Sociocultural Pathology of English Language Teaching: A Case Study of Home Culture Attachment, Cultural Intelligence, Politeness, and Cultural Adaptability

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

• Mahshid Rezaeyan ¹
• Shima Ghahari ¹
• Mahdi Dahmardeh ²

¹ Department of English, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran

² Department of English, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22067/lts.v50i4.53349

Abstract

1. Introduction
In the 1950s, Sapir and Whorf suggested that the cultural concepts and categories inherent in different languages determine their cognitive classification, making speakers of different languages think and behave differently. Since then, the topic of teaching and learning second/foreign language (L2) and the role of culture in L2 instructions have been a matter of considerable interest among language educators, with a particular focus on language learners’ identity. With the increasing use of English on the global scale, many L2 learners have developed a sense of cosmopolitan identity as a member of global community (Ghahari, 2015; Sung, 2013). Some researchers, on the other hand, have reported that L2 learners display their first language (L1) identities (e.g., Canagarajah, 2005; Kitao, 2008). There are still other studies which have discovered the possibility of constructing glocal or hybrid identities (e.g., Sung, 2014). However, the existing studies have examined the concept of identity in relation to accent (e.g., Sung, 2013), L2 proficiency level (e.g., Khodadady & Ghahari, 2012), in language institutes (e.g., Pishghadam & Saboori, 2011), and from L2 instructors’ viewpoint (e.g., Pishghadam & Sadeghi, 2011). Therefore, the present research examined sociocultural identity of L2 learners’ at college-level in terms of home culture attachment (HCA), cultural adaptation (CA), culture quotient (CQ), and politeness.

2. Methodology
The data were collected via the administration of multiple measures and checklists to English (n=98) and non-English (n=95) major students at two universities. The checklists included home culture attachment (r=0.75), pragmatic skills (r=0.71), cultural quotient (r=0.72), and cultural adaptation (r=0.68). Thus, the study followed a 4 × 2 factorial design.

3. Discussion
The results of a one-way ANOVA demonstrated that the English group was the higher achiever in terms of CQ and politeness and the lower achiever in HCA domain compared with the non-English group. Respecting the outperformance of L2 learners in cultural quotient, the nature of L2 learning as a means to promote communicative competence and intercultural competence needs to be taken into account (Kern & Kramsch, 2014). Intercultural competence is defined as the ability to deal with the differences which are derived from everyday communication (Magos & Simopoulos, 2009). Hence, the development of intercultural competence enables L2 learners to observe other people’s behaviors, reflect on their own culture in the light of others’, and cooperate more effectively with people from other cultures.
Another strength of L2 learners was at the level of politeness. In order to use language appropriately, L2 learners need a fair command of pragmalinguistic and socio-pragmatic competencies (Brown & Levinson, 1987) to avoid being considered rude by native speakers. This will lead them to become more aware of the target culture norms, to recognize the relationships and differences between the target and their own cultural norms, and finally, to be more sensitive toward them. One possible explanation for the L2 students’ degree of alienation could be identity conflict. Although it is less severe than identity conflicts in English as second language environments, identity conflict is mainly created in EFL contexts by the pedagogic textbooks and materials and could gradually lead L2 learners to observe their home culture more critically (Pishghadam & Sadeghi, 2011).

3. Conclusions
The present study aimed to shed light on the impact of L2 learning on learners’ sociocultural identity in the globalization era. The ultimate results indicated the presence of English goes beyond utilitarian values, encompassing a range of benefits in L2 learners’ lives and social skills. Yet, the impact of English for individuals is multiplex and mutually re-enforcing, having negative consequences as such. Finally, university instructors are advised to adopt a reflective, interpretive, sociocultually grounded, and politically engaged L2 pedagogy in order to enable L2 learners to realize and appreciate the values of other cultures while maintaining and enriching their own.

Keywords

• Home Culture Attachment
• Cultural Intelligence
• Cultural Adaptation
• Politeness Principle
• Linguistic Relativism

20.1001.1.22285202.1396.50.4.8.3

References

اکبری، ن. (1382). مهاجرت و سازگاری: پژوهشی در مورد ایرانیان مقیم امارات متحده عربی. شیراز: نوید.

حاتمی، پ. (1389). بررسی عوامل مؤثر بر سلامت اجتماعی دانشجویان با تأکید بر شبکه‌های اجتماعی. پایان‌نامة کارشناسی ارشد. دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران.

حسینی، س. ع.، و بهرامی، م. (1381). مقایسة تفکر انتقادی در دانشجویان سال اول و سال آخر کارشناسی. آموزش در علوم پزشکی، ۲(۲)، 21-26.

ساروخانی، ب. (1386). دایره‌المعارف علوم اجتماعی. تهران: کیهان.

شعرباف، ح. (1376). بررسی عوامل مؤثر بر تمایلات آوارگان افغانی شهر اصفهان و حومه در بازگشت به افغانستان. پایان‌نامة کارشناسی ارشد.

شهبازی، م.، و وزینی طاهر، ا. (1392). بررسی سلامت روانی و میزان عزت نفس دانشجویان سال اول و آخر. طب نظامی، 15(۲)، 103-110.

صالحی امیری، ر.، و حسین‌زادگان، ز. (1389). جهانی‌شدن فرهنگی و تأثیرات آن بر فرهنگ ایرانی‌. پژوهش‌نامة فرهنگ و جهانی‌شدن، (۵۷)، ۹-۴۶.

صفار مقدم، ا. (1388). مقایسة عناصر ادب در زبان‌های کره‌ای و فارسی. تحقیقات فرهنگی، ۲(۱)، 77-97.

علائی، س.، و میرمحمدی، م. (1392). بررسی نقش و اهمیت هوش فرهنگی در مدیریت فرهنگی. مهندسی فرهنگی، (77)، 169-199.

قهاری، ش. (۱۳۹۲). تأثیر رشتة زبان انگلیسی بر هویت فرهنگی: بررسی مقایسه‌ای هوش فرهنگی و انزوای ارزشی. پژوهش‌های زبان‌شناختی در زبان‌های خارجی، ۳(۲)، ۲۸۷-۳۱۲.

کاوسی، ا.، و حسین‌زادگان، ز. (1390). حفظ هویت ایرانی-اسلامی در فرآیند جهانی‌شدن. مطالعات راهبردی جهانی‌شدن، 2(۳)، 37-62.

محسنی تبریزی، ع. (1380). آسیب‌شناسی اجتماعی جوانان: بررسی وابستگی به فرهنگ مادری (بیگانگی فرهنگی) و مشارکت فرهنگی در محیط‌های دانشجویی کشور. تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه مفید.

 

Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., Koh, C., & Ng, K. Y. (2004). The measurement of cultural intelligence. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, New Orleans, LA.

Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., Koh, C., Ng, K. Y., Templer, K. J., Tay, C., & Chandrasekar, N. A. (2007). Cultural intelligence: Its measurement and effects on cultural judgment and decision making, cultural adaptation, and task performance. Management and Organization Review, 3(3), 335-371.

Bandura, A. (2002). Social cognitive theory in cultural context. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51(2), 269–290.

Berry, J., Poortinga, Y., Segeall, M., & Dasen, P. (2000). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brislin, R., Worthley, R., & Macnab, B. (2006). Cultural intelligence: Understanding behaviors that serve people's goals. Group and Organization Management, 31(1), 40-55.

Brown, H. (2002). Principles of language learning and teaching. New York: Longman.

Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Campbell, L. (1997). The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Retrieved from http:// venus. va.com.au/ suggestion/sapir.htm

Canagarajah, A. (2005). Reclaiming the local in language policy and practice. London: Routledge.

Crowne, K. (2008). What leads to cultural intelligence? Business Horizons, 51(5), 391-399.

Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Earley, P., & Ang, S. (2003). Cultural intelligence: Individual interactions across cultures. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

Giddens, A. (1998). Sociology. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

Johansson, K., Segerstad, H., Dahlgren, M., Hult, H., & Dahlgren, L. (2008). The two faces of political science studies: Junior and senior students' thoughts about their education and their future profession. Higher Education, 55(6), 623-636.

Kern, R., & Kramsch, C. (2014). Communicative grammar and communicative competence. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 1-6). Chicester: Wiley-Blackwell.

Khodadady, E. & Ghahari, Sh. (2011). Validation of the Persian cultural intelligence scale and exploring its relationship with gender, education, travelling abroad and place of living. Global Journal of Human Social Science, 11(7), 64-75.

Khodadady, E., & Ghahari, Sh. (2012). Exploring the relationship between foreign language proficiency and cultural intelligence. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 1(1), 22-30.

Kitao, K. (2000). Teaching culture in foreign language instruction in the Unites States. Retrieved from http:// ilc2.doshisha.ac.jp/ users/ kkitao/ library/ article/ culture.htm.

Kuh, G., Cruce, T., Shoup, R., Kinzie, G., & Gonyea, R. (2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on college grades and persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 540-563.

Kumaravadivelu, B. (2003). Critical language pedagogy: A post-method perspective on English language teaching. World Englishes, 22(4), 539-550.

Lazarus, R., & Folkman, S. (1985). Coping and adaptation. New York: Gilford press.

Lyons, J. (1981). Language and linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Magos, K., & Simopoulos, G. (2009). Do you know Naomi? Researching the intercultural competence of teachers who teach Greek as a second language in immigrant classes. Intercultural Education, 20(3), 255–265.

McDevitt, B. (2004). Negotiating the syllabus: A win-win syllabus. ELT Journal, 58(1), 3-9.

Ndebele, N. (1987). The English language and social change in South Africa. The English Academy Review, 4, 1-16.

Nettler, G. (1957). A measure of alienation. American Sociological Review, 22(6), 670-677.

Ng, K., Van Dyne, L., & Ang, S., (2012). Cultural intelligence: A review, reflections, and recommendations for future research. In A. M. Ryan, F. T. L. Leong, & F. L. Oswald (Eds.), Conducting multinational research: Applying organizational psychology in the workplace (pp. 29-58). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

O’Neil, D. (2005). Language and culture: An introduction to human communication. Retrieved from http://anthro.palomar.edu/language.

Pennycook, A. (1994). The cultural politics of English as an international language. Harlow, Essex, UK: Longman Group Limited.

Peterson, B. (2004). Cultural intelligence: A guide to working with people from other cultures. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Pishghadam, R., & Ghahari, Sh. (2012). Fundamental concepts in applied linguistics: A reference book. Tehran: Rahnama Press.

Pishghadam, R., & Saboori, F. (2011). A qualitative analysis of ELT in the language institutes of Iran in the light of the theory of ‘World Englishes’. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(3), 569-579.

Pishghadam, R., & Sadeghi, M. (2011). Culture and identity change among Iranian EFL teachers. Ozean Journal of Social Sciences, 4(3), 147-162.

Pishghadam, R., Hashemi, M., & Bazri, E. (2013). Specifying the underlying constructs of the home culture attachment scale. International Journal of Society, Culture, and Language, 1(1), 37-51.

Pusecker, K., Torres, M., Crawford, L., Levia, D., Lehman, D., & Copic, G. (2011). A comparison of assessing general education goals with freshmen and senior students. A research project at the University of Delaware, center for teaching and assessment of learning.

Sahragard, R. (2003). A cultural script analysis of a politeness feature in Persian. Paper presented at the 8th conference of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, Japan.

Sapir, E. & Whorf, B. (1958). Culture, language and personality. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Shaffer, M., & Millar, G. (2008). Cultural intelligence: A key success factor for expatriates. In S. Ang & L. Van Dyne (Eds.), Handbook of cultural intelligence: Theory, measurement and applications (pp.107-124). Armonk, NY: ME Harpe.

Shahsavadi, S., Ghonsooly, B., & Kamyabi, A. (2010). Designing and validating home culture attachment questionnaire for students of foreign languages and its application. Ferdowsi Review, 10, 49-76.

Sigelman, L., & Welch, S. (1993). The contact hypothesis revisited: Black-white interaction and positive racial attitudes. Social Forces, 71(3), 781-795.

Sternberg, R., & Grigorenko, E. (2006). Cultural intelligence and successful intelligence. Group and Organization Management, 31(1), 27-39.

Sung, C. (2013). English as a lingua franca and English language teaching: A way forward. ELT Journal, 67(3), 350-353.

Sung, C. (2014). Global, local or glocal? Identities of L2 learners in English as a lingua franca communication. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 27(1), 43-57.

Templer, K., Tay, C., & Chandrasekar, N. (2006). Motivational cultural intelligence: Realistic job preview, realistic living conditions preview, and cross-cultural adjustment. Group and Organization Management, 31, 154-173.

Triandis, H. (2006). Cultural intelligence in organizations. Group and Organization Management, 31(1), 20-26.

Tsou, W. (2005). The effects of cultural instruction on foreign language learning. RELC Journal, 36(1), 39-57.

Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Livermore, D. (2010). Cultural intelligence: A pathway for leading in a rapidly globalizing world. In K. M. Hannum, B. McFeeters, & L. Booysen (Eds.), Leadership across differences. San Francisco, CQ: Pfeiffer.

Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Nielsen, T. (2007). Cultural intelligence. In S. Clegg & J. Bailey, (Eds.), International encyclopedia of organization studies (pp. 345-350). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Watts, R. (2004). Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.