Jffi*-Yfrffi5.

-z

Parfait Awono

El,rtc eNo Ertc PrRspBcrIvBs

\\1/hen discussing perspectives, we need to recognize that there are two kinds:

W emic and etic (Damen, 1,987). Emicperspectives are those articulated by

members of the culture to explain themselves and their culture, while etic per-

spectives are those of outsiders to the culture who use their own criteria to

explain the others' culture.Etic perspectives include those of visitors to the culture, the criteria they use

to describe and explain what they encounter, as well as categories for cross-

cultural description and analysis established by anthropologists and other cul-

tural researchers to describe many cultures. At one end of the continuum, etic

perspectives consist of simple explanations from one's own cultural back-

ground. This is a common reaction to cultural phenomena-explaining them in

terms of perceived similarities or differences to one's own culture, better known

as ethnocentrism. At the other end of rhe spectrum. etic perspectives consist of

categories that can be used to describe any and all cultures. Some of these cate-

gories are drawn from notions of cultural universals and read like the table of

contents of introductory cultural anthropology textbooks. They reflect cultural

practices and products: institutions like family, kinship, economy, leisure, music,

or government. Other etic classifications come from theories of cultural per-

spect ives: va lue or ientat ions such as indiv idual ism/col lect iv ism, low-

context/high-context, polychronic/monochronic, and the like.

Etic perspectives, therefore, provide frameworks to describe, analyze, and

explain a culture from the outside. Each etic category carries assumptions aboLlt

the nature of culture, and it is important to bring out these assumptions.

Emic explanations are perspectives that members of the culture use to

describe or explain their own way of l i fe. These perspectives do not necess:rri lv

correspond to etic categories, nor does rhe terminology that the rnembers r-rse for

their explanations. \(/hen asked, members m:ry eirsily express the reasons for

cultural products and pracrices. Or, given that many fundamental cultr-rral pcr-

spectives are outside awareness, l ike the sr-rbrnerged bulk of the cultr"rral iceberg,

members may have diff iculty f inding words to fully explain them, just as I had

no explanation on American toilet training practices.Parfait Awono il lustrates the insider/outsider perspectives on the same touch-

ing behaviors seen from two different cultures, his native Cameroon and tl 're

U.S. students in his French class.

In my French I class, we were reviewing greetings. After the usualbonjour, salut, etc.,I introduced handshakir-rg. I asked them horvoften they shake hands with their friends. The answer was rarely tonever. I then explained to them hor'v friends in Cameroon u'or.ildshake hands several t imes during the same day

'Whenever the)r

would meet, they u'ould shake hands. Students said they would real-ly be uncomfortable to be touched.

'We explored the possible reasons

why Cameroonians shake hands so tnuch, with the main one beingthe l imited personal space people allo'uv themselves in Cameroon.

To make things worse, I told them that frier-rds, brothers, slsterswalk hand in hand-literally-in Cameroon, without that havingany connotation. When they heard this, most students were

Cu t -TunE : PERspEc l t v t - : s IN Pnec - l t c l -8 0 . T E a c u r N c

).1;+:i-qri: :rtri: :,r,., ill$J1..1Jt:fff.ffi

,-- -**,I-"","".. ".tir:**

nds:j b vper-a t o

useOSS-

cul-etic:rck-'n inownst of

' :ate-'e of:uralusic,per-rOW-

and:lout

3 t orri lY' f o r

forper-.efg,

had

uch-the

shocked, except for a Korean-American *tudent' He said that on a

triD to South Korea htlx#i;;"pi" hold;"n hands evervwhere'

"r,i h. thought.u.'yioa"v *"1!"f Ht,t1a lie refused to hold

hands with his.ourins, and the! thought he was iust a weird

American kid. stuaenil ffii;;;i ttttvra trv holding hands onlv if

they had to.

As a Cameroonian living in this country., I have noticed that people

in the United States i""i i""tn each oiher a lot' The rare occa-

sions that I have .br;; ;;pl. touching others are when

#;H ft ^ ;r r -.," i .,, *il' r" &t: i I:l 1 l:f Hii,*ilL", 5ffi""

the shoutder-(usually from a superlor/coacl

deal (handshuk.); fo' "iatt*tf i i tttg);

friends eivins each other a

hue to comfort t". ;;;ht;' ii'*;;i;t ob'eruid thlt holding

haids occurs i" ,fr. f.lfo*ing situations: parents hold younger.kids

when crossing ,o"a'iil;;;^illd h"ttds ai a sign of intimate attec-

tion. Although not t l; l i t i ;;*ht"'*o individuals of the same gen-

der are seen holding;ffi;] ;;;;il in this countrv alwavs consider

them love Partners'

In view of the unfortunate and biased negative perception ot' Sar

and lesbian l ife in malf n-tt it"" culturi l circles' students do not

want people to think they are Bay.or lesbian' The issue of use of

personal ,pu.. "t 'o*t;;:t;;ff; lay

here' In eeneral' people in

ihe united s,"r., '" ' t! i ' ; ;;;t Pt;i"ul tputt ' Touching infringes

that freedom.

Mv eoal was to show students the different interpretations the

,u^i p..ron"l bth^';-:;; ' ;;;;;tttrdine to cultures' one behav-

ior can be marked ;;;;;i;;re and unmirked in another' I want-

ed to stress tn. t^tt'ihlii";pt; in Cameroon are closer' and they

tolera te be ing tottche'd-bi "tia

io"ttting acquaintances' I' think my

students became "*"it

iri-rtt differenle' I lgle that if ,they ever

find themselves in Cameroon or surrourded by a bunchrct

ca mero onia,.',, tl'ti'ii""#;;;;t Jt"l shaking hands "

o !,T9#;;ile'",td'thui holding hands,does not mean people are

intimate. Lovers '" i;;;;;;;';9i;"!-' hold hands! I don't recall

seeing my own o"t"il"ittiafi;"h;;J;' itt "lottt

showing anv other

t ig" 6f aifection to each other!

So hopefully my students wil l not say "Gross!" or "That's gay!"

when they ,.. ,u.,iilJi'uuioi i" a Cameroonian setting' or even in a

Korean one, as tt't'tJ""ti-from the Korean-American boy'

lfr rr,enNlNc CuLruRE: ErIc aruo Eutc PrRst't'ctlvrs

Reu iewPar fa i tAwor to ' saccoun tand iden t i f y t l t eem icande t i cpe rspec t i ues 'Basedon tbecu l t u res , ' ouk 'o * 'wha to the rpe rspec t i ues (em ico re t i c ) canyouadd to the touching behauiot he describes?

CuLtuReL PE,RsPr-c-r tvr ,s ' 81

Etic Iterspectiues: PerceptionsIt is a daunt ing task to ident i fy the perspect ives of a culrure. Fortunately for lerp-guage teachers, anthropologists, intercul tural ists. and others have devisedframeworks for examining cultures. These frameworks, because they apply toall cultures, are examples of etic perspectives.

A number of rnodels of etic perspectives ?rc prcv-rent in the field. In essence,these models presume that there is a finite set of realities that all cultures mustaddress. These realities are part of the human condition. Different cultures per-ceive these realities in distinct ways. These distinct perceprions, in turn, lead to dif-ferent beliefs, values, attitudes, and practices-in a word, to different worldviews.For example, a fundamental reality of the human condition is nature. Therefore,a basic etic perspective is the perception of humankind in relationship to nature.Do the people of a culture see themselves in control over nature? Or do they seenature as controlling them? Each of these perceptions will lead to different values,beliefs, attitudes, and practices. By determining how cultures perceive this andother aspects of the human condition, we are able to identify worldviews.

The models of etic perspectives are thus very useful in attaining culturalunderstanding. These models include perceptions of humankind, humankindand nature, time, acrivity, social relationships (Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck,19601; perceptions of self and others-"individualism/collectivism" (Hofstede,1'984); perceptions of uncertainty-<.rtr..rtainty avoidance" (Hofstede, 19g4);perceptions of inequity-"power disrance" (Hofstede, 1984); "masculinity/femi-ninity" (Hofstede, 1984), and others.

To summarize at this juncture, cultural perspectives are both explicit andtacit. Members of the culture have their own explanations, emic perspectives.Outsiders bring etic perspectives, their own ways of explaining others' culturesusing criteria that they apply to all cultures. The interplay between emic and eticperspectives is crucial to cultural comparisons and to cultural understanding.The central challenge in this process is to make tacit perspectives explicit.

VrEwporNTS oN CurruRRL PERSpECTTvESOnce these emic and etic perspectives are brought to light, however, there is stilla significant obstacle in the pathway to cultural understanding: point of view. Toillustrate this obstacle, let me describe a research task I assigned to a group oflanguage teachers.

Their task was to research the culture surrounding football at a nearby highschool. \7e all amended a game on a windy, frigid night in October and observedthe action that unfolded, on and off the field of play. From this observation,. theteachers decided on persons to interview about football. They supplemented theirinterview findings with readings and discussions, and amempted to make expla-nations about U.S. culture based on their research. The task was to discover andarticulate cultural perspectives, using the framework of products, practices, com-munities, and persons.

The teachers chose a wide variety of involved people to interview: coache's,players, parents, a referee, pep band members, rt,td.nl bystanders, even a radioannouncer at the game. As the teachers shared their results in class, an intrigu-ing picture began to appear. Informants, members of the culture. ."presJ.d

For models of eticperspectrves, see

Appendix A, p.L57.

8 2 . T c n c u t N c ; C u t . r u R F t : p E r { s p F _ c r r v F t s t N P R . A C t r t c E

s( ) l l l c s l l i l r ' ( ' ( l l ) c rs l )cc t i ' , 1 ' t foc l tba l l , wh ich was to be cxpec tcd . I l ' r ' cvc rdivergent, cven corrf l ict ing, v iews also emerged.

lJancl l t lcrnbcrs werc cr i r i , ' r r l of footbarl l arrd the amount of monev that theschool dcvoted to tl-ris sport at the expense of other extracurricul",

".iiuiti.s fo,

other students. Some disl iked t l re att i tude of cerrain footbal l players ""d;; ;_tus they err joyed in the sclroo^ as they walked down the hal ls. One coach talked

about the importance of character-building, teamwork, discipline, achieuinngoals, and learning other lessons for responsible adulthood, which *... ,..]ondary to football itself. The only female member of the football team saw hertask as one of achieving equality with the boys, gaining acceptance. Ateacher/coach recognized the inherent contradiction of valuing the physical vio-lence of the game and educating for citizenship at the same time. One studentcared little about the game and was only interested in the evenr as an opportu-nity to socialize with friends and to meet girls. A parent saw the competirion asa necessary evil, something that her son would have to do if he was to succeedin life after graduation from high school, even though she disliked the aggres-sion of football and worried about her son getting hurt.

This posed a dilemma for many of the language reachers, who did not knowhow to resolve this multiplicity of perspectives. Americans seemed to hold differ-ent perceptions, values, beliefs, and attitudes about the cultural practice of foot-ball. What was the "American" perspective on football? Whar was the answer?

Part of the difficulty in determining such a unifying perspective is that rhere aremany points of view, multiple perspectives on the nature of culture. Earlier, Idescribed an examination of cultural anthropology t[at I carried out and the manyschools of thought, or theories of culture, that I encountered. Although rhere aremany dilfureqces among these various schools, they differ most significantly in thearea of perspectives. That is to say, these schools offer different explanations of cul-tural meaning-the perceptions, values, and beliefs of the culture. These variedexplanations, can be abstract and philosophical. For example, cultural materialismholds that the values members share derive ultimately from the economic realities oftheir culture, whereas structuralism maintains that culture consists primarily of themyths created by members of the culture and the duality of mental constructs suchas raw and cooked, male and female. How to reconcile such points of view?

Understanding perspectives, in my opinion, represents the most challengingaspect of teaching culture. The task, simply pur, is to identify the perceptions, val-ues, beliefs, and attitudes of the culture. However, culture consists of numerouscommunities, all coexisting under the umbrella of a national culture. These com-munities, in theory at least, share common perspectives. In fact, by its very nature,the national culture presumes such common perspectives. In practice, on the otherhand, these various communities often hold different perspectives. Some of themare in opposition-sometimes in open conflict, as in pro- and anti-abortion com-munities, pro-environment and pro-development groups, criminals and police, orvying political parties.

It boils down to this: cultural perspectives depend on your point of view. I'musing point of view literally, in rerms of how you choose ro view cultural per-spectives. Given shifting points of view, how can language teachers hope to offeraccurate explzrnations of cultural perspectives?

C u t . r u n a l P E n s p l , c - r t v E s . 8 3

Tnr tEE [ )o t tu r s vp Vtpw oN CuuruRp-T.h" vvorking solur ion I propose is to present al ternat ive viewpoints as part of

I k , , , , i , i , rE , ,1 . . , o r d iscover ing in te rpre ta t ious . A l thor , rgh there r rc " '? r l l

viewpoints and theories of culture, I will reduce these to three broad approach-

es (adaptcd fr . , - ' ' art in and Nakayama , 1,997lto explaining cul tural perclec-

tives: tte functionalist view, the interpretive view, the conflict view. In sunple

rerms, these can be defined respectively as culture as a unified whole, culture as

dist inct communit ies, and culture as a competing communit ies'

Iigure ?.3: Three Points of Yiew on Gulture

THr FUNCTIoNALIST VIEw

The functionalist view takes the broad view of culture, most often at the nation-

al level, using the nation as the focal point. Drawn from social science theory, it

assumes a national cultural community, a national way of life. This perspective

holds that a society constructs systems or structures-institutions- to ensure

the harmonious functioning of that society. Accordingly, the institutions of the

culture establish the key products, practices, and perspectives of the culture as a

whole, as the following diagram illustrates.

Figure 7.4: The Functionalist Yiew of Gulture

Functionalist Viewculture as an integrated,

harmonious wholeculture as defined by distinctcommunit ies and members

Conflict Viewculture as separate

communities in conflict

Perspectives

Interpretive View

Practices

8 4 . T u n c ; H r N c C u L T L t R F - : P r : t t s p n c r l v E s I N P n n c r l c E

l+s.I

'T lre funct iorral ist v ier,v l )crtains r t t thr ' , - r ' , , ' r f f iHl l . rr" l , cul ture and society

rr t t l rc ir broadest-what tour ists or v is i tctrs are l ikely to encounter, such as anexpe r ience with the educir t iorral systerrt . involvement with the laws and govern-

rrent, encounters with the liealth care system, parttcipation in the economic sys-

tem, and the like. The functionalist view assumes that the culture is an integrat-

ed, harmonious whole, and that i t tends to bc sL..rc. There is also an assump-

tiol of peaceful coexistence, of resolution of conflicts for the common good. It

is at this level that politicians talk about "the people"-an appeal to those who

supposedly constitute the heart of the culture, or to that dimension that unites

all members of the culture.Even though the functionalist view bypasses the existence or role of other

communiti"r *ithin the culture, it does address a common question that arises

in culture learning. This question is about national culture. What makes the

French French? Mexicans Mexican? Italians Italian? And so on' Broad general-

izations about the way of life apply to this national community' 'We

have to

assume that there is something that all members of any national culture share,

to varying degrees, by virtue of having participated in its social institutions. The

history oi , *lr.tte or nation, particularly in terms of its political, social, and

economic development, reveals much of its cultural perspectives. The function-

alist view, in effect, is the culture that dominates most language/culture text-

books and materials.Also, most of the etic perspectives discussed earlier tend to address the func-

tionalist view; they are often applied to national culture. Applying these etic per-

spectives to the national culture leads to generaLizations like these: "Americans

tend to be individualists, monochronic, low-context' futufe-oriented, activity-

oriented, informal, and tend to value equality;" "Japanese tend to be collec-

tivist, hlgh-context, being-oriented, formal, and tend to value hierarchy'"

Similarly,-the notion of *o.ldrriew is often presented at the level of the national

culture community; hence it supports a functionalist view of culture.

In the case of the high rchooi football study, the functionalist point of view

would seek to identify the broad national culture perspectives and determine

where and how they are reflected in this microcosm of the larger culture. The

belief that sacrifice, hard work, competition, and teamwork make for success'

for example, would be used as a predictor of the perspectives held by all those

associated with the sport in the high school.

Key Quest ionsr What are the cultural perspectives portrayed in the institutions of

the culture?o How are these perspectives reflected in the cultural phenomenon

under study?r How are these perspectives reflected in groups or communities?r How are these perspectives reflected in individuals?

C u l r u R e l P E R S P E C T I v E s ' B 5

@ rr.t/iN/N(; CLi tl Ll nt.: N,r'r rorual

Find a source that describes tha "natir>nnl characteristics" 6ee Brake et al..1995) of your culture of origin. Being honest, apply each of tbese national char-acteristics to yowrself to see wbicb ones drp .'zlatiuely dccurdte. Apply these char-acteristics to ntembers of your family or othcrs you krcow from your culture. Tocontrdst this, find a source of characteristics from another national cwlture andapply these to )', ,,rself. What obseruations cdn you mal<.e about the fwnctional-ist uiew?

Trrr INrrRpRETrvE VrewThe interpretive view assumes that cultural meanings or perspectives are definedby the members of the culture in the circumstances in which they find them-selves, either as individuals or as members of communities. Since many com-munities comprise a culture, there are an equal number of cultural perspectives.The interpretive view does not address the notion of a national culture commu-rr i ty. Al l cul ture, in the interpret ive view, is local (Geertz,1973).

The interprerive view places grear emphasis on the emic perspective, rheinsider's view, and assumes that this is the view that matters most. Insiders areexactly that: those who are members of the communities in question. If mem-bers of the national culture are not members of a particular community, they arenot really insiders of that community and are not in a position to offer views onbehalf of that group.

In the football research project, taking the interpretive point of view wouldassume that each of the groups associated with the phenomenon of football hasa valid perspective. The band members have their view, just as the players, the

ffi il j',t"lifru:xi:T:Tn:';h3:'Hd;jH:*;J,,;;:H;:T::'"",:pretive point of view presumes that there will be mulriple perspectives, as manyas there are participants.

8 6 . T n a c ; H l N c C u t - . l u t i . F t : p F t r { s t , E C T I V E S I N p n n c l r c u

Ct trtx.+c-rERl.sT/cs

ilg

IIIIiI

Key Questions. l rVl-rat are the groups or col- l l l r luni t ies involved in this phenomenon?

r How do the part ic ipants in these {:r()ups or communit ies view the

phenomenon?. F[,rw do individual part ic ipants view the phenomenon?

llpl tneRNING Cu rrunp: lNrPRrRrrtNG CoMMUNITIES

Draw up a list of a few groups or communities of which you are a member' For

each community, describe an euent sponsored and carried out by its members,

including yourielf. Compose a brief speech in which you briefly recount this

euent aid explain its importance to this community and to you as a member''Work with a colleague. Deliuer your speeches to one another, and then ask each

other questions abiut the perspectiues beld by this community and their mani-

festatiins in the euent. foilo*lrg these interuiews, compdre the perspectiues of

your communities. -What

obseruations can you make about the interpretiue uietu

of culture?

Trtr CoNFLICT Vtrw

The conflict view purs rhe emphasis on the communities that make up the cul-

ture, particularly on their interactions with the core culture and its institutions

urrd'"rrrorrg themselves. Although this view accepts that each community has its

o*r, p.rrp-.ctives, it does 1-rot "Jr,r-.

harmonious relationships among them' Tci

the contrary, it assumes that these groups are in competition or conflict with one

".roth.r, "yi"g for influence' power' or control' The conflict view perceives

power u. ih. ..rrtral feature ".rd

,ri.*, culture as a place where struggles for

power among communities are played out'

The core culture is the communitY

Microcultures, cocultures' or other

persons who possess dist inct sets of

that controls the institutions of the society'

cultural communities consist of groups of

practices and perspectives. They participate

C u l r u n n l P r R s P E c : . t - t v E s ' 8 7

l l . l t l l c ' c ( ) rc c t l l t t l r ( ' \ ' c t fh ( 'n J rspec t ives come in to conf l i c t w i th th1 ;sc 9 t 1 ; ther .cotnnrutt i t ics in t l tc ct t l tutc.

- l 'h is view underscores the dynamic, evolving nature

of cul turc. The conf l icts are points of potent ial change in cul tural p.rr"p". t iu. ,and pl act ices.

Looking ar tlre football project in rerms of rhe conflict point of view, itappears that the bancl p.,,o. rn and its members are in competition wirfi rficfootball program for school funding, status, and influence in the school. Therealso seem to be issues of equality between the male players and the female player.

Key Questionso What are the groups or communities involved in the cultural phenomenon?o How do these groups or communities perceive themselves in relation to

other participating groups?o what are the issues of power (authoritS dominance, or influence)

between or among these groups?o How do individuals perceive issues of power (authority, dominance, or

influence) in rhis phenomenon?

l$l rraRNrNG Cut,rup.r: Coty,uttuNrcres nv Corurr_rcr

Scan a feru newspapers, both local and national. Make a short list of the dis-agreements, conflicts, competitions, disputes, negotiations, confrontations, alli-Ances' or collaborations described in tbe news. Next to eacb item on your list,identify tbe groups or communities inuolued. If the community has a-n officiatlname or title, write this down; otherwise, assign a nAme. As best you cyn, list theissues of power that are inuolued, from tbe uiewpoint of eacb of the communities.'what

obseruations can you make about tbe conulict uiew of culture?

The advantage of these three perspectives is that each offers a distinct viewpointon cultural phenomena.

'$fhen we look at culture from differenc viewpointi our

understanding is increased. By acknowledging and seeking multiple p.rrp..-tives, we begin to grasp the compiexity of culture. \We begin io ,.. that there aremany possible explanations, nor jusr one right answer.

Suggested Readings

.|ames Banks (1991), in Teaching Strategies for Ethnic Studies, has developed anapproach to teaching a muldcultural curriculum that is based in part on exam-ining events from multiple perspectives. He describes how an issue such as socialprotest can be explored from a variety of viewpoints: the political system, socialinstitutions, literature, language, music, and ari. Even though Brake, \Talker and\)Talker (1995) wrote Doing Business Internationatty: ihe Guide to Cross-Cultural Success for businesspersons, they present an excellent synthesis of 10cultural orientations (etic perspectives) drawn from a number of research.r, l"cultural studies, anthropolo gy, and intercultural communication. They explainthese in a clear, succinct manner and use fhem as a frame for comparing cultures

Tr :n t . r t IN<; Cut - - ru I tF t : p I . tR .s l , t : c r tv l . t s IN Pnnc; - r tc_ t .8 8 .