Social & Cultural Reality Theory in Action
72251 Intercultural Communication
Assignment 1
Melissa Peters
ID: 3304924
Short answers
Q. 1. Challenge DeVito, O’Rourke and O’Neill’s (2000) definition of culture using Richards (1999) or Anae (1997). How do DeVito et al look at membership within a culture and how does Richards see it differently?
DeVito, O’Rourke and O’Neill’s (2000, p.99) definition of culture is very limited when describing modern cultures of globalised human society. Perhaps where people are isolated to villages, towns or countries with little communication with the outside world, the definition would be completely workable. But now, due to access of information, global trade, travel and immigration etc the world is becoming more and more an eclectic melting pot of human culture. For most, our individual ‘culture’ is not definitive, but active, highly influenced, and ever-changing. This is especially the case when addressing one’s culture from an individual, identity-based standpoint.
Cultural identity
As we can see in Parehau Richards opening speech of the 1998 ANZCA conference (Richards, 1999), Richards seeks to identify herself from both a Maori cultural and an academic standpoint, whilst weaving in the many social groups that have influenced her culture, including: * Two lines of tribal heritage * European ancestry * Catholic denomination * Upbringing by Anglican grandparents in a rural community * Education as a Maori woman * Academic position in a western learning institution.
There is no one ‘culture’ (according to the DeVito et al definition) that would express Richards’ diverse identity. Nor could her unique combination of values, beliefs, behaviours, communication styles etc, be packaged and labeled as any one particular ‘culture’.
Membership
DeVito et al assert that membership comes by way of either generational enculturation (passed down) or social acculturation (adopted). Richards’ expresses that membership is found by way of
Assignment 1
Melissa Peters
ID: 3304924
Short answers
Q. 1. Challenge DeVito, O’Rourke and O’Neill’s (2000) definition of culture using Richards (1999) or Anae (1997). How do DeVito et al look at membership within a culture and how does Richards see it differently?
DeVito, O’Rourke and O’Neill’s (2000, p.99) definition of culture is very limited when describing modern cultures of globalised human society. Perhaps where people are isolated to villages, towns or countries with little communication with the outside world, the definition would be completely workable. But now, due to access of information, global trade, travel and immigration etc the world is becoming more and more an eclectic melting pot of human culture. For most, our individual ‘culture’ is not definitive, but active, highly influenced, and ever-changing. This is especially the case when addressing one’s culture from an individual, identity-based standpoint.
Cultural identity
As we can see in Parehau Richards opening speech of the 1998 ANZCA conference (Richards, 1999), Richards seeks to identify herself from both a Maori cultural and an academic standpoint, whilst weaving in the many social groups that have influenced her culture, including: * Two lines of tribal heritage * European ancestry * Catholic denomination * Upbringing by Anglican grandparents in a rural community * Education as a Maori woman * Academic position in a western learning institution.
There is no one ‘culture’ (according to the DeVito et al definition) that would express Richards’ diverse identity. Nor could her unique combination of values, beliefs, behaviours, communication styles etc, be packaged and labeled as any one particular ‘culture’.
Membership
DeVito et al assert that membership comes by way of either generational enculturation (passed down) or social acculturation (adopted). Richards’ expresses that membership is found by way of