The Connection between Culture and Non-Verbal Communication - Essay Example

CULTURE AND NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION ANALYSIS The Connection between Culture and Non-verbal Communication Introduction In its wider sense, language is a component of the culture-specific behaviour. Non-verbal communication forms an important part of how people communicate with one another and is culturally influenced. How people apply different forms of non-verbal communication varies significantly based on the cultural background (Andersen, 2008). Historically, people of various cultures have had myriad distinct social problems to solve to achieve reproductive success or adapt. Such include the formation of successful social and work groups in which people apply different forms of body language to confer different messages. Universally, there is a set of psychological problems that various groups of individuals must solve to survive which highly connect with the biological imperatives. In essence, both groups and individuals must design ways of addressing the universal problems. The means developed by people and groups essentially become their culture. Therefore, culture can be referred to in this context as a shared system of socially transmitted behaviour that defines, describes and guides our ways of life, communicated from one generation to another. Every culture can be said to have its unique language, with its grammar, vocabulary, pragmatics and phonology. The specific way in which every culture develops its non-verbal language differs from that of another. The connection between culture and non-verbal communication is a reality that the essay endeavours to analyse critically. The Connection between Culture and Non-verbal Communication Just like the case with verbal communication, culture significantly influences the various forms of non-verbal communication in profound ways. The application of gestures, facial expressions, the interpersonal space, gaze, touch and body postures impacted on by cultural behaviours that differ significantly. There is a great connection between culture and gestures. The examination of the interrelationship between culture and gestures dates back to the 1936 and 1941 studies by David Efron (Berko, Rosenfeld and Samovar, 2013). In these studies, David examined the use of gestures among the Lithuanian and Sicilian Jewish immigrants who lived in the New York City. In his findings, Efron established that there were different gestures between the traditional Italians and Jews which gradually kept disappearing as people got assimilated into the American culture. Other studies by Ekman et al. in 1976 produced a documentation of the cultural differences in the use of emblematic gestures between the Americans, Japanese, and the New Guineans. It is worth noting, therefore, that the use of gestures varies across the cultural divide. Although acceptable in some cultures, certain gestures may be an abuse and completely unacceptable in another. For example, the A-OK gesture used by the Americans becomes completely obscene in many European cultures and has sexual implications. Similarly, in some cultures, placing both hands on the side of ones head and with the figures pointing upwards implies that one is angry with another. However, in some cultures it is interpreted to mean a request to have sex with someone (Esposito, 2007). Several other signs that are acceptably used in the United States could be offensive if used in other cultures. Using a finger or hand to mean ‘come here is a common practice in the United States. However, the same is a gesture used to beckon dogs in several cultures and hence an offensive sign to use for humans. While some communities use one finger to point at something, other communities perceive the gesture as being rude. The Asians thus prefer pointing using the entire hand to using one finger. The use of gestures as a form of non-verbal communication, therefore, differs with cultural orientations. While some gestures are permissible in certain cultures, they carry different unacceptable meanings in other cultural contexts. Gazing and eye contact are also distinctly used in several cultures. As a means of non-verbal communication, the gaze is highly associated with power, dominance, nurturance and affiliation. Many studies on human and non-human primates on gaze indicate that its affiliative aspect begins at infancy who learn from the adults who take care of them. Different cultures create different rules concerning visual attention and looking (Knapp and Hall, 2010). However, both affiliation and aggression are prominent behavioural tendencies for the maintenance of group stability. Several cross-cultural studies indicate differences in the rules. The Arabs, for example, have been found to gaze more directly and much longer at their partners than the Americans. In terms of gaze, cultures have been categorized into contact and noncontact cultures. The contact cultures are associated with the facilitation of contact or physical touch during interaction while the noncontact cultures engage more in gazing with more direct orientations in their interactions. For the latter, less interpersonal distance and with more touching is preferred during interactions with one another and at most implies deep affection. Studies on gaze have indicated that eye contact differs with ethnic groups. In the US, for example, there are differences in visual behaviour and gaze among the various ethnic groups. Eye contact in the mainstream Western cultures is interpreted to mean honesty and attentiveness (Kostić, Chadee and Buck, 2015). In many cultures including the Hispanic and the Asian, however, looking people in the eye when conversing is considered as being rude and disrespectful. In these cultures, women avoid direct gaze at men because it is interpreted to mean sexual interest. How people look at one another based on gender varies culturally among people. Therefore, the gaze is seen as a means of communication in certain cultures and an offensive act in others. Touch and interpersonal space are used to mean different things in different cultures. In several cultures, the elderly are used to patting the heads of children as a sign of affection and friendliness. In the Asian communities, the touching someones head is abominable. According to the Asian culture, the head is considered a sacred part that should not be touched anyhow (Leach, 2005). Different people across the cultures that allow contact use either hand to touch and transfer objects. However, in the Middle East, the left hand cannot be used to touch and transfer objects owing to its reservation for bodily hygiene. In the Muslim cultures, people of the opposite gender cannot touch one another. Besides touching, the interpersonal space culturally depends on the social relationship between individuals. Such could be public, social, intimate or personal. Although different cultures appreciate these aspects of interpersonal space, a notable difference exists in the space. Compared to the American males, the Arab men maintain a much closer interpersonal space while Latin Americans tend to interact more closely than people of European backgrounds. The interpersonal space and touch are means of non-verbal communication but differ significantly in both concept and practice across cultures. Cultural influences on many other forms of non-verbal communication including body movements and posture notably exist. There are cultural differences in the semantics that are attached to body posture and movements. The evidence obtained from several cultural studies unanimously indicates that culture plays a critical role in moulding non-verbal behaviours. These actions constitute a primary part of the communication process. The movement of arms and the head have different interpretations across the cultures (Leach, 2005). In some cultures, moving the head up and down is used as a sign of agreement while moving it sideways is a way of showing disagreement. However, these movements have no basis of communication in other cultures. Facial expressions are a non-verbal communication that is universally applied though with notable among different cultures. They are used to express emotion for both people and animals. Various researchers on the use of facial expressions as an innate aspect of humanity and animals have established that all cultures approve the emotions expressed through facial expressions (Esposito, 2007). Depending on the culture, different expressions may be taken to portray happiness, fear, anger, disgust, surprise or even sadness. The universality of the cultural interpretation of these distinct emotions that are expressed through the face has been proven by cross-cultural studies on expressions conducted by Elkman in 1972. These studies involved the comparison of the use of expressions among the American, German, Japanese, French and Canadian participants attesting evidence to the claim of universality of emotions. Other studies have also indicated cross-cultural similarity of the emotional responses that emanate from different facial expressions. However, several studies show that people from different cultures express emotions differently. It is said that while the Americans may portray anger due to some situations, the same cases ignite emotions of happiness with a smile among the Japanese implying the disparity in culture. It is highly arguable whether people express emotions differently depending on their cultural orientations. Nonetheless, the difference in the expression of emotions that is culturally influenced is a reality that cannot be undermined. Conclusion Culture influences language. How people interpret different means of verbal and non-verbal communication differs across the cultural divide. The use of gestures, facial expressions of emotions, body postures and movements, gaze and interpersonal space is profoundly impacted on by the cultural backgrounds. The use of these forms of non-verbal communication differs not only in practice but also in conceptualization. Culture and communication are inseparable, and culture significantly impacts on language. References Andersen, P. (2008). Nonverbal communication. Long Grove, Ill.: Waveland Press, Inc. Berko, R., Rosenfeld, L. and Samovar, L. (2013). Connecting. Toronto: Harcourt Brace Canada. Esposito, A. (2007). Fundamentals of verbal and nonverbal communication and the biometric issue. Washington, DC: IOS Press. Knapp, M. and Hall, J. (2010). Nonverbal communication in human interaction. Boston, MA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. KosticÌ, A., Chadee, D. and Buck, R. (2015). The social psychology of nonverbal communication. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan. Leach, E. (2005). Culture and communication. Cambridge u.a.: Cambridge Univ. Pr. Read More