As a rule, difficulties, problems, and barriers in the process of communication and interaction between representatives of different cultures arise based on stylistic, semantic, and phonetic phenomena. Primarily, stylistic aspects are expressed in the inconsistency of the language styles of communicants who, when interacting, use specific terms that are incomprehensible to a partner. Accordingly, the complications associated with semantic moments may arise due to giving incorrect meanings to symbols and phrases used in the transmission of messages, which in many languages have multiple meanings and can be used in communication for various purposes (Huang & Agbanyo, 2022). Moreover, phonetic difficulties of perception arise due to incorrect pronunciation of sounds, as well as a wrong division of the main elements of the language as morphemes, words, and sentences.
The interaction and development of relations in the Internet environment are different from the “classical” type of communication between people of other cultures in terms of such difficulties as depersonalization and lack of live contact with an individual, as well as the risks of encountering misinformation and with scammers posing as representatives of other cultures. For example, today, one can note the growing trend of spreading destructive, harmful, and provocative information on racism, xenophobia, and ethnic strife via the Internet. There are a considerable number of extremist and terrorist websites through which destructive organizations conduct extensive propaganda to spread their ideologies. In addition, a person has more opportunities to express and interpret data correctly in real life, at least with the help of gestures and facial expressions. In contrast, Internet communication is often limited to “impersonal” text messages, limiting such potential.
The key similarities between Internet communication and face-to-face are the features of the transmitted symbols, signs, traditions, values, or norms within the framework of perception, adaptation, and reaction to another culture. Equally, interlocutors learn to assimilate and adapt to someone else’s culture, combine the originally embedded and borrowed elements into a single whole, as well as understand similarities and differences and draw conclusions from this. Hence, the main difference between the two types of communication is based on the means and forms of contact: online service instead of a personal meeting. In this case, one can additionally highlight such a distinction as the number of opportunities available to people. Thus, in the real world, an individual speaks not only with words but also with body language, gestures, facial expressions, and even appearance and clothing. In contrast, on the Internet, such privileges are often absent and deprive the features of tactile and visual perception of a carrier of a particular culture.
Reference
Huang, W., & Agbanyo, G.K. (2022). Multicultural neurolinguistics: A neuroscientific perceptive of cross-cultural differences in translation.Front. Psychol., 13, pp. 1-8.