Introduction Culture on the move: Towards a minorization of cultural difference (original) (raw)
Related papers
Culture on the Move: Towards a Minorization of Cultural Difference
Moderna Språk, 2020
The article is an introductory paper to a Special Issue in Moderna Språk that collects eight contributions focusing on demythologizations of cultural politics. Using Deleuzian concepts of minorization and delirium, the paper attempts to frame cultural difference in a new open terrain where all forms of localisms and regimes of identifications are seen as frames of capture that subjugate rather than emancipate difference. The measure of a culture’s health, I argue, does not reside in atrophy of its self-identity but in its dispersion of atoms everywhere, its schizoid states of intensities and deterritorializations where thresholds of self-consistency are surpassed and zones of indiscernibility entered. In this context, cultural difference could be seen as a permanent disjunction of territoriality, body or code, that which escapes capture to disrupt the self-valorizing forces of its enunciation, a kind of counter-pressure of synchrony in diachrony, a black body within the white imaginary that produces lesions and lines of escape in airtight regimes of definition and multiplies narrative ruptures in every narrative of constitution. With this mind, the paper then proceeds to introduce and analyze eight contributions to the volume that articulate cultural difference in a variety of contexts including translation, cuisine, media, water writing, punk literature, history, urban studies and protest art as well as more theoretically focused deconstructions of territorial fictions that cultural imaginaries rely on.
Living in-between: culture and language
Thresholds, British Council, 2005
Luís Mendes and Gillian Moreira are part of a new politicised movement of language teaching. In this field of education, there is a running debate about how language teaching should react to globalisation and the historical perspectives of colonialism. Many agree this lively discussion is a good thing but the arguments are often crudely simplified, especially in the case of English language teaching. On the one hand we are asked to consider the plundering promoters of English. With their veiled motives of neo-imperial greed, they are busy thinning out the biodiversity of the world's languages by raising the cash crop of text books and pedagogies known as ELT. These professionals, say their critics, are all of a kind: they are invariably white Anglo-Saxons and are either shameless or guilt-ridden oppressors, trading the commodity of English at the price of cultural subjugation. In the opposing corner stands another protagonist: one who denies charges of cultural imperialism by an appeal to the marketplace. If we listen to the customer, goes the argument, we find that international students want international English, a tool stripped of any cultural elements which might impede communication. You don't need to know about what an 'Englishman' has for breakfast in order do business across Asia. For them, a uniform global 'youth' is united by a common aspirational culture and seeks a neutral communication tool to further its educational and professional ambitions. Mendes and Moreira deepen this debate by claiming that culture is more than kings and queens or an optional extra. They argue that culture lies at the heart of a revolution in the classroom, one that recognises that using another language to communicate across cultures can no longer be seen as a simple transaction which leaves both parties unchanged. The multiple channels through which we can choose to communicate, and the crossing and recrossing of borders due to migration and travel, create new educational possibilities and responsibilities. These are no longer hypothetical choices; they are now unavoidable. Of course, linguistic communication is still used to exchange information for a purpose but it is increasingly more likely be a personal challenge: some of those borders crossed will be within ourselves as we confront values different from our own. The two writers, whose research we feature here, see language learning as a key to self-understanding. For them, we enter a dramatic encounter with otherness, and thereby can see our own values in a new light, relative to the values held by those from different cultures. This isn't a matter of just acquiring facts, but reflecting on our attitudes and sometimes deciding to change. We no longer see our identities as fixed but recognise that the self is a fluid entity, being formed and reformed by cultural cross-currents. We operate in the 'space in-between' or the 'third space' between cultures. The language classroom is particularly rich in opportunities for developing and exploring these special spaces which question rather than reinforce borders. Mendes and Moreira are researching this with their communities of teachers. The political terms of this debate have shifted from being a critique of colonial ideology to examining the extent to which we can use education to increase respect for the ecology of cultures, combat racism, and become 'critical citizens'. Fellow researchers Alred, Byram and Fleming, see a time when 'frontiers become less barriers and prohibitions and more gateways and invitations.' (Intercultural experience and education, 2002). Everyday life is full of these 'gateways and invitations'. One way of deepening our awareness of them is to observe how others negotiate them and grasp intercultural difference. Testimonies of ''real' intercultural living' draw us into the 'third spaces' created and employed by others. The fascinating case-study that follows, provided by Mendes and Moreira, combines human interest and intercultural insight in its explorations of the encounters and experiences of a couple, named P and B: Case Study We studied an example of the personal narratives of two people who have come together from two completely different worlds.
Editorial [in Language and Intercultural Communication]
2017
The relationship between language, actors and the specific social contexts in which they speak emerges as a prevalent theme in this issue. This is due in part to the mobilities of populations, amplified to varying degrees by the competing social forces of the 21st century: both the good, such as lifestyle and education; and the not-so-good, such as economic pressure and conflict. In various ways, the papers in this second issue of Volume 17 describe how this experience of mobility - both terrestrial and virtual – can vary in relation to the amount of capital, both economic and cultural, with which our sojourners travel: from Mendez-Garcia’s postgraduate sojourners in Spain to Park’s South-East Asian marriage migrants in Korea; from Lapresta, Huguet and Fernández-Costales’s inward migrants to Catalonia to Dong’s ‘空中飞人’ (‘flying people)’ in Beijing; from Chen’s Chinese students using social media in the USA to Akiyama’s eTandem intercultural interlocutors; and from Zhu’s university st...
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 2007
In its fifth edition, this introductory textbook shows its usefulness over time; nevertheless, it remains grounded conceptually in past decades. The field of intercultural communication, and the related fields of anthropology and cultural studies on which this book draws, has forged ahead, responding to changing paradigms and the globalization of knowledge, technology, and cultural production. This edition is updated with recent issues and content related to cultural groups, such as Muslim immigration to Europe, in which Jandt documents the increase in the Muslim immigrant population and the responses by several nation-states to this growing population. Despite updating content and issues related to intercultural communication, it continues to draw primarily on a structuralist paradigm of culture, rather than a constructivist paradigm in which culture, and, in turn, intercultural communication, is constructed and contested by individuals in relation in societies.
Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2023
The Handbook edited by Jane Jackson has been released in contemporary and transnational times where interculturality-related challenges continue to emerge. Some of these challenges include "the rise in populism, elevated fear of difference, and heightened anti-immigration sentiments" (Jackson, 2020, p. 1) and may, to varying degrees, influence individuals' lives and well-being. To tackle these issues and foster greater equity, diversity, and inclusion in intercultural communication and research practices, the Handbook presents 34 chapters to introduce interdisciplinary studies of language and intercultural communication for senior undergraduate students, graduate students, and scholars from multidisciplinary backgrounds (e.g., language education, anthropology, sociology, business, tourism) who are interested in language and intercultural communication research. Each chapter not only critically assesses field-specific theories and research methods, but also discusses practical recommendations and future directions for conducting research. The Handbook categorizes chapters into five parts. Part I, 'Foundations of language and intercultural communication studies', contains five chapters mainly reviewing the (re)conceptualizations of language and intercultural communication research, with a particular focus on historical developments across the globe (Chapter 1), culture and power (Chapter 2), identity and communication (Chapter 3), intercultural competence and citizenship (Chapter 4), and criticality and reflexivity (Chapter 5). Part II, 'Core themes and issues', shares a similar theoretical orientation with 14 chapters structured under three themes to discuss the relationships between language and other constructs such as culture, identity, and global citizenship education. Diverging slightly in focus, Part III, 'Theory into practice: Towards intercultural (communicative) competence and citizenship', looks at some important practices such as intercultural education for second language teachers (Chapter 20), intercultural responsibility and glocal critical citizenship (Chapter 21), digitally mediated development of intercultural competence (Chapter 22), equity-and diversity-focused global citizenship education (Chapter 23), and intercultural learning assessment (Chapter 24). Exemplifying interdisciplinary approaches, Part IV, 'Language and intercultural communication in context', provides diverse contexts in which intercultural communication takes place, such as international education (Chapters 25, 26, & 27), business education (Chapter 28), workplace (Chapters 29 & 30), health services (Chapter 31), legal discourse (Chapter 32), and tourism (Chapter 33). Finally, Part V, 'New debates and future directions', includes a closing chapter (i.e., Chapter 34) synthesizing ongoing debates and highlighting the need to strengthen socially just research and practical efforts so as to promote interculturality across public and private domains. This edited volume possesses several strengths. An important aspect is that all chapters exhibit a high level of criticality and reflexivity. Chapter 5, for example, explains the interconnectedness between these two notions and increases the visibility
In the wake of developing methods of cultural research, the language of cultural studies is undergoing evolution and enrichment as well. This phenomenon obviously applies to all evolving academic fields, but in the area of the humanities a particular impact, consisting of the (sometimes deliberate) creation of successive cultural spaces, is manifested. For example, the introduction of a new concept may result in the initiation of a trend in the description and categorisation of reality. This is what happened, for example, with the concept, now very fashionable, of gender, which refers to cultural phenomena (which does not necessarily mean, however, that it has a particular referent) that sometimes must be created (interpreted) anew. In other words, these phenomena do not simply exist, but rather are inferred from observations (literally: they would not exist without suitable interpretation). These are followed by further activities, such as the construction of a new axiology and ethics, a new philosophy of the individual (describing him or her in terms of so-called cultural gender), and, in the case of strong sociopolitical trends and activities, modification of law as well. These trends do not usually derive from the work of academics, but from political tendencies. This modest example demonstrates the creative power of concepts in disciplines such as sociology and cultural studies.
Since the 1980s the field of language teaching and learning has emphasized the interplay between language, culture and identity and promotes, both communicative and intercultural competencies. This mirrors a general trend in the social sciences after the so-called cultural turn which brought about a concentration on culture, identity and voice (the politics of recognition) at the expense of socio-economic structures and relations (the politics of redistribution). This article argues that despite this marginalization, socio-economic and hence class issues still impact crucially upon the amount and quality of recognition people receive from others and should therefore be brought again to the forefront of theoretical discussions. This seems ever more important in the current neoliberal socio-economic restructuring in all spheres of life that deepens inequality and thus impacts upon the conditions under which people meet and communicate with each other. This article analyzes the characteristics and consequences of the cultural turn that brought about this unhelpful divide between the politics of recognition and the politics of redistribution and then proposes an alternative theoretical framework that combines a Critical Realist ontology with Bourdieu’s notion of habitus and field. Such a framework, it is suggested, would shed a more realistic light on intercultural communication and could help to connect language teaching and learning with questions of social justice, and thus enhance empathy, understanding and criticality in students.
I-LanD Journal – Identity, Language and Diversity International Peer-Reviewed Journal Call for papers for the special issue: “Translating and Interpreting Linguistic and Cultural Differences in a Migrant Era” The next monographic issue of the I-LanD Journal will be centred on exploring the role which translation and interpreting play as activities which potentially foster the recognition or misrecognition of, amongst others, sexual, ethnic, racial and class differences in an era of great waves of migrations, and will be edited by Eleonora Federici (University L'Orientale, Naples), and Rosario Martín Ruano and África Vidal Claramonte (University of Salamanca). Given the thematic scope of this issue, contributions should adhere to any of the following broad research strands: - Translating gender and sexualities; - Translation and interpreting as cultural mediation; - Translation and ideology; - Translating and interpreting cultural differences in professional fields; - Translation, adaptation and negotiation of gender and ethnic differences in TV series, cinema and the Web; - Translation and representation of political and cultural differences in the press; - Recognition and marginalisation of sexual, cultural and ethnic differences in translated texts; - Ethics and pedagogy of translation. Contributions are expected to be discursively inspired in their methodology, so that they may draw on any of the following approaches: Translation Studies, Linguistics, Critical Discourse Analysis, Semiotics, Gender Studies, Cultural Studies, Postcolonial Studies, Narratology, Social Sciences and Media Studies, to name but a few. Original contributions in English will be considered for publication in this issue. Word-count of the abstract - The length of each abstract is approximately 500 words, excluding references. Word-count of the paper - The length of individual papers is approximately 7,000-8,000 words, excluding references. The attachment should not contain the author’s name and affiliation but should be accompanied by an email including such personal information. Contact and submission email - efederici@unior.it, africa@usal.es, mrmr@usal.es, ilandjournal@unior.it Deadlines - Submission of abstracts to guest editors: October 15, 2018. - Notification of acceptance/rejection to prospective contributors: by October 30, 2018. - Submission of individual chapters to guest editors: February 10, 2019. Description The role of translation and interpreting is crucial in the mediation of discourses and in the evolution of literary/linguistic/cultural representations of differences in various sociocultural contexts. A critical analysis of dominant models of translation and interpreting in the various professional fields and a reflection on the ethical implications of translation and interpreting are paramount for a rethinking of theories and practices of mediation, translation and interpreting in Western societies. Aims The aim of this monographic number is to offer a Translation and Interpreting Studies insight into the ethical challenges of translation and interpreting in an era of great waves of migrations through investigations on these activities as fields of recognition or mis-recognition of, amongst others, sexual, ethnic, racial and class differences. Through an interdisciplinary approach which draws on theories and practices from the fields of Translation Studies, Linguistics, Critical Discourse Analysis, Semiotics, Gender Studies, Cultural Studies, Postcolonial Studies, Narratology, Social Sciences and Media Studies, this monographic issue aims at gathering substantial contributions capable of depicting and displaying major in-context examples of linguistic usage, cultural representations, stylistic, narrative and communicative frames, patterns and schemata in political, social, literary and cultural discourses, in the shaping or negotiation of which translation and interpreting play a major role.
Rajakumar calls for “a more inclusive conversation” within academic cultures to take greater account of linguistic and cultural difference. She argues that even within a single-language-use setting, especially with a dominant world language such as English, there can be multiple linguistic and identity formations. She frames her argument with Pennycook’s (2010) understanding of language as a dynamic, socially constructed and locally specific form of human interaction. Building on the work of Nunan and Choi (2010) and Rivers and Houghton (2013), she draws parallels between language and communication styles. With examples of gendered speech in the workplace ( Llamas and Watt 2009) and a more contemporary context internet communications ( Nakamura, Chow-White, and Nelson 2011), Rajakumar makes a passionate case for educators to open the communicative space of academic settings to these diverse cultural experiences.