People give meaning and react to certain words differently depending on the social meaning they hold for such statements. This means that communication between two people coming from diverse regions and cultures vary depending on their perception. This perception is resultant from communal interaction between a character and society. This essay focuses on communication between two people characterized by social and cultural differences.
There are many instances where social effects play part in communication. Solitary is the articulation of certain words. Citizens from unlike cultures behave and act in diverse ways in regards to communication. The sundry emanates from diversity in culture (Althobaiti, 2014). This can be explained through inter-sectionality and social-cultural theory. Therefore, any theory is destined to render solution to problems that the society may be going through. Theories application will go hand in hand with shared relations amid members in a community. Different cultures will apply theory in a diverse way to explain various circumstances depending on the value attributed to certain context/issues. According to Ledbetter and sparks, a presumption intends to give details and sustain a claim. The same case applies to symbolic Interactionism theory, which denotes that communiqué is a product of collective interactions. For this document, a lot of weight will be laid upon cultural differences that affect communication and interaction amongst people (Atkinson, 2015). Communication challenges could also been accelerated by the diversity in regards to social life and lifestyle. The white family belonged to the upper class of the community while the servant came from lower-class.
Definitions of Concepts
A variety of concepts emerges through the exploitation of this assumption to evaluate the scenario. The primary concept denotes individuals as being an element of a greater society. He/she is regarded to be a cooperative creature that has to interact with others as a means of gaining identity. This infers that the behavior and actions depends on acquired knowledge from previous experiences. This concept is defined in this text as the driving force in determining human reaction to issues faced in this particular scenario. This outlines the nominal definition of self as used in investigation (Baran & Davis, 2012). Self is a unit in the sum total that determines the direction undertaken by the social order. However, society dictates certain features such as behavioral attributes and communication strategies. For instance, if two characters are drawn in a conversation then they are most likely to address each other on the context of cultural background. The problem arises when one person belongs to a dissimilar civilization from the other. Their behaviors and actions are depends on acquired acquaintance and abilities from their preceding attraction and connection to society.
The next model applied is the cooperative wellbeing or the public. In this case, the native is defined as the people or milieu a being interrelate with. This means that the prevailing situation will determine the direction taken by one party towards the other. A personage is an element in the component an action that exposes them to influence from group interactions. Creatures are lively mortal and interrelate with the surroundings at diverse stages (Denzin & Faust, 2011). Societal classes established in the civilization are subjected to ideas that tend to set down others classes. For example, one class may believe and act in manner that it shows conceit in consideration to others. At this point, the negative influence may tactically destroy the relationship that persists between social classes. The society for that reason controls our thinking and views towards others.
Relationships among Concepts
The definition of various concepts above brings in an element of change in the interaction or mediation endeavors. For the first concept that is self, the definition intended to connect an individual to the environment where he or she exist in. The self is a creation of traditions and racial believes and ethnicity. For instance, the whites conform to a diverse culture away from the blacks. This invokes the sentiment of superiority and worthiness for a person. The reasons as to why the white family despised the maid are because they viewed her as lesser human being. Therefore, the interface amid the two natives was characterized by hatred and animosity. An example of animosity played against groups includes government neglecting the foreign culture due to their remote practices. These foreigners may come from a different country and on accounts of race, government decide to deny them an opportunity to exercise their practices. It is unfair to mistreat an individual based on their race and social status as observed in the scenario. However, the interaction is dependent on the mode of interaction established by the two cultures (DeWeerdt, 2012).
The second model talked about culture and human actions. Experienced gained in the ancient times controls behavioral attributes in persons. This insinuates that the behavior was intrinsic and uneasy to end. In addition, factors that have played big roles in shaping the outcome of the story include racial discrimination and intercultural communication (Farrell, 2012). Racial discrimination comes into play when the white lady together with her family accuses the maid of bad pronunciation. They were incognizant of the dissimilarities amid their diverse civil and cultural background. The erudition structures are diverse amid cultures. Therefore, when two citizens come close to one another differencess are deemed to arise.
The limitation of this theory is that it treats an individual as a social character who is in separable from the community. This means that behavioral attributes of an individual is used to define a community. Some people may possess unique characters and behaviors not common to all people. It would therefore be unfair to generalize characters as the theory dictates. Moreover, the theory fall short of expounding on the factors that affects social interactions. There are numerous factors that affect the manner in which individual view and categorize issues (Ferris & Stein, 2010). This means that failure to consider these factors results to inaccurate conclusion about a certain event or occasion as it arises.
The proponents of this theory are concerned about the close contact and influence of daily activities upon individual actions. Therefore, an act occurs through a process that is closely related to the daily activities carried out by participants. On the other side, critics concentrate on the impressionistic research performed through this process. This insinuates that the theory involves framework used by other theorists. This makes it dependent on information derived from other sources. It is also hard to test the theory because the conclusion is reached at through observation. Moreover, interactionist theory is limited in terms of focus where it concentrates on small-group or individual social life. Therefore, the theory will not help researchers dealing with a large group of people (Films for the Humanities & Sciences (Firm), Films Media Group, & Online Classroom Ltd, 2009). Lastly, proposition made by the theory cannot stand alone without reference to other sources. This infers that interactionist theory exists in the midst of other theories an action that raises criticism. This is why the theory is not used widely by researcher in the modern world.
Implications for the Area of Interest
The area of interest is cultural communication between people from different races and culture. The communication is characterized by social behaviors that individuals acquired from a tender age. Growing up in the community means that a person learns the norms and attributes of his or her society. The values taught at different levels will affects interaction significantly at a later date or in the current situations. Pronunciation and use of language is also important in understanding the effects of culture on communication.
A word can be used to represent different issues or have diverse meaning along cultures (Nöth, 2011). Therefore, people may use the same word in different context and to send diverse messages to the recipient. This does not mean that the spelling of the word have to change rather the meaning across the board changes. Specifically, culture conforms to ethnicity and the values that each group holds. Therefore, two cultures may not come into an agreement in regards to various issues such as pronunciation and application of words. The theory may also be applied in the context of social integration. The coming together of various components of society influences the thinking and behavior of people in public. There is a big difference between individual action in private and in public places (RITZER, 2013). T. This is how the theory implies to the cultural and social communication.
Althobaiti, N. (2014). Corrective Feedback: A Bridge between Cognitive Interactionist and Social Interactionist Perspectives. EDUCATION, 2(10), 950-954. doi:10.12691/education-2-10-15
Atkinson, P. (2015). Rescuing Interactionism from Qualitative Research. Symbolic Interaction,38(4), 467-474. doi:10.1002/symb.183
Baran, S. J., & Davis, D. K. (2012). Mass communication theory: Foundations, ferment, and future. Australia: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Denzin, N. K., & Faust, T. (2011). Studies in symbolic interaction: Volume 37. Bingley, U.K: Emerald.
DeWeerdt, S. (2012). Culture: Diverse diagnostics. Nature, 491(7422), S18-S19. doi:10.1038/491s18a
Farrell, M. (2012). New perspectives in special education: Contemporary philosophical debates. Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge.
Ferris, K., & Stein, J. (2010). The real world: An introduction to sociology. New York: W.W. Norton.
Films for the Humanities & Sciences (Firm), Films Media Group, & Online Classroom Ltd. (2009). Making sense of sociological theory. New York, NY: Films Media Group.
Nöth, W. (2011). Comunication: the Paradigms of symmetry, antisymmetry anda asymmetry.Matrizes, 5(1), 85. doi:10.11606/issn.1982-8160.v5i1p85-107
RITZER, G. E. (2013). Sociological theory. Place of publication not identified: Mcgraw hill higher educat.