There are a great many published studies already in existence with these thoughts in mind.
Arguably, modern cross-cultural and anthropological studies began in 1889 with the work of Sir Edward Tylor. His goal was essentially to conduct ethnographies to define and describe culture in the context of analyzing society. Culture began to be discussed in terms of looking for marked differences amongst people. The problem with this broad definition, however, was that many could not determine what marked differences Tylor was referring to (Munck, 2010, p. 279-280). Perhaps people could have similar social interactions with one another, yet they speak different languages. Munck (2010) explains this by writing, “To take a simple example, there are likely to be strong similarities in religious, marriage, and inheritance practices among Islamic societies despite linguistic differences” (p. 280). It is not easy, therefore, to determine where one culture ends and another one begins. Language then, surely, cannot be the sole indicator of one’s cultural identity.
In order to better understand different cultures, and to determine what such a concept is comprised of, it is often beneficial to conduct ground research in a society different than one’s own. Due to a lack of understanding, foreigners visiting a different culture often end up demonstrating cultural insensitivity and view others “through the lens of a culture bump” (Grimes, 2010, p. 27). Those traveling to another culture must cope with feelings of loneliness and they can quickly become frustrated with the actions of others. It is this lack of understanding that forms the foundation for the necessity of cross-cultural communication. Only through the promotion of different cultures can society truly learn to adapt and accept others into its fold (Ringland, 2005, p. 36).
Let us consider Canada for a moment. Due to a diminished pool of labor, the