Transculturation

Transculturation is a term coined by Fernando Ortiz in 1947 to describe the phenomenon of merging and converging cultures. In simple terms, it reflects the natural tendency of people (in general) to resolve conflicts over time, rather than exacerbating them. In the modern context, both conflicts and resolutions are amplified by communication and transportation technology —the ancient tendency of cultures drifting or remaining apart has been replaced by stronger forces for bringing societies together. Where tranculturation impacts ethnicity and ethnic issues the term "ethnoconvergence" is sometimes used

In one general sense, transculturation covers war, ethnic conflict, racism, multiculturalism, interracial marriage, and any other of a number of contexts that deal with more than one culture. In the other general sense, tranculturation is the positive aspect of global phenomena and human events, where resolutions to conflicts are inevitable

Constructing cultural identity

Common characteristics and ideas may be clear markers of a shared cultural identity but essentially it is determined by difference: we feel we belong to a group, and a group defines itself as a group, by noticing and highlighting differences with other groups and cultures. Any culture defines itself in relation, or rather in opposition to other cultures. People who feel they belong to the same culture, have this idea because they rely partially on a common set of norms, but the awareness of such common codes is possible only via the confrontation with their absence, namely, with other cultures. To put it simply: if you think you're the only existing culture (e.g. living on an island in the Pacific) you don't see yourself as a culture.

Thus the dynamics of cultural self-definition imply a continuous contact between cultures. Moreover, those relations are never relations of equality, since they never exist in an isolated form: the complex web of relationships created by the superposition of political, economic, scientific, and cultural relation, turns any relation between two cultures into an unequal one. There is always a dominant culture, or a dominant cultural practice (culture A may be dominant in, say, literature, and B in cinema)

The unequal character of intercultural relations, that is to say, the fact that the construction of identity is linked to unequal power relations, implies that identity construction can be seen as ideological: in establishing its identity, a cultural practice constructs, reproduces, or subverts social interests and power relations

Two remarks may clarify this thesis. First, the very fact that, within a culture or cultural practice, there is an awareness of a common identity implies that there has also been a striving toward preservation of this identity, toward self-preservation of the culture. If identity is constructed in opposition to the alien, intrusions from other cultures imply loss of autonomy and thereby loss of identity

http://www.journalist.ir/html/

http://www.journalist.ir/html/modules.php?name=BookCatalog

::: سه پارادايم در مطالعات مصرف فرهنگي

http://pr.eprsoft.com/archives/007958.html

cultural schizophrenia:

 is especially strong among those who have had to learn a new language along with the new culture. It seems that there is a feeling attached to speaking one language that is slightly different than that which is felt when speaking the other. In those who have emigrated while still quite young, speaking the original language may make one feel more like a child for example. Unconscious reflexes may be attached to the speaking of one language as well. For example, I find myself kissing people "goodbye" if I have been speaking French with them, and hugging them if we have been speaking English and I am often surprised to see that I might have done this completely unconsciously. Between bilingual people, there is often the question of which language is primary. Most people can identify which language is the most dominant, and can say which one they dream in. Some people might dream in whichever language they have heard during the day. Whether these language experiences are purely linguistic or whether they are a clue to understanding the complexities surrounding cultural identity could well be an interesting investigation.

CULTURAL FACTORS IN COMPLEX DECISION MAKING

Stefan Strohschneider
University of Bamberg
Germany

ABSTRACT

Complex decision-making is conceptualised as the process of problem solving in meaningful and important, but complex, dynamic and partially opaque situations. This process is open to a number of cultural influences, among them educational practices, environmental predictability, and power distance. Two empirical studies that explore into the cultural relativity of this type of decision making use interactive computer simulations of complex problems as research instruments. There are a number of behavioural differences between participants from India and Germany which can be explained within a culture-theoretical framework and give reason for the plea to include cultural factors in theories on human decision making.

CULTURE, PSYCHOLOGY, AND EDUCATION

David Matsumoto
San Francisco State University
U.S.A.

ABSTRACT

In my view, the study of culture provides three main contributions to our understanding of human behavior and mental processes. First there is great knowledge to impart about cultural similarities and differences in behavior, and these form the basis for improving psychological theories. Second the study of culture is a prime example of critical thinking in the field, as cross-cultural research begs the question about whether our notions of truth and psychological principles are applicable to people beyond those whom were studied. Third research on intercultural adjustment provides us with clues about possible psychological constructs that may be universally necessary for adjusting to life well in a pluralistic and diverse environment. I discuss these contributions, and reframe thinking about the goals of education focusing on these skills.

Gender, Power, Discipline and Context: On the Sociolinguistic Variation of okay, right, like, and you know in English Academic Discourse

Erik Schleef | University of Michigan

This presentation examines the sociolinguistic distribution and the functions of the question tags okay?, and right? as well as the discourse markers you know, like, okay and right in the academic speech of women and men of various academic disciplines in the lecture and seminar context. Contradictory findings on male and female communicative behavior in academia warrant a more refined investigation of the nature of academic speech and the way various academic contexts and conversational roles influence the use of question tags and discourse markers. I propose that not one single factor - e.g. gender or power - but rather a constellation of the following factors is responsible for the use of these structures: 1) conversational tasks in different academic disciplines, 2) gender, 3) power and conversational roles, (4) context, and 5) educational level. The data for this project is drawn from the MICASE corpus on academic speech compiled at the University of Michigan. My data suggest that among instructors the structures under investigation vary by discipline but not gender. However, in the less powerful conversational role of student, gender variation can be found in the seminar context in all academic disciplines