ESL 21B

Essay 1.2, Topic 1

7.5.07

The Value Pitfalls of International Communication

There are so many different cultures existing in the world that we live. These cultures have many parts, including values, assumptions, traditions, and social customs. Because many cultures are so different from each other, it is natural that cultures can clash at times. One of the key areas of conflict is in the values which cultures think are most important.Good! In order to succeed in a foreign culture, it is important to understand how these clashes can arise. There are three main culture clashes between American and Japanese values, and understanding their roots is the key to avoiding cultural miscommunication.

The first key value-clash between Japan and America is based in language - especially addressing other people. When I first came to America I felt strange that people spoke to each other in the same way, no matter who they were. In my home country, Japan, people need to speak differently depending on their job, age, and other things. If your boss says ohayo, good morning, you need to answer ohayo-gozaimasu, which also means good morning, but in a more formal way. Ohayo and ohayo-gozaimasu both mean "good morning", but ohayo is less polite than ohayo-gozaimasu. Your boss needs to be spoken to in a more formal way than he or she should speak to you. This is a clear indication of valuing rank in normal Japanese speech, something which is largely absent in American English. In the essay "Polite but Thirsty", Yaping Tang says Americans call each other by their first name, regardless of rank, position, or age. This American tradition of egalitarian language points to an inherent value of equality, which the Japanese do not necessarily shareExcellent!. Americans who visit Japan should respect the Japanese values of status, and be wary of using improper language when addressing others. Meanwhile, Japanese visiting America should understand American values and be careful not to sound too formal and unfriendly when addressing others.

A second major value-clash between Japan and America centers on individual versus group mentalities. Americans value individualism, but Japanese value collectivism. Gary Althen says "[Americans] are trained from very early in their lives to consider themselves as separate individuals who are responsible for their own situations in life and their own destinies." in his essay "American Values and Assumptions". Thus, the American value of individualism is in stark contrastGoodWordChoice to the Japanese value of collectivism. Japanese are taught to suppress their individual desires and personality in the name of communal unity and one-ness. For example, there is a famous saying in Japan which can be translated as: the nail that sticks up gets hammered down. Or in other words; be an individual at your own risk. These clashing Japanese and American values can lead to misunderstandings. A personal example of this is, when I was working as a receptionist in Japan; one American businessman came to my office. He just said his name and his business partner's name. This was strange to me because, Japanese people will identify themselves by the company that they work for, while Americans identify themselves first by name. I expected the businessman to tell me his company name so I was confused as to how to direct him, until he showed me his business card. Japanese show their group-values by placing the greatest importance on their company while Americans show their individualism by using their namesExcellent!. Americans and Japanese should be sensitive to the potential value-clashGoodWordChoice between individualism and collectivism when doing business or traveling internationally.

The third potential value-clash between Japan and America is related to self-expression and direct versus indirect communication. "Americans usually assume that conflicts or disagreements are best settled by means of forthright discussion among the people involved." writes Gary Althen. Essentially, Americans assume that people will honestly express themselves without hesitation. However, the American value of honesty and transparency is in direct conflictGoodWordChoice with the Japanese values of harmony and tranquility. For example, Japanese people assume exactly the opposite of Americans: they assume that people will say "yes" even if the answer is "no", in order to avoid direct conflict. Also, people might not understand what Japanese are thinking, because Japanese people do not say [[so]]MissingW directly. If someone goes to Japan and asks for directionSing/Plu on the street, they will certainly get directions but they may be incorrect because the Japanese person was uncomfortable saying that they did not know the way. The Japanese person may value a happy resolution to the conversation overGoodWordChoice an honest expression of unhelpfulness. Japanese do not want to say "I don't know", so they prefer to give incorrect directions. This indirect approach would cause much frustration for an American because they are expectingVTense an honest and direct answer such as "I can't help you" or "you should ask at the police station". {***}Choppy Japanese people are aware of a subtle kind of body language where people can indirectly express their true thoughts. Often an unnatural smile might alert you that the directions you are receiving are not correct. This kind of indirect communication requires a different mindset from that of someone who values directness. Americans use this same kind of subtlety but in a direct way, a wink or a sarcastic statement can be easily understood by other Americans but not by a foreigner. Thus both American and Japanese cultures use subtle forms of communication but they do so according to their differing values of directness and indirectnessGood!.

The three value-clashes mentioned in this essay, rank versus egalitarianism, individual versus group, and directness versus indirectness, are all important stumbling blocksGoodWordChoice to overcome for smooth intercultural communication. However, these problems are just beginning{1}, yet understanding them can erase a lot of culture clashes between Japan and America. It is important to realize, however, that these kinds of value-clashes are not limited only to Japan and America. Every culture has it's own values and these values translate into customs and cultural expectations. In Japan our values of harmony, indirectness, and status permeate our culture. In even a basic situation like going shopping all of these values can come into play. If I ask a store clerk if they have any of my favorite food they will address me respectfully, and tell me in an indirect way that they are sold out. In America the same situation can show the opposite values, as I might address the clerk in a friendly manner, and he or she would happily tell me that they are defiantlyWChoice sold out and I should come back tomorrow. These examples illustrate the point that values are wovenGoodWordChoice into the most basic things in a culture. Thus, we can hardly expect to fully understand any foreign culture. If we have different values then we will surely have different traditions and expectations. These values are the root of intercultural miscommunication which exists in the world. Yet, keeping in mind that cultural misunderstanding starts from the most basic value-clashes is an important tool.Fragment The secret to avoiding culture clashes is remembering that potential problems can spring from a very basic level of expectations. When we meet people from other cultures we must remember that that they may embrace very different values from our own and understand of the differences in actions and expectations from our own. People can solve a lot of international problems by remembering to think about potential clashes before they happen, and working to create a deeper cultural understanding at the level of values.

Works Cited

Althen, Gary. "American Values and Assumptions" New Directions Second Edition (2005). New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

Tang, Yaping. "Polite but Thirsty" New Directions Second Edition (2005). New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005.