Intercultural communication as a type of communication. Intercultural communication

Research methods

Knowledge of the countries of the world - decoration and food

human minds

(Leonardo da Vinci)

1.1. The history of the theory
intercultural communication

Intercultural communication arose in the United States after the Second World War, but the problems of interaction and mutual influence of cultures, the correlation of culture and language have always attracted the attention of researchers. Many questions that later became fundamental for intercultural communication were developed by such scientists as W. von Humboldt, F. Boas, H. Steinthal, E. Sapir, B. Whorf, L. Weisgerber and others.

The views of Wilhelm von Humboldt had a huge impact on the development of many areas in linguistics. According to the scientist, “the division of mankind into peoples and tribes and the difference between its languages ​​and dialects are closely interconnected and depend on the third phenomenon of a higher order - the action of human spiritual power, which always acts in new and often more perfect forms ... Each specific language is associated with the spirit people. It has grown together with all the thinnest threads of its roots ... with the strength of the national spirit, and the stronger the influence of the spirit on the language, the more natural and richer the development of the latter. The spirit of the people and the language of the people are inseparable: “The spiritual identity and structure of the language of the people are in such close fusion with each other that as soon as one exists, the other must necessarily follow from this ... Language is, as it were, an external manifestation of the spirit of peoples: the language of the people is its the spirit, and the spirit of the people is its language, and it is difficult to imagine anything more identical” [Humboldt, 1984: 68].

The concept of V. von Humboldt received peculiar interpretations in domestic and foreign science.

The largest representative of the W. von Humboldt tradition in Germany in the second half of the 19th century was Heimann Steinthal, for whom language was an “individual spiritual product”. At the same time, following W. von Humboldt, he wrote that the basis of this unity and individuality of languages ​​lies in the originality of the national spirit. The concept of the “spirit of the people” still remained with Hyman Steinthal, but in many respects it turned out to be rethought: instead of “human spiritual strength” and the developing absolute idea, H. Steinthal talks about collective psychology. He wrote that language is essentially a product of society, of the people, that it is self-consciousness, worldview and the logic of the spirit of the people [Alpatov, 2001: 83].

The traditions of W. von Humboldt were also developed by the scientist Karl Vossler. He used such phrases as "the spirit of the language", "the spiritual originality of this or that people." However, his concept was in many ways different from Humboldt's. If for W. von Humboldt the people are primary in relation to the individual, and for H. Steinthal there is still a single “spirit of the people” as a collective psychology, then K. Vossler consistently proceeded from the primacy of individuality. The reason for language development, from his point of view, is "the human spirit with its inexhaustible individual intuition" [Alpatov, 2001: 89]. It is only in a single individual that language changes occur, which can then be adopted by other individuals and become standard. Only in this sense can one speak of the "spirit of the people", which is made up of many individual spirits.

In Russian linguistics, the prominent Indologist and language theorist Ivan Pavlovich Minaev was a follower of the ideas of W. von Humboldt, who believed that each language reflects the individuality of the people who created the language, and in turn developing under its influence.

Another representative of the direction of W. von Humboldt in Russian linguistics was Alexander Afanasyevich Potebnya, a professor at Kharkov University. Following W. von Humboldt, he emphasized the active nature of language: “Language is a means not to express a ready-made thought, but to create it ... it is not a reflection of the existing worldview, but an activity that composes it” [Potebnya, 2007]. A.A. Potebnya agreed with W. von Humboldt's ideas about the connection of language with the "spirit of the people": "Languages ​​are different from each other not by one sound form, but by the whole system of thought expressed in them, and by all their influence on the subsequent development of peoples" [Potebnya, 1958] .

Of great interest is the "linguistic relativity hypothesis" of the American linguist and anthropologist Edward Sapir and his student Benjamin Whorf, according to which the structure of language determines the structure of thinking and the way of knowing the outside world. According to Sapir-Whorf, the logical structure of thinking is determined by language. The nature of cognition of reality depends on the language in which the cognizing subject thinks. People divide the world, organize it into concepts and distribute meanings in this way and not otherwise, because they are participants in some agreement that is valid only for this language. “Similar physical phenomena make it possible to create a similar picture of the universe only with the correlation of language systems” [Whorf, 1960: 174].

The ideas of Sapir-Whorf echo the positions of many scientists of the European direction of neo-Humboldtism. So, for example, L. Weisgerber considers the interaction of different linguistic communities as a "linguistic meeting of peoples." We are talking about the transfer of the creation of a given linguistic community into the cumulative knowledge of another community and thus into the permanent foundations of its spiritual activity: “This is a meeting of peoples in their languages, namely in the process of spiritual assimilation and transformation of the world. This acquaintance and, in addition, the use of the results that different linguistic communities came to in the course of their “transformation of the world into the property of the spirit” provides boundless opportunities” (cited in [Radchenko, 2005: 274]).

Of great interest to the theory of intercultural communication are the works of the American scientist Margaret Mead, which deal with the role of the social factor in shaping the individual's behavior.

The works of the American anthropologist Edward Hall played a huge role in the development of intercultural communication. It was he who first used the term "intercultural communication".

E. Hall also proposed the concept of "cultural grammar", according to which all parameters of cultural systems, including the temporal factor, contextuality of culture, attitude to space, are specific, like the languages ​​of different peoples. Together with verbal methods, each of these elements participates in communication and carries information. The scientist believed that culture can be learned like a language, therefore, it can also be taught. Hall's idea paved the way for concrete, systematic, and organized "teaching" of foreign cultures.

E. Hall's followers American cultural anthropologists Florence Kluckhohn and Fred Strodbeck developed the concept of cultural communication in terms of value orientations.

The American scientist Dell Hymes developed the ethnographic direction of communication. He wrote that "the ethnography of communication" is the study of language taken as a phenomenon, placed in the dynamics and structure of communicative events, and aims to develop a theory of communication as part of a system of culture.

A significant contribution to the methodology of cross-cultural research was made by the American psychologist Harry Triandis, who was engaged in a comparative analysis of the nature of cultures. He proposed a number of methods for studying cultures, developed a self-training technique called "culture assimilator" [Triandis, 2007: 343-349]. The ethnographic study of communication is focused on comparing communication strategies in different linguistic cultures.

The ideas of intercultural communication have attracted increasing attention in the field of education.

In the 1960s the subject "Intercultural Communication" was taught at a number of US universities. In the 1970s the purely practical nature of the course was supplemented by the necessary theoretical generalizations and took the form of a classic university course, combining both theoretical provisions and practical aspects of intercultural communication

In Europe, the formation of intercultural communication as an academic discipline took place somewhat later than in the United States. In some European universities at the turn of the 70-80s. 20th century departments of intercultural communication were opened (Munich, Jena).
In Munich, curricula on intercultural communication were developed, based on materials from folklore, ethnology and linguistics.

Of great interest for the development of the theory of intercultural communication are the works of the German scientist Gerhard Maletzke. In the book "Intercultural Communication" (1996) he describes innovative approaches to classical methods of intercultural communication in relation to a German-speaking audience.

Research by German scientists is also carried out in linguistic and linguodidactic aspects and considers intercultural communication through the prism of overcoming language barriers.

In the domestic science and education system, the initiators of the study of intercultural communication were teachers of foreign languages, who were the first to realize that for effective communication with representatives of other cultures, it is not enough to know a foreign language. The Faculty of Foreign Languages ​​of Lomonosov Moscow State University became a pioneer in research and application of intercultural communication methods.

Russian scientists are actively developing the theory of intercultural communication.

So, a review of the emergence and development of the discipline "Intercultural Communication" testifies to the formation of its independent status and its isolation as a field of knowledge. This science is in the stage of formation and accumulation of theoretical experience.

1.2. Object and subject of the theory of intercultural
communications

Under object of study a certain area of ​​reality is understood, which is a set of interrelated processes, phenomena.

Subject of study- this is some part of the object that has specific characteristics, processes and parameters. For example, a common object for all the humanities is a person, each of these sciences has its own subject of study - a certain side of a person and his activity.

object studying the theory of intercultural communication is the process of natural communication in natural conditions between representatives of different linguistic cultures, i.e. interpersonal communication in dynamic and static aspects, considered both as a potency and as one of the many possible realizations of this potency.

The object is located at the intersection of several fundamental sciences - linguistics, cultural studies, ethnography, linguistic and regional studies, psychology, sociology. The theory of intercultural communication is of great importance, because in the modern information age, contacts between people, peoples, cultures are extremely intensified, a multicultural, multiethnic, polyconfessional society is becoming typical, in need of successful, constructive communication between representatives of different cultures.

Subject The theory of intercultural communication is the analysis of the types of interaction between representatives of different linguistic cultures, the study of factors that have a positive or negative impact on the result of communicative interaction and other problems.

The theory of intercultural communication studies the models and functions of communication, the correlation of language and culture, culture and civilization, the typology of cultures, verbal and non-verbal markers of culture, the picture of the world, linguistic personality, stereotypes and their classifications, the influence of stereotypes on the result of perception of a particular phenomenon or fact, artifact, correlation of the theory of intercultural communication with other disciplines related to it, etc.

According to L.I. Grishaeva and L.V. Tsurikova, there are constant elements in communication between representatives of the same linguistic culture, implemented by a large number of options and subject to the influence of a significant number of various factors. The ratio "invariant-variants" is calculable. Therefore, according to L.I. Grishaeva and L.V. Tsurikova, intercultural communication as the interaction of representatives of different linguistic cultures can also be described in terms of "invariant-variants" [Grishaeva, Tsurikova: 2006: 283].

Main categories, with the help of which it is possible to describe the most significant patterns for intercultural communication, we can recognize the following: culture, civilization, communication, cultural adaptation, acculturation, culture shock, worldview, stereotype, linguistic identity, national character, dialogue, identity, inculturation etc.

Intercultural competence of the individual is a synthesis of different types of competencies: linguistic, communicative, cultural, personal. It assumes the presence of a set of skills that allow adequately assessing the communicative situation, correctly choosing and using verbal and non-verbal means, provides for an understanding of value attitudes, psychological and social identity characteristic of a given culture, the ability to extract information from such language units as toponyms, anthroponyms, names political realities and differentiate it in terms of its significance for intercultural communication.

Another important dynamic category of intercultural communication is concept. According to Yu.S. Stepanov, the concept is defined as "a clot of culture in the mind of a person", a "bundle" of ideas, knowledge, associations, experiences that accompany the word [Stepanov, 1997: 40]. Concepts can be used as supporting elements for comparing mentalities, cultural, value dominants, which, due to their elusiveness, mobility and vagueness, are difficult to analyze [Stepanov, 1997: 41].

The next dynamic category of intercultural communication is discourse . According to T. van Dyck, “discourse, in the broad sense of the word, is a complex unity of linguistic form, meaning and action, which could be best characterized using the concept of a communicative event or a communicative act. Discourse… is not limited to text or dialogue itself. An analysis of the conversation confirms this with particular clarity: the speaker and the listener, their personal and social characteristics, and other aspects of the social situation, undoubtedly relate to this event” [Dyck, 1989, p. 121–122].

Discourse includes text and extralinguistic factors (knowledge about the world, attitudes, goals of the addressee). Speech and non-speech actions of communication participants are aimed at achieving a common communicative goal (greetings, requests, acquaintances, etc.). Each speech act of a communicative event acts as a strategic means. The content, structure and strategies for the implementation of a communicative event are culturally determined. In different linguistic cultures, similar communicative events are realized differently in interactive and linguistic terms.

The central, backbone link of the communicative process is linguistic personality , which, within the framework of intercultural communication, is analyzed from the point of view of mentality, social belonging, concept sphere, picture of the world, hierarchy of values, etc.

1.3. Interaction Theory Intercultural

The content of the article

INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION, communication carried out in conditions of such significant cultural differences in the communicative competence of its participants that these differences significantly affect the success or failure of a communicative event. In this case, communicative competence is understood as knowledge of the symbolic systems used in communication and the rules for their functioning, as well as the principles of communicative interaction. Intercultural communication is characterized by the fact that its participants, in direct contact, use special language variants and discursive strategies that are different from those that they use when communicating within the same culture. The often used term "cross-cultural communication" usually refers to the study of some particular phenomenon in two or more cultures and has the additional meaning of comparing the communicative competence of communicating members of different cultures.

The ability to develop communicative competence is inherent in all representatives Homo sapiens, however, the specific implementation of this ability is culturally determined. In addition, it is also determined by the unique individual experience of each person, from which it follows that during communication, which is a process of messaging, meanings are constantly being recreated, since they do not coincide even among people who speak the same language, who grew up in the same and the same culture. It goes without saying that in the presence of different cultures and different languages, communication becomes so complicated that understanding, one can speak only with a certain degree of irony.

From birth, a person belongs to many groups, and it is in them that his communicative competence is formed. Larger groups, commonly referred to as cultures, essentially determine the cognitive and pragmatic basis of communicative activity.

In the process of communication, messages are exchanged, i.e. transfer of information from one participant to another. Since humans cannot communicate directly—say, by means of electrical impulses sent from one brain to another—information is encoded in a particular symbol system, transmitted, and then decoded, or, more broadly, interpreted by the addressee of the message ( cm. SEMIOTICS). Communication always takes place when some meaning is attributed to some behavior or its result and they act as signs or symbols. Of all the types of sign (symbolic) behavior in the human community, the most important are the use of language (verbal communication) and the nonverbal behavior that accompanies it (nonverbal communication). Taken together, they form sign communication, or communication in the narrow sense. The applicability of the concept of communication to the exchange of messages of a non-sign nature is allowed by a number of concepts (in particular, K. Levi-Strauss spoke about such communication, whose views on this issue were sympathetically quoted by R. Jacobson), but within the framework of this article, communication in a broad sense, including the exchange of messages of an unsigned nature is not considered.

Sign communication occurs in accordance with the following principles:

As is clear from its very name, sign communication deals with signs. Therefore messages must be interpreted.

Specific participants are involved in the communicative event. Therefore, the same statements mean different things in different communicative events.

A communicative event is an interaction (transaction) in which each of the parties in real time acts as both a Source and a Receiver. To interpret the message, i.e. to create mutually acceptable meaning, which requires cooperation.

Communicative behavior, in particular its non-verbal component, is often unconscious.

Thus, communication is a complex, symbolic, personal, transactional and often unconscious process that is necessarily imprecise. Communication allows participants to express some information that is external to the participants themselves, their internal emotional state, as well as the status roles in which they are relative to each other.

Natural language is an ambiguous symbolic system, and yet its implementation in communicative events usually leads to mutual agreement between communicants on the interpretation of linguistic meanings. This is facilitated by culturally conditioned communicative competence - several types of general knowledge shared by communicants. Firstly, this is knowledge of the symbolic system itself, in terms of which communication takes place, and, secondly, knowledge about the structure of the external world. Knowledge about the external world consists of the personal experience of the individual; basic, fundamental knowledge about the world that all people have; and all other knowledge that we possess as a result of our belonging to various national, ethnic, social, religious, professional and other groups.

Differences in individual experience underlie the statement about the uniqueness of each communicative event, as well as the fundamental ambiguity of the language that arises during the generation and interpretation of messages in a communicative act.

The commonality of basic knowledge about the world explains the fundamental translatability of messages from one language to another and the possibility of understanding between members of the same language community using the same symbolic system.

Knowledge that is more specific, but common to a particular group of people, provides support for the generation and interpretation of messages. This group or "cultural" knowledge categorically determines how the information coming to the individual is interpreted and how the verbal-thinking impulse is formed when the message is generated.

In theoretical works, culture is compared either with a program embedded in a person’s head, or with a screen standing between him and the world, or with an instrument in his hands. One thing is clear: the world is given to us not at all in sensations, but in complexly organized interpretations of these sensations. The interpretation model is culture.

Culturally conditioned knowledge is described, in particular, in specially designed formats of scenarios and frames (see, for example, the works of M. Minsky and R. Shenk; APPLIED LINGUISTICS;); in them, one or another sphere of human activity can be conceptualized as a scheme of certain simpler steps and even described in terms of some basic metalanguage (one of the most famous semantic metalanguages, Lingua Mentalis, was developed by A. Vezhbitskaya for many years).

From the history of intercultural communication.

The term "intercultural communication" in the narrow sense appeared in the literature in the 1970s. In the famous textbook by L. Samovar and R. Porter Communication between cultures(Communication between cultures), first published in 1972, provides a definition similar to that given above. By this time, a scientific direction had also been formed, the core of which was the study of communicative failures and their consequences in situations of intercultural communication. Subsequently, there was an expansion of the concept of intercultural communication in such areas as the theory of translation, teaching foreign languages, comparative cultural studies, contrastive pragmatics, etc. To date, scientific research in the field of intercultural communication focuses on the behavior of people faced with culturally determined differences in language activity and the consequences these differences. The results of the research were descriptions of cultural specificity in the expression and interpretation of situational language actions of communicants. From the very beginning, these studies were of great practical importance and were used in numerous developments for practical exercises (trainings) on the development of cross-cultural susceptibility.

Intercultural communication as a social phenomenon was brought to life by the practical needs of the post-war world, ideologically reinforced by the interest that since the beginning of the 20th century. formed in the scientific community and in the public mind in relation to the so-called "exotic" cultures and languages ​​( cm. LINGUISTIC RELATIVITY HYPOTHESIS). Practical needs arose as a result of the rapid economic development of many countries and regions, revolutionary changes in technology, and the associated globalization of economic activity. As a result, the world has become much smaller - the density and intensity of long-term contacts between representatives of different cultures has increased greatly and continues to increase. In addition to the economy itself, education, tourism, and science have become the most important areas of professional and social intercultural communication.

These practical needs were supported by changes in public consciousness and, above all, by the postmodern rejection of Eurocentric approaches in the humanities and social sciences. The recognition of the absolute value of the diversity of world cultures, the rejection of the colonial cultural policy, the awareness of the fragility of existence and the threat of destruction of the vast majority of traditional cultures and languages ​​led to the fact that the relevant disciplines began to develop rapidly, based on a new phenomenon in the history of mankind, the interest of the peoples of the Earth to each other. Among the many anthropologists, ethnographers, linguists, culturologists, whose works on the description of traditional societies, cultures and languages ​​contributed to the formation of the idea of ​​a multipolar human community, one should especially mention the American anthropologist and linguist Franz Boas and his work on the languages ​​of North American Indians, which appeared at the end of 19 - early 20th century

Fundamentals of discipline.

As an academic discipline, intercultural communication primarily uses the achievements of cultural anthropology and research on communication processes in society. The most significant contribution to the study of communication is made by cognitive and social psychology, sociology, cognitive linguistics and typology of languages. Such a variety of methods is not surprising when it comes to such a multifaceted, continuous and endless activity, invariably inherent in a person, as communication.

Communication can be characterized by what type of communicative competence is conventionally involved in a communicative event. For social communication, these are schemes and scenarios of behavior in corresponding everyday situations; for professional communication, this is the area of ​​knowledge related to professional activities in the workplace. Unlike these types of communication, interpersonal communication is based on individual experience and is possible only with a certain degree of its commonality among the participants in communication. Based on this, we can talk about different functional areas of intercultural communication: interpersonal, social, public, intergroup, professional, mass communication and communication within small groups.

The study of intercultural communication involves familiarity with the following phenomena and concepts:

principles of communication;

main functions of culture;

the influence of culture on perception and communication in its various spheres and types;

parameters to describe the influence of culture on human activity.

It is important to note the fundamental applied orientation of many studies: their results are intended for direct use in fields of activity and professions that carry out themselves through communication (in such cases it is called professional communication). These include education, social and political activities, management, consulting (including medical), social work, journalism, etc. Operational parameters for describing the influence of culture on human activity and the development of society were formulated in the works of anthropologists F. Klukkhona and F. Schrodbeck, linguist and anthropologist E. Hall, sociologist and psychologist G. Hofstede.

It is clear that when discussing intercultural communicative differences, it is necessary to resort to a high degree of generalization, since the individual characteristics of a particular speaker or a particular communicative situation may not fit into a cultural stereotype. This is reflected in research methods, in which, in order to obtain reliable results, reliance on a large body of data and accurate statistical analysis is necessary. Statements have to be formulated in terms of a "standard" case or "trends".

Klukhon and Schrodbeck drew attention to cultural differences in value systems, which generally make up the picture of the world of a given culture. This picture includes such fundamental things as the attitude to time, to activity, to nature, ideas about the value of interpersonal relationships.

Edward Hall in his books described different parameters of culturally determined communicative differences. So, in particular, he introduced a distinction between high- and low-context cultures, which manifests itself in the amount of information explicitly expressed in the message. An example of a high-context message is a remark in a conversation between two close people: “How can you talk about it like that.” The low-context example is a good guide on how to find an item you've never seen in a place you've never been. Given that cultures may tend to have higher or lower context messages, this can be used as a parameter to compare them. In a standard utterance within a low-context culture (Swiss, German, North American), the information that is required for the correct interpretation of this message is contained in the most verbalized form. Statements in high-context cultures (China, Japan) often cannot be understood on the basis of the actual linguistic signs contained in them. For their correct interpretation, knowledge of the context is required, and not narrow, situational, but rather broad, culturological. Therefore, at the level of ordinary European consciousness, Japanese conversation is often described as a game of omissions. And the Japanese, in turn, often think that the Europeans are too direct and tactless. The differences between high-context and low-context communication manifest themselves, in particular, at the level of so-called discursive macrostructures. They are used to describe communication styles in various scenarios.

The well-known sociologist and managerial theorist Geert Hofstede, as a result of his extensive research in the late 1970s, was able to formulate four features that can describe national cultures in terms of their position relative to each other on a scale of each of the four parameters. The study consisted of a survey of a large number of employees (more than 1,000) of a multinational corporation in more than one hundred countries about their attitude to work and behavior in the workplace. The resulting clusters of features made it possible to formulate the following axes of cultural oppositions.

Power distance. The degree to which a society accepts an uneven distribution of power among its members. In cultures with low power distance (such as Scandinavia), the communicative style of politicians is markedly different from, for example, Turkey, where a politician must radiate significance, authority and power.

Individualism. The degree to which society agrees that the views and actions of an individual can be independent of collective or group beliefs and actions. Thus, in the United States, success is formulated in terms of individual achievement and emphasizes individual responsibility for actions. 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) in the choice that the individual makes, the role of the group is very large - for example, the family.

Avoidance of uncertainty. The degree to which members of a society feel insecure about 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 are afraid of 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 degree to which a society is oriented towards achieving success, being assertive, solving problems, acquiring things. This is opposed to the ideas of quality of life - caring for others, solidarity with the 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 "male" qualities. Highly competitive cultures are equally opposed in many other respects to the US and Japan. To low-competitive - the Scandinavian countries. In the works of Hofstede in the 1980s, this parameter had another more ponderous name "masculinity" (masculinity / femininity dimension). Later, in many works, the manifestations of this parameter began to be called the orientation of society towards competition.

The main directions of research.

In the studies of intercultural communication, psychological, sociological and linguistic directions can be distinguished. This division depends both on the object of study and on the methods used.

Sociologists working in the field of intercultural communication use methods traditional for this science to question certain groups of respondents in a certain way. Their questionnaires are aimed at identifying value attitudes and stereotypes that are manifested in people's behavior. It mainly deals with behavior in the workplace, in business interaction and business. This is due to the fact that sociological research finds its practical application, first of all, in modern transnational corporations. Based on the generalizations received by sociologists about the types of behavior characteristic and preferred for a particular cultural group, appropriate practical recommendations are formulated, which are implemented in the form of special intercultural trainings. Typical subject areas of the questionnaire are the following: information exchange, interaction with colleagues, decision-making, behavior in conflict situations, attitude towards the leader, work-life connection, attitude towards innovation. It is clear that most of the studied culturally determined behavioral stereotypes can be traced back to the cultural parameters introduced by Hofstede. Therefore, such work often has the character of testing how these parameters operate in a particular environment: changes are studied with respect to a given period of time, the age of the group under study, more often two or more cultural groups working together.

More general sociological problems are related to the social adaptation of migrants, the preservation or loss of traditional cultures among national minorities, and so on.

Psychologists in the field of intercultural communication are primarily interested 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, the potential scope of categories, features of intergroup categorization, and many others have been studied by methods of social psychology.

When it comes to communication, especially intercultural communication, it can be very difficult to draw a line between sociological and psychological research conducted in the field of social psychology. Both of them deal with complex categories arising in the process of communication or transmitted through it - values, motives, attitudes, stereotypes and prejudices. The task of both those and others is to designate the observed phenomenon (perhaps by linking it with others) and to show differences from similar reactions and attitudes in a situation of intra-group rather than intercultural interaction.

And only linguists are primarily interested in how exactly this happens. What in a language message signals the presence of intercultural interaction? What exactly characterizes the messages exchanged between representatives of different cultures? In what communication contexts does this manifest itself? How exactly does misunderstanding, incomplete understanding occur, what linguistic features and mechanisms allow or do not allow compensating for under-understanding?

Of the linguistic topics being developed, the closest thing to psychology is the study of various communication styles in their use within and outside one's group. The psychological concept of accommodation is applied to such communication parameters as the rate of speech, the choice of the appropriate vocabulary (when talking with a foreigner, with a child, etc.), simplified or complicated grammatical structure. Accommodation can be positive (adjusting to the interlocutor) or negative (using the most different style from the interlocutor). The orientation of accommodation in the communication of representatives of different groups depends (if we talk about the contribution of the cultural component) on how one group relates to another. The structure of relations includes the scales "bad - good", "bottom - top", "close - far". Special consideration is given to such oppositions as the functions of speech itself and silence as the absence of speech. So, in European cultures, silence in a situation of communication with unfamiliar or even strangers is not encouraged and is considered impolite. Hence the invention of special topics “about the weather” for situations of so-called phatic communication aimed at maintaining a certain level of social relations, expressions like “an awkward silence hung”. In contrast, in the Athabaskan culture of North American Indians, talking to a stranger is considered dangerous and discouraged. They are silent with strangers until they get to know them properly. Conversation is not a way to get to know each other better, as is commonly believed in European cultures.

The second important area of ​​linguistic research is associated with the rapid development in recent decades of the study of discourse as some integral process, central to communicative activity. The complexity and versatility of such a phenomenon as discourse, and attempts to identify the main factors influencing its forms, rather quickly led to the development of a number of areas that study non-linguistic (in addition to grammar and vocabulary) factors of discourse existence. Within the framework of pragmatic discourse factors, factors of a cultural nature were revealed. Discourse on the same - even a very rigidly defined one (for example, a business letter, an expression of condolence, a speech at a meeting, an apology for being late, etc., not to mention traditional genres such as fairy tales or ritual formulas) - is very different in terms of proper discursive rules (used macro- and microstructures) depending on the culture of the group within which this discourse is formed. So, in Southeast Asia, the text of a business letter is built inductively: first, the reasons, circumstances, and only at the end the actual requirements or business proposals. Representatives of the European and North American tradition, this style seems "muddy" and not businesslike. From their point of view, such a letter should begin with the formulation of the main requirement or proposal, followed by its justification and detailing.

Cross-cultural studies of discourse in general can be aimed at revealing the culturally determined picture of the world behind the stories of the incident or the most memorable event. So, in the book of Livia Polanyi American storytelling(Telling the American Story, 1989) builds an archetype of modern American consciousness - a set of some unformulated statements that are unshakable presumptions on which both the narrator and the listener rely.

A fruitful approach to the study of discourse for the purpose of intercultural comparison is realized in the works of Ron and Susan Scollon, in particular in the book Intercultural communication: a discursive approach (Intercultural Communication: A discourse approach, 1995), who explore the genre of professional communication and try to deductively calculate the main cultural oppositions according to various discursive parameters.

Another option for research on the pragmatic aspects of discourse has become the so-called cross-cultural pragmatics, which deals with a comparative analysis of individual principles that characterize communicative activity and the corresponding cultural scenarios. Among the most important and at the same time culturally contradictory pragmatic principles, it is necessary to note the "Principle of Politeness" by P. Brown and S. Levinson and numerous works devoted to speech acts, one way or another built on this principle - prohibitions, apologies. Cross-cultural differences are manifested, in particular, in what type of politeness - based on solidarity or maintaining distance - is characteristic of a given culture. Thus, Russians may seem impolite to Germans, because the principle of solidarity with a communicative partner pushes them to express their opinion and give advice in cases where the German communicative culture, which respects the principle of autonomy and distance, considers this as an obsession.

Cross-cultural linguistic research often takes the form of a comparative analysis of the "languages" of two culturally opposed groups that seem to use the same common language code. The most striking example of this kind is the work of Deborah Tannen on the peculiarities of the communicative behavior of men and women. The simplest statements of the representatives of these two groups, made in the same English language, are understood by them differently in different scenarios. So, when a “standard” woman complains to a “standard” man about some problem, they are involved in completely different communicative acts: the woman wants to be sympathized with, and the man believes that practical advice is expected from him. Tannen's most famous book is called - You just don't understand(You Just Don't Understand, 1990).

In Russia, research on intercultural communication was considered until recently a part of sociolinguistics. Within this discipline one can distinguish, firstly, comparative studies of the use of one language as a lingua franca of several ethnic or cultural groups, and, secondly, the functional limitations faced by the language of one (usually smaller) ethnic group in a situation of intercultural communication. In addition, the problems of intercultural communication were considered to one degree or another within the framework of teaching Russian as a foreign language, as well as regional studies.

Applied aspect of intercultural communication.

From the very beginning, intercultural communication had a pronounced applied orientation. This 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 professional activities are related to the interaction between cultures, when mistakes and communication failures lead to other failures - in negotiations, to inefficient work of the team, to social tension.

The central concept in the field of applied intercultural communication is intercultural sensitivity. Its increase in the conditions of multiplying differences, uncertainty, ambiguity and changes that characterize modern society becomes an important component of the professional suitability of a specialist. This goal is served by a large amount of educational and educational literature and intercultural trainings.

Various kinds of reference books, guides, manuals on how best to trade (train, negotiate, work, etc.) with the Japanese, French, Russians, etc., provide specific knowledge about the characteristics of a particular culture in the field of professional, social and partly interpersonal communication. They may target two or more cultures being compared. The information they contain enhances knowledge about another culture, but does not directly lead to an increase in intercultural receptivity. This role is played by cross-cultural trainings based on the idea that it is not enough to simply provide participants with a certain amount of new information about another culture. This knowledge must be mastered in such a way as to change some communicative and cultural presumptions and thereby influence the behavior of people in situations of intercultural communication. The increase in intercultural susceptibility occurs in several stages.

First, participants must recognize that problems do exist. This is not so obvious, since neither the principles of communication nor cultural stereotypes are in most cases conscious. At this stage, role-playing games are widely used. One of the most famous games of this kind is that the participants, without the right to talk, play a simple card game; while they think that everyone plays by the same rules, while in fact the rules given to them are somewhat different from each other. The resulting feelings of confusion, bewilderment, anger, and powerlessness are a good analogy for the emotional consequences of cross-cultural misunderstanding.

Then the participants receive the necessary information about the features of intercultural communication in general and for these cultures in particular. At this stage, specific critical cases are actively used in the form of problem situations to be resolved. This helps to develop motivations for resolving intercultural communication conflicts. The following exercises are aimed at consolidating the acquired knowledge in the form of behavioral communication skills.

This kind of training and the development of appropriate materials, critical situations and role-playing games have become an important part of the activities of many management professionals in large corporations and independent institutions.

Mira Bergelson

Literature:

Ter-Minasova S.G. Language and intercultural communication. M., 2000

Textbook - Theory of Culture, edited by Ikonnikova. (ABOUT DIFFERENT WAYS OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION.

The concept of “intercultural communication” was first formulated in 1954 in the work of G. Treiger and E. Hall “Culture and Communication. Analysis Model".

Intercultural communication has a number of features that make it more complex, demanding and difficult than intracultural or interpersonal communication.

Intercultural communication is always interpersonal communication in a special context, when one participant discovers the cultural difference of another. Great Soviet Encyclopedia” Aleksandrov V.V.

Communication will be intercultural if it occurs between carriers of different cultures, and differences between these cultures lead to any difficulties in communication. These difficulties are related to the difference in expectations and prejudices inherent in each person, and, naturally, differ in different cultures. Representatives of different cultures have different ways of deciphering received messages. All this becomes meaningful only in the act of communication and leads to misunderstanding and tension, difficulty and impossibility of communication.

Finally, intercultural communication is based on a process of symbolic interaction between individuals and groups whose cultural differences can be recognized; perception and attitude to these differences affect the type, form and result of contact. Each participant in cultural contact has his own system of rules that function. So that sent and received messages can be encoded and decoded. Signs of intercultural Differences can be interpreted as differences in verbal and non-verbal codes in a specific context of communication. The process of interpretation, in addition to cultural differences, is influenced by the age, gender, profession, social status of the communicant. Therefore, the degree of interculturality of each specific act of communication depends on tolerance, enterprise, and personal experience of its participants.

Intercultural communication should be considered as a set of various forms of relations and communication between individuals and groups belonging to different cultures. Van Dijk T.A. Language. Cognition. Communication. - M., 1989.

In intercultural communication, the spheres of macroculture and microculture are singled out.

Types of culture are distinguished on a continental basis and, due to their scale, are called macrocultures. There are global differences between macrocultures, which are reflected in their communication with each other. In this case, intercultural communication takes place regardless of the status of its participants, in a horizontal plane.

Many people are part of certain social groups with their own cultural characteristics. From a structural point of view, these are microcultures (subcultures) within a macroculture. Each microculture has both similarities and differences with its parent culture, which provides their representatives with the same perception of the world. In other words, cultures of different social groups and strata within the same society are called subcultures. Therefore, the connection between subcultures flows within this society and is vertical.

Within each sphere, intercultural communication occurs at different levels. There are several types of intercultural communication at the micro level.

Interethnic communication is communication between persons representing different peoples (ethnic groups). Most often, society consists of ethnic groups of various sizes that create and share their own subcultures. Ethnic groups pass on their cultural heritage from generation to generation and thanks to this they retain their identity among the dominant culture. Joint existence within the framework of one society naturally leads to mutual communication of these ethnic groups and the exchange of cultural achievements. www.krugosvet.ru/articles/87/1008757/1008757a1.htm-25k-.

Countercultural communication - occurs between representatives of the mother culture and the child subculture and is expressed in the disagreement of the child subculture with the values ​​and ideals of the mother. Great Soviet Encyclopedia” Aleksandrov V.V.

Communication among social classes and groups is based on the differences between social groups and classes of a particular society. There is not a single socially homogeneous society in the world. All differences between people arise as a result of their origin, education, profession, social status, and so on. In all countries of the world, the distance between the elite and the majority of the population, between the rich and the poor, is quite large.

It is expressed in opposing views, customs, traditions, etc. Despite the fact that all these people belong to the same culture, such differences divide them into subcultures and affect communication between them. Ikonnikova N.K. Mechanisms of intercultural perception // Sociological research. - 1995. - No. 8.

Communication between representatives of different demographic groups: religious, gender and age. Communication between people in this case is determined by their belonging to a particular group and, consequently, by the peculiarities of the culture of this group. Ageev B.C. Psychology of intergroup relations. - M, 1983.

Communication between urban and rural residents is based on the differences between the city and the countryside in the style and pace of life, the general level of education, a different type of interpersonal relations, different “philosophy of life”, which directly affect the process of communication between these population groups.

Regional communication occurs between residents of different regions (localities), whose behavior in the same situation can differ significantly. So, for example, residents of one US state experience significant difficulties in communicating with representatives of another state. Inhabitants

New Englanders are repelled by the sugary-sweet communication style of Southerners, which they consider insincere. And a resident of the southern states perceives the dry style of communication of his northern friend as rude.

Communication in business culture. arises due to the fact that each organization (firm) has a number of specific customs and rules associated with corporate culture, and when representatives of different enterprises come into contact, misunderstanding may arise.

A common feature of all levels and types of intercultural communication is the unawareness of cultural differences by its participants. It seems to them that their style and way of life is the only possible and correct one, that the values ​​they are guided by are equally understandable and accessible to all people. And only when faced with representatives of other cultures, discovering that the usual patterns of behavior stop working, the average person begins to think about the reasons for his failure.

3 THEORIES OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION

The uncertainty reduction theory shows how the expectations of a particular person from meeting a new culture can be changed, his cognitive uncertainty and anxiety can be reduced. http://www.countries.ru/library.htm.

The theory of adaptation Y. Kim. Adaptation is a complex process with many components, during which a person gradually, on the rise, gets used to a new environment and new communication. Great Soviet Encyclopedia. Aleksandrov V.V.

The dynamics of such interaction is called the dynamics of stress-adaptive growth. It follows the principle of "two steps forward and one step back." Periodic retreats that delay the process of adaptation are associated with intercultural crises. Several conditions are necessary for successful adaptation. They include communication with a new environment (frequency of contacts, positive attitude), knowledge of a foreign language, positive motivation, participation in various events, access to the media.

Coordinated value management and rule theory. Human communication is inherently very imperfect, so perfect and complete mutual understanding is a kind of unattainable ideal. Since not all acts of communication have a specific purpose, achieving mutual understanding becomes not at all necessary. The goal is to achieve coordination, which is possible with interaction that is understandable to its participants. At the same time, in a specific context, the meanings are controlled and their individual interpretation takes place. What is important is not the extent to which the rules adopted in this communication are social, but the extent to which these rules are consistent with each other in the minds of each participant in communications.

rhetorical theory. Allows you to analyze not only individual differences, but also the properties of large groups. Part of this theory is also the analysis of the subconscious adaptation of messages in relation to specific situations of communication.

constructivist theory. All people have a special cognitive system with which they can interpret the words and actions of others quite accurately and accurately. But since culture influences the individual scheme of human development, representatives of different cultures form different views and perceptions. In the course of inculturation, a person acquires a view of the world that is different from that which exists in a representative of another culture. Thus, a person's cognitive consciousness is formed, which can be simple or complex, and it, in turn, affects individual communicative behavior and adaptation strategies.

The theory of social categories and circumstances. It is focused on the question of the importance of roles, stereotypes and schemes for the communication process, that is, those elements of the perception mechanism that form the basis of mutual understanding and social consciousness. Social consciousness is understood as a fundamental cognitive process of social categorization, which leads to a positive perception of members of an ingroup and to a negative attitude of members of this group towards other people. At the same time, the self-esteem of a person, which is formed under the influence of the groups to which he belongs, is very important. When meeting with representatives of other groups, the so-called "communicative accommodation" occurs, an attachment to communication with another person. It is determined by our schemes and stereotypes. Based on our assessment of the interlocutor, a linguistic strategy is determined, that is, the choice of communication style and possible topics for conversation. Ikonnikova N.K. Mechanisms of intercultural perception // Sociological research. - 1995. - No. 8.

Theory of conflicts. He considers conflicts to be normal behavior, a form of social action regulated by the norms of each culture. Thus, each culture has its own patterns of conflict. There are cultures that pay great attention to the causes of conflict, are sensitive to violations of the rules, and often rely on intuition when resolving conflict. These are collectivist cultures. Grushevitskaya T.G., Popkov V.D., Sadokhin A.P. Fundamentals of Intercultural Communication: Textbook for High Schools Ed. A.P. Sadokhin. - M.: UNITY-DANA, 2002.

4 AXIOMS ​​OF INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION

The greater the degree of trust between people, the more important is the information that comes as a result of communication between them. Any communication is inherent in some ambiguity and ambiguity.

There is a set of established gestures and rituals that we understand and expect from a partner.

The work on reducing the level of uncertainty consists of three stages: pre-contact, initial contact and final contact. The pre-contact level implies that the interlocutors have a pre-contact impression of each other. In the process of communication, we subconsciously move from an undirected study of the situation to a purposeful one, we realize that the partner is part of the communicative situation. From this point on, we receive a large amount of non-verbal information from observing the behavior and even the appearance of this person. There is a "mutual scanning". Most insecurity reduction strategies involve extracting information through non-verbal channels. At the initial stage of contact, in the first minutes of verbal interaction, the first impression of the interlocutor is formed.

There is an opinion that the decision to continue or terminate contact is made in the first four minutes of the conversation. Already in the first two minutes, we draw conclusions about whether this person likes it, whether he understands us and whether we are wasting time.

Communication systems in different cultures are passed down from generation to generation and are assimilated in the process of inculturation. For every culture there are only acceptable stages of communication.

It is necessary to develop the speed of thinking and the ability to express your thoughts in different ways, that is, to explain the same idea in no different ways. Success in interacting with people should be viewed as success in completing some individual task. The ability to be an intermediary between people, to correctly introduce interlocutors to each other, to say the right word in the right situation is an invaluable skill for intercultural communication.

It is no coincidence that the possibilities of cultural and intercultural communication attract close attention today. Communication enters everyday life today in a new and broader sense of the word, associated with the term "communication", but not identical to it. http://encycl.anthropology.ru/article.php?id=694 - Encyclopedia of Philosophy and Philosophical Anthropology.

Along with the pre-existing and now classical means of communication, mass media have emerged and are spreading, capable of involving the widest audience in the communication process. But what is especially important - they turn culture into a social need, unite information about the state of the world.

Communication between cultures, having become a new reality, connects and destroys national traditions, creating the tradition of "interculture". Miloslavskaya S. K. On the evolution of the concept of culture in linguodidactics. - Materials of the IV Symposium MAPRYAL on linguistic and regional studies. M., 1994.

5 LEVELS OF THE MK PROCESS

Any fact and process of intercultural communication can be characterized by the level/depth of penetration of communicants into contacting cultures. From this point of view, the following levels can be distinguished:

1) cultural mutual acceptance;

2) cultural understanding;

3) cultural "connection".

The first level can be conditionally represented through the statement: "I assume, know and take into account that the other thinks and acts differently."

The second level is through the statement: "I know and understand why the other is different, and I am ready to agree with the explanation of his otherness and accept it."

The third, highest, level can be expressed by the statement: "I understand and accept the conceptual values ​​of the other and am ready to share them."

The concept of "intercultural business communication" covers a number of speech registers, both written and oral, and requires special attention. Ikonnikova N.K. Mechanisms of intercultural perception // Sociological research. - 1995. - No. 8.

CONCLUSION

Intercultural communication is an integral part of a person's professional culture. The culture of business communication contributes to the achievement of effective cooperation between business partners. It is interesting that in many foreign countries such a scientific direction as "the science of communication (communication)" is developing. This scientific direction explores different types and forms of communication from the point of view of linguistics, psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, rhetoric, linguo-culturology, etc.

The study of this topic is a long and laborious process. daily structure and relationships, both interpersonal and international, are in the process of changing.

In the totality of spiritual and objective factors of culture, the culture of communication plays an important role, denoting a set of internal (spiritual) and external (behavioral) stereotypes, due to which interaction between people is carried out. Stereotypes are a system of information ordered in a certain way in intercultural communication.

The culture of communication has its own functions. First of all, it is an educational function aimed at the formation and reproduction of the main features of the spiritual world of the individual and the ethnic group as a whole. This function implies a wide network of various organizational measures, social institutions that reinforce, develop, and create stable communication stereotypes. The evaluative and regulatory function of intercultural communication ensures the stability of spiritual qualities, the unity of requirements for human behavior. Evaluation and self-control, inhibition of one's desires, activity, responsibility are the main factors that act as a result of the manifestation and as the goal of this function. And, finally, the communicative function of intercultural communication acts as a means of communication between people and a general condition for their joint activities.

The multifunctionality of the culture of communication contributes to the stabilization of various aspects and levels of interethnic relations, bringing them into line with social requirements, thereby ensuring the formation of the necessary spiritual qualities and orientation of behavior.

The unique appearance of each culture is the result of a special system of organization of elements of experience peculiar only to this culture, which in themselves are not always unique and are repeated in many cultures. However, ethnic stereotypes of behavior and thinking are specific to each culture.

The basis for the formation of ethnic stereotypes are cultural differences, which are easily perceived in intercultural interaction. Being formed in the zone of ethno-cultural contacts on the basis of systems of ethnic ideas about the imaginary and real features of one's own and other ethnic groups, stereotypes are fixed at a subconscious level as an unquestionable imperative in relation to representatives of other ethnic cultures. It is easy to see that the images of "strangers" are made up not so much of the real features of these "strangers" as of our own qualities, forced out of consciousness and turned over in the course of psychological relaxation. Ethnic stereotypes in situations of intercultural communication act as "guides" of behavior. Based on the formed ideas, we predict in advance the behavior of representatives of another ethnic group, and unwittingly, we set a distance in the process of intercultural communication.

The perception of another ethnic group is a direct reaction to contact with a foreign ethnic environment. Usually, perception goes through the prism of one's ethnic "I", that is, a certain traditional stereotype of thinking and behavior, determined by ethnicity. Now, when ethnic differences more and more dominate the behavior of people, determining the nature of the perception of other ethnic groups, intercultural communication gives rise to many problems.

In interethnic communication during the socio-economic, political instability, contradictions begin to operate more fully, which previously had a limited manifestation. These are constantly growing random inter-ethnic contacts in everyday life, on the street, regulated by no one from the outside, which sometimes may not correspond to generally accepted stereotypes of behavior.

It's no secret that age, gender, religiosity, behavior are paid attention to in any ethnic culture, especially Eastern. All this has to be taken into account in the process of interpreting the behavior of a partner in intercultural communication. If this is a family member, close friend, countryman, we understand each other well. But if he lives in another region, republic, country, it turns out that this person thinks differently, speaks differently, adheres to values ​​that are different from ours. Due to differences, communication acquires a new dimension, requires special efforts, great attention, concentration. When talking with close friends, we turn to our own experience. With representatives of another ethnic group, everything is different.

The formation of intercultural communication skills begins in childhood, when, communicating with adults and peers, absorbing oral folk art (fairy tales, songs, games), the child joins the values ​​of culture, ideas about the norms of behavior and relationships, developing as he accumulates and assimilates life experience . In the process of inculturation in each ethnic culture, a mechanism is laid for educating its representatives, first of all, respect for their traditional values, and then for other cultures.

Thus, being formed and manifested in tradition, the ethnic stereotype becomes an element of self-preservation of the ethnic group as an integral and unique organism. This stereotype plays a consolidating role in the formation of an ethnic group and an ethnos as a whole.

Getting into a foreign culture, a person finds himself in a situation where the usual stereotypes of behavior are not acceptable. Sometimes it seems that representatives of different ethnic groups will definitely understand each other if they get to know each other better. However, with a low level of intercultural competence, negative stereotypes increase and manifestations of aggressiveness are observed. With the help of ethno-cultural stereotypes and information links, the distribution of information and the organization of coordinated actions within the ethnos are carried out. Traditionally, this role is played by visits, public and family etiquette, and other institutions through which people come into contact with each other, thanks to which the socio-cultural community of ethnic groups is created and preserved.

Ethnic cultural stereotypes cannot be considered separately from the culture of communication, since interethnic communication is not an isolated area of ​​social life, but a mechanism that ensures the coordination and functioning of all elements of human culture.

The culture of interethnic communication is a system of stereotyped forms, principles, and methods of communicative activity specific to a given ethnic group. The system of ethnocultural stereotypes is specially adapted to perform socially significant functions in the life of an ethnic group.

One of the elements of intercultural communication is the ethnic stereotype of communications. It is understood as generally recognized patterns of communicative behavior, timed to typical, often repeated situations of foreign and intraethnic interaction: greeting, farewell, introduction during acquaintance, expression of gratitude, postures, gestures, mimic movements. The specificity of such, essentially universal, forms of human activity is manifested, first of all, in the way they are deployed, in the way of structuring typical situations of interaction.

For example, Mongols tend to ask first about the condition of their own livestock, and only then ask about the well-being of the family. For Americans, business matters first; for Russians, health and news of mutual interest.

It should be noted that intercultural communication is the sociocultural mechanism that provides the possibility of coordinated human activity. Ways to implement this key function are specific to different peoples. Consequently, there is every reason to speak not only about the orienting and integrating functions of intercultural communication, but also about socially differentiating functions, including the specifics of ethnic and interethnic communication.

It is known for certain that traditional everyday stereotypes to a large extent retain ethnic specificity, causing both favorable and negative reactions when perceived by representatives of different cultures. Therefore, it is very important in the process of communication not to be limited to a superficial perception of other ethnic groups, but to go towards in-depth mutual understanding, interaction and mutual enrichment.

The purpose of the culture of interethnic communication is to promote a more in-depth knowledge of each other by ethnic groups and strengthen mutual understanding between them. All this is achieved by tolerance, observance of generally accepted norms of interaction. The highest level of interethnic cultural interaction can be promoted by a positive stereotype of thinking and behavior that has been formed in the socio-psychological plan.

Negative stereotypes that denigrate another culture, being rationalized, are organized into a whole system of views (the ideology of Nazism). In a softly veiled form, the opposition of the stereotypical features of one culture to another is inherent in almost any ideology. It is reproduced by the media, in film and video products, school textbooks, where the history of other ethnic groups is covered in a biased way.

To avoid the problem of rejection of ethnic groups, it is necessary to find the positive features of one's culture, thereby encouraging interest in its traditions. Then try to find individual positive features in other cultures and common points that unite them. This is the only way to develop intercultural communication skills. This requires special efforts of participants in intercultural communication with representatives of other cultures, targeted social programs (joint learning, recreation).

The most famous model of intercultural learning belongs to the American specialist in intercultural communications M. Bennett. According to him, the learning process consists of six consecutive steps that replace each other.

From step to step, awareness of the culturally specific conditionality of views and behavior increases, expressed in a change in the views of the student from ethnocentrism (the first three steps are “Rejection of intercultural differences”, “Rejection of intercultural differences”, “Minimization of intercultural differences”) to ethnorelativism (the last three steps - "Recognition of intercultural differences", "Adaptation to intercultural differences", "Integration of intercultural differences"). At the fifth stage - adaptation to intercultural differences - a person is able not only to be aware of differences in culture, but also to change his behavior depending on the cultural specifics of the situation, to adequately interpret the behavior of a communication partner and respond to it in such a way that communication is successful, and at the same time not experience discomfort. At the final stage of learning, a person already feels, depending on the circumstances, a representative of one or another culture. As a rule, this means a bicultural or multicultural identity of a person and is achieved, first of all, by people who have gone through the processes of socialization and inculturation on the verge of two or more cultures (for example, children from mixed marriages).

The historical experience of any ethnos includes the achievements of other ethnoses that it has assimilated. Revealing what is common in the culture of different ethnic groups does not detract from their originality. On the contrary, it helps to emphasize the original that is created on the basis of common achievements. The cultures involved in dialogic interaction are mutually enriched, revealing the diverse meanings contained in them. Such interaction is the most important condition for the coexistence and development of modern cultures.

The diversity of spiritual values ​​reflects the multidimensionality and complexity of the system of spiritual needs of society. One of the important functions of spiritual culture is the regulation of human behavior. Thanks to well-established ethnocultural stereotypes, there is a tacit regulation of communication between representatives of different ethnic groups, their relations at work and in everyday life. Ethnic stereotypes that have become part of everyday life and become a habit are firmly merging with the lifestyle.

The culture of relations is a great moral value on which the culture of interethnic communication is built. As a side of the spiritual life of society, the culture of interethnic communication involves the creation of spiritual values ​​of a special kind, in which universal stereotypes are fixed as a prerequisite for the interaction of various ethnic groups. Ethnic stereotypes in the culture of interethnic communication have a programming character, because they anticipate possible behaviors.

The term "intercultural communication" refers to the exchange of knowledge, ideas, thoughts, concepts and emotions between people from different cultures. The first definition of intercultural communication was proposed in 1972 by American scientists Larry Samovar and Richard Porter in "Communication Between Cultures" ("Communication between Cultures"). According to this definition, intercultural communication is a type of communication in which the sender and recipient belong to different cultures.

Expert opinion

American scientists R. Porter and L. Samovar give the following definition of communication: "that which takes place whenever someone reacts to the behavior or consequences of the behavior of another person" .

In the Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language by S. I. Ozhegov and N. Yu. Shvedova, intercultural communication is characterized as the totality of mankind's achievements in industrial, social and mental terms.

There are other definitions of intercultural communication. In general, based on different approaches to existing definitions, it can be concluded that intercultural communication is a special form of communication between two or more representatives of different cultures, during which information and cultural values ​​of interacting cultures are exchanged.

Also, intercultural communication is understood as a special field of science that studies the interaction of individuals with various patterns of historically derived behavior.

Intercultural communication- this is a complex, complex phenomenon that includes various areas and forms of communication between individuals, groups, states belonging to different cultures.

Process Intercultural communication is a specific form of activity that involves knowledge of foreign languages, material and spiritual culture of another people, religion, values, moral attitudes, worldviews, etc., which together determine the behavior of communication partners. Only the combination of these two types of knowledge - language and culture- provides effective and fruitful communication, serves basis effective intercultural communication.

Subject intercultural communication are contacts occurring at different levels, in different audiences, in bilateral, multilateral, global aspects. aim intercultural communication should be the creation of conditions for the development of a constructive dialogue, equivalent in relation to representatives of other cultures.

Expert opinion

According to the Russian researcher of the interaction of cultures I. N. Khaleeva, intercultural communication is a process of communication (verbal and non-verbal) between communicants who are carriers of different cultures and languages, or, in other words, a set of specific processes of interaction between people belonging to different cultures and languages .

Intercultural communication involves interaction (communication) between cultures, races, ethnic groups, religions, subcultures within large cultures.

Along with the concept of intercultural communication in the scientific literature there is the concept cross-cultural communications. However, it is usually applied to the study of some particular phenomenon in two or more cultures and has the additional value of comparing the communicative competence of communicating representatives of different cultures.

Despite the fact that the problem of intercultural communication today is of justified interest, many issues related to this phenomenon are quite debatable and cause controversy in the scientific community. They stem from the very essence of the phenomenon, and are also due to various methods and approaches related to the study and analysis of communication in the field of culture.

In the course of its existence, a culture constantly refers either to its past or to the experience of other cultures. This appeal to other cultures is called intercultural communications. Culture and communication are closely interconnected. Culture not only influences communication, but is itself influenced by it. Most often this happens during inculturation, when a person in one form or another of communication learns the norms and values ​​of culture. By reading, listening, watching, exchanging opinions and news with people we know or don't know, we influence our culture, and this influence becomes possible through some form of communication.

• Samovar L Porter R. Intercultural Communication: a Reader. 7 head. Belmont: Wadsworth, 1994.
• Samovar L., Porter R. Intercultural Communication: a Reader. 7th CD. P. 25.