Though most outsiders view Chinese culture as being monolithic, both ethnically and religiously, there are over 20 million Muslims living within China. They’ve managed to peacefully co-exist with both their Muslim and Chinese identities.

Few people know that the Hui People, who are one of the fifty-five minorities of the People’s Republic of China, have been practicing Islam for 14 centuries, ever since Islam first emerged in Arabia. Even fewer people know that of those fifty-five officially recognized minorities of China, ten of them practice Islam. The Hui people particularly stand out from the rest of the Muslim minorities for a number of reasons. For example, as opposed to the other Muslim minorities for whom Chinese is a second language, the Hui People speak Chinese regional dialects. In addition to the language difference, contrary to the other Muslim minorities who are concentrated in the same region, the Hui people are spread out all over China. As a result of this regional diverse, the Hui People share many cultural similarities with the Han Chinese. These are only two distinctions that separate the Hui People from the other Muslim minorities in China, and while these two alone make the Hui People unique, there are even more differences that deserve recognition. The study of the Hui People is important because it will demonstrate how Islam has been practiced in harmony with Chinese culture for centuries. Furthermore, this study will also explain how one becomes loyal to his/her Chinese and Muslim identities simultaneously, because Chinese Muslims don’t find any problem in identifying themselves as Chinese and adopting Chinese customs that agree with Islam. Accordingly, the rest of the paper will give an overview about the origins and main characteristics of the Hui People before explaining the adaptation of Islam to the Chinese culture.

Who are the ten Muslim minorities of China?

The main focus of this paper will be an analysis of the particular characteristics of the Hui People. However, before undertaking the analysis, I will give a brief overview of the other nine Muslim minorities in China. The Chinese government has categorized its minorities based by nationality ever since 1949. Furthermore, the ten Muslim minorities of China were categorized by their ethnicity, including the Hui People. Six of the nine Muslim minorities, namely Uyghurs, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, Uzbeks, Tatars and Tajiks, predominantly live in the XinJiang Autonomous Region, which is also known as Eastern Turkistan to many non-Chinese (Dillon, 1996, p.4). They all speak a form of Turkic language, except the Tajiks who speak Persian (Dillon, 1996, p.4). The remaining three Muslim minorities, who are the Salars, the Boa’an, and the Dongxiang, live in different regions. The Salars are another Turkic speaking Muslim minority in China that live in a region that borders the Gansu and Qinghai provinces (Dillon, 1996, p.4). The Salars trace their ancestry back to people who migrated from the Samarkand region during the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644). The Boa’an live in the southwest of the Gansu province, while the Dongxiang live in the western-edge of Gansu province. Both trace their ancestors back to the Asian troops sent out during the Yuan Dynasty (1271-1368). The Boa’an and Dongxiang languages also originate from the Mongolian language family, even though they are different from each other (Dillon, 1996, p.12)

The etymology of “Hui”

The Chinese word hui consists of two squares which literally means “return.” According to a Chinese Muslim scholar, “[t]he outer square means the universality of Islam, whereas the inner square refers to the Ka’bah” (Cahuh, 2004, p.156). In addition to this definition of hui), some Chinese Muslim scholars describe “the religion of the Hui as the religion that returns us to Allah,” the name of God in Islam (Cahuh, 2004, p.156).

The term ‘hui’ was used to describe all Muslims in China before the People’s Republic of China, in 1949, even though there were various nations practicing Islam during imperial China, including various Turkic people, Persians, and Arabs. The identification of Muslims as ‘hui’ gained a widespread usage starting with the Yuan Dynasty (1368-1644), ruled by the Mongols. After Imperial China, the Communist Government identified the Hui People with those who “do not have a language of their own but speak the dialects of the peoples among whom they live” (Gladney, 1996, p.20). Today the Hui People are famously known as Chinese Muslims.

The Development of Islam in China

Interestingly, the first appearance of Islam in China dates back to the 7th century in the Tang Dynasty (618-907), following the emergence of Islam in Arabia in 610 CE. Arab and Persian traders, soldiers and Sufi saints played a significant role in this transmission of Islam to Asia. Persian and Arab traders first settled in the southeastern coast of China, Canton (Guangzhou,) Xiamen, Quanzhou, Yangzhou, and some of them married local Chinese. However, this was a small amount of the Muslim community, and they were of little interest to local officials during Tang and Song Dynasties (618-1279 CE) (Gladney, 1996, p.17).

The Yuan Dynasty (1368-1644) was a landmark in terms of the spread of Islam in China because the Mongol rulers forced many Muslims living in Central Asia and Western Asia to migrate to China. “[T]he armies of Genghis Khan and his successors sacked major Islamic centers, including Bukhara and Samarkand, and transported sections of the population-skilled armourers, other craftsmen, and enslaved women and children among them-back to China, where they were settled as servants to Mongol aristocrats” (Dillon, 1996, p.17). In addition, the Mongol rulers of China made legal and hierarchical distinctions between the four kinds of people that led the Muslims to have higher status than the Chinese because the Muslims succeeded the Mongols who were at the top level (Gladney, 1996, p18).

Muslims in China believed that Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas, the maternal uncle of the Prophet Muhammad, along with the three companions of the Prophet, were the first Muslims in China. In accordance with this claim, He Qiaoyuan, a seventeenth century Chinese scholar, also stated that “the prophet’s four apostles arrived in China to preach during the middle of the reign of Emperor Wude in the Tang Dynasty” (Sen, 2009, p.80). At the same time, many Chinese Muslims pay visit to a tomb which is associated with Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas in Canton (Guangzhou). Today there are even some Chinese Muslims who trace back their ancestry to Abi Waqqas. However, contemporary scholars regarded that this chronicle was a legend due to the lack of evidence. Instead, they argued the beginning of Islam in China started with the envoy sent by Caliph Usthman, in the Tang Dynasty, in 651 (Sen, 2009, p.81).

Han Kitab

The Han Kitab is a collection of treatises, translations and books constructed by different Chinese Muslim scholars between the seventeenth and twentieth centuries. Wang Daiyu, Ma Zhu, and Liu Zhi are the most well-known authors of the Han Kitab. The authors of the Han Kitab took an unprecedented position in the history of Islam in China by using predominantly Neo-Confucian terms in the introduction and description of fundamental Islamic concepts such as prophethood, God, and ritual. The Han Kitab is the very example of the adaptation of Muslims into Chinese culture. For example, the concept of prophethood in Islam, is explained with the Neo-Confucian concept “shengren” which means “a link in the long chain of sages sent by Heaven to communicate the Way through their worldly teaching” (Frankel, 2011, p.88). In short, the authors of the Han Kitab are mainly concerned about making abstract Islamic terms more understandable by using the existing religious terminology in China.

Practicing Religion in Muslim China

With the end of the Cultural Revolution in 1976, the Chinese government’s shift in its attitude towards the practice of religions certainly enabled the revival of religious institutions and the free practice of religions in China. In fact, comparing the other Muslim minorities, the Hui People hold much more freedom in terms of practicing Islam. Political issues mainly lead other Muslim minorities to encounter some restrictions in practicing Islam. For example, the political, cultural and religious activities of Uyghurs are closely monitored and restricted by the government because they are considered as a threat to national unity.

With regard to the Hui’s religious traditions, they consider themselves Sunni Muslims who follow the Hanafi School of law. The mainstream Islam is called gedimu in Chinese, which is the transliteration of the Arabic word al qadim, “the ancient.” They call their Imams ahong, deriving from the Persian word akhong. As seen, it is possible to encounter the transliteration of both Arabic and Persian terms in the Hui People’s religious and daily life expressions. The Hui People also have names in the traditional Chinese forms, along with a religious name. Mahmud Ma Xiao and Sharif Wang Yongliang are examples of Hui names. There are also some common names among the Hui, “like Ma, probably derived from the first syllable of Muhammad” (Dillon, 1996, p.50-53).

In addition, the close interactions between the Hui people with Chinese culture were reflected in the mosques built in the Tang, Song, Yuan, Ming and early Qing dynasties because they have a similar architectural style with the Buddhist and Daoist pagodas constructed in the same period. However, the recently built mosques have been following the models of “Afghanistan, Iran, the republics of the former Soviet Central Asia, or the Arab world” architectural styles (Dillon, 1996, p.38).

That the Hui People are scattered around the country is a significant sign indicating the integration of the Hui People into all walks of life. It is unexpected that a minority group does not concentrate in a region, but spreads out all over the country. In the case of the Hui, they are all around the country even though most of them live in Ningxia, Gansu, Henan, Hebei, Qinghai, Shandong, Yunnan, Xinjiang, Liaoning and Anhui provinces. As for the population of the Hui, they are one of the most populous minorities in China, following the Zhuang and the Manchu. According to the report on Mapping on the Global Muslim Population conducted by Pew Research Center (2009), there are 22 million Muslims in China (p.7). To another report on International Religious Freedom conducted by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (2006), “there were 20 million Muslims, more than 40,000 Islamic places of worship (more than half of which are in Xinjiang), and more than 45,000 imams nationwide.” The same report also announced that the Hui People nearly consisted of the half of the Muslims in China.

Despite the fact that the Hui share many cultural affinities with the Han, it is obvious that their practice of Islam distinguishes them from the Han Chinese. For example, the Hui, like all Muslims, observe some dietary rules, such as not eating pork and any meat not slaughtered according to the Islamic way. Nevertheless, when one says meat in China, the Han first recall pork. Mao Zedong, who is the founding father of the People’s Republic of China, also said that pork is “a national treasure” of China (Gladney, 1996, p.13). As for dressing, Hui men wear a white skullcap and Hui women cover their head with a headscarf originating from their Muslim identity. At the same time, as opposed to the Lunar New Year and Mid-Autumn which are the most common Chinese festivals, the Hui primarily celebrate annual Lesser Bairam (Eid ul-Fitr), and Corban (eid ul-adha) along with all Muslims around the world.

Conclusion

It is a little known fact that over 10 million Chinese speaking people – not including Turkic, Persian and Mongolian speaking Muslims – practice Islam today. This piece touched upon some of striking features of these Chinese Muslims, called the Hui. The earlier sources established that the first presence of Islam in China dated back to not long after the rise of Islam. The example of the Hui people also demonstrates how a Muslim society is well adapted to another culture while also maintaining its Islamic identity. Muslims have been inevitably influenced by Chinese culture and have adopted some parts of it – such as architecture, language, customs, and clothing – that do not disagree with the fundamentals of Islam. It is an undeniable fact that the Hui people’s practice of Islam has prevented them from being assimilated and absorbed into Chinese culture. The examples given in the last section, Practicing Religion in Muslim China, show that the Hui people maintain their Islamic identity while also owning their Chinese identity. This ideology was first documented by the Chinese Muslim literati who explicitly stated, three hundred years ago, in the Han Kitab, that Islam is compatible with Chinese culture

As cultural differences continue to be an important part of life, we need to examine how different cultures make sense of the world in terms of the meanings that represent the mind, and within which the concept of intelligence is defined. First, I will explore some basic philosophical views about the conception of intelligence which I believe constitute the root of cultural constructions of the notion.

Historical conceptions of intelligence

Some scholars of the past, such as philosophers, writers and theologians, explored intelligence but did not attempt to define the nature of intelligence. For example, in the Odyssey, Homer distinguished between good looks and good thinking. He remarked that one may have a poor physical appearance but may speak in an articulate way. Another man may be handsome but lack the ability to communicate well with others. Plato made his comments regarding the nature of intelligence in Theaetetus. In the dialogue, Socrates asks Theaetetus to imagine that there exists in the mind of man a block of wax that is of different sizes in different men. The block of wax can also differ in hardness, moistness and purity. Socrates suggests that when the wax is pure and sufficiently deep, the mind will learn easily and will not be subject to confusion. Because impressions in the wax are clear, it only will think things that are true. However, when the wax is impure or very soft or very hard, there will be defects in the intellect. People whose wax is soft will be good at learning but be apt to forget. People whose wax is hard will be slow to learn but will retain what they learn. People whose wax is shaggy or gritty, or whose wax is a mixture of earth and dung will have only indistinct impressions. Those with hard wax will have the same because there will be no depth to their thoughts (Sternberg 1985).

In the Posterior Analytics Book, Aristotle conceived of intelligence in terms of “quick wit.” For example, an intelligent person seeing someone in conversation with a man of wealth might conclude quickly that the person is seeking to borrow money from the wealthy man.

Cultural conceptualization of intelligence

In recent years, researchers have found that people in Eastern and Western cultures often have fundamentally different ideas about intelligence. Richard Nisbett, in The Geography of Thought, argues that these differences are due to the different cognitive styles of both cultures, including how intelligence is understood. He suggests that people in Western countries tend to view intelligence as a means for individuals to devise categories and to engage in rational debate, while people in Eastern cultures see it as a way for members of community to recognize contradiction and complexity and to play their social roles successfully.

I think, as Nisbett says these differences between Eastern and Western views of intelligence are related to differences in the basic cognitive processes of people in those cultures. In most cases, Western notions of intelligence are not shared by other cultures. For example, at the mental level, the Western emphasis on speed of mental processing (Sternberg 1981) is not shared by many cultures. In contrast, people in Eastern countries may even be suspicious of the quality of work done very quickly and emphasize depth rather than speed.

Similarly, Chen (1994) found three factors underlying Chinese conceptualizations of intelligence: nonverbal reasoning ability, verbal reasoning ability and memory. These factors differ substantially from American people’s conceptualizations of intelligence which have mostly mental attributions, such as: practical problem solving, verbal ability and social competence (Sternberg 1981).

About Eastern notions of intelligence, Das (1994) has suggested that in Buddhist and Hindu philosophies, intelligence involves waking up, noticing, recognizing, understanding, and comprehending but also includes such things like determination, mental effort, and even feelings and opinions (Sternberg and Kaufman 1998). In a related study, Yang and Sternberg reviewed Chinese philosophical conceptions of intelligence. The Confucian perspective emphasizes the characteristic of benevolence and of doing what is right. Again, Taoist culture emphasizes the importance of humility, freedom from conventional standards of judgment, and full knowledge of oneself which appears well-correlated with Plato’s “Know yourself” notion.
Differences between cultures in conceptions of intelligence have been recognized for some time. In a study, Gill and Keats (1980) reported that Australian University students value academic skills and the ability to adapt to new situations as critical to intelligence, while Malay students emphasize practical skills, such as speed and creativity, as well as both social and cognitive attributes in their conceptions of intelligence.

Studies done in Africa provide evidence of substantial differences in the notion of intelligence. Serpell (1974, 1977, and 1982) found that people in Zambia emphasize social responsibilities, cooperativeness, and obedience as important to intelligence; intelligent children are expected to be respectful of adults. In Zimbabwe, the word intelligence means to be prudent and cautious, especially in social relationships (Dasen 1984). As in many Eastern countries, service to the family and community, politeness and respect for elders are seen as the key to intelligence.

In his study. The Geography of Thought, researcher Nisbett, compares the Greeks and the Chinese in order toshow the different cognitive styles of East and West, which in turn causes different conceptions of intelligence. The Ancient Greeks were known for their strong sense of agency, the ability to exercise free will, while the Chinese found their belief system in harmony. The Greeks also had a curiosity about the nature of the world. They were not satisfied just to make systematic observations about the world; they were also interested in the underlying principles of their observations. Debate and confrontation were discouraged in Chinese society, whereas they were encouraged in Greece. The Eastern way of life is based on the principle that the life is ever-changing and filled with contradictions. It was interrelationships that defined the Chinese; who they were with would define who they were and what roles they were to fulfill. The sense of identity was defined by social context, by individual attributes while in Greece, objects and people would be analyzed separately. These fundamental differences in thought patterns have implications that extend to all aspects of life.

At this point, the differences seen in the individualistic culture of the West and the collectivistic (Petersen 2004) culture of the East need more attention to provide a better picture of the notion of intelligence in terms of its cultural construction.

Different thinking styles of East and West

There are some assumptions which are thought to be true by most Westerners. That is, they are individuals with characteristics that make them distinctive; moreover, we want to be unique. Westerners are in control of their own behavior and feel better when they believe that they can choose and control the outcomes of their actions. They are goal-oriented and success-driven (Nisbett 2004), and relationships can sometimes interfere with attaining success. Personal success and feeling positive about oneself are important for the sense of well-being.

Conversely, Easterners are less concerned with personal success; they are far more group driven (Nisbett 2004). Their sense of well-being is related to their being in harmony with those around them; moreover, rules that apply to relationships are not universal, instead relationships are dictated by the context and are unique to the roles each holds in that context. This collective sense of the East extends also to language. For example, in the Japanese language, there are many words for “I,” each dependent on the situation. Who “I” am is different when I am with a boss, co-worker, family member, or friend. In my home country, in Turkey which has strong Eastern roots; there is still the tradition of using “We” instead of ‘I’ in an effort to be humble and avoid egocentric ownership of success. In contrast, Americans rarely take context into account when asked for self descriptions. Moreover, Americans are more likely to overestimate their personal attributes (Nisbett 2004). On the other hand, it is the goal of harmony and fulfilling one’s role in social life to achieve collective success that prevails in Eastern culture.

Another notion of Eastern culture that has a substantial effect on its cultural conceptions of true intelligence and progress is self -criticism which is regarded as part of learning. Self-criticism is taught to Japanese children to help them learn how to solve problems and improve relationships with others. Again, in Turkey, the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, and some other Islamic scholars affect people’s conceptualizations of progress and success, such as, “Happy are those whose own faults preoccupy them too much to think of the faults of others” and “The strongest among you is the one who controls his anger.”

Differences in culture start early in life and continue throughout life. Western parents encourage their children to be independent. Generally they do this by focusing attention on objects. In Eastern cultures, parents focus attention on social relationships and feelings. When children grow up, the differences can be seen in experiments, for example, that Easterners’ have a superior ability to be aware of the emotions of groups of others (Peterson 2004). One theory that accounts for this difference is communication styles. In the West, it is the communicator who is responsible for making the information clear to the listener. In the East, it is the responsibility of the hearers to understand what they are told. The implication of these two contrasting styles can leave Americans feeling that Easterners are difficult to “read” because of their subtle and indirect communication styles. Conversely, Easterners may feel Americans are so direct that they may even be thought to be rude (Nisbett 2004).

Not surprisingly, the East and West have very different styles of dealing with conflict. As in ancient China, debate is still uncommon in the East. Because argument and debate pose a threat to group harmony, what Westerners consider controversial topics would not be brought up in conversation in the East (Becker 1986). Moreover, while debate is part of the rhetoric of science in the West, a skill Westerners are taught throughout their education, it is new to many Easterners that come to the West to pursue a scientific career.
Easterners and Westerners also differ in their perception of control. In Western culture, feeling in control promotes a feeling of well-being to a much greater extent than it does for Easterners (Nisbett 2004). On the other hand, Westerners have more difficulty tolerating ambiguous situations than Easterners. Westerners tend to believe that if things are going to change, it will be in the same direction and at the same level, whereas Easterners see the world as a complex dynamic system (Peterson 2004).

It is at this point that researchers (Nisbett, Peng, Choi, Norenzayan 2001) comment that Easterners appear to think more holistically, paying greater attention to relationship and context, relying more on experience-based knowledge than abstract logic and showing more tolerance for contradiction. Westerners are more analytic in their thinking, tending to separate objects from their context, to avoid contradictions and to rely more heavily on formal logic.

Conclusion

Taken all together, it is certain that people who grow up in different cultures do not just think about different things but they think differently. Thus, the connotations of the word intelligence do not only include a particular set of mental functions but also some value-based conceptions of appropriateness, such as competence, helpfulness, and so on. So, for example, when someone tells a parent that their child is very intelligent, they may be talking about child’s education, or their good relations with others, and sometimes their being a good listener, or lots of other meanings which all depend on the context of the culture in which people live.

References

• Becker, C. B., (1986). Reasons for the lack of argumentation and debate in the Far East. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10, 75–92
• Chen, M. J. (1994). Chinese and Ausralian concepts of intelligence. Psychology and Developing Societies, 6, 101–117
• Choi, Nisbett, Norenzayan, Peng (2001). Culture of Thought. Psychological Review: 108, 291–310
• Curtis Mary E.; Glaser Robert. Changing conceptions of intelligence. Review of Research in Education, Vol. 9 (1981), 111–148
• Das, J.P. (1994). Eastern views of intelligence. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Human Intelligence (Vol.1, pp.387–391).New York: Macmillan
• Dasen, P. (1984). The cross- cultural study of intelligence: Piaget and Baoule. International Journal of Psychology, 19,407–434
• Gill R, Keats DM. 1980. Elements of intellectual competence: judgments by Australian and Malay university students. Journal of Cross – Cult. Psychology. 11:233–43
• Nisbett, Richard E. (2004). The Geography of Thought: How Asians and Westerners Think Differently…and Why. New York: Free Press
• Norenzayan, A., CHOI, i., & Nisbett, R. E (1994). Eastern and Western perceptions of causality for social behavior: Lay theories about personalities and social situations. In D. Prentice & D. Miller ( Ed.s), Cultural divides: Understanding and overcoming group conflict (pp.239–272). New York: Sage.
• Serpell, R. (1974). Aspects of intelligence in a developing country. African Social Research, No.17, 576–596
• Serpell, R. (1994). The cultural construction of intelligence. In W. J. Lonner & R. M. Malpass ( Eds.), Psychology and culture. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
• Sternberg, R. J. (1990). Metaphors of mind: Conceptions of the nature of the intelligence. New York: Cambridge U. Press
• Sternberg, R. J., Conway, B. E., Ketron, J. L., & Bernstein, M. (1981). People’s conceptions of intelligence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 37–55
• Sternberg, R. J., & Kaufman, J. C. (1998). Human abilities. Annual Review of Psychology, 49,479–502
• Sternberg, R. J. (1985c). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity, wisdom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 607–627
• Yang, S. R. & Sternberg, R. J. (1997a). Conceptions of intelligence in ancient Chinese philosophy. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 17, 101–119

Little did the famous Muslim geographer Ibn Battuta know that about 22 years after his historic visit to China, the Mongol Dynasty (called the Yuan Dynasty in China) would be overthrown. The Ming Dynasty (1368-1644) would begin, and a Muslim boy would help a Chinese prince. That prince would become the emperor, and the boy would grow up to be the Admiral of the Chinese Fleet.

His name… Zheng He. The ships that he would sail throughout the Indian Ocean would retrace some of the same routes taken by Ibn Battuta, but he would be in huge boats called junks. He would go to East Africa, Makkah, the Persian Gulf, and throughout the Indian Ocean.

Speak of the world’s first navigators, and the names Christopher Columbus or Vasco da Gama flash through a Western mind. The remarkable feats of a Chinese Muslim who helped transform China into the region’s, and perhaps the world’s, superpower of his time, Zheng He’s (1371-1433) adventures are little known and were accomplished decades before those of the two European adventurers.

In 1405, Zheng was chosen to lead the biggest naval expedition in history up to that time. Over the next 28 years (1405-33), he commanded seven fleets that visited 37 countries throughout Southeast Asia to faraway Africa and Arabia. In those years, China had by far the biggest ships of the time. In 1420, the Ming navy dwarfed the combined navies of Europe.

Ma He, as he was originally known, was born in 1371 to a poor ethnic Hui (Chinese Muslim) family in Yunnan province, southwest China. His grandfather and father once made an overland pilgrimage to Makkah. Their travels contributed much to young Ma’s education. He grew up speaking Arabic and Chinese, learning much about the world to the west and its geography and customs.

Recruited as a promising servant for the Imperial household at the age of ten, two years later Ma was assigned to the retinue of Duke Yan, who would later usurp the throne as Emperor Yong Le. Ma accompanied the Duke on a series of successful military campaigns and played a crucial role in the capture of Nanjing, then the capital. As a result, he was awarded supreme command of the Imperial Household Agency and was given the surname Zheng.

Emperor Yong Le tried to boost his damaged prestige as a usurper by displaying China’s might abroad, sending spectacular fleets on great voyages, and bringing foreign ambassadors to his court. He also put foreign trade under a strict Imperial monopoly by taking control away from overseas Chinese merchants. Command of the fleet was given to his favorite, Zheng He, an impressive figure said to be over eight feet tall.

A great fleet of large ships, with nine masts and manned by 500 men, each set sail in July 1405, half a century before Columbus’ voyage to America. There were great treasure ships over 300 feet long and 150 feet wide, the biggest being 440 feet long and 186 feet across, capable of carrying 1,000 passengers. Most of the ships were built at the Dragon Bay shipyard near Nanjing, the remains of which can still be seen today.

Zheng He’s first fleet included 27,870 men on 317 ships, including sailors, clerks, interpreters, soldiers, artisans, medical men, and meteorologists. On board were large quantities of cargo, including silk goods, porcelain, gold and silverware, copper utensils, iron implements, and cotton goods. The fleet sailed along China’s coast to Champa close to Vietnam and, after crossing the South China Sea, visited Java and Sumatra and then reached Sri Lanka by passing through the Strait of Malacca. On the way back, it sailed along the west coast of India and returned home in 1407. Envoys from Calicut in India and several countries in Asia and the Middle East also boarded the ships to pay visits to China. Zheng He’s second and third voyages, taken shortly after, followed roughly the same route.

In the fall of 1413, Zheng He set out with 30,000 men for Arabia on his fourth and most ambitious voyage. From Hormuz, he sailed around the Arabian boot to Aden at the mouth of the Red Sea. The arrival of the fleet caused a sensation in the region, and 19 countries sent ambassadors to board Zheng He’s ships with gifts for Emperor Yong Le.

In 1417, after two years in Nanjing and touring other cities, the foreign envoys were escorted home by Zheng He. On this trip, he sailed down the east coast of Africa, stopping at Mogadishu, Matindi, Mombassa, and Zanzibar. He might have reached Mozambique. The sixth voyage, in 1421, also went to the African coast.

Emperor Yong Le died in 1424, shortly after Zheng He’s return. Yet, in 1430 the admiral was sent on a final seventh voyage. Now 60 years old, Zheng He revisited the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea, and Africa, and died in 1433on his way back while in India.

Zheng He’s junks

Zheng He’s flag treasure ship was 400 feet long ” much larger than Columbus’. In this drawing, the two flagships are superimposed to give a clear idea of the relative size of these two ships. Columbus’ ship the St. Maria was only 85 feet long, while Zheng He’s flag ship was an astonishing 400 feet long.

Imagine six centuries ago, a mighty armada of Zheng He’s ships crossing the China Sea, then venturing west to Sri Lanka, Arabia, and East Africa. The fleet consisted of giant nine-masted junks, escorted by dozens of supply ships, water tankers, transports for cavalry horses, and patrol boats. The armada’s crew totaled more than 27,000 sailors and soldiers.

Loaded with Chinese silk and porcelain, the junks visited ports around the Indian Ocean. Here, Arab and African merchants exchanged the spices, ivory, medicines, rare woods, and pearls so eagerly sought by the Chinese imperial court.

Seven times, from 1405 to 1433, the treasure fleets set off for the unknown. These seven great expeditions brought a vast web of trading links ” from Taiwan to the Persian Gulf ” under Zheng He’s imperial control. This took place half a century before the first Europeans, rounding the tip of Africa in frail Portuguese caravels, discovered the Indian Ocean.

His humble tomb

Zheng He (1371-1433), or Cheng Ho, is arguably China’s most famous navigator. Starting from the beginning of the fifteenth century, he set out seven times. For 28 years, he traveled more than 50,000 km and visited over 37 countries, including Singapore. Zheng He died in the tenth year Ming emperor Xuande’s (1433) reign, and was buried in the southern outskirts of Bull’s Head Hill (Niushou) in Nanjing.

In 1983, during the 580th anniversary of Zheng He’s voyage, his tomb was restored. The new tomb was built on the site of the original tomb and reconstructed according to the customs of Islamic teachings.

At the entrance to the tomb is a Ming-style structure, which houses the memorial hall. Inside are paintings of the man himself and his navigation maps. To get to the tomb, there are newly laid stone platforms and steps. The stairway consists of 28 stone steps divided into four sections, with each section having seven steps. This represents Zheng He’s seven journeys to the west. Inscribed on top of the tomb are the Arabic words Allahu Akbar (God is Great). 

Other developments supported this trend, the most important being:

The invention of the silicon chip (1958-59). Subsequent improvements have so miniaturized computer components and compressed data that data transmission is now practically instantaneous. When combined with Web browsers, search engines, and the Internet, access to financial and other data can be exploited to its full potential. The U.S. Congress’ approval of Internet commerce and the falling prices of home computers and phone calls was a boon for transnational corporations (TNCs). Now they can micromanage their far-flung operations, direct money to the best economic opportunity, avoid taxes and financial losses, cripple unions and labor gains, skirt environmental legislation, and find other “creative” ways to increase profits.

The deregulation of financial capital (1973). This was signaled by abandoning the Bretton Woods system of fixed currency exchange rates, which had been maintained by America since 1944 and supported by its adherence to the gold standard, in favor of letting the market determine a currency’s value. Now that governments could no longer control the outflow of national currency, TNCs were free to move it as they wished.

Breaking the large banks’ and insurance companies’ monopoly on providing financial loans. With the rise of the bond market in the late 1960s, securitization of home mortgages in the 1970s, and “junk bonds” and the securitization of the international debt market in the 1980s, the current phase of globalization quickly blossomed.

These developments opened once-closed markets to millions of individual investors and mutual fund managers whose first concern is profit. As a result: “Not only can investors now buy and sell stocks and bonds from all over the world, not only can they now do that buying and selling from their home computers, but Internet brokerage sites are now giving them-for free-the information and analytical tools to make those trades, without ever having to call a broker. The more people do that, the more they will demand more information and analyses about different economies and companies, and the more easily they will move their money around, punishing the bad performers and rewarding the good ones.”¹

The underlying philosophy of increasing profits meshed nicely with a firm belief in social Darwinism. Developing and then applying “economic” Darwinism was a logical outgrowth. Just as individuals and species survive by adapting and becoming stronger, so companies survive by means of rapid adaptation.

This can take the form of corporate mergers or understandings, paying lower wages to and providing few if any benefits for overseas workers, and justifying everything in terms of increased efficiency. A new vocabulary has emerged for such activities: downsizing, outsourcing, streamlining, business restructuring or re-engineering, cost rationalization, retrenchment, redundancy, rationalization, risk minimization, profit alignment …

Benefits and Drawbacks

Those who dream of vast legions of Chinese consumers assert that globalization will make China a more open society. First, they say, Beijing’s official monopoly on information will end because foreign and local investors must have access to the Internet. Internal dissident groups can use it to contact sympathizers and publicize their causes at home and abroad.² Second, as China is drawn further into the world community, Beijing will have to adhere to international business law and treaties on workers’ rights, working conditions, fair payment, and so on. It also will have to adjust to globalization’s driving economic philosophy of neo-liberalization, which means liberalizing the economy, privatizing state-owned businesses and utilities, opening the financial and banking sectors, establishing transparency and accountability, and providing accurate financial data. Supposedly, such reforms will counteract China’s tendency to put politics and ideology above all other concerns. Third, those Chinese who work with foreign investors will learn about democracy, individuality, personal responsibility, human rights, governmental accountability, and how people in other countries actually live. In addition, foreign investment will open up new opportunities for Chinese entrepreneurs and those who want to improve their lives. They might even be paid above the normal hourly or daily wage, and thus can send money home to help their families.

Such arguments can be applied to many developing countries with only slight variations. These arguments sound great and really do have some merit, but reality sometimes does not conform to theoretical expectations. The following examples are by no means confined to the countries mentioned.

In Mexico, economic development is concentrated in Mexico City and along the northern border with America. The agricultural sector is largely ignored, despite the large numbers of people involved in it. Looking for debt relief, foreign investment, and entrance into the North American Free Trade Association (NAFTA), the government gutted Article 27 of its constitution, which made all communal land belonging to indigenous communities off-limits to foreigners and TNCs. It had to do this because America and Canada want access to Mexico’s untapped wealth, most of which is under indigenous-held land. The result was the Zapatista uprising on January 1, 1994, which continues to enjoy wide support, and a host of problems that drove the 71-year old ruling party from power in 2000.

In northern Thailand, villagers untouched by Bangkok’s modernization and development can see how their urban counterparts live thanks to television. Hoping to reap some of the benefits, some families sell their daughters to Bangkok’s brothels. Large sectors of Thai society and the government silently support this, finding an easy way out of this moral dilemma by saying that it is the girls’ karma. The result is an out-of-control AIDS epidemic and a booming sex-tourism business based upon the unbelievable exploitation of young women. Neighboring Cambodia has the same problem, while many Russian women see prostitution as the key to the good life.

In Ecuador, Amazonian Indian tribes and other affected peoples sued Texaco in an American court (1993) to force it to clean up the contamination it left behind. Texaco, which no longer operates in Ecuador, dumped “4.3 million gallons per day of toxic oil waste water over a period of 20 years … [but] claims the dumping caused no appreciable damage.” It also left behind more than 300 open waste pits contaminated with heavy metals and other carcinogenic compounds. “In their lawsuit, the plaintiffs cite a wave of deadly cancers, skin lesions, birth defects and other abnormalities among the areas indigenous peoples, and massive die-offs of plants, crops, and animals from air and groundwater pollution as well as poisonous “black rain.” In some villages near polluted water sources, the rate of cancer is 100 times higher than the historical norm.” The case has yet to be resolved.³ There are similar problems with Shell in Nigeria, Nike in Indonesia, Union Carbide in India, and Rio Tinto in Papua New Guinea.

Areas of Concern

Agriculture. The Green Revolution of the 1960s globalized agriculture and introduced the concept of “cash crops.” It also brought the promise of higher crop yields, reduced malnutrition, and rural development. However, along with it came traditional crop varieties and farmers displaced by agribusiness and hard-currency-earning cash cops, expensive imported fertilizers and pesticides, increased land distribution inequity, foreign corporate patenting of seeds and crop strains developed by local farmers over the centuries, and the diversion of financial and natural resources to agribusiness.

All of this undermined local agriculture, a devastating blow to indigenous farmers. Even worse, the Food and Agriculture Organization says that about 75 percent of all plant species have become extinct. In more than 80 of the 154 countries surveyed in 1995, this loss was attributed to “the spread of modern, commercial agriculture and the introduction of new varieties of crops.”⁴

Medicine. On February 1, 2001, America threatened to complain to the World Trade Organization about Brazil’s national and highly successful AIDS treatment program. By producing local and cheap generic drugs and delivering them for free, Brazil has halved its AIDS victims’ death rates and substantially reduced treatment costs. On April 19, 2001, after a protracted battle in South African courts, several pharmaceutical TNCs dropped their quest to block the South African government’s plan to import cheap generic drugs to treat its AIDS victims. Cilpa, an Indian company that produces cheap generic drugs for AIDS victims, routinely faces pressure from pharmaceutical companies and their governments to cease and desist.

In each case, the charge is the same: violation of the intellectual property and patent rights held by Western pharmaceutical companies. That these same companies are among the richest in the world, and that their clients are among the poorest countries in the world, is rarely mentioned. Prices have been reduced as a result of such negative publicity, but many victims in Asia and Africa still cannot afford the medicine they need to survive.

In the Amazon, researchers have discovered many plants and herbs with medicinal value from the indigenous peoples. However, most of them sell the data to the large pharmaceutical companies and both become rich. The Amazon’s people do not benefit; in fact, their situation deteriorates as even more TNCs descend upon them.

National Sovereignty. The rise of 24-hour computerized and almost instantaneous financial transactions and currency speculation makes it hard to know who is in control. Governments face an impossible situation: “Central banks and elected governments [are] regularly compelled to choose between [their obligations to domestic economies and the new force of the global market] … This was often a ‘no win’ choice for political leaders since yielding to the market’s idea of ‘sound economic policy’ frequently required them to depress their own economies, increasing unemployment or cutting social spending.”⁵

George Soros, perhaps the best known of all individual and institutional currency speculators, has humbled governments with this strategy. Working together, they humiliated the Bank of England in 1992 and destroyed Europe’s Exchange Rate Mechanism in 1993. Malaysian Prime Minister Mohamad blames Soros for the Asian economic crisis of 1997-98. No individual currency speculator can do much on his or her own, but when big players like Soros begin to move, others jump on the bandwagon. The results show who is really in charge of a nation’s economy and, to a certain extent, social policy.

Structural adjustment programs (SAPs) are another controversial matter. In the 1980s, America began tying its aid to World Bank and IMF economic prescriptions and reforms (reducing inflation, promoting exports, meeting debt-payment schedules, and decreasing budget deficits) and to facilitating increased American trade and investment.

However, they generally entail “severe reductions in government spending and employment, higher interest rates, currency devaluation, lower real wages, sale of government enterprises, reduced tariffs, and liberalization of foreign investment regulations…. But while government balance sheets may improve, SAPs have failed to establish a base for sustainable, balanced economic development … [and] have bankrupted local industries, increased dependency on food imports, gutted social services, and fostered a widening gap between rich and poor.”⁶

In addition, they tend to keep poor countries in debt, for new loans are needed to pay off existing debts and to qualify for future loans. Despite this, they remain the usual “cure” for countries seeking international financial aid and investment. This could change if anti-SAP protests continue, and if demands that lending institutions become more transparent and make allowances for social policies succeed.

Political Development and Human Rights. Decades of Western investment in oil-rich Middle Eastern and resource-rich African countries appears to have strengthened dictators of all persuasions. Instead of supporting human and religious rights in Chinese-occupied Tibet and Sinkiang, not to mention in China itself, American business interests persuaded Washing-ton to grant China permanent normal trade relations on September 19, 2000. Thus, China’s violations of human, labor, and religious rights no longer has to concern the American business community. Unfortunately, this seems to be the rule rather than the exception.

Conclusion

Global capitalism, based upon unfettered consumerism and the idea that continued profits through continued growth leads to ultimate happiness, now runs the world’s economy: “The culture-ideology of consumerism is the set of beliefs and practices that persuades people that consumption far beyond the satisfaction of physical needs is, literally, at the center of meaningful existence and that the best organized societies are those that place consumer satisfaction at the center of all their major institutions.”⁷

If this is true, human unhappiness is sure to increase. Poor people viewing the “real” lives of the rich through foreign television programs or movies see a lifestyle and possessions forever beyond their rich. Workers face constant job insecurity. Rural migrants in cities have their hopes dashed when they cannot find jobs. The media report the rise of sweat-shop and child labor, environmental devastation, a loss of corporate accountability and responsibility to their home bases, a hollowing of hard-won labor gains by threats of relocating overseas, and declining taxes as TNCs juggle their books.

Even those who benefit cannot feel secure. Their job might be outsourced in the interest of higher profits, abolished by corporate streamlining, or lost because they cannot acquire new skills fast enough. Shareholder dissatisfaction can destroy their companies, and job-related demands upon their time can make a normal family life and friendships impossible.

In sum: “Given their narrow premise, market economists never attempted to calculate all of the collateral damage that could also be attributed to the liberalization of finance-the capital investments destroyed when viable factories were abruptly abandoned, the economic output lost when economies grew more slowly, the public welfare costs from rising unemployment or declining wages, the instability for companies and nations caused by the sifting money values.”⁸

Economic globalization does have its good and bad points. But its emphasis on always-increasing profits as the way to ultimate happiness and meaning in our lives is misguided, for how can what is transient give lasting satisfaction? It has nothing to offer those who fall behind but dreams that will be fulfilled “sometime in the future.” And one day they will demand the fulfillment of those dreams…

Footnotes

1. Thomas L Friedman, The Lexus and the Olive Tree: Understanding Globalization (New York: Anchor, 2000), 71.
2. China’s first “cyber-dissident” was tried in Shanghai on December 4, 1998, “on charges of subversion for having given the addresses of 30,000 Chinese computer users to VIP Reference, a journal that Chinese dissidents publish in the United States.”
3. Ibid., 68.
4. Cristobal Bonifaz and Joseph C. Kohn, “Amazon Tribal Leaders Blast U.S. Judge For Blocking Texaco Pollution Case,” 31 May 2001. Online at: www.amazonwatch.org.
5. The State of the World’s Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, Chapter 1: “The State of Diversity,” (Leipzig: 1996). Online at: http://web.icppgr.fao.org/ wrlmap_e.htm.
6. William Greider. One World, Ready or Not (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1997), 242.
7. Carol Welch and Jason Oringer, “Structural Adjust-ment Programs,” Foreign Policy In Focus, vol. 3, 3 (Apr. 1998). Online at: www.foreignpolicy-infocus.org/briefs/ vol3/v3n3sap.html.
8. Leslie Sklair, The Transnational Capital Class (Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 2001), 4-5. 8 Greider, One World, 250.

Other References

• Bales, Kevin. Disposable People: New Slavery in the Global Economy. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California, 2000.
• Barnet, Richard J. and John Cavanagh, Global Dreams: Imperial Corporations and the New World Order. New York: Touchstone, 1995.
• Korten, David C. When Corporations Rule the World. 2d ed.
• Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press, 2001. Madeley, John.
• Big Business, Poor People: The Impact of Transnational Corporations on the World’s Poor. New York: Zed Books, 2000.

Interpretations, assumptions and expectations

In situations of cross-cultural communication it is not only what happens or what is said that is important, it is how participants interpret the interaction which ultimately counts. It is this interpretation which guides our perception of meaning and our memory of other people. Most of us draw conclusions about others from what they say, or rather from what we think they mean. The gap between what we think others mean and what they intend to say can occur in any communication. This gap is often wider in cross-cultural contexts. This is evident when there is a lack of knowledge of the common language of communication, say English, which may he a second or foreign language to one or both sides. Less obviously the gap is often wider because in intercultural communication participants may not realize that they are using language in different ways which go beyond purely linguistic competence. Our consideration of cross-cultural communication needs to include: discourse competence in which conversations or texts may be structured using different principles; sociolinguistic competence in which language users may draw on differing ideas about who may speak to whom, on what sorts of topics, on what kinds of occasion, in what manner and for what purposes; cultural competence in which cultural norms and beliefs are used to interpret actions and language behaviour and to attribute values and interpretations to interaction. The problem is that our own perception of these aspects of language use is influenced by our own cultural background. It is all too easy to be unconsciously ethnocentric about such matters and to assume that our way is normal, logical or better than those ways used by speakers who come from other cultural backgrounds.

An analogy illustrates this point. In Figure 1 the middle item may be interpreted as a letter B or as a number 13, depending on whether it is read vertically or horizontally. Our interpretation depends on the context of what system we expect to use, in this example an alphabetical or numerical context.

In learning English, students need to be constantly alert for shifts in meaning as participants use varying systems and principles of interpretation. Objectively, the form and shape of the middle item in Figure 1 has not changed. Subjectively, the meaning can he completely different when the figure is seen in an alphabetical or numerical context. Different contexts lead to different expectations which in turn lead to different interpretations of the same object. Similarly, the context of our own culture may lead us to interpret another person’s words, behaviour or attitude quite differently from the way in which that person intends them to be interpreted. We may not be aware of the patterns of interpretation which members of a particular culture use.

In our own culture we can afford to take much communication for granted. Since childhood we have learned what word, normally mean, how and why things are said. Our own culture has provided us with a framework of working principles and systems of interpretation which most of us automatically use every day. We do not need to work out how to use greetings or apologies, how to respond to invitations or compliments, how to take turns or interrupt others, or what silences might mean. In learning to use a foreign language, however, we need to be aware that speakers of the target language may be using quite different assumptions and systems for such ways of using language. We need to become aware of alternatives. We need to expect the unexpected. We need to check our interpretations of what is apparently obvious.

Levels of communication

Language is like an iceberg: some aspects are visible with fairly obvious meaning, but a larger part is hidden or taken for granted.

The greater the foreign language skill in pronunciation, grammar or vocabulary, the greater the danger that the other hidden levels of communication may come into play. Participants on both sides will assume that they mean the same thing by different gestures or patterns of discourse, but in fact they often have quite different interpretations. Hearers often that if a speaker has a reasonable level of skill in the obvious areas of words, grammar and pronunciation then the speaker will he equally skilled in the other kinds of competencies. Often this is not at all the case, especially if the speaker’s foreign language learning has concentrated on language competence. Many learners of English have focussed their main attention on learning words and grammar. In many foreign language classrooms little attention is given to the role of culture and cross-cultural communication.

Words

For many students, learning a foreign language is all about learning words. The students’ aim seems to be largely to acquire a knowledge of a wide vocabulary, concentrating on new and difficult words. These students may not realize the importance of learning new meanings to known words, especially apparently simple words. However, simple words often turn out to have unexpected cultural meanings, as the following dialogue noted in Britain shows.

In this situation, A is an Arabic speaker, a visitor to Britain. She was only expecting a cup of tea and was puzzled by the offer of food. The British hostess (B) was upset that A had already eaten since she had, she thought, specifically invited A for food. The source of the misunderstanding is the word ‘tea’ which in Britain, especially among lower social classes, often means an early evening light meal. Although A speaks excellent English and is, in fact, an experienced university English teacher in her own country, she had not realized that a simple word like ‘tea’ can have different cultural meanings.

Similarly, ‘simple’ common words used in idioms can often catch out learners who are used to concentrating on ‘difficult’ words. The word ‘house’, for instance, takes on a variety of unexpected meanings in such examples as ‘The comedian really set the house on fire’ (the comedian got a good response from the audience, or ‘house’), The drinks are on the house tonight’ (the owner or manager will pay for all the customers’ drinks), ‘After the minister’s speech the House rose at nine’ (the members of the House of Commons, in the British Parliament, went home at nine o’clock).

Grammar

Grammar can often present unexpected difficulties in cross-cultural communication when learners of another language have not worked out the relationship between grammatical form and language function. This happened in the following example in Britain where a British person (B) wants to visit a Chinese student (C) in her room.

The problem ‘here is that the expression ‘do you mind it’ is a polite form of a request which anticipates a negative response, No, I don’t mind…’. C realizes that this is a request but responds only to the function, ‘Yes’ (meaning ‘Yes, do come in’). Since C has not responded with the expected negative grammatical form this leaves B to understand that she is busy (‘Yes, I do mind, I am busy at the moment’) . Fortunately, B did not leave immediately after C’s first response and the misunderstanding was cleared up.

Pronunciation

Clearly when words are mispronounced this can cause problems in cross-cultural communication. This usually happens when speakers have poor pronunciation or confuse words. Less obvious problems can crop up when fluent speakers of English, for instance, are influenced by local varieties of the language. This would be perfectly acceptable in local situations but can cause difficulties when English is used in international contexts. For example, Malaysian speakers of English may stress the second syllables of words like ‘colleague’ or ‘management’ where speakers of other varieties of English expect to hear the stress on the first syllable. Since the difference in stress is also accompanied by changes in the pronunciation of stressed or unstressed vowels (schwa) this can cause momentary confusion. More seriously, hearers’ perceptions of speakers of a language like English are influenced by the fact that stress and intonation commonly convey attitudes. Thus in English a heavy falling intonation can mean definiteness, abruptness or rudeness. Unfortunately, Arabic speakers who learn English have often not been taught this and they transfer Arabic falling intonation patterns to English. One result is that English hearers sometimes perceive the other group (wrongly) as being aggressive or pushy. A solution is to raise the learners’ awareness of the meanings of various intonation patterns in English and the attitudes which might be interpreted from their use.

Body Language

The same gestures or body language may express quite different meanings in different cultures. In Northern Europe yes’ is generally signalled by a downward head movement or up-and- down nodding. In contrast, in Turkey and neighbouring countries a common gesture for ‘no’ is an upward movement of the head, easily mistaken for the European ‘yes’ by those who are unfamiliar with Turkish people. Further scope for misunderstanding arises because the Turkish ‘no’ is often accompanied by a click of the tongue. This noise and the upward head movement means ‘you are stupid’ in Britain! There are cultural differences in the use of space, e.g. how close to others people expect to stand or sit. Many Latin Americans or people from the Middle East prefer to come quite close to their hearers when talking. This shows friendliness and solidarity. North Americans or Northern Europeans, on the other hand, tend to keep more space between themselves and hearers. This shows their awareness of the other person’s individuality and need for personal space.When speakers from the USA and Saudi Arabia, for example, come together they may feel uncomfortable without knowing the reason. Both parties unconsciously try to maintain their own natural polite and friendly distances, The American may feel the Arab is aggressive or pushy when the latter comes close, while the Arab may believe the American is unfriendly or untrustworthy if that person keeps moving away.

Further cross-cultural mismatches can occur in eye contact. Whether and how listeners look at a speaker’s eyes varies from culture to culture. One contrast seems to be that in Britain and the Middle East listeners gaze at a speaker’s eyes to show that they are listening and showing respect whereas in many parts of Africa and Asia this can signify disrespect or anger and be interpreted as insulting. On the other hand, the African or Asian manner of showing politeness, respect and honour to a speaker – by lowering one’s gaze or looking below the other’s eyes – can be interpreted as disinterest, suspicion or guilt by British or Middle Eastern listeners.

Even a smile can cause problems, as an American teacher in Taiwan discovered. One of her students arrived late. He was smiling. She became angry and said, ‘You are late and it’s not funny. Take that smile off your face. He then became very upset because she had publicly become angry with him. Later she realized that a smile is not always a sign of humour – the student was smiling with embarrassment. Such potential sources of difficulty are not likely to be pointed out by participants in cross- cultural situations. Openly drawing attention to misunderstandings may be thought impolite or over-direct unless the speakers are well known to each other.

Discourse Patterns

Speakers from different cultures make use of different discourse patterns in the way they structure information or interpret what others say. Even silence is used to structure discourse: participants know by the length of a pause that a speaker has finished speaking and they can take a turn. However, the exact timing of such turn taking can vary. Among many Greek speakers the pauses between turns are minimal; speakers alternate rapidly and overlaps between one speaker and the next are common and arc accepted as showing solidarity between speakers who understand each other. In contrast, in Scandinavia and Finland such pauses are often one or two seconds longer as members of those cultures show respect and perhaps think carefully about what they want to say. In cross-cultural situations between these two different groups it is very likely that English will be used as a common language of communication. Greek speakers report that they feel there are long silences between themselves and Scandinavians, which leads them to wonder if they have said something wrong or (given that Scandinavians are often highly competent in English) whether they have made a language mistake. As a result the Greeks feel rather insecure (unnecessarily). The Scandinavians meanwhile feel that the Greeks keep interrupting them. They feel (wrongly) that the Greeks are aggressive.

Important cultural differences can emerge when we consider where a speaker puts the main point. Chinese speakers frequently put the main point near the end of what they say. First they establish common ground and give relevant background information before they lead the hearer up to the main point. Sometimes this point only gets a brief mention – after all, it will be clear to the listener familiar with this discourse pattern where the argument is going. This kind of inductive discourse pattern seems to be oriented to the hearer. Many British and American speakers, in contrast, use a more deductive discourse pattern which is more oriented to the speaker in this second pattern the speaker usually gives an early indication of what is to come. Often the main point conies right at the beginning, especially if the speaker is answering a question in a formal situation. The idea seems to be to get to the heart of the matter quickly. Background information or supporting arguments follow. Since the hearer already has a good idea of the main point, it is clear how this background information will be relevant. Each of these contrasting discourse patterns is completely valid and can he taken for granted in its own cultural context. In cross-cultural situations the differences can cause problems. British people listening to Chinese speakers expect the main point to come quickly. Not hearing one, the British may become impatient or lose concentration and miss the point when it finally comes. Some British listeners report that they think the Chinese keep ‘beating around the bush’, they go round and round but don’t seem to get to the point. Chinese listeners expecting the background first often feel they do not get this information from British speakers so they sometimes miss the significance of the main point or do not see the logic behind it. It would help if both sides realized that for the British the background comes from the main point, while for the Chinese the background leads up to the main idea.

Sociolinguistic Uses

Sociolinguistic uses of language relate closely to discourse patterns, but there is greater emphasis on the social context and variation. For instance, to ask a person’s age, how much they earn or whether they are married is acceptable in all cultures, but in very different circumstances. To ask such questions of a stranger is normal in Turkey or China hut quite unexpected in Britain, America or Australia. Western tourists in Turkey or China may not appreciate the friendliness behind such questions. Instead they may think that local people are too curious about what they think are private matters or questions for job interviews. They would prefer to talk about the weather or their jobs (but these may not be such interesting topics in Turkey or China).

Part of the challenge in learning a foreign language is to learn how to manage [he sociolinguistic uses of the language. At a simple level this means understanding how greetings vary across the world. In China, ‘Have you eaten?’ is a greeting, not an indirect invitation to a meal. In Fiji or Malaysia, ‘Where are you going?’ is not always an enquiry about a person’s destination, but again is a greeting. In Botswana, a greeting is ‘How did you wake up?’. Each language also has many informal greetings. An Indonesian student in Britain (I) did not realize this when greeted by a British teacher (B) at a bus stop:

B Hello. How’s it going?

I I’m going home.

This left B puzzled. His greeting had not been returned and he wondered why the student mentioned he was going home. Later he realized the student was about to catch the bus.

The sociolinguistic uses of compliments can cause dilemmas about the nature of the expected response, as this dialogue between a Chinese speaker (C) and a British visitor (B) shows.

C Your Chinese is very good.

B Oh, thank you

This dialogue looks harmless until we consider what each speaker is thinking. C thinks B must be very boastful: B’s Chinese is not, in fact, good and C expected B to say, ‘No, no, it’s very bad’, since in Chinese a compliment should be rejected to show modesty. B is much happier: he has been complimented and he has thanked the Chinese speaker for his kind thoughts; he is not, in fact, immodest but is following the English rule that a response to a compliment often relates to the complimentary, not to the content.

Cultural Presuppositions

In many instances of cross-cultural communication it is important to understand the cultural presuppositions which lie behind speakers’ words and their expectations and interpretations. For instance, a Chinese student (C) asks a British person (B) for help.

C Can you help me?

B I would like to help you….but I’m afraid I can’t because….

When C heard the first words she was very happy, believing she would get help; when she heard the second phrase she was very disappointed. She thought, ‘Why did you raise my hopes and then let me down?’ She concluded that B was hypocritical. It would help if she understood the cultural presuppositions that B is using: first, to show good will and kindness by saying he would like to help, then moving to the main point that he cannot help before explaining why not. A Chinese speaker would probably give the reasons for not helping first before concluding that it was impossible: this would prepare the hearer for the bad news.

Many Chinese and Latin Americans respond to personal invitations by accepting to come, but when the day arrives they may not turn up. This has left many British and North American hosts puzzled, thinking: why did they promise to come, then break their promises? Can they he trusted? But this interpretation misses the Chinese or Latin American cultural presupposition behind their reply: it is better to show good will, by accepting and perhaps not go, than to refuse and bring immediate disappointment to the potential host. This shows regard for the hosts face, and for that of the person invited, who does not have to provide an excuse for refusing the invitation. Thus the Chinese and Latin Americans in this situation base their reply on social values, while the British and North Americans put truth values first. If this is understood, the situation becomes easier on both sides, although there will still be further variation depending on whether the invitation is by telephone, letter, or face to face, on whether it is a group invitation and how well the people know each other.

Fundamentally, relevant cultural presuppositions relate to how members of a culture view the world, how they think about human nature, time, space and society. Also crucial are the balance between individual and social identity, the role of language in social relations and getting things done, and how concepts of politeness and face are realized in interaction. Probably all of these is important in all cultures, hut the nature and emphasis of each may vary.

Some Caveats

When we consider cross-cultural communication it is natural to consider cross-cultural differences but we should first remember that cultures have much in common: we are all members of humanity, there has been extensive interaction between cultural groups for centuries and for most of the time most people get along very well with each other. Differences and problems should not obscure common elements.

Secondly, we need to remind ourselves that generalities about cultural groups do not always apply to individuals. There is always individual variation even in those cultures which emphasize collective thinking and action. Every culture has some balance between unity and diversity, between the individual and the group, between expected conventional responses and freedom of choice.

Thirdly, while general insights are very helpful we also need to bear in mind that different situations elicit different responses even in the same culture. Situational variation is common and much cultural activity is determined by context even in those cultures which stress principles which apparently transcend contextual variation.

Fourthly, in thinking about cross-cultural communication we should avoid a tendency to think about ‘us’ and ‘them’- For example, it is very useful to analyse some cultures (like British, French, German, American) as being individualistic, since they put emphasis on the individual, and other cultures (say Turkish, Chinese, Japanese, Indian) as being collective, since they tend to emphasize the group. But in using such binary categories we should remember that any culture probably has both individualistic and collective tendencies – it is a question of emphasis and relative balance.

Some Conclusions

We have looked at cross-cultural communication from a foreign language perspective. We have emphasized that it is not only cross-cultural language and behaviour which count but also participants interpretations of situations and people, since this interpretation often frames perceived meaning. Our own culture provides us with systems of interpreting language and interaction and in cross-cultural situations we need to be aware of these systems and endeavour to transcend them. Here, we have used a framework of different levels of communication to discuss how the more obvious levels of words, grammar and pronunciation often obscure the crucial role of body language, discourse patterns, sociolinguistic uses of language and cultural presuppositions. In face-to-face communication all these levels usually work simultaneously, in combination,

Speakers’ or hearers’ attitudes can be influenced by their interpretations, which in turn can be influenced by their own cultural systems. There can be a vicious circle here: cultural expectations can lead to different language use, which can lead to miscommunication. This in turn can lead to wrong assessments and stereotypes of participants from other cultures, which cart reinforce or mould cultural expectations, and so on. However, a major way to break such vicious circles is to be aware of possible difficulties, to have some knowledge of other cultures, and to try to develop intercultural skills.

To finish on a positive note, it is worth remembering that most of the time people from different cultures do get on with each other: as members of different cultures we share a common humanity. Good will and a friendly smile can overcome many barriers. Patience, trust and sensitivity are part of an international language of humanity which goes beyond words.

FURTHER READING ON THE TOPIC BY THE AUTHORS

• CORTAZZI, M. (1990) ‘Cultural and Educational Expectations in the Language Classroom’ in B. Harrison (ed.) Culture in the Language Classroom, pp.54-65, London: Macmillan.
• JIN, L. CORTAZZI, M. (1993) ‘Cultural Orientation and Academic Language Use’ in I). Graddol, L. Thompson, M.Byram (eds.) Language and Culture, pp.84-97, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
• CORTAZZI, M. JiN, L. (1994) ‘Narrative Analysfis: applying linguistics to cultural models of learning’ in D.Graddol, J. Swann (eds.) Evaluating Language, pp.75-90, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
• CORTAZZI. M.; JiN, L. (1994) ‘Ways with Words – Chinese students’ learning of English vocabulary’in D. Dai (ed.) Papers from the Second International Symposium on ELT, pp.1 5-28 Taipei: ETAROC.
• JIN, L; CORTAZZI, M. (1995) ‘A Cultural Synergy Model for Academic Language Use’ in P. Bruthiaux; T. Boswood; B. Du-Babcock(eds.) Explorations in English for Professional Communication,pp.41-56, Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong.
• JiN, L. CORTAZZI, M. (1996) ‘Changes in Vocabulary Learning in China’ in H. Coleman & L. Cameron (eds.) Change and Language,Clevedon: Multilingual Matters,
• CORTAZZI, M JiN, L. (1996) ‘Cultures of Learning: Language Classrooms in China’ in H. Coleman (ed.) Society and the Language Classroom, Cambridge: CUP.
• JIN, L. CORTAZZI, M. (1996) ‘This way is very different from Chinese Ways’, EAP needs and Academic Culture in T. Dudley-Evans. M. Hewings (eds.) Evaluation and Course Design in EAP.London: Macmillan