication at different levels, communication is impossible, just as communication can be perceived as a continuation of dialogue taking place in different areas.
Various approaches to understanding this phenomenon are reflected in scientific research.
Significant contributions to the development of the problem of communication were made by mathematicians Andrei Markov, Ralph Hartley, as well as Norbert Wiener, who is considered the father of cybernetics. Their research was the first to examine the idea of transmitting information and to evaluate the effectiveness of the communication process itself.
Back in 1848, the famous American researcher, mathematician Claude Shannon, based on the works of his predecessors, published the monograph “Mathematical Theory of Communication,” where he examined the technical aspects of the process of transmitting information.
A new impulse of interest in the problem of communication dates back to the middle of the twentieth century. In the 50s and 60s, significant interest among scientists was caused by issues of transferring information from addressee to addressee, message coding, and message formalization.
For the first time, the real branch of communication was examined in their study by scientists G. Trader and E. Hall “Culture and Communication. Model of Analysis" in 1954. In this scientific study, the authors consider communication as an ideal goal that every person should strive for in order to more successfully adapt to the world around them.
The original term intercultural communication was introduced into scientific circulation in the 70s of the twentieth century in the famous textbook by L. Samovar and R. Porter “Communication between Cultures” (1972). In the publication, the authors analyzed the features of intercultural communication and those features that arose in its process between representatives of different cultures.
An independent definition of intercultural communication was also presented in the book by E. M. Vereshchagin and V. G. Kostomarov “Language and Culture”. Here intercultural communication is presented as “adequate mutual understanding of two participants in a communicative act belonging to different national cultures.” In this work, the authors paid special attention to the problem of language, which is undoubtedly important in communicative communication, but not the only one that determines the essence of this phenomenon.
Subsequently, intercultural communication was considered more broadly, and in in this direction scientific research areas such as translation theory, foreign language teaching, comparative cultural studies, sociology, psychology, etc. were highlighted.
Summarizing various approaches to the study of intercultural communication, and also taking into account the interdisciplinary nature of this phenomenon, we can offer the following, fairly general definition. Intercultural communication- this is a complex, complex phenomenon that includes various directions and forms of communication between individuals, groups, states belonging to different cultures.
The subject of intercultural communication can be called contacts occurring at various levels in different audiences in a bilateral, multilateral, global aspect.
Communication between cultures should be aimed at developing a constructive, balanced dialogue that is equal in relation to representatives of other cultures.
Despite the fact that the problem of intercultural communications today is of justifiable interest, many issues related to this phenomenon are quite controversial and cause controversy in the scientific community. They stem from the very essence of the phenomenon, and are also caused by various methods and approaches related to the study and analysis of communication in the field of culture.
§ 2. Historical aspect of intercultural communication
Intercultural communication today is a completely natural reality that reflects the needs of modern society and global development. However, the history of this phenomenon goes back to the deep past, deserves special attention and shows how the modern features of intercultural communications took shape, what factors had a special influence on this phenomenon, and who was the most active participant in the process that gradually established specific directions and forms of international dialogue in the field culture.
As historians, ethnographers, and representatives of other humanities note, the first contacts, reflected in the monuments of material and spiritual culture, and writing date back to the era of the formation of ancient civilizations.
Archaeological finds indicate that at this time there was quite an active exchange of household items, jewelry, original weapons, etc.
Thanks to the development of contacts, the Phoenician alphabet, which arose in Palestine between the 2nd and 1st millennia BC. e., spread to the Mediterranean countries and then became the basis of the Greek, Roman, and later Slavic alphabets, which confirms the positive significance of intercultural communication.
The special role of contacts in the era Ancient civilizations played a role in the development of science. In ancient times, the tradition of philosophers visiting eastern countries became widespread. Here the Greeks became acquainted with eastern “wisdom”, and then used their observations in scientific activity. It is generally accepted that the traditions of the famous Stoic school were greatly influenced by the teachings and lifestyle of the Indian Brahmans and Yogis.
In the history of ancient civilizations, one can also note the borrowing of the cult of gods representing other cultures, which were then included in their own pantheon. Thus, the Assyrian-Palestinian deities Astarte and Anat appeared in the Egyptian pantheon. Under the influence of ancient culture, the cult of Serapis arose during the Hellenistic period; eastern roots can be found in the veneration of the Greek gods of fertility Dionysus, Adonis and others; in Ancient Rome, the cult of the Egyptian goddess Isis became important.
Military campaigns also played a major role in the development of intercultural communication, for example, the aggressive policy of Alexander the Great led to the fact that the geography of intercultural communication increased significantly.
During the era of the Roman Empire, a system of intercultural communication gradually emerged, which developed thanks to active road construction and stable trade relations. Rome at that time became the largest city of the ancient world, a real center of intercultural communication.
Along the famous “Silk Road” they were delivered to Western Europe from China and through Asian countries luxury goods, jewelry, silk, spices and other exotic goods.
Exactly at ancient period The first areas of cultural interaction also arise, such as trade, religious, artistic ties, tourism, theatrical contacts, literary, educational, and sports exchanges, occurring in various forms.
The actors of international cultural interaction at this time were representatives of the ruling classes, the intellectual elite of society, traders, and warriors. However, intercultural communication of this time was not without peculiarities and contradictions. Representatives of various cultures treated the conquests of other peoples with restraint, with a certain wariness. Language barriers, ethnic and religious differences, specific mentality - all this complicated cultural dialogue and acted as an obstacle to the intensive development of contacts. So, in Ancient Egypt, In ancient Greece, a representative of another civilization was often perceived as an enemy, an adversary, as a result of which ancient civilizations were largely closed and introverted.
Representatives of ancient peoples assigned a special place and importance to their own civilization in their system of views on the world order. In the most ancient maps of Egypt, Greece, and China, the center of the Universe was its own country, around which other countries were located. Of course, at this time intercultural communication was presented in its rudimentary form and was of an intercivilizational nature, but later, developing and evolving, it became the basis of intercultural communications of the modern period.
In the Ancient era, great scientists attempted to comprehend the phenomenon of communication itself. The philosopher, teacher of Alexander the Great, Aristotle, in his famous work “Rhetoric,” first tried to formulate one of the first models of communication, which boiled down to the following scheme: speaker – speech – audience.
A new stage in the development of intercultural communications dates back to the Middle Ages. In the Middle Ages, the development of intercultural communication was determined by factors that largely characterize the culture and international relations of that time, when feudal states with a fairly low level of development of productive forces, the dominance of a subsistence economy, and a weak level of development of the social division of labor appeared on the political arena.
An important factor influencing the characteristics of intercultural communication has become religion, which determines both the content and the main directions and forms of dialogue.
The emergence of monotheistic religions changed the geography of cultural exchange and contributed to the emergence of new spiritual centers. During this period, countries are coming to the fore that previously did not play the role of cultural leaders, but were only provinces of the largest ancient civilizations, which largely exerted cultural influence on them. Cultural ties of this period were characterized by isolation and locality. They often depended on chance, were most often limited to a narrow region and were very unstable. Frequent epidemics, wars, and feudal strife limited the possibility of developing strong cultural ties. In addition, the spiritual content of the Middle Ages itself was not conducive to active cultural contacts. Sacred books were the basis of the worldview of a medieval person, they closed him on his own inner world, his country, religion, culture.
In the Middle Ages, the Crusades played their very specific role in the development of cultural ties. During the period of the “Great Migration” there were devastating barbarian invasions of Europe and Africa, which also illustrates the peculiarities of the development of intercultural contacts of this time. The expansion of Central Asian nomadic peoples, which lasted for 1300 years, also dates back to this period. The most obvious examples of interaction between European and Muslim cultures, dating back to the Middle Ages, can be found in the history of Spain.
In the 8th century, Spain was subjected to powerful eastern aggression. Moving from the Arabian deserts, through Egypt and North Africa Arab-Berber tribes crossed Gibraltar, defeated the Visigoth army, occupied the entire Iberian Peninsula, and only the Battle of Poitiers in 732, which ended in the victory of the Frankish leader Charles Martel, saved Europe from the Arab invasion. However, Spain for a long time, until the end of the 15th century, became a country where Eastern and European traditions intersected and different cultures were connected.
With the conquering Arabs, another culture penetrated into Spain, which was transformed in a very original way on local soil and became the basis for the creation of new styles, magnificent examples of material culture, science and art.
By the time of the conquest of the Pyrenees, the Arabs were a very gifted and talented people. Their knowledge, skills and abilities in many areas of human activity significantly exceeded European “learning”. Thus, thanks to the Arabs, “0” was included in the European number system. The Spaniards, and then the Europeans, became acquainted with very advanced surgical instruments. On the territory of the European country they built unique architectural monuments: the Alhambra, the Cordoba Mosque, which have survived to this day.
The Arabs in Spain produced leather, copper, carved wood, silk, glass vessels and lamps, which were then exported to other countries and were in well-deserved demand there.
The Arabs brought special fame and well-deserved respect to ceramic products, the so-called lustrated vessels, which have a special metallic luster. There is an opinion that the art of lustration was transferred by the Arabs from Persia and then improved.
Back in the 11th–12th centuries, Europeans adopted from the Arabs the technique of woven carpets, which were called Saracen.
The influence of Arab art was not limited only to the Middle Ages. Arabic style and Moorish motifs can be found in works of art of the Romantic era and in Art Nouveau art.
The example of the interaction of European and Arab cultures in the Middle Ages quite convincingly illustrates the features of intercultural relations of this period, which, of course, were very fruitful, but were mainly limited to borrowing, and not to deep penetration and comprehension of the culture of another people.
However, despite religious dominance, as well as the transformation and reduction of various directions and forms of intercultural interaction in the Middle Ages, new forms of contacts appeared, which are certainly important for modern intercultural communications.
The most interesting direction of intercultural interaction in the Middle Ages can be called the formation and development of educational contacts, which were an indispensable condition for university education. The first universities arose in Europe in the 9th century. They were opened in cities, mainly at churches and monasteries. Already since the Middle Ages, the practice of international student pilgrimage has been developing. Medieval universities had their own scientific specialization. Thus, Italian universities were considered the best in the field of medicine and law, French universities provided the best education in the field of theology and philosophy, German universities (since the Modern Age) established themselves as the best schools in the field of natural sciences.
student life in all European countries it was organized in the same way. Teaching was conducted in Latin. There were no barriers to crossing borders. All these factors contributed to the fact that student exchange was a natural phenomenon, and the migration of students within Europe was an integral part of their lives.
During the Middle Ages, such a form of trade contacts as fair activities also emerged. The first fairs arose during the period of early feudalism, and their development was directly related to the formation of commodity-money production. The first fairs were opened at the intersections of trade routes, transshipment points, they were organized in certain days, months, seasons. In the Middle Ages, fairs were organized by monasteries, and the beginning of trading coincided with the end of church services.
As cities expanded and grew, fairs became international in nature, and the cities where they were held became centers of international trade. Fairs contributed to the development of intercultural communication and acquaintance with the traditions of different peoples. Having appeared in the Middle Ages, fairs, for the most part, did not lose their importance in the modern era.
The Renaissance played an important role in the development of intercultural communications. Great geographical discoveries contributed to the development of trade and became a condition for the dissemination of knowledge about the culture of various peoples. Gradually, an urgent need for information exchange appears; non-European cultures are of great interest to Europeans. Already from the 16th century, intercultural contacts in Europe were associated with a fascination with exotic countries, goods, and luxury goods. Kings, nobles, and representatives of the aristocracy began to collect outlandish collections, which later became the basis of famous museums and art collections. The fascination with strange countries, peoples and cultures is reflected in art. Oriental motifs are woven into the works of European masters.
However, interest in “other” cultures also had negative consequences. It was accompanied by rampant plunder, European colonization and the creation of European colonial empires, and was associated with the destruction of the cultures of peoples subject to European rule.
Thus, despite the expansion of the geography of intercultural communications, political, religious, and economic differences did not contribute to the establishment of equal relations between representatives of different cultures.
New impulses for the development of the communicative space were put forward by the very course of history, when in the modern era the need arose to organize the production process under the conditions of division of labor, new means of communication appeared (river, ground transport), and the world begins to represent an integral, unified organism.
Life itself in the modern era dictated the need to develop international cultural contacts. The value of science based on experiment scientific knowledge involves the exchange of information and educated people.
The geography of intercultural communication is changing. Almost all countries and peoples are involved in the dialogue during this period, regardless of their religious, cultural, or political affiliation. With the creation of large-scale industry in Europe and the intensification of the export of capital, acquaintance with the elements of industrial civilization took place, and in part became part of European education. The necessary conditions have arisen for the development of sustainable development of intercultural communication. The entire political and spiritual life of humanity began to acquire a stable, international character. New incentives have emerged for the exchange of information in the field of culture and the acquisition of advanced industrial experience.
The most important role in the dissemination of information, intensity and expansion of the geography of intercultural communication was played by the development of transport - railway, sea, and then air. Already in the 19th century, the world map appeared in its modern outlines.
The modern era is characterized not only by a significant expansion of the forms and directions of intercultural exchange, but also by the involvement of new participants in the communication process. The emerging processes of democratization and integration have become a sign of the times. During this period, intercultural communication begins to be regulated both at the state level and develops taking into account private initiative.
In the modern era, it becomes obvious that culture and intercultural communications can become an important part of international relations, a flexible and very effective tool in resolving political and economic issues.
However, a significant contradiction in intercultural relations in this period was the idea of unequal values of the cultures of different peoples. Racism and national prejudices were not only the reason for the continued inequality of peoples, but also a psychological factor that made it possible to ignore the most ancient and, of course, richest cultures of peoples who lagged behind in their industrial development. World culture was artificially divided into the culture of the “civilized world” and the culture of “savage peoples”. At the same time, the struggle for influence on colonial and dependent countries became a source of international conflicts, world military clashes, accompanied by a spiritual crisis and destruction of the cultural environment. The roots of these contradictions are largely determined by the course of world history. For a long time, Western countries, due to their technical, technological, economic and political development, had a strong influence on others, in a broad sense eastern countries, cultures and civilizations of Asia, Africa, America.
In the scientific literature today, the expansionist aspirations and aggressive policy of the West are openly noted, which dates back to the campaigns of Alexander the Great, Roman rule, and the Crusades. To a large extent, the aggressive policy of European countries was confirmed during the period of great geographical discoveries and the establishment of the colonial system. The ideological foundations of the expansionist policy were expressed in the idea that only Western, European civilization is capable of ensuring the progressive development of humanity and its foundations can be universal.
The cultural expansion of the West is also called cultural imperialism. It is characterized by the use of political and economic power to instill and spread the values of one's culture and disdain for the gains and values of another culture.
At the end of the 19th century, the prerequisites emerged for the understanding of the communication process, which in the 20th century became a fully recognized scientific category.
The whole complex of contradictions and traditions of intercultural relations of the 19th century found its continuation in the 20th century, which in historical memory is associated with the destructive consequences of world wars, the emergence of weapons of mass destruction, as well as the rapid growth of communication processes that were a consequence of scientific progress, the development of transport, the emergence of new means of communication.
In the twentieth century, the number of participants in intercultural exchange grew steadily, which reflected the process of democratization and integration of the world community. Intercultural communication has become a necessary condition for solving global problems and pressing tasks, among which we can note those directly related to issues of cultural cooperation and its new understanding. In the 20th century, the idea of the equivalence of different cultures began to emerge; issues of preserving the identity of national cultures and cultural diversity were put on the agenda. In addition, the acute humanitarian conflicts that arose required the universal participation of representatives of different cultures and spiritual traditions.
Already since the second half of the twentieth century, the world community has been consolidating. Interest in cultural contacts becomes consistent and conscious. There is a desire to organize intercultural contacts, both at the state level and at the level of international organizations. Intercultural communication is beginning to be perceived as a fully recognized value in politics, economics, and international relations.
However, along with the obvious processes of integration in the twentieth century, there are also trends that are associated with differentiation arising from political confrontation and religious differences.
For example, the USSR for a long time pursued a policy of isolationism towards capitalist countries. Official propaganda launched a fight against cosmopolitanism and sycophancy towards the West. However, it should be noted that in the USA and many other capitalist countries, the attitude towards the USSR was extremely ideological, which, of course, gave intercultural communications a particularly highly politicized character.
IN modern world We can also find examples that representatives of various religions (especially the Muslim and Christian world) do not strive for deep cooperation or development of dialogue, but, on the contrary, experience complex conflicts, sometimes ending in military clashes and terrorist acts.
Thus, two trends can be noted in modern intercultural communication. On the one hand, there is an active expansion of the communicative space, which includes more and more countries and representatives of various social groups. However, on the other hand, dialogue in the cultural sphere cannot be called equal, mutually beneficial for many participants in this process.
The problems of intercultural communications of our time are of a rather complex nature, which stems from the phenomenon of culture itself. So, even in the modern era, many scientists turned to the problem of intercultural dialogue, and presented various studies directly or indirectly related to the general problem of intercultural communications.
The formation of scientific concepts that systematically study cultures as special forms of organization of human life dates back to approximately the second half of the 19th century. They were the result of increased interest in the study of the phenomenon of culture in a philosophical aspect. At the same time, in the works of many Western and Russian philosophers, the question of the interaction of different cultures and civilizations was raised, including the interaction of the cultures of the West and the East.
The subject of O. Spengler's research is the “morphology of world history,” that is, the uniqueness of world cultures. The author of numerous interesting publications rejects the usual periodization of world history into the Ancient World, the Middle Ages and the Modern Age and identifies a number of separate, independent cultures that, like living organisms, experience periods of origin, formation and dying. The dying of a culture is characterized by a transition from culture to civilization. “Dying, culture turns into civilization,” writes famous philosopher and cultural scientist. Hence, O. Spengler contrasts each other with such concepts as “becoming” and “what has become,” that is, “culture” and “civilization,” which is a key aspect in his concept. According to Spengler, the end of Western civilization (since 2000) is simultaneous with the 1st–2nd centuries. Ancient Rome or XI–XIII centuries. China. The list of cultures that he calls “great or powerful,” in addition to the cultures of Egypt, China, India, Greece and Russia, includes separately the culture of Europe (“Faustian culture”) and separately the “magical” culture of the Arabs.
Speaking about the interaction of cultures, O. Spengler is skeptical that in a few centuries there will not be a single German, Englishman or Frenchman left on earth. Culture, according to Spengler, is “the powerful creativity of a ripening soul, the birth of myth as an expression of a new feeling for God, the flowering of high art, filled with deep symbolic necessity, the immanent action of a state idea among a group of peoples united by a uniform worldview and a unified life style.” Civilization is the dying of creative energies in the soul; problematism of worldview; replacing questions of a religious and metaphysical nature with questions of ethics and life practice. In art - the collapse of monumental forms, the rapid change of foreign styles coming into fashion, luxury, habit and sport. In politics - the transformation of popular organisms into practically interested masses, the dominance of mechanism and cosmopolitanism, the victory of world cities over the countryside, the power of the fourth estate. Spengler's typological system can be called symbolic.
In addition, the answer to the question of how open cultures are to comprehension, which was posed by the famous researcher Oswald Spengler, is not entirely clear. In his works, he represented each culture as a closed organism, very original and unique. Spengler noted that there cannot be deep contacts or dialogue between representatives of different cultures. The famous scientist believed that each culture has its own “language of worldview”, understandable only to those who belong to this culture. The scientist argued that there cannot be deep cultural contacts between representatives of different cultures? and the dialogue is reduced only to borrowing, copying other people's samples, transferred to a different cultural context.
Of course, this point of view reflects only one of the features of modern intercultural communication, which can be called significant, but along with localization trends, globalization processes exist and are actively developing, reflecting the specifics of the development of intercultural communication.
Nevertheless, one cannot help but admit that O. Spengler was also at the origins of the problem of dialogue of cultures.
Interesting approaches to the development of the problem of intercultural communications were also proposed by the famous English scientist A. D. Toynbee. He is the originator of the concept of "call and response". In his work “Comprehension of History,” the scientist also addresses the problem of the emergence, development and death of civilizations in world history. In total, he identifies 21 civilizations, among which there are separate Arab and Western cultures. It should be noted that Toynbee also distinguishes Syrian and Persian cultures separately. His typological approach is based on comparative analysis.
A.D. Toynbee categorically rejects the existence of a single civilization. In the concept of civilization, he includes a group of countries and peoples that are connected by the same fate and worldview. The author also contrasts civilization with primitive societies, he talks about a certain hierarchy that exists in civilization - this is a universal state and a universal religion. According to Toynbee, civilization goes through three stages: flourishing, breakdown and decline.
The causes of the death of civilization are the internal (revolution) and external proletariat (war) or the collapse of the structure. The reasons for the growth and development of civilization are the challenge and the presence of a creative minority. Toynbee distinguished between periods of greatest “creativity” and periods of greatest power, the “universal state.” Between them is the “era of crisis” with protracted civil wars and decline. As a result of the crisis, one political unit ultimately defeats all the others and subjugates the entire “area” of civilization, a “golden autumn” sets in, which ultimately ends in complete withering and the “invasion of barbarians.” Thus, in the analogy of civilization with the human body, a period approximately corresponding to the “midlife crisis” appears.
In his book “Comprehension of History,” A.D. Toynbee examines problems that are relevant to us, namely, problems of environment and race (racial theory and racial feeling), problems of religion (including religious discrimination and caste), problems of migration (stimulus overseas migration). A. D. Toynbee gives the following definition of the concept of race: “race is a term used to designate a characteristic feature inherent in any genus or species, class or group of living beings.” Regarding the racist theory, the author writes that “racial differences in the anatomical structure of man are considered as immutable and are perceived as evidence of equally immutable racial differences in the human psyche.” Toynbee concludes that racial feeling in the West mainly came from the Western settlers, and it also had a religious character.
Addressing the problems of migration, Toynbee writes that its stimulus is the social failure and disadvantage of the migrating people - they go to a new land in search of happiness, and even knowing that they will encounter the prejudices of local residents, a new language, culture, manners and customs - all the same ready to go forward, fight and assert myself. In his studies, Toynbee also considers the problem of caste, and notes two cases: when the local population is conquered by an invader who considers it necessary not to exterminate them, but to reduce them to the position of a lower caste, and also when the local population accepts immigrants on its territory, but prefers to keep them in unfavorable and humiliating conditions. Thus, the privileged race occupies a prestigious place in all walks of life. The disadvantaged race, as a rule, is engaged in crafts and trade.
A. Toynbee sees the phenomenon of religious discrimination as similar to racial discrimination. The author traces religious discrimination in three various options: “where the heirs of the disadvantaged community are members of the same society and belong to the same civilization as the heirs of the privileged community; where the heirs of the disadvantaged and privileged communities belong to two different developing civilizations; where members of a privileged community belong to a developing civilization, while members of a disadvantaged community represent a relict civilization.”
Let us note that Toynbee argued that it was possible to save Western civilization by strengthening the role of the religious-church principle. Toynbee's Civilizations to a greater extent represent a variant of cultural community.
The problem of historical and cultural typology was presented in his research by the Russian philosopher N. Ya. Danilevsky. He identified a total of 12 independent civilizations or, as he called them, historical and cultural types: Egyptian; Chinese; Assyro-Babylonian-Phoenician, or Old Semitic; Indian; Iranian; Jewish; Greek; Roman; New Semitic, or Arabian; Germano-Roman, or European; Mexican; Peruvian. This division of civilizations by N. Danilevsky was the basis for three main conclusions: firstly, each great civilization showed a kind of archetype, which was built according to a specific plan; secondly, he proposed the theory that the life of civilizations has its limit, and one civilization replaces another; and thirdly, he believed that comparative analysis particular and general qualities of civilization will entail a deeper understanding of history as a whole.
Addressing the issue of interaction of cultures, N. Ya. Danilevsky believed that the cultures of different peoples would be almost impossible to mix with each other. He identified five laws of historical development, based on the concept of cultural-historical types, in accordance with one of them, civilizations do not spread from one people to another, but only influence each other.
A qualitatively different approach to the classification of cultures or civilizations was expressed by P. Sorokin, who refuted the integrated essence of civilization and predetermined this role for “supersystems” or “large forms”, within which culture is born. P. Sorokin explores the existence of four supersystems over three millennia using material from the Mediterranean and the West. Its supersystem coincides with the initial period of crop growth; sensational - with a period of their maturity and decline, a culture of ideal synthesis - with the moment of culmination of development (especially in art and philosophy) and eclectic, or mixed - with a period of decline. Unlike the authors of other typologies and concepts, P. Sorokin, in the analysis of supersystem cultures, pays special attention to the classification of cultural elements.
The famous historian and political scientist Z. Brzezinski addresses the issues of interaction between cultures today in his work “Choice. World domination or global leadership." The author writes that in the modern world there is a huge uneven distribution of poverty, the social consequences of uneven aging of the world's population, and, accordingly, migration pressure. The author notes some contradictions between globalization and migration - in some rich countries, “the same people who strongly condemn globalization, at the same time, put forward harsh anti-immigration slogans because they want to preserve the image of the nation-state that they are familiar with.”
He notes that this was not always the case, that before the emergence of nation states, the movement of people was carried out without special restrictions and was often even encouraged by enlightened rulers. In broad terms, Brzezinski writes that until the 20th century, migration was determined by socio-economic conditions, not political decisions. The passport is, according to the researcher, a kind of attribute that symbolizes the loss of humanity’s right, and “the consequence was nationalism, which from a humanitarian point of view was a step back.”
At the present stage, the expanding European Union faces many problems - including how impenetrable its borders should be. When the new ten members were admitted in 2002, a pressing question was how soon the current member states would be willing to lift existing restrictions on the free movement of labor from the newly admitted states.
Z. Brzezinski emphasizes that the social, demographic, economic, and cultural differences between countries in the world are too great - this is the incentive for some peoples to migrate en masse. There is a huge difference in income between the rich West, which the author writes is shrinking in size and aging, and the poorer East and South, which are growing and will remain relatively young. Z. Brzezinski's research reflects the view of a specialist in the field of international relations on the problem of dialogue of cultures. He addresses this topic indirectly, in the context of the rather complex problem of migration, which is a separate topic within common problem intercultural communications.
Questions about the dialogue of cultures were also raised in S. Huntington’s famous study “The Clash of Civilizations.” According to his definition, civilization is a cultural entity. Villages, regions, ethnic groups, nationalities, religious groups all have distinct cultures at varying levels of cultural diversity. The European Communities, in turn, will be divided according to cultural traits, which distinguish them from Arab and Chinese communities. However, according to S. Huntington, Arab, Chinese and Western communities are not part of any broader cultural entity. They form civilizations. Thus, civilization is a grouping of people on a highly cultural basis and a very broad layer of the cultural essence of people. It is determined both by general objective elements, such as language, history, religion, customs, and by the subjective self-determination of people. Since people define their identity in ethnic and religious terms, they see the relationship between them and members of other ethnic groups and religions as “us” versus “them.” In the future, according to the author, “the importance of identifying a civilization will increase, and the world will be shaped to a greater extent by the interaction of seven or eight major civilizations: Western, Confucian, Japanese, Islamic, Indian, Orthodox, Latin American, and perhaps African.” The author notes a tendency towards strengthening economic regionalism. “On the one hand, successful economic regionalism will enhance awareness of civilization. On the other hand, economic regionalism can only lead to success when its roots are in a common civilization.”
S. Huntington draws attention to the fact that, on the one hand, the West is at the peak of its power. At the same time, the phenomenon of returning to one's roots is clearly evident among non-Western civilizations. The West is faced with non-Western civilizations with their growing desire, using their resources, to shape the world along the paths of non-Western development. In many non-Western countries, elites are emerging that are characterized by anti-Western allegiances and educated in local culture. Cultural characteristics and differences are less changeable, compromised and resolvable than political and economic ones, as the author notes.
At the same time, the researcher foresees the coming conflict of the West with all other civilizations, primarily Muslim and Confucian, which, in his opinion, have already formed an anti-Western bloc. “Differences in economic power and the struggle for military and economic power, for social institutions - this is the first source of conflict between the West and other civilizations. A second source of conflict is cultural differences reflected in core values and beliefs. Western concepts are fundamentally different from those prevailing in the rest of the world. Western ideas often have little resonance in Islamic, Confucian, Japanese, Hindu, Buddhist or Orthodox cultures. Western efforts to spread such ideas create a backlash against “imperialist human rights” and the affirmation of indigenous culture and values, as exemplified by the support of religious fundamentalism among younger generations in non-Western cultures.”
Thus, based on the theory of S. Huntington, we can conclude that the central axis of international relations in the future will be the conflict between “the West and the rest of the world” and the reaction of non-Western civilizations to Western power and its values. This reaction, according to Huntington, will be expressed mainly in the form of one of three forms or a combination of several. At one extreme, non-Western states are trying to pursue a course of isolationism in order to isolate their societies from Western penetration and not participate in the affairs of the Western-dominated world community. The second alternative is the equivalent of the “trailer car” theory in international relations: an attempt to join the West and accept its system of values and social institutions. The third alternative is to try to “balance” the West by developing economic and military power, and cooperation with other non-Western societies as opposed to the West, while maintaining their national values and social institutions.
Many outstanding philosophers, cultural scientists, and thinkers of the second half of the 19th-21st centuries turned to understanding the problem of developing dialogue in the field of culture. The works of outstanding Western philosophers O. Spengler, A. J. Toynbee, S. Huntington, Z. Brzezhinski, as well as prominent Russian thinkers N. Ya. Danilevsky, P. Sorokin became the foundation for modern theories of interaction between cultures and served as the basis for further research in this direction.
Naturally, representatives of such a science as ethnography also addressed the problems of international cultural relations. It was in ethnography, based on rich and varied material, that results were obtained that clearly demonstrated the interaction of cultures of different ethnic groups and the importance of their influence on each other. Ethnographers formulated an important observation confirming that the intensity of cultural contacts can be considered as a consequence of the high level of one’s own culture and its openness to the achievements of other civilizations.
Such authoritative ethnographers and anthropologists as J. Fraser, C. Levi-Strauss, M. Moss consistently addressed these issues in their scientific work.
The history of the development of cultural interaction and the main approaches formed in scientific practice clearly indicate that this direction is quite popular, relevant, has established traditions and is of particular interest today during the period of active integration and development of intercultural communication.
At the present stage, issues of interaction between cultures are subject to a comprehensive rethinking. The world is experiencing intense spatial mass mobility of the population. As a result of the internationalization of life, the problems of intercultural interactions, integration, and international migration become of great importance, and the processes of intercultural communications are actively developing. Understanding these processes is extremely important for the harmonious development of world civilization due to their obvious influence on the social, economic and cultural spheres of life in modern society. The problem of interaction between cultures today is so complex and ambiguous that it requires a serious, comprehensive understanding, taking into account all the various components of this phenomenon and based on existing experience.
§ 3. Social and psychological aspect of intercultural communication
Research in the field of psychology and sociology is of great importance for understanding the problem of intercultural communications. According to the main theoretical approaches to the analysis of this topic, at the center of intercultural communication is a person for whom knowledge of the achievements of other peoples and civilizations is the most important socio-psychological factor. According to the famous researcher K. Popper, such important categories of psychology for a person as introversion and extroversion can also be attributed to culture, the center of which is man.
The most interesting studies related to the problem of intercultural communications relate to such a direction of psychology as ethnopsychology.
Ethnic characteristics and differences can be called one of the most important problems of intercultural communication. It was the focus of scientific attention of many representatives of the humanities, and was first formulated in the era of Antiquity. The great ancient scientists Hippocrates and Plato wrote about this.
In the famous work of Hippocrates “On airs, waters, places” we read that peoples have certain differences that are associated with the location of the country, climatic conditions, and natural factors.
It should be noted that the role of the geographical factor in shaping the character of the people was later especially noted by researchers in Modern and Contemporary times. Characterizing the natural conditions of Europe and Asia, the great Russian scientist V. O. Klyuchevsky writes: “Two geographical features distinguish Europe from other parts of the world and from Asia mainly: this is, firstly, the variety of surface shapes and, secondly, the extremely sinuous outline sea shores." It is known what a strong and versatile effect both of these features have on the life of the country. Europe has primacy in the force with which these conditions apply in it. Nowhere do mountain ranges, plateaus and plains replace each other so often over such relatively small spaces as in Europe. On the other hand, deep bays, far-out peninsulas, and capes form a kind of coastal lace of western and southern Europe. Here there is one mile of seashore per 30 square miles of continental space, while in Asia there is one mile of seashore per 100 square miles of continental space. In contrast to the diversity of plant and climatic zones of Europe, delicately outlined by the lace of sea shores, in Eurasia “the sea forms only a small part of its borders; The coastline of its seas is insignificant compared to its continental space; exactly one mile of sea coast falls on 41 square miles of continent.
Uniformity is a distinctive feature of its surface; one form dominates almost the entire length: this form is a plain, a wavy plane, very slightly raised above sea level.
Taking into account the characteristics of the countries of the Old World, he identifies six subcontinents: Europe, Eurasia, Far East, India, Afrasia (Middle East), tropical Africa (sub-Saharan Africa). Natural conditions These six great zones predetermined the ethnic diversity of humanity.
Significant interest in the topic of national identity in the context of ethnopsychology arises in the era of the New Age, when the Great Enlighteners sought to determine the peculiarities of the way of life of different peoples, national culture, and national specifics. Almost all scientists of that time addressed this topic. It was most fully and consistently developed by the famous French educator C. Montesquiou. In his scientific reasoning, he noted that climate, soil, and relief had a special impact on national culture and national character. The philosopher noted that such an impact can be both indirect and direct.
An original view on the problem of the formation of national character and national characteristics in his research was presented by K. Helvetius. According to Helvetius, character is a way of seeing and feeling, this is something that is characteristic only of one people and depends more on socio-political history, on forms of government.
Representatives of German classical philosophy I. Kant and G. Hegel made a significant contribution to the development of the problem of ethnic psychology. Kant's famous work “Anthropology from a practical point of view” contains such concepts as “people”, “nation”, “character of the people”. A people in his study is an association in one area or another of many people who make up one whole. Each nation has its own character, manifested in emotional experience (affectation), in attitude and perception of another culture. The main manifestation of national character, according to the philosopher, is the attitude towards other nations, pride in state and public freedom. According to Kant, the basis for understanding the character of a people is the innate character traits of their ancestors and, to a lesser extent, climate, soil, and form of government. He proved his observation by the fact that when the place of residence or forms of government change, the character of the people most often does not change.
In the 19th century, ethnic psychology continued to develop and became an independent scientific discipline. Its consistent development is associated with the names and works of such scientists as H. Steinthal, M. Lazarus, W. Wundt.
It was H. Steinthal and W. Wundt who first tried to present folk psychology as an independent direction of scientific research. Their works identified the tasks of folk psychology, which boiled down to understanding the psychological essence of the folk spirit; identifying the laws by which the spiritual activity of the people occurs; as well as determining the factors and conditions for the emergence, development and disappearance of representatives of a particular people.
The famous French scientist G. Lebon devoted his research to the problem of folk psychology. Le Bon considered the most important to describe the mental structure of historical races and determine the dependence on it of the history of the people, their civilization.
In the twentieth century, research in the field of psychology related to the problem of intercultural communications was mainly devoted to the formation of national character and national culture. The works of S. Freud played a certain role in the development of this direction. Methodological basis This direction included methods of in-depth interviewing, dream analysis, meticulous recording of autobiographies, long-term observation of interpersonal relationships in families belonging to different nations and ethnic groups.
An independent direction of psychology in the discourse of intercultural communication can be called work devoted to the study of personality in different cultures. Various studies conducted by specialists have led to the conclusion that there is a so-called “modal personality”, which refers to a certain personality type, which includes the largest number of adult members of society. However, it was noted that due to numerous variations, the concept of multimodal personality has become widespread, which allows us to identify “characteristics of a nation.”
In the conditions of international integration, the development of globalization processes and powerful cultural exchange, issues related to the peculiarities of the specific experience of someone else's cultural experience, traditions in direct communication with representatives of another culture, which are developed within the framework of psychology and sociology, acquire particular urgency and practical significance. Almost every person is familiar with the feeling of confusion and alienation when he finds himself in another culture or is forced to communicate with foreigners. A person who finds himself in a different culture finds himself in a different world with different traditions, moral and ethical guidelines, etc.
Something alien can be perceived as something unusual, exotic, and extremely interesting. However, at the same time, foreign traditions can cause a feeling of anxiety, fear, extreme danger.
In scientific and popular literature, social groups that are open to communication, to a foreign culture and perceive it very positively and friendly are usually called xenophiles.
On the contrary, if communication with representatives of another culture causes an extremely hostile reaction and aggression, a desire to resist traditions and certain moral and ethical guidelines, then such a group is called xenophobes.
Currently, the study of these groups and their psychological characteristics is especially relevant in connection with the problems of emigration that many countries face.
As an original topic, intercultural communications became a problem in psychology and sociology in the 70s of the twentieth century. Within the framework of these sciences, at this time, social and psychological aspects of communication, features of behavior in the process of intercultural dialogue, and features of the development of intercultural contacts began to be considered. Communication in the sociological aspect is considered as a consequence of the laws of social development. Sociological approaches to the study of intercultural communications are interesting, first of all, for their methodology.
Researchers in the field of psychology and sociology identify the following specific types of reactions to representatives of other cultures and to other cultures in general:
1. Denial of cultural differences;
2. Protecting one's own cultural superiority and identity;
3. Minimizing differences;
4. Acceptance of existing cultural differences;
5. Adaptation to new culture;
6. Integration.
Such types of reactions as denial of cultural differences, defense of one's own cultural superiority are based on the confidence of representatives of a certain culture that the beliefs, norms, and values of people all over the world should be the same.
In addition, there is an opinion that the way of life and ideological foundations of another culture can pose a threat to the culture with which they interacted. In the conditions of coexistence in one state of different nations, ethnic groups, significant groups of emigrants, there is no doubt that a defensive reaction of certain groups of the population arises, which can take on very aggressive forms. History and modern international relations know many such examples when representatives of another culture were perceived as enemies; just remember the ideas of Nazism, the Ku Klux Klan movement, etc.
A positive attitude towards representatives of another culture is also associated with such phenomena as adaptation and integration.
Adaptation is associated with a person’s desire to adapt to the conditions of another culture, without fundamentally changing his identity, preserving his traditions, moral and ethical values.
Deeper penetration and comprehension of another culture is associated with integration. Integration into another culture, cultural environment is determined, first of all, by certain living conditions and is possible when an individual lives in a different environment for a long enough time, when he creates a family outside his historical homeland, and is engaged in professional activities.
A fairly convincing example of the integration of our compatriots can be called the creative and artistic emigration of the twentieth century. Many Russian and Soviet writers, artists, musicians were never able to adapt to the new conditions, the new cultural environment. However, for such famous writers as I. Brodsky, V. Nabokov, a foreign language became their native language and, presenting their works in English, they achieved world recognition and received prestigious prizes and awards.
American researchers, for whom this topic is of great practical importance, have successfully and actively dealt with the issue of perceiving foreign culture.
American colleagues developed and substantiated certain stages of contact and comprehension of another culture. Their work is supported by rich and varied material, real-life examples, and statistical information.
"Zero stage" represents the first encounter with another culture. It is associated with superficial ideas about her. The zero stage involves general acquaintance with various manifestations of another culture. These are the impressions of a tourist, a traveler.
The next stage is conventionally named "Honeymoon". It is characterized by a very positive attitude towards another culture and a desire to idealize it.
After this stage comes the so-called "culture shock phase", which is associated with a more realistic view of another culture, an understanding of its problems and characteristics. After this phase, there is a possibility of adaptation, integration or refusal, escape from this culture.
Today we can note that in major cities, in megacities there are very unique cultural islands that are created by immigrants seeking to distance themselves from a culture that is foreign to them. They maintain constant contacts with their compatriots, organize national holidays, and strive in every possible way to demonstrate their identity in the context of other cultures. These examples are most clearly presented in the USA. However, in modern Russia we can identify various foreign cultural groups that in every possible way confirm their identity. These are Armenians, Azerbaijanis, Georgians, Chechens and others.
Issues of adaptation and integration of various groups into other foreign cultural environments are also dealt with by modern psychology, sociology and other humanities, which make a significant contribution to understanding the problem of intercultural communications.
Particularly noteworthy are the work methods of sociologists. Sociologists working in the field of intercultural communication use traditional methods for this science of questioning specifically selected groups of respondents. The questionnaires developed and introduced into scientific and practical use are aimed at identifying certain attitudes and stereotypes manifested in people’s behavior. Basically, sociology examines the behavior of representatives of different cultures in the workplace, in close business interactions and in the business sphere. This is due to the fact that sociological research finds its practical application, first of all, in modern transnational corporations, which play an increasingly significant role in modern economics and politics.
The results obtained by sociologists have great value. On their basis, appropriate practical recommendations are formulated, which are then implemented in the form of special intercultural trainings. Typical topics of survey respondents are: exchange of information, interaction with colleagues, decision-making practice, behavior in conflict situations, attitude towards the leader, connection between work and private life, etc. It is clear that most of the culturally determined behavioral stereotypes studied can be raised to certain cultural parameters, formulated by the famous sociologist Geert Hofstedeo, which deserve special attention.
The famous sociologist and management theorist Geert Hofstede, as a result of his extensive research in the late 1970s, was able to formulate four characteristics that can describe national cultures by their position relative to each other on the scale of each of the four parameters. The study consisted of surveying a large number of employees (more than 1000) of a multinational corporation in more than one hundred countries about their attitudes towards work and behavior in the workplace. The characteristics obtained as a result of statistical processing made it possible to formulate the following principles of cultural oppositions.
Power distance. The extent to which a society accepts an unequal distribution of power among its members. In cultures with low power distance (for example, Scandinavia), the communication style of politicians is markedly different from, for example, Turkey, where a politician must exude importance, authority and power.
Individualism. The extent to which a society accepts that an individual's beliefs and actions can be independent of collective or group beliefs and actions. Thus, in the USA, success is formulated in terms of individual successes and achievements and individual responsibility for actions is confirmed.
Collectivism, on the contrary, means that people must link their views and actions with what the group (family, organization, party) believes. In such cultures (Latin America, the Arab East, Southeast Asia), the role of the group, for example, the family, is very important in the choices made by the individual.
Uncertainty avoidance. The degree to which members of a society feel insecure in uncertain, unstructured situations and try to avoid them by developing rules, formulas and rituals and refusing to tolerate behavior that deviates from the standard. Societies with a high degree of uncertainty avoidance fear innovation and welcome the search for absolute truth. In production and in the educational process, representatives of such societies prefer well-structured situations.
Competitiveness. The principle by which society is focused on achieving success, assertiveness, solving problems, acquiring things. This is contrasted with ideas of quality of life - caring for others, solidarity with a group, helping the less fortunate. Highly competitive cultures clearly contrast traditional male and female social roles. Success – including for women – is associated with the manifestation of “masculine” qualities. Highly competitive cultures equally include the otherwise contrasting United States and Japan. Low-competition countries include Scandinavian countries. In Hofstede’s works of the 1980s, this parameter had another more heavy-handed name “masculinity/femininity dimension”. Later, in many studies by specialists, this feature began to be called the orientation of society towards competition.
More general sociological problems are related to the social adaptation of migrants, the preservation or loss of traditional cultures among national minorities, etc.
Psychologists in the field of intercultural communication are currently interested, first of all, in the influence of cultural differences on the processes of interpretation and categorization, as well as the nature of the corresponding behavioral stereotypes. Since the 1970s, important concepts of anxiety, uncertainty, intergroup categorization, and many others have been studied using social psychology.
When it comes to communication, especially intercultural communication, it can be very difficult to draw the line between sociological and psychological research conducted in the field of social psychology. Indeed, as mentioned earlier, the topic is of a distinctly interdisciplinary nature. Both psychologists and sociologists deal with complex categories that arise in the process of communication or are transmitted through it - values, motives, attitudes, stereotypes and prejudices. The task of both is to identify the observed phenomenon (perhaps linking it with others) and to show the differences from similar reactions and attitudes in a situation of intra-group rather than intercultural interaction.
Within the framework of sociological and psychological research, certain models of communication have been proposed that deserve some attention.
Thus, the famous scientists Elihu Katz and Patzey Lazarsfeld developed the so-called “two-stage model of communication.” The undoubted contribution of these scientists to the development of communication theory was the introduction into scientific circulation of the so-called concept of “opinion leaders”, on whom the dissemination of information depends. In addition, scientists have suggested a gradual process of communication with the participation of the media. The researchers analyzed the problem of how media messages affect the audience immediately after receiving it and two weeks later. As the results of the work showed, the impact, despite the elapsed time, does not fall, but rather increases.
The famous communication researcher Elizabeth Noel-Neumann proposed another model - the “spiral of silence”, where the connection between the processes of mass and interpersonal communications was proven. Mass communications in the proposed model were presented as a unique means of forming a climate of opinion. The author proved that the so-called climate of opinion determines people’s readiness to engage in interpersonal communication.
The proposed “spiral of silence model” reveals a situation where the media successfully manipulate public opinion and present the word not to the majority, but to the minority, which then speaks on behalf of the majority.
As an example of the “spiral of silence” model, various researchers cite the experience of totalitarian communication. This is where your own opinion becomes not just inconvenient, but in some situations downright dangerous.
The relationship between the information content of messages and their public perception was studied by Donald Shaw and Max McCob. According to their proposed theory, the formation of audience perceptions is largely shaped by the media, which focus the attention of information recipients on what is important and what is not. The success of information impact depends on many circumstances: the choice of facts, the quality of coverage.
The so-called “innovation diffusion” model developed by Everett Rogers is also of particular interest. It examines the final stage of the communication process - the perception or rejection of information messages by society. In this model, E. Rogers analyzed the ability to perceive innovation in various segments of society. He proposed an original classification of various groups of society, depending on the degree of perception of the new.
The famous researcher Kurt Lewin proposed the “gatekeeper” model, which is successfully used in communication practice. In his theory, we are talking about people making decisions on the selection and purchase of products, things and, in a broad sense, information. This model was formed by the example of the choice of certain products by people who spread their point of view in society.
The scientist himself noted that a “gatekeeper” can be someone who is able to control the flow of news (in the broad sense of the word), analyzing, measuring, expanding, repeating and withdrawing information.
The “gatekeeper” model, according to Kurt Lewin, allows one to more clearly navigate various value systems, select messages that are interesting to the audience, and predict their perception.
Thus, sociological and psychological models of communication demonstrate multiple approaches to studying the present phenomenon. They are of significant practical interest and great theoretical significance. In the works of famous researchers, the concept of communication becomes more complex, filled with new content and becomes an independent phenomenon of modern life, which today cannot be neglected.
The sociological and psychological aspect of intercultural communication makes it possible to address the rather complex processes of this phenomenon, to identify the nature of many factors influencing the content, forms and directions of the phenomenon of intercultural communication.
§ 4. Linguistic aspect of intercultural communication
It can be noted that back in the mid-twentieth century, the problems of intercultural communications were reduced by scientists to issues of learning a foreign language.
Interest in the linguistic component of intercultural communications is quite justified. Language is considered one of the most important categories of culture; the transmission of cultural information depends on language. At the same time, language can be called a kind of code that serves as a barrier for a person who does not speak the language system.
Language is also a means of systematizing and ordering the picture of the world. Thanks to language, the world becomes visible to a person, to a certain extent clear and understandable.
Language is a tool of culture. It has numerous functions, forms the personality of a person, a native speaker, through the vision of the world, mentality, attitude towards people, etc., imposed on him by the language and embedded in the language, that is, through the culture of the people, using language as a tool of communication.
Language can be called the most vivid expression of the culture of a people. He is a transmitter, a bearer of culture. It transmits information related to the treasury of national culture, stored in it from generation to generation. “The first place among the nationally specific components of culture is occupied by language. Language, first of all, contributes to the fact that culture can be both a means of communication and a means of separation. Language is a sign that the speaker belongs to a particular society. Language as a sign of an ethnic group can be looked at in different ways. It acts as both an important factor of integration and an ethno-differentiating feature of an ethnos... Language also turns out to be an instrument of self-preservation of an ethnos and the separation of “us” and “strangers”.
However, language is not only a means that determines and influences intercultural communication, but also the environment in which a person functions and at the same time uses its influence. The language of each people reflects in all its diversity cultural traditions, moral and ethical principles, and the course of history. Knowledge of a foreign language greatly facilitates the process of communication and allows you to become quite deeply acquainted with the traditions of the country, the people, with its rich and original heritage of national culture.
Language reflects the idea of a people’s place in the world around them, a complex hierarchy of social and political relations, and future aspirations. It reflects with sufficient completeness the richness and originality of the natural world in which the people live. That is why knowledge of the language contributes to a deep knowledge of culture and creates the prerequisites for the development of intercultural communications. The famous Russian philosopher A.F. Losev believed that it is the language of a given people that is the key to understanding the essence of the national spirit, its original, intuitive foundations. “In a name, in a word, the essence of original intuition is first recorded. The word is the first revelation of the hidden intuitive essence... Word and language are the organ of national self-awareness.”
Language is also the basis for the formation of human groups. It most consistently expresses thoughts, feelings, moods, and psychological characteristics. Researchers believe that there are more than 100 languages and at least 300 dialects on the planet today. A study of the linguistic map of the world shows that only a few countries are linguistically homogeneous. Moreover, in many countries you can find languages belonging to different groups, having different roots, nature and history. At the present stage, the most widely used language is English, which clearly dominates in the field of international relations and business. The promotion of the English language is also associated with global changes in the modern world and information technology. Today it is obvious that for all Internet users, English is an important condition for virtual communication. According to researchers, at the present stage in the world, more than half of international and business correspondence is carried out in English.
It should be noted that every word used in a language appears in a certain cultural context and carries a special meaning and significance for each culture. So, for example, the word “cow” for a Hindu means not only an animal, but is also a symbol of holiness and spirituality. Russian people have special associations in connection with the words revolution, mausoleum, victory, winter.
Language is only a property of the people. Subcultural groups have their own language, which can only be understood by a narrow circle of people.
For intercultural communications, language is an important factor, a means of communication, but language can and does create certain barriers to communication. It is well known that the task of translating texts, especially artistic and philosophical ones, is one of the most difficult. In the process of translation, the depth, attitude, and sometimes the meaning of the work are lost.
To understand the meaning of what is said, translation is sometimes not enough; indicators such as intonation, rate of speech, and accents are of particular importance. It is no coincidence that in learning a foreign language much attention is paid to pronunciation, which allows for more successful development of dialogue and understanding of the features of a foreign language.
The language also reflects the features of Western and Eastern mentality, features of culture and traditions.
Thus, the speech of the eastern speaker is quite brightly colored, structured taking into account national traditions with references to authorities. The Eastern speaker builds a distance between himself and the audience, striving to show his superiority and dominance.
The American speaker, on the contrary, strives to get closer to the audience and build his speech in a realistic manner. Clearly, clearly outline the situation and pose very specific questions and tasks.
In the Soviet Union, official speeches were also subject to certain traditions associated with ideological and political attitudes. The speakers had to refer to authorities - the classics of Marxism-Leninism, and in every possible way emphasize the superiority of the socialist system, confirming this thesis with examples from Soviet history.
A big problem is the translation of some important concepts that can be considered national into a foreign language. For example, for the Russian people, for whom spirituality comes first in their value system, “soul” is the main concept that prevails over reason, intelligence, and common sense. Experts note that phraseological expressions with the word “soul” are most often used by Russians in colloquial speech, compared to other phraseological units. Foreign students Those studying the Russian language constantly experience difficulties in using these phraseological units. For example, when translating expressions with the word “soul” into German, it was found that only 1/3 of German phraseological units contain the word “soul”, and 2/3 are translated into German with the word “heart”.
This circumstance is explained by the difference in the stereotypes of perception of this concept. If for a German “soul” is most often a religious concept, then for a Russian it refers to human, internal processes that occur “inside” the person himself. The difference in ideas influences the stylistic use of the word “soul” in Russian and German phraseological units. The Russian language presents the entire “palette” of styles in the use of this word, and in German one can note an exceptionally reverent attitude towards it. Expressions with the word “soul” usually refer to a neutral or high style.
Of course, the examples given are quite general and schematic, but to a certain extent they characterize the features of the linguistic aspect of intercultural communication.
The peculiarities of the linguistic aspect of intercultural communications also determine the main directions of research, in this area among which the study of various communication styles in their use within and outside a particular culture or group should be highlighted. Modern research are aimed at studying such features as the pace of speech, the use of appropriate vocabulary in conversation with groups that are different professionally, socially, and age-wise.
Separately, issues related to the ability to maintain a conversation in various audiences are considered. These questions arose because in European culture silence and withdrawal from communication are considered as a manifestation bad upbringing, is considered impolite. Whereas in the cultures of other nations, on the contrary, a conversation with an unfamiliar person is perceived as a very dangerous event. Conversation is not a way to get to know a person better.
These areas of linguistic research are adjacent to psychological approaches and are associated with the concept of accommodation.
The independent development of linguistic research within the framework of intercultural communication acquires the problem of studying discourse as an important process in the development of communication. These issues are quite thoroughly presented and discussed in the works of foreign researchers, among which we can note the work of Ron and Susan Scollon “Intercultural Communication: A Discursive Approach.” The study of discourse as an independent phenomenon has led to the development of a number of areas that study linguistic factors. So it became obvious that the same topic, practical task, has significant differences dictated by cultural factors. An example is the text of a business letter, which is written in a different manner by representatives of official services in Southeast Asia and in Europe. This applies both to the design of such writing and to the manner in which the main issues are presented.
In Asian countries, the text of the letter begins with a list of reasons, circumstances, factors, and in the final part proposals and demands are formulated.
In the European tradition and North American business correspondence, a letter begins with the formulation of a proposal and demands, which are further argued. For Europeans and Americans, the Eastern style of business correspondence is considered unacceptable and unclear.
Discourse studies reveal a picture of the world conditioned by cultural traditions, which determines the meaning of narratives.
The problem of discourse has independent significance in works devoted to professional communication. In this direction, quite interesting works are presented by both foreign and domestic studies by such authors as L. M. Simonova, L. E. Strovsky, and the already mentioned book by Ron and Susan Scollon and others.
Works devoted to cross-cultural pragmatics are of independent importance. The origins of this direction were foreign researchers, and, above all, the famous philologist A. Verzhbitskaya. In his research, the author shows that many direct translations, equivalents of words and concepts, actually contain significant differences. This important point is not always taken into account in translations. However, it is quite obvious that the English word friend does not reflect the important essence that is attached to the Russian word friend, essentially a person who is spiritually close, capable of self-sacrifice, selfless help.
When conducting business negotiations, knowledge of the context is of particular importance, since the subtleties of translation and intonation determine decision-making, which can have great economic and political significance. The meaning of many, for example, English phrases that are used in negotiations in countries such as the UK, Australia and the USA, where it is official, sometimes acquire the opposite or controversial meaning. Thus, during negotiations, American businessmen (tabling a proposal) use the expression “postpone the proposal” as a desire to mark a decision. However, their colleagues, for example from the UK, perceive this expression as a certain impulse and signal to action.
Features of the language and difficulties of translation are of great importance for promoting goods abroad. There are many examples of this specificity. So, for example, to sell the domestic Zhiguli car abroad, it was necessary to change its name, which would reflect national specifics and sound more harmonious to foreign audiences. This is how the name “Lada” was found, which became popular abroad, while the word “Zhiguli” translated from French could be heard as “girl”, “alphonse”.
Superficial knowledge of the language can introduce significant difficulties into the organizational and work process and have a negative impact on business development.
So, for example, if English partners promise to finish some task “by the end of the day,” this means that it will be completed only when the work is completed.
Misunderstandings between employees can also arise in matters of designating days and months, in business correspondence. Thus, in the European reading, 12/11/08 means that we are talking about December 11, 2008, while Americans read this message as November 12, 2008.
Such a seemingly simple universal phenomenon as the calendar, the division of the calendar year into seasons or seasons, actually turns out to be quite complex if we turn to the national traditions of different peoples. So, a Russian-speaking person has no doubt that there are four seasons - winter, spring, summer, autumn, each of which is represented in three months. According to English tradition, the year is also divided into four seasons. However, they are represented by different numbers of months. Winter and summer have four months each, and autumn and spring have two months, respectively. The Russian spring month of May is summer in the English tradition, and November refers to the winter months.
Thus, the above examples also indicate numerous problems associated with the linguistic aspect of intercultural communications. It is quite obvious that knowledge of the interlocutor’s language cannot always be a factor of mutual understanding in the development of communication between peoples.
On the other hand, when studying the linguistic aspect of intercultural communications, we must not forget that the languages themselves need protection and support, since they, being the code of culture, store unique information that is passed on from generation to generation and should become available to descendants. The diversity of cultures in the world is largely dependent on linguistic diversity, which reflects multiple cultural traditions. It is no coincidence that in the modern world such attention is paid to the issues of preserving the language and its dissemination as a means for successful and deep cultural communication, which is confirmed in the legislative practice of various states, as well as in the activities of authoritative international organizations.
In most countries of the world, a documentary base has been formed that regulates a wide range of issues related to the national language and concerning its relations with other languages. In 120 countries around the world, provisions on the use of language are included in their constitutions, and in some cases these laws relate to the use of language as an instrument of international cooperation. These factors indicate the unconditional importance of language policy for the state, both at the domestic and international levels.
It can be stated that there is not a single state that has not made efforts to develop comprehensive measures to preserve and disseminate the language to foreign audiences. The most striking and illustrative example here is the policy of France, a country that is experiencing great problems associated with the spread of its national language and is making efforts to change the current situation.
Perhaps for France, more than for any other country in the world, the issue of maintaining its linguistic presence abroad is not so pressing. The French language once served as the language of international communication and contributed to the spread of French culture, which corresponded to the international authority of the state. However, today the boundaries of the distribution of the French language in the world have narrowed significantly, the number of speakers of French and those studying this language has decreased, which has forced France to take decisive steps to change this situation.
Currently, France has developed a well-thought-out, comprehensive system of measures aimed at solving the problems of language presence abroad and countering the influence of the English language. The general management of these events, as well as all foreign cultural policy, is carried out by the state through a system of ministries and government agencies, but in practice they are most actively implemented through other mechanisms: through the French Alliance (Alliance Francaise), cultural centers, and various educational programs. In recent years, the most active role in this direction has been played by the Francophonie movement.
By now, we can talk about the duality of the main goals of French language policy: firstly, maintaining the position of the French language and its promotion abroad, and secondly, its protection from external linguistic influences at the national level, in particular from the influence of the English language . From this point of view, French language policy cannot be considered only as a set of actions carried out abroad.
No less important is a set of internal protectionist measures aimed at protecting the native language from foreign influences. The modern language policy of the French Republic is developing in these two directions, which has a largely positive effect. Perhaps, using the example of French language policy, we can talk about the close relationship between domestic and foreign policy efforts as a condition for achieving positive results.
Modern language policy in France is based on 3 main principles:
– Ensuring the spread of the French language in the world;
– Preserving the role of the French language as a language of international communication;
– Respect for linguistic and cultural diversity, promoting linguistic pluralism.
In addition, French language policy is traditionally based on the idea of the absolute universalism of the French language, which was formed several centuries ago. The essence of the language policy pursued by the French Republic in recent years can be expressed in the words of Alain Denault, a member of the French Academy: “the problem of preserving the French language ... must be considered as a national problem, because the image of France, its prestige, its place in the world depends on its solution.”
The institutional foundations of the language policy of modern France deserve special attention. Thus, back in 1966, the Higher Committee for the Protection and Expansion of the French Language was created, which subsequently transformed into the Higher Committee for the French Language. In 1984, two new bodies were formed in its place, the Consultative Committee and the General Commissariat for Francophonie Affairs. In 1996, a Delegation for the French Language was established under the Ministry of Culture, which also dealt with issues of Francophonie. Finally, in 2001, to maintain the linguistic diversity of France, a common Delegation for the French language and for the languages of France was created. These structures in different years pursued the main line of the state's language policy: they monitored the purity of the French language and protected it from foreign influences. At the same time, within the framework of language policy, these structures resolved issues related to linguistic minorities, supporting them, provided that the main state language was French.
In recent years, due to the influx of emigrants from Arab countries to France, the public has widely discussed the issue of including the Arabic language in school curriculum as an elective. However, this proposal in the country itself has many supporters and many opponents. Supporters of the project say that French legislation enshrines provisions for the protection of regional languages, which they include Arabic. Opponents insist that the official language in France is only French and a deviation from this rule would be a significant concession to the Arab diaspora.
Thus, France has long had a policy of protecting its cultural traditions and language, while at the same time supporting regional languages as part of French culture. However, in recent years, there has been a trend towards regional languages being integrated into French culture. In this regard, the French government balances policies aimed at preserving cultural pluralism in the world and integrating ethnic minority cultures into French culture. Such duality, however, does not contradict the general foreign cultural policy of France, which takes into account both the modern realities of the time associated with the processes of integration and globalization, and national interests, in particular, the preservation of cultural diversity.
The measures considered to implement language policy are largely internal character. However, activities aimed at strengthening the position of the French language and protecting it from Anglo-Saxon influence, carried out within the country, are also characteristic of the country’s foreign policy. Now the French government and the general public are taking various steps to strengthen the status of the French language as a language of international communication, a language that unites representatives of different peoples, states and cultures. This work is carried out in a variety of directions, however, recently France has been most actively developing its language policy on three main fronts: science, sports, and international organizations.
Considering the French language as a language of science, the significant achievements of French scientists made in different years are first taken into account. For example, in the humanities, history and sociology, as well as in mathematics and some others. To maintain the status of the French language as the language of international science, various journals, dictionaries, and data banks of scientific terminology are published in French. Various events are actively being carried out aimed at promoting the French language as the language of education, the language of economics and the language of trade and industry. For example, in 1997, the Congress of the French-Canadian Association “Science Speaks French” was held, at which possible prospects in this direction were discussed.
French is also now the language of sports thanks to the activities of Baron P. de Coubertin, the founder of the modern Olympic Games, which is recorded in Art. 27. IOC Olympic Charter.
Currently, the French language is used in a number of international organizations: the UN, UNESCO, the Council of Europe. In the EEC it is used on a par with English. Representatives of France in these and other international organizations have often recently called for more frequent use of the French language when drawing up various international declarations. By developing its language policy, France seeks to debunk the most common stereotypes regarding the French language. If previously the traditional reason for choosing French to study was an interest in classical French culture, now significant efforts are being made to modernize this image. Today, France is one of the countries with the most dynamically developing language policy.
Today, much attention is paid to the issues of language preservation in the work of international organizations. In the modern world, the problem of preserving cultural diversity and cultural identity has long been overdue. The challenges of protecting cultural diversity are not limited to “ multinational states", but also before the entire world community.
It is currently difficult to determine the number of cultures on the planet, but it is believed that this can be done by counting the number of living languages in the world. As mentioned above, language contains rich information about cultural values, mentality, and the specific behavior of cultural representatives. It is language that primarily serves as an indicator of cultural differences. Preserving endangered languages is an important element in preserving cultural diversity. Language is an element that unites people regardless of the place and time of their residence.
Today we can say with confidence that the cultural diversity of the planet tends to decline. According to a 1990s study by David Chrystal (Emeritus Professor of Linguistics at the University of Wales, Bangor), every two weeks one language goes out of circulation. David Crystal estimates that if this trend continues, by 2100 more than 90% of living languages will disappear. The reasons for this phenomenon remain overpopulation, immigration and cultural imperialism.
There are about 200 states in the world, home to approximately 5 thousand ethnic groups. 2/3 of countries have more than 1 national or religious group that makes up at least 10% of the population. Many countries have large indigenous populations made up of ethnic groups displaced by colonizers and immigrants.
All over the world, peoples persistently demand respect for their cultural identity. Their demands often focus on social justice and greater political participation, but they also care about reaffirming the significance of their history. They also care whether they and their children live in a society that respects multiculturalism or one in which everyone is bound to conform to one dominant culture.
Cultural identity has been suppressed throughout history, in all regions of the world. Conquerors and colonizers tried to impose their language, religion, or way of life on the people they ruled. Many cultures were labeled as “backward”, while in others there was a lack of respect for human rights and disrespect for members of other cultures, such as apartheid in South Africa. Moreover, entire population groups were destroyed through genocide, as was the case in Nazi Germany.
According to UN statistics, about 300 million people. in the world belong to indigenous groups, representing about 4 thousand languages in more than 70 countries. Latin America is home to 50 million indigenous people, representing 11% of the region's total population. Indigenous peoples are not always a minority. These groups are carriers of a unique cultural heritage, unique ways of communicating with other people and the environment. They retain political, cultural and economic characteristics that distinguish them from the mainstream of society. In Australia alone, about 500 languages disappeared after the arrival of Europeans.
Language is one of the fundamental elements of individual cultural identity. Limiting people's ability to use their native language—combined with limited proficiency in the dominant or official national language—can exclude people from education, political life, and access to justice. A case in point is the data provided in the UN Human Development Report. Interestingly, in 2004, only 62% of the population in East Asia and the Pacific had access to primary education in their mother tongue, and only 13% in sub-Saharan Africa.
Languages are rapidly dying out, and in order to survive, they need our support and interest. There were once 7,000 to 8,000 distinct languages. Today, most of the world's 6,000 known languages are spoken by a very small number of people. Halfway through modern languages fewer than 10,000 speakers, and one in four languages has fewer than 1,000 native speakers.
A significant role in addressing issues of preserving languages in the world is played by the authoritative international organization UNESCO, which not only initiates the creation of a documentary base related to the issues of preserving languages in the world, but also conducts numerous practical events directly devoted to the problem of cultural diversity. Already since the end of the twentieth century, within the framework of this organization, the most important documents devoted to the protection of intangible cultural heritage have been developed, various exhibitions, festivals, and concerts have been held aimed at popularizing this very acute problem of all humanity. This topic continues to be actively discussed by all participants in the organization today. Thus, most recently, in support of the convention for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage, the French Committee for UNESCO held an intangible cultural heritage day on March 26, 2008, together with the House of World Cultures. This event is already being held for the fifth time as part of the Fantasy Festival.
The area of oral folk art preserves a huge variety of forms. It includes proverbs, riddles, stories, sayings, legends, myths, epic songs, poems, lullabies that convey knowledge, traditions, values and play significant role in the life of every people.
Language acts as one of the main communicative means of transmitting intangible cultural heritage, as well as one of the main forms of intangible cultural heritage. Some types of expressions have become widespread and are used throughout society; others in limited groups, for example, only among the adult population. In many countries, the preservation of oral traditions is a highly specialized activity carried out by professional performers. Professional performers are found in all regions of Africa; in countries such as Germany or the USA there are today hundreds of professional storytellers.
Folklore traditions peoples are usually transmitted orally, which in turn causes them to change. The survival of these traditions depends on an unbroken chain of transmission of accurate text.
Many languages are now in danger of extinction, according to statistics from the UNESCO organization itself, more than 50% of existing languages are now endangered, on average one language disappears every two weeks. The organization strives to draw attention to the threat of language extinction. Working in this direction, UNESCO works closely with Discovery communication and other programs within the UN.
To date, two of the most important documents have been adopted within UNESCO for the protection of endangered languages: the Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, the Agreement on the Survival and Threat of Language Extinction.
The Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity is more general in nature. It concerns not only the problems of preserving languages. The document emphasizes the need for cultural diversity (i.e. one's own language, traditions, customs, culture) for life on the planet. Cultural diversity is manifested in the uniqueness and diversity of characteristics inherent in the groups and communities that make up humanity. As a source of exchange, innovation and creativity, cultural diversity is as important to humanity as biodiversity is to wildlife. In this sense, it is a common heritage and must be recognized and secured for the benefit of present and future generations. The declaration emphasizes the very close relationship between cultural diversity and identity, cultural diversity and pluralism, cultural diversity and human rights.
The agreement on the survival and threat of extinction of languages concerns only language problems, ways to preserve languages, brief analysis the situation in which endangered languages are found. The main goal of the document is to help various communities, linguists, teachers, local authorities, and international organizations prolong the life of endangered languages. The group of experts identified a number of factors that can be used to determine the “vitality” of a language, which can be used in efforts to maintain linguistic diversity.
Intangible cultural heritage includes many forms and they are all important. Today, countries are striving to allocate funds to maintain and protect the world's intangible cultural heritage. It can be argued that many successful projects have already been carried out, but their effectiveness is not always high.
Within the framework of UNESCO, in addition, a large number of documents have been adopted on the issues of preserving cultural heritage and cultural diversity. Each convention aims to ensure and encourage cooperation in the field of culture. The large number of projects carried out within the framework of the conventions indicates a significant response from the international community, the effectiveness of these documents, which we believe should be consolidated into a single code of general materials on the preservation of the cultural diversity of the modern world.
Language is a unique tool for intercultural communication, a sign of culture that stores information, the loss of which can become a serious problem for all inhabitants of the planet. In this regard, it should be noted that the linguistic aspect of intercultural communications is of great importance both for participants in this process and for researchers and the international community, who must direct efforts to preserve languages, and therefore cultural diversity.
§ 5. Intercultural communications in international relations
The problem of intercultural communications acquires independent significance in international relations, which, on the one hand, are a striking example of the development of communication at various levels, but at the same time reflect the numerous features of the phenomenon of intercultural communications. The very history of intercultural communications shows that they are directly related to the development of political, trade, cultural, and interreligious contacts. It is in the history of international relations that one can note the formation of various directions and forms of intercultural communication, which took shape under the influence of numerous factors.
First of all, we should recall such an area of intercultural communication as trade, from which, according to a number of researchers, diplomacy later grew. Even in ancient Greek mythology, the cunning, dexterous and resourceful Hermes patronized messengers and granted them immunity, a kind of immunity granted by Zeus himself.
According to tradition, the merchant walked ahead of the envoy, and the first agreements promoting intercultural communication were devoted specifically to trade contacts. The importance of concluding trade relations is also confirmed by the fact that the texts of trade obligations were also presented on tablets with writings reflecting the powers of the envoys.
The earliest texts of trade agreements date back to time immemorial and are mentioned in the Old Testament.
In the Middle Ages, there was a direct merging of diplomatic and trade relations. The most obvious example of this is the history of the famous Italian cities of Venice, Milan, Rome, and Florence. Already starting from the 15th century, trade and diplomatic missions were created there, which sent their consuls to the cities of the Middle East to establish and develop trade relations. Among Italian cities, the most important importance was attached to trade in Venice, a city that managed to reach a leading position in Europe mainly thanks to developed trade and diplomatic contacts.
It may be recalled that the foundations of the national diplomatic tradition in Great Britain were laid in 1303 in the famous merchant charter, and the establishment of bilateral diplomatic relations between England and Russia took shape thanks to trade contacts.
The development of trade relations contributed to active, widespread exchange. There was an acquaintance with the cultural achievements of various peoples, which contributed to the development of communication and intercultural communications, both at the interstate and non-state level. Subsequently, trade relations became an independent area of interstate communication, although such forms of cultural relations as trade exhibitions and fairs, of course, should be classified as a phenomenon with strong cultural overtones.
Cultural ties played an important role in the development of political dialogue in subsequent times and often actually contributed to changing the political climate. For example, the establishment of relations between the United States and China began with ping-pong competitions (“ping-pong diplomacy”), and contacts between the USSR and military regimes in Latin American countries were carried out mainly through tours of popular Soviet artists there.
However, despite quite natural economic and political interests, cultural contacts in international relations began to be considered as an independent value only recently. For a long time, cultural ties have been complicated by the peculiarities of national and spiritual traditions, and issues of religious affiliation.
Often it was cultural differences that hampered the development of interstate relations. For a long time, it was quite difficult to overcome these contradictions, since the established beliefs were based on the superiority of a particular culture or religion.
In the era of ancient civilizations and the Middle Ages, the diplomatic protocol itself, based on national traditions and attitudes dating back to the early centuries of the formation of statehood and national self-determination, caused great problems.
Thus, “Metrics of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania”, high-ranking Russian diplomats could not go to the same sovereign twice in a row “without prejudice to the royal honor.” In addition, the retinue of messengers consisted of 20-30, and the envoys - of 150-200 people. The ambassadors were accompanied by a retinue of 300–4000 people.
The special missions of Russian diplomacy were also distinguished by incredible pomp. They included thousands of nobles, servants, cooks, barbers, priests, clerks, grooms and other persons. Organizational support for such a mission was extremely difficult and caused a lot of inconvenience for the receiving party. However, during the Middle Ages no steps were taken to restrict diplomatic missions. According to the traditions of that time, it was believed that the splendor of Muscovy’s retinue and the representativeness of diplomatic delegations testified to special meaning event and the status of the country that honors the host state.
During the Middle Ages, cultural ties were practically not considered as an important part of international relations. Only in the modern period is there an awareness that intercultural communications are not only an indispensable condition for the development of broad interstate dialogue, but also a guarantor of solutions to numerous pressing problems.
In the 19th century, traditions of international diplomatic protocol were gradually formed, allowing one to bypass many of the difficulties of communication; within the framework of international relations, various directions and forms of cultural ties continued to develop.
The factor of culture and cultural connections is confirmed in the activities of public services. At the end of the 19th century, centers aimed at promoting national culture abroad were created for the first time. Dialogue in the field of culture has come to be seen as an important basis for resolving political, economic and other pressing issues of international relations.
In 1883, the first non-profit public organization Alliance Francaise appeared in Paris, the purpose of which was to spread French culture abroad by organizing French language and regional studies courses. Very soon its committees were created in various countries of the world based on local legislation.
To date, Alliance Francaise representative offices are open in 140 countries around the world.
The French experience soon found its continuation in the work of similar centers that arose in other countries of the world. In 1919, the Goethe Institute appeared in Germany, which aims in its activities to develop cultural contacts, as well as the study of the German language and German culture in foreign audiences.
In the 30s of the twentieth century, the concept of one of the most powerful cultural organizations in Europe - the British Council, which today is one of the most authoritative organizations in the field of cultural cooperation, was formalized.
At the beginning of the twentieth century, after the Socialist Revolution, a similar organization (VOKS), aimed at spreading Soviet culture appeared abroad and in the USSR. The All-Union Society for Cultural Relations with Foreign Countries (1925) performed various functions, had a wide geographical representation and, using culture, successfully solved the problem of promoting political ideas.
Today, the activities of cultural centers are a completely independent area of intercultural communication. There is practically no economically developed country with political weight that does not have such an organization. It can be noted that the activity of cultural centers largely reflects the political ambitions of countries seeking to build relationships with their political partners not only focusing on the immediate political situation, but also in the hope of developing truly long-term multi-level interstate communication.
Cultural centers can be considered as an example of the successful development of bilateral international relations in the field of culture and intercultural communication.
However, intercultural communications in the modern world have quite successful traditions of developing dialogue on a multilateral basis. Thus, the first attempt to make intercultural ties an important source of international cooperation, a tool for building a world based on high humanistic ideals, dates back to the beginning of the twentieth century. At this time, under the League of Nations, thanks to the aspirations of representatives of the creative and scientific intelligentsia, special sections and institutes were created, whose activities reflected current problems in the development of intercultural communication in international relations.
The Assembly of the international organization of the League of Nations in 1926 and 1931 approved the development of intellectual cooperation, which was soon represented by the following structures: the section for intellectual cooperation at the Secretariat of the League of Nations; International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation in Paris; International Institute of Educational Cinema in Rome.
The most significant organization in this area can be considered the International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation, which was headed by the former high-ranking official of the League of Nations, Henri Bonnet.
The management of the institute was entrusted to the famous scientist Herriot. In a short period of time, in more than forty countries, the so-called special commissions for intellectual cooperation began their work to coordinate work with the Institute, which communicated with the Institute. In addition, independent committees and commissions of both a temporary and permanent nature arose in the League of Nations on certain topical issues of cooperation. For example, the commission on radio broadcasting, library exchange, and museum affairs.
The connection between states and the institute was also carried out through specially appointed state delegates. The institute itself also had a number of sections reflecting certain areas of intercultural cooperation, such as literary, artistic, etc.
The work of the institute was to strive to solve pressing problems of cultural exchange, using the powerful potential of the intellectual elite different countries. In turn, she revealed numerous problems professional nature, differences in approaches in the educational, artistic, scientific spheres. The activities of the Institute of Intellectual Cooperation for the first time showed the importance of intercultural communication in the field of international relations at the multilateral level. Despite the fact that its work was interrupted by the events of the Second World War, the Institute’s experience was subsequently in demand in the work of the universal international organization in the field of culture UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization), which emerged in 1945.
At the moment, UNESCO can be called the most authoritative organization in the field of science, culture and education.
The main issues within the competence of UNESCO include:
– bridging the widening gap between developed and developing countries;
– preservation of ecological balance and biological diversity of the planet;
– development of food and mineral resources of the world ocean;
– ethical aspects of scientific and technological progress and development of information and computer science;
– problems of population, urbanization;
– problems of eliminating illiteracy;
– problems of preserving the natural and cultural heritage of mankind;
- the problem of human rights.
In the field of education, which is one of the main activities of this organization, UNESCO combines programs aimed at ensuring universal primary education, as well as for secondary and higher education with assistance in the training of teachers and educators. Particular attention is paid to knowledge in the field of new information technologies, environmental sciences, social issues.
In the field of natural sciences, UNESCO programs include research in the field of biosphere, ecology, and climate.
In the field of social sciences, UNESCO conducts research on issues such as tensions leading to war, human rights, racism, and the relationship of man with his environment.
UNESCO's multifaceted activities are aimed at stimulating and supporting creative activity, studying and developing cultures, protecting world heritage, works of art, monuments, as well as original cultural traditions, attracting specialists from different countries, drawing on the experience of the entire world community.
To the most important regulations adopted by UNESCO should include:
Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage;
Declaration of Principles of Cultural Cooperation;
Convention against Discrimination in Education;
Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict;
Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice;
A series of international and regional conventions on the recognition of educational documents;
Today, UNESCO has 186 member states, another 177 states have national commissions uniting representatives of education, science and culture, and 588 non-governmental organizations constantly maintain official relations with UNESCO.
Of independent importance for the development of intercultural communication in the field of international relations is the legal framework, numerous treaties, agreements, official programs that determine the content and forms of intercultural communications, as well as those areas of cooperation that are of priority for certain countries.
Work in this direction is being carried out quite actively in all countries. Thus, in Russia alone in the early 2000s, more than 70 agreements on cultural cooperation were concluded, and more than 20 were signed on cultural centers. The Department for Cultural Relations and UNESCO Affairs of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation successfully developed intergovernmental programs of cultural cooperation for a two- to three-year period. Today their number is approaching 100 documents.
Regulatory and legal activities contribute to the development of intercultural communication at the state and non-state level, allows for the successful implementation of certain projects and in many ways is a guarantor of stable, good neighborly relations and the development of intercultural communication.
It should be noted that the problems of intercultural communications are directly reflected in the foreign cultural policies of many countries, which develop their own concept for the development of international cultural relations, taking into account national interests, political and economic objectives.
The problem of foreign cultural policy itself has not been sufficiently developed in scientific research, although, of course, the present direction of foreign policy activity has certain traditions and successful practice. In our opinion, under foreign cultural policy one should understand the complex of measures implemented by the state at the foreign policy level in order to achieve certain interests and to form a positive foreign policy image. These efforts are aimed at directly or indirectly promoting national culture abroad, as well as providing its citizens with ample opportunities to become acquainted with modern achievements in the field of science, culture and education of other countries. From the proposed definition it follows that one of the central elements of foreign cultural policy should be maximum openness and tolerance towards representatives of other cultures.
As follows from this definition, the main, most general goal of the foreign cultural policy of any state is to form its positive image by introducing other peoples to its culture, as well as to promote the process of intercultural interaction, to establish mutual understanding between peoples through the organization of cultural exchanges, development cultural ties, strengthening good neighborly relations. However, one cannot fail to take into account that most often the formation of a positive image of the state implies the creation of favorable conditions for solving political, economic and other problems facing the state in the present day. international level, i.e. it relates to the sphere of foreign policy. The choice of foreign cultural policy priorities is also directly related to specific political, socio-economic and cultural realities and is consistent with the general interests of the state. Foreign cultural policy contributes to the development of intercultural communications, while at the same time being an important area of international cooperation.
Intercultural communication in the field of international relations is connected not only with the development of dialogue and the promotion of one’s own culture abroad, but also directly with the current problems that arise in the field of culture and international humanitarian communication. These include the problem of cultural expansion. Today it is impossible not to note that “the growing avalanche of American culture and Western cultural products often erodes the national foundations of other peoples, stifles their culture, languages, etc., leads to the commercialization of the spiritual sphere, forces other states to push aside concern for the spiritual side of the life of their people to the background, giving preference to attempts to solve first the economic, financial, scientific, technical and other problems generated by globalization.”
It is obvious that today it is not possible to solve many of the negative consequences of globalization processes without the participation of the state.
Intercultural communications in international relations can be called an important condition for political, economic and humanitarian cooperation. Without taking into account the basic features of the communication process, it is quite difficult to build contacts in the modern world, both at the bilateral and multilateral levels. On the other hand, the direction, depth and content of intercultural dialogue largely depend on the characteristics of international relations.
For the direction of scientific research itself, the present problem is new, relevant and, of course, promising. Today, the work of specialists in this field is predominantly developed within the framework of areas directly devoted to the activities of international organizations in the field of culture, research on current problems of globalization, work related to the study of foreign cultural policy, etc.
Issues related to the formation of the country’s image abroad, also related to issues of intercultural communications, are of independent importance. In international relations, these topics are adjacent to the problem of foreign cultural policy of modern states, the purpose of which, as noted above, mainly comes down to the issues of forming a positive image of the country in a foreign audience.
Modern studies devoted to the problem of intercultural communications, educational and methodological works, as a rule, are addressed to international relations specialists. Obviously, a diplomat, an employee of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs must have a certain level of competence in matters of intercultural communication in order to solve important political and economic problems. However, as we noted, international relations themselves are an important part of intercultural communications. To a large extent, they create conditions for the development of cooperation, which are enshrined in numerous agreements and documents of varying status. It is in the sphere of attention of modern international relations that there are numerous issues related to the preservation of language, culture, and the maintenance of cultural diversity. International relations is a completely official sphere of intercultural communications on which, nevertheless, the development of a broad, democratic dialogue aimed at creating an atmosphere of friendship and trust between peoples based on respect for the diversity of cultures of the modern world depends.
The problem of intercultural communications in the field of international relations also includes issues of political communications, the formation of a positive image of the country, topics that deserve a more thorough and comprehensive analysis.
Literature on the topic
Required literature
Monographs
1. Andreev A. L. “We” and “They”: the attitude of Russians to other countries of the world // Renewing Russia: a difficult search for solutions. – M., 1996.
2. Brzezinski Z. Choice. World domination or global leadership. – M.: International Relations, 2005.
3. Bogolyubova N. M., Nikolaeva Yu. V. Cultural exchange in the system of international relations. – St. Petersburg, 2003.
4. Bondarevskaya E. V., Gukalenko O. V. Pedagogical foundations of intercultural communication. – Tiraspol, 2000.
5. Vailavik P., Bivin J., Jackson D. Psychology of interpersonal communications. – St. Petersburg, 2000.
6. Vereshchagin E. M., Kostomarov V. G. Language and culture. – M., 1990.
7. Galumov E. Fundamentals of PR. – M., 2004.
8. Global problems and universal values. – M., 1990.
9. Golovleva E. L. Fundamentals of intercultural communication. – Rostov n/d., 2008.
10. Grushevitskaya T. G., Popkov V. D., Sadokhin A. P. Fundamentals of intercultural communication. – M., 2002.
11. Donets P. N. Fundamentals of the general theory of intercultural communication: scientific status, conceptual apparatus, linguistic and non-linguistic aspects, issues of ethics and didactics. – Kharkov, 2001.
12. Zinchenko V. G., Zusman V. G., Kirnoze Z. I. Intercultural communication. Systems approach. – N. Novgorod, 2003.
13. History of mentalities. Historical anthropology. – M., 1996.
14. Kagan M. S. The world of communication. The problem of intersubjective relations. – M., 1988.
15. Kashlev Yu. Many faces of diplomacy. Confession of the Ambassador. – M., 2004.
16. Klyukanov I. E. Dynamics of intercultural communication: a systemic semiotic study. – M., 1998.
17. Konetskaya V. P. Sociology of communication. – M., 1997.
18. Kochetkov V.V. Psychology of intercultural differences. – M., 2002.
19. Kunitsyna V. N., Kazarinova N. V., Pogolsha V. M. Interpersonal communication: a textbook for universities. – St. Petersburg, 2001.
20. Kurbatov V.I. The art of managing communication. – Rostov n/d., 1997.
21. Larchenko S. G., Eremin S. N. Intercultural interaction in the historical process. – Novosibirsk, 1991.
22. Lebedeva N. M., Luneva O. V., Stefanenko T. G., Martynova M. Yu. Intercultural dialogue. Ethnocultural competence training. – M., 2003.
23. Leontovich O. A. Russia and the USA: Introduction to intercultural communication. – Volgograd, 2003.
24. Leontyev A. A. Psychology of communication. – M., 1997.
25. Lewis R. D. Business cultures in international business. – M., 2001.
26. Markhinina V., Udalova I. Interethnic society: state, dynamics, interaction of cultures. – Novorossiysk, 1996.
27. Intercultural communication and problems of national identity: collection. scientific works / ed. L. I. Grishaeva, T. G. Strukova. – Voronezh, 2002.
28. Intercultural communication: to the problem of a tolerant linguistic personality in the system of university and school linguistic education. – Ufa, 2001.
29. Recent history of French language policy: collection. Art. / comp. Yu. G. Bakhirev. – M., 2001.
30. On the way to tolerant consciousness. – M., 2000.
31. Okoneshnikova A.P. Interethnic perception and understanding of each other by people. – Perm, 1999.
32. Fundamentals of communication theory. – M., 2003.
33. Pocheptsov G. G. Theory of communication. - Moscow; Kyiv, 2001.
34. The problem of national identity and principles of intercultural communication. School-seminar materials. – Voronezh, 2001.
35. Rodionov B. A. Communication as a social phenomenon. – Rostov n/d., 1984.
36. Russia between Europe and Asia. – M., 1993.
37. Roth Yu., Kopteltseva G. Meetings on the edge of cultures. – Kaluga, 2001.
38. Samartsev O. R. Modern communication process. Part 1. Fundamentals of communication theory: textbook. allowance. – Ulyanovsk, 2001.
39. Samartsev O. R. Phenomena of global communication. – M., 1999.
40. Sergeev A. M. Communications in culture. – Petrozavodsk, 1996.
41. Ter-Minasova S. G. Language and intercultural communication. – M., 2000.
42. Toynbee A. J. Comprehension of history. – M.: Iris-Press, 2002.
43. Tolerance and communication. Collective monograph / ed. G.I. Petrova. Tomsk, 2002.
44. Huntington S. Clash of Civilizations. URL: http://grachev62.narod.ru/huntington/content.htm. 05/25/2008.
45. Spengler O. Decline of Europe. T. 1. – M., 1992.
1. Antonov V.I., Yampilova Z.S. The problem of stereotypes as one of the barriers in the context of communication of cultures // Russia and the West: dialogue of cultures. – M., 1999. – Issue. 7.
2. Drobizheva L. M. Ethnic self-awareness of Russians in modern conditions // Soviet ethnography. – 1991. – No. 1.
3. Resh O. The problem of stereotypes in intercultural communication // Russia and the West: dialogue of cultures. – M., 1998. – Issue. 6.
4. Sokol I. A. Correlation of the concepts of communication and communication // Personality-word-society: VII International Conference. – Minsk, 2007.
1. Desherev Yu. D. Linguistic encyclopedic dictionary. – M., 1990.
additional literature
Monographs
1. Antipov G. A., Donskikh O. A., Markovina I. Yu., Sorokin Yu. A. Text as a cultural phenomenon. – Novosibirsk, 1989. – P. 75.
2. Astafurova T. N. Linguistic aspects of intercultural business communication. – Volgograd, 1997.
3. Belyanka O. E., Trushina L. B. Russians at first sight. – M., 1996.
4. Bondyreva S.K. Kolosov D.V. Tolerance: introduction. into the problem. – M., 2003.
5. Brudny A. Understanding and communication. – M., 1989.
6. Van Dyck T. A. Language. Cognition. Communication. – M., 1989.
7. Vlasov V. G. Styles in art. – St. Petersburg, 1998.
8. Vygotsky L. S. Collected works in 6 volumes - M., 1984.
9. Znakov V.V. Understanding in knowledge and communication. – Samara, 1998.
10. Zolotukhin V. M. Tolerance. – Kemerovo, 2001.
11. Ikonnikova N.K. Modern Western concepts of intercultural communication (models of individual behavior in situations of contact of cultures). – M., 1994.
12. Ionin L. G. Sociology of culture: the path to the new millennium. – M.: Logos, 2000.
13. Intercultural communication: collection. textbook programs. – M.: Moscow State University Publishing House, 1999.
14. Intercultural communications: collection. scientific works – Chelyabinsk, 2002.
15. Methods of modern communication: problems of theory and social practice. – M., 2002.
16. The world of language and intercultural communication. Materials of the international scientific and practical conference. – Barnaul, 2001.
17. Mikhailova L. I. Sociology of culture. – M., 1999.
18. Pavlovskaya A.V. Russia and America. Problems of communication between cultures. – M.: Publishing house Mosk. University, 1998.
19. Persikova T. N. Intercultural communication and corporate culture. – M., 2002.
20. Sokolov A.V. Introduction to the theory of social communication. – St. Petersburg, 1996.
21. Sokolov A.V. General theory social communication. – St. Petersburg, 2002.
22. Solovyova O. V. Feedback in interpersonal communication. – M., 1992.
23. Sorokin Yu. A. Ethnic conflictology. – Samara, 1994.
24. Sorokin P. A. Man. Civilization. Society. – M., 1992.
25. Tsallagova Z. B. Ethnopedagogical dialogue of cultures. – Vladikavkaz, 2001.
26. Shalin V.V. Tolerance. – Rostov n/d., 2000.
27. Shirokov O. S. Exodus to the east. – M., 1997.
1. Waldenfels B. Own culture and foreign culture. The paradox of the science of “Alien” // Logos. – 1994. – No. 6.
2. Galochkina E. A. “Let them teach me...”: intercultural communication in the classroom // Russia and the West: dialogue of cultures. – M., 1998. – Issue. 5.
3. Ikonnikova N.K. Mechanisms of intercultural perception // Sociological studies. – 1995. – No. 4.
4. Muravleva N.V. Understanding and interpretation of facts of foreign culture // Russia and the West: dialogue of cultures. Vol. 7. – M., 1999.
5. Pavlovskaya A.V. Stereotypes of perception of Russia and Russians in the West // Russia and the West: dialogue of cultures. Vol. 1. – M., 1994.
6. Sitaram K. S., Cogdell R. T. Fundamentals of intercultural communication // Man. – 1992. – No. 2–5.
7. Sternin I. A. Communicative behavior in the structure of national culture // Ethnocultural specificity of linguistic consciousness. – M., 1996.
* * *
The given introductory fragment of the book Intercultural communication and international cultural exchange: a textbook (N. M. Bogolyubova, 2009) provided by our book partner -
Recent advances in the field of information technology, increased interest in expanding the interrelations of different countries and peoples, are opening up more and more new types and forms of communication, the effectiveness of which entirely depends on mutual understanding of cultures, manifestation and respect for the culture of communication partners. Necessary conditions for the effectiveness of the communication process between twoor more representatives of different cultures are the following factors: knowledge of foreign languages, knowledge of the material and spiritual culture of another people, moral values, worldviews, which together determine the behavior pattern of communication partners.
According to P.S. Tumarkin, intercultural communication, as is known, presupposes knowledge of a foreign cultural communicative code, i.e. first of all, language, norms and rules of behavior (behavioral code), psychology and mentality (psychomental code), etc. We call the total action of the communicative code in the communication process the national communicative regime. Highest level Competence in the field of intercultural communication is the ability to freely switch to the appropriate communicative mode (mode switching). In the absence of such competence (or knowing only the language), people most often communicate with speakers of a different culture and evaluate them on the basis of their own national norms, which makes communication between representatives of different cultural spheres especially difficult. All this increases attention to communication issues, the main condition for the effectiveness of which is mutual understanding, dialogue of cultures, tolerance and respect for the culture of communication partners.
Considering the features of intercultural communication, one should dwell on the processes of interpenetration (convergence and assimilation) of cultures, or acculturation. In the Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary, acculturation is defined as “the processes of mutual influence of cultures, the perception by one people, in whole or in part, of the culture of another people, usually more developed.” The American scientist R. Beals understood acculturation as “perception, i.e. the assimilation of a significant part of another culture... as an adaptation, that is, the combination of original and borrowed elements into a harmonious whole... as a reaction when many different counter-acculturation movements arise.
In Russia, the ideas of intercultural communication began to actively develop in the mid-1990s. Initially, they were associated with a change in the paradigm of teaching foreign languages: to effectively establish intercultural contacts, not only linguistic, but also cultural skills and abilities are required. Fundamental works have appeared in Russian science that indicate the promise of this type of research. This topic “problems of intercultural communication” is discussed in the works of T.G. Grushevitskaya, V.D. Popkova, A.P. Sadokhina, O.A. Leontovich, S.G. Terminasova. Currently, in Russia, intercultural communication has the status of an academic discipline, relies on a developing network of research centers and higher educational institutions, and has a publishing base. One of the domestic researchers O. A. Leontovich notes that when studying intercultural communication in Russia, more attention is paid than in the United States to such interdisciplinary areas as ethnolinguistics, linguistic and cultural studies, etc.
The lack of a unified theoretical and methodological approach to the study of intercultural communication in Russia and abroad is aggravated by different understandings of the terminology of this area in the Russian and English-speaking scientific traditions. In scientific and theoretical texts devoted to the problem of communication, most often the concept of intercultural communication is used to mean the interaction of two participants in a communicative act belonging to different national cultures. Within the Russian scientific tradition, the term intercultural communication (interlingual communication, intercultural interaction, intercultural communication) is associated with the exchange of knowledge, ideas, thoughts, concepts and emotions between people from different national cultures.
The scale and intensity of intercultural contacts give rise to the need for constant comprehension, interpretation and comparison of elements of one’s own and foreign culture. According to E.I. Buldakova, intercultural communication, becoming a factor in the everyday life of a modern person, has complicated his perception of the world and the process of self-identification. As a result, the author notes, the social integrity of modern man, already in a state of renewal, is increasingly fragmented.
Situations of intercultural interaction show its ambiguity and complexity. Communication partners do not always receive satisfaction from communicating with representatives of another culture. The statement that “foreign culture is always dirty” has already become an axiom of the sociology of culture and cultural anthropology. There are many reasons for this, including the attitude towards another culture as “alien” ”, and the stereotypes rooted in our minds, and the harmful effects of ethnocentrism. Moreover, ethnocentrism not only interferes with intercultural communication, but it is also difficult to recognize, since it is an unconscious process. All this together creates difficulties in being understood and heard in the act of verbal communication.
The concept of “ethnocentrism” was first proposed by the American sociologist V. Sumner in 1906, “...defining it as the tendency to consider one’s society and its culture as a model and measure all values exclusively in relation to it.” The essence of this definition boils down to the following: the culture of one’s ethnic group is at the forefront, and the rest - other cultures are not of equal value.
The phenomenon of ethnocentrism was previously characteristic of many people. For example, European colonialists considered non-European peoples inferior and incorrect. Unfortunately, even today the phenomenon of ethnocentrism is characteristic of many nations. This is a kind of “defensive reaction” that helps members of a nation feel like they belong to their culture. However, in intercultural communication such ethnocentric ideas are accompanied by incorrect assessments in the worldview of communication partners.
In order for ethnocentrism not to destroy the process of communication between participants of different ethnic groups, it is necessary to form not only a respectful attitude towards one’s own, but also another nation. It is possible to instill a friendly, respectful attitude towards other people through activities aimed at deep acquaintance with the culture of countries. To do this, both the organization of the educational process and the construction of the entire educational trajectory of the younger generation must comply with the principles of cultural centrism and culture orientation.
From the very beginning, intercultural communication had a clearly applied orientation. It is not only a science, but also a set of skills that can and should be mastered. First of all, these skills are necessary for those whose activities are related to interaction between cultures, when mistakes and communication failures lead to other failures - in negotiations, ineffective team work, and social tension. With the development of intercultural research, new forms of training are emerging, called intercultural or cross-cultural. A new profession is emerging - a specialist in intercultural communication, and an international society for intercultural education, training and research is being created.
In conclusion, I would like to note that currently the space of intercultural communication has become almost limitless. This is facilitated by modern society, which is developing dynamically and creating new socio-cultural formations.
Bibliography
- Filipova, Yu.V. Updating the personal characteristics of communicants in the context of a dialogue of cultures / Yu. V. Filipova // Bulletin of Moscow State University. Ser.19 Linguistics and intercultural communication. – 2008.No.1.P.131-137.
- Tumarkin, P.S. Russians and Japanese: current problems of intercultural communication / P.S. Tumarkin // Bulletin of Moscow University. Ser.13. Oriental Studies.1997.No.1.- P.13-17.
- Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary.-M., 1983.- P.16.
- Beals, R. Acculturation / R. Beals // Anthology of cultural studies. St. Petersburg, 1997.- T.1.- P.335.
- Maslova, V.A. Linguoculturology / V.A. Maslova. - M.: Publishing Center "Academy", 2001. - 320 p.
- Leontovich, O.A. Russia and the USA: introduction to intercultural communication: textbook. allowance / O.A. Leontovich. -Volgograd: Peremena, 2003.- 388 p.
- Vereshchagin, E.M. Language and culture / E.M. Vereshchagin, V.G. Kostomarov. - M.: Russian language, 1990.
- Buldakova, E.I. “Buffer-synergy zones” in the space of intercultural communication: abstract of thesis. dis…..candidate of philosophical sciences / E. I. Buldakova. – Rostov n/d, 2008.-23s.
- Goiko, E.V. Barriers in intercultural communication / E.V. Goyko // Bulletin of MGUKI. - 2011. - No. 2. - P. 47-51.
- Grushevitskaya, T.G. Fundamentals of intercultural communication: a textbook for universities / T.G. Grushevitskaya, V.D. Popkov, A.P. Sadokhin; edited by A.P. Sadokhina.- M.: Unita-Dana, 2003.-352 p.
- Krenska, N. On the issue of intercultural communication and cultural differences in teaching a foreign language / N. Krenska // Russian and foreign languages and methods of teaching them: Bulletin of the Peoples' Friendship University of Russia. - 2008. - No. 3.
- Idiatullin A.V. Cultural determinants of modernization of the system of higher humanities education in the Republic of Tatarstan // Bulletin of the Kazan State University of Culture and Arts. – 2005. – No. S3- P.81-86