The importance of creating and maintaining good communication in human society cannot be overemphasised.

– Communication competencies, culture and SDGs: effective processes to cross-cultural communication

People are most happy when these needs for meaning are satisfied.

– The Construction of Meaning from Life Events: Empirical Studies of Personal Narratives

Language brings people together and grants access to various cultures and the riches they contain, for appreciation, enjoyment, joy, education and enlightenment. As such language learning, despite its rigours is something to be embraced because of its empowering effects. While learning the standard form of language is hard enough, it is hardly sufficient, because of communication gaps.

When a person learns a language, he may expect that once he has learnt that language, he will be able to use it to communicate with others who use that language. He may expect that this would be a straightforward matter because in a dictionary, there are fixed meanings for words. As he begins to use what he has learnt, in the real world, he may be very puzzled as to why he is on occasion unable to translate his intention into a form of words which would be correctly received by the hearer or reader.

There are people who are able to successfully communicate with everyone they interact with. Successful communication would mean, “the receiver interprets the message correctly” (2022) and the communication objective is fulfilled. It will be very useful for students to learn how language must be used in order to communicate successfully.

The first step to successful communication is to be aware that what is being said and what is being understood may be different, even if the words used were in a mutually intelligible language and by people who share the same culture. The problem becomes compounded when communicating with people from a different cultural background.

Aririzugoh (2022) has proposed some strategies to successfully communicate with those from different cultures and these strategies are also very applicable when communicating within cultural groups.

His recommendations flow from the understanding that effective communication requires, more than a mutually intelligible language alone, a deep and accurate understanding of the culture of those we are communicating with. Culture is relevant because how a person uses words and how she understands words would be dependent on her cultural lens.

He gave several examples of how culture matters. British people say yes and American people say yeah. When an American employee says yeah to his British higher-up, he may be perceived as rude and if she lets it be known as such, he may be “bewildered by the boss’s apparent coldness”. Also, when the English and German languages interact, one man’s gift may be another man’s poison – the word “gift means poison in German”.

Culture, according to him refers to “learned societal values, beliefs, and customs that some people accept and share collectively” and includes, “all the broad knowledge, beliefs, art, morals, law, customs, and other experiences and habit acquired … as a member of a particular society”. This definition is useful to illustrate how Aririzugoh’s (2022) strategies are applicable within cultural groups.

Members of the same culture would have different experiences and habits or reflexes based on those experiences and to this extent interpret messages in accordance with the world view such experiences have forged.

Aririzugoh (2022) referred to four models which aimed to help us understand which aspects of culture we should be mindful of when communicating. These were developed by Edward Hall, Geert Hofstede, Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner, and Sam Vaknin.

The insights taken together from these models suggest the following about communication. When interacting with someone, it may be useful to ask (ourselves) the following questions before crafting messages, verbal and written.

How does this person behave and expect others to behave in situations when one person is in some way more senior? Does this person expect to be praised explicitly for achievements or a specific contribution in a team effort? Does this person deal on the basis of the nature of a relationship or by rules regardless of relationships? Is meaning required to be plain and obvious or must a message arrive in a more subtle form? According to Aririzugoh (2022), Africans find “straightforward ways of talking”, “rude”. Must traditions be followed strictly? Must matters be resolved in short order or can time play its role? Must schedules and plans be strictly followed or are they to be considered tentative, in which case, rescheduling is to be expected?

There is one cultural dimension proposed by Vaknin (2005) as highlighted by Aririzugoh (2022), which is interesting and useful to have in mind when communicating with someone from another culture. This is the exogenic-endogenic dimension.

Let’s say there is an issue that needs resolving and which will take cooperation and collaboration between two individuals. One is exogenic in outlook and the other endogenic. The endogenic person would proceed from the belief that responsibility to solve a problem falls entirely on the individual(s) involved. The exogenic person would cast his cares onto a higher power and await divine intervention or guidance. This is a very significant difference which has to be respected.

Indeed, Aririzugoh (2022) cautions that it is “counterproductive to assume” that one cultural approach is “the best”.

According to him, to be successful in communication, it may be useful to consider the sender’s role, the receiver’s role, the message, the channel and feedback.

As sender, we must be aware of the different meanings of words across cultures, body language, and be mindful of all the different questions mentioned earlier. Importantly, we must be prepared to clarify or “even repeat the whole communication process” if we find that our message did not get across.

Aririzugoh (2022) observes that as receivers, what we hear or understand is “selected to conform to … existing preconceptions”. This creates gulfs and in certain cases, a convenient avatar to reinforce a new identity. He adds that how a receiver interprets a message is “shaped by his own culture”.

Senders must be responsible. At the same time, receivers too have every stake in ensuring a successful outcome. They can contribute their share for success by taking a generous interpretation of the sender’s intentions where possible.

The message links senders and receivers. Senders must be aware of how exactly meaning should be encoded (through pictures, direct, indirect phrasing) and if they are encoding it in the way expected of them. Receivers must be aware that no dictionary exists for some ways of representing meaning.

The channel refers to “a passage for the sender to guide his message to the receiver”. One insight he shares is that some cultures have a preference for certain types of messages to be verbal and for others to be written.

Feedback is how the sender knows if the message has been crafted properly and is for the receiver to give. The sender depends on the feedback from the receiver to know if clarification is required because both sender and receiver, if they are communicating, communicate for the purposes of ensuring successful outcomes.

The way forward is in the middle.

The Brain Dojo