What Implications Does Identity Have for Intercultural Communication?
Social realities can manifest into cultural identities of any group of people. An individual’s nature of social interaction depend on the dimensions of his cultural identity. It can encompass both race and ethnicity, although these two terms require careful consideration due to the difficulty in tracing their sharp delimitations. Various sources of ascriptive, cultural, territorial, political, economic and social nature can contribute to the formation of identities (Hortobágyi, 2009, pp. 258-259). According to the sociologist George Herbert Mead, identity has two components – the social component and the personal component. The social identity encompasses derivatives from various social collectives such as family, association with a sports or a peer group. Personal identity refers to the uniqueness of the individual in connection with his unmistakable life history. While identities appear fixed to any particular notion, they also have a dynamic component (Martin & Nakayama, 2010, p. 109).
According to Spreckels and Kotthoff (2007), language plays an important role in the attribution of ethnic and national identity. Hortobágyi (2009) says that linguistic element mirrors one’s own identity and describes that people define themselves in all of their daily interactions and communication by negotiating their identities with people of similar or different backgrounds. In the process of communication, both verbal and non-verbal means of expression reveal the manifestations of identity. The non-verbal means of expression have the most impact on the perception of an identity. A UCLA study shows that non-verbal cues determine the effectiveness of a communication by 93 percent (pp. 258-259). Martin and Nakayama (2010) say that expression of identity takes place through communication of core symbols, labels and norms. Identities do not develop smoothly. Instead, they form over time through various kinds of communication with many different people. Their developmental process remains specific to regional boundaries, i.e. they develop in different ways in different cultures (pp. 108-109). In intercultural societies, identities can serve or swerve depending on individual attitudes to cultural complexities.
Hortobágyi (2009) defines intercultural communication as the communication system in which the participants represent differently. She mentions that identities in complex societies not only have multiple facets, but can also shift constantly. She points that multiple facets of cultural identities fall against the complex background of political, socio-economic and financial world with display of ambiguity in varying degrees. Influenced by such factors, cultural groups try to constantly redefine, reinforce or reshape their identities to fit the needs of socialization (p. 258). Spreckels and Kotthoff (2007) say that difference in identities do not always raise issues in intercultural communication. For instance, two doctors of different nationalities can successfully work together as like-minded professionals. According to Martin and Nakayama (2010), identity can profoundly influence intercultural communication. They warn that an intercultural communication can turn problematic if an individual takes the wrong approach in negotiation of any identity for themselves. Assumptions can lead to the lack of respect of another individual’s identity. For successful interactions in intercultural settings, one should recognize and find the right balance between individuals and the cultural aspects of their identity (p. 109).
For harmonious exploitation of advantages in intercultural communication, one must acknowledge the complexity of cultural identity. An effort to understand the people, culture and society in general needed to succeed in multicultural backgrounds. The effectiveness in multi-cultural education relies on the process of deconstruction of a given experience or a situation for greater insights and revelation of any sources of prejudice (Hortobágyi, 2009, p. 261). Martin and Nakayama (2010) urges to challenge, resist, renegotiate and resolve any conflicts in intercultural settings.
Identity functions as a process of constant change to anyone who needs it. Cultures change even faster in the post-modern world of globalization where new cultures – that once resided in the next door – now comes knocking at our own doorsteps. While multicultural education plays a vital role for active participation in intercultural communication, individuals have to stand-by their aspirations to display effectiveness in the negotiation of their own identities in intercultural communications.
References
Hortobágyi, I. (2009). The Role of Identity in Intercultural Communication. Philology and Cultural Studies, 2(51), 4th ser., 257-262. Retrieved March 24, 2016.
Martin, J. N., & Nakayama, T. K. (2010). Intercultural Communication in Contexts (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Spreckels, J. & Kotthoff, H. (2007). Communicating Identity in Intercultural Communication. Handbook of Intercultural Communication (pp. 415-440).
