Pedagogy

In the context of this study, communication is going to be defined as the kind of behavior that occurs as a result of meaning being attributed to a given behavior. If a person looks at our behavior and links it with a given meaning, communication is deemed to have occurred regardless of whether such actions were intended or unintentional. Culture as a term may assume many meanings and as such its definition depends on the context of its application. Culture has always been closely linked with ethnicity and thus intercultural communication can be seen as the communication that takes place among ethnic groupings. Culture can go beyond just ethnic groups to include beliefs, attitudes, religion, and experience among other things that a given group of people hold or value as a people. Intercultural communication is a concept that has been in existence since time immemorial (Hall, 1992).

Intercultural communication comes into play when members who subscribe to a certain cultural group have to pass some information to others who are not members of their cultural group. Certain techniques have to be employed to facilitate such kind of communication. Intercultural communication had featured in many studies but it was always embedded in other areas of study. This continued until the 1950s when Edward Hall was credited with bringing out intercultural communication as a concept on its own. He is thus deemed the founder of this field of study (Scollon  Wong, 1995).

This paper is going to focus mainly on the intercultural communication between the United States and Japan. Before the onset of the Second World War, the United States was seemingly isolated and as such managed to distance itself from issues pertaining intercultural communication. This ensured that when the Second World war came to an end, the United States managed to cut out its niche as the a country with an outstanding economy that faced no damage. The United States had an obligation of assisting the war-torn Europe. A barrier was evident on the front of intercultural communication and thus it hampered their efforts. The United States formed the Foreign Service Institute, an institution that was charged with the duty of training diplomats who were assigned foreign service obligations. In 1960, Intercultural communication had not established a strong base as a concept of its own. Most of the United States diplomats at the time who were serving in Japan neither knew Japanese culture nor their language (Bradford, 1960).

The United States was keen on ensuring that intercultural communication was highlighted to its diplomats in foreign missions. The United States wanted to ensure that foreign diplomats got the best quality education on the language used by their country of destination. Native speakers of these languages were hired to teach these languages and hence the culture could also be learnt from these people. Japan had also emerged as a considerably large economy only rivaled by the United States and a few other countries at the time. This paper lays great emphasis on the way intercultural communication between the United States and Japan grew to what it is today (Scollon  Wong, 1995).

Many scholars originating from both the United States and Japan had ventured into the study of communication behavior which was evidenced between the United States and Japan. By 1970, such studies had gone to the extent of exploring the differences that could be derived from individualism and collectivism, high-context cultures as well as low-context cultures. Such studies were concentrated between these two countries since, as great economic powers, these countries are more likely to engage in many business transactions as well as personnel interchange. Japan took serious consideration on the concept of intercultural communication as a key to business progress as this enabled them expand their business empires (Martin  Nakayama, 2007).

Hall insisted that communication involved more than just the oral exchange of words. Culture was considered part and parcel of any communication. Initially, Japanese thought that learning English language was enough in enabling someone to become a competent intercultural communicator. The emphasis that Hall laid on non-verbal communication caught the attention of the Japanese. The Japanese scholars were keen on characterizing their nonverbal aspects of communication. The Japanese did not rely much on verbal communication as much as the Americans who had initially found it very difficult to understand them. Studies that were biased towards intercultural communication were skewed towards gaining a clear understanding of nonverbal aspects such as facial expressions, proxemics, hand gestures, bowing, silence among other gestures that were common in Japanese communities (Hall, 1992).

The theoretical perspective that was formulated by Hall on high-context as well as the low-context communication was responsible for facilitating the understanding of cultural concepts in Japan. The Japanese did not invest much towards improving the intercultural communication with minority groups within its territory such as the Chinese. The Japanese mainly concentrated on English language and did not take a keen consideration on other people and their cultures. The Japanese were faced with the problem of inferiority complex when they interacted with whites who came from rich countries. They were also faced with the problem of superiority complex when they were dealing with people from low income countries. Hall defined low-context information as that in which all the messages were passed in an explicit manner. High-context communication involved more than just explicit conveyance of a message (Condon  Yousef, 1975).

Time and space are aspects that stand out in intercultural communication. Some cultures assert more value to time and equate it to money. They do not like losing time or wasting it while other do everything to their preferred perfection without taking the issue of time into consideration. This can be a great hindrance to intercultural communication. Culture may be a very powerful tool that can be used in the advancement of power. Face and face-saving is also another concept that comes out when people from different cultures interact. Maintaining a good public image when communicating with people from other cultures is a paramount aspect of communication as it portrays the status, power, and the respect of the communicating parties. Nonverbal communication is also a key aspect. Facial expression in Japan that could be deemed to be a sign of satisfaction in many cultures may actually mean the opposite (Bradford, 1960).

The scholarship that has been granted on studies related to intercultural communication has been a positive move towards better regional understanding. Japan could have advanced to a relatively greater level if it would have extended its research on intercultural communication to encompass the minority cultural groups within its territory such as the Chinese. This could have ensured that better understanding could be achievable between these countries. Japan should not be affected with the issues of superiority complex and inferiority complex if it aims at having a better understanding and cooperation with many countries. Good intercultural communication ensures peace and commercial developments.