Analysts and education experts are of the view that an instructor should understand the culture and the native language of a student learning a foreign language. Furthermore, it is important to understand the culture of the speakers of the target language. In this regard, it is essential to understand both L1 and L2 aspects of a culture. The new culture should not contradict the culture of the learner.
LoBianco (1999) refers to this phenomenon as the ‘Third Place’. The third place is crucial in teaching a foreign language. LoBianco (1999) argues that when teaching a foreign language, one should identify the middle ground between L1 and L2. The middle ground is then used to benefit the learners.
However, it is important to note at this juncture that the middle ground does not imply adopting the target culture. To the student, the middle ground may translate to appreciating the different cultures of fellow students (Liddicoat, Crozet & LoBianco, 1999).
Moreover, foreign language students should comprehend the culture of the native speakers, regardless of whether or not they wish to adopt the new lifestyle and behaviour patterns (Liddicoat, 2000). Various scholars, such as Schmidt (1993) and Cook (1999), encourage learners to pay attention to the various aspects of the language they are learning.
The learner should pay attention to such aspects as styles of speech, relevant contexts, and functional meanings. Kasper (2001) and Trosborg (1994) add that students should be aware of the sociopragmatic and pragmalinguistic behaviour appropriate for particular settings.
Learning the various pragmalinguistic features, such as politeness markers, poses a challenge to learners. It is challenging given that one has to use the features correctly and within the right context (Schmidt, 1993; Lazenby, 1997).
According to Lazenby (1997), sociopragmatic features are the social aspects of speech. Sociopragmatic features involve day to day activities, such as asking for help or apologising. The arguments made by Bardovi in 1999 (and cited in Kasper, 2001) reveal that grammatical awareness and pragmatic competence should remain independent of each other.
The scholar notes that achieving considerable levels of grammatical competence does not necessarily mean that the learner is pragmatically competent. The two phenomena are quite different from each other.
I am an English instructor at the College of Technology in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Most of my students are aged between 19 and 25 years, and they learn the English language within a period of two years. The students have already learnt English for a period of six years before joining college. However, the English instructions they have received prior to joining the college place little emphasis on culture.
As a college instructor at the college level, my major aim is to assist the students in learning both the language and its corresponding spoken culture. There are several personal and professional beliefs that inform my envisaged objectives. For example, I believe that teaching my students the culture of the speakers of the target language will help them appreciate the uniqueness of the two cultures.
As an English teacher working with learners of Arabic descent, I have faced various challenges, both within and without the classroom. For example, I have to contend with various groups of students who feel embarrassed or shy to pronounce English words like a native English speaker. I have come to realise that the shyness and embarrassment is as a result of the attitudes held by the students.
The attitudes come from the fear of attracting criticism from other students, who are of the opinion that Saudi students should not be expected to pronounce English words like native English speakers.
In addition to this, I have come to realise that most Saudi students feel that memorising words, as well as learning grammar and sentence structure, is enough. They disregard the need to pronounce such words correctly, as well as the need to learn about the various aspects of the English language culture.
The other cultural impediment I have come across in my efforts to teach the students the English language has to do with the various language textbooks. The various textbooks contain phrases, words, and pictures that are considered immoral or illegal in Saudi Arabia, a predominantly Muslim nation.
Some of the issues considered as either immoral or illegal in foreign language books relate to alcohol, sexuality, and diet. Textbooks written in foreign language, and targeting learners of the foreign language, should take into consideration the Muslim culture with regard to the issues highlighted above.
At the same time, the books should be designed in a manner that clearly portrays the English culture, while avoiding conflicts with the religion and culture of the local people. For example, it is permissible to portray what happens in the West during summer holidays.
However, to us here, it is repulsive to show pictures of scantly-dressed men and women frolicking on the coastal beaches. Similarly, the textbooks should not depict the celebrations of English speaking people that include imbibing alcoholic drinks.
A critical analysis of the Saudi classroom will reveal that it is a third place, a place where students are prepared for higher learning. Teachers should use this opportunity to inform students about the differences between the Arabic and Western cultures. Creating such awareness is critical given that some of the students may get the opportunity to study in English speaking nations, such as the United States of America and United Kingdom.
To this end, the teachers should prepare the students to deal with the cultural shock. Some of the preparations include informing the students that they should expect to sit in the same classroom with students of the opposite gender. In addition, the students should be made aware of the fact that they will be taught by both male and female instructors.
The students should also know that the power distance in most Western countries is low. As a result, they should be ready to relate with their teachers less formally compared to how they relate with teachers in Saudi Arabia. Therefore, it is appropriate to inform students that in the English speaking nations, they do not have to refer to their instructors by their titles.
Nonetheless, most of the students in Saudi Arabia will never get the opportunity to travel to the West. As such, the teacher should use the classroom setting to help them understand the English language and the way of life of native English speakers. According to LoBianco (1999), the class becomes the ideal third place to learn foreign languages.
The learning can take place through watching videos, reading novels, telling stories, and listening to conversations between native English speakers. Moreover, the classroom setting in Saudi Arabia is regarded as a private space within a public space. Learning foreign languages and cultures takes place within such private spaces.
According to LoBianco (1999), the college becomes the public space, while the classroom becomes the private space. The latter is the space within which students learn the English language and the English culture. In this third place, students are briefly separated from their culture, granting them the opportunity to engage in another culture foreign to them.
The scholars who crafted the third place theory had several objectives in mind. The major aim of this theory is to generate self-reflection, critical engagement, and sensitivity among the learners of the language and speakers of the target language (Papademetre, 2003). Furthermore, one should understand that the language and culture of other people impacts on their actions, feelings, thoughts, and values.
For example, a Saudi student should comprehend the lifestyles of people in English speaking nations. Linguists point out that for such an understanding to be created among students, the instructor should be aware of their own culture and the foreign culture they are teaching. The understanding of these two cultures is a perplexing and challenging responsibility.
Culture and language have deep and far reaching impacts on the way we act and react, as well as on the beliefs and values we hold dear. For example, young people may have difficulties comprehending what their elders are saying.
Both the instructor and the learner should aim to move to the third place’s middle ground, where they can observe cultural disparities and exchange significant and corresponding reconstructive ideas. Nevertheless, cross-cultural education is seen as one of the immediate results of combining different cultures.
In attempts to ensure that the leaner comprehends the foreign culture, the instructor should endeavour to seamlessly combine the culture of the student with the one that he or she wants to introduce in their life. Furthermore, the instructor should avert any form of clash between the two cultures. Educating a person on the ways of another culture requires more than having knowledge and information about the two cultures.
Such education requires the instructor to reflect and focus on both the target and native cultures. The reflection and focus is important given that the culture of the people is expressed through their language. As such, the student should understand that when learning a foreign language, they should familiarise themselves with the various aspects of the dialect.
They should learn about the various aspects of the lives of the people in focus (Tang, 1999). For example, people from different cultures and from different geographical locations have different speech expressions. It is common to hear such phrases as “’g’day mate” in Australia, but the phrases are not used in America or in England.
In efforts to understand the culture of a target language, the students are encouraged to learn about the various aspects of the lives of the native speakers. To facilitate this, the teacher is charged with the responsibility of capturing the interest and attention of the learners as far as learning the language is concerned (Byram, Esarte-Sarries, Taylor & Allat, 1991).
The focus of learning the foreign language should not only be on the differences between the two cultures, but also on discovering abstract similarities between them.
For example, the ‘language behaviour’ exhibited by different cultures may be similar, depending on the level of abstraction. At high abstraction levels, cultural similarities are more discernible compared to cultural differences. However, at low abstraction levels, it is differences, and not similarities, which are discernible.
The challenge facing instructors like me is the need to teach a language from different degrees of abstraction. The instructor should broach the subject by introducing obvious comparisons between the two cultures. As the learning progresses, the instructor will then shift to other comparisons at higher abstraction levels (Bex, 1994).
According to Liddicoat & Crozet (2001), interculturality is what validates the other and the self. In order to attain a hybrid position suitable for the learner, which is the third place, there should be a compromise between the two phenomena (Crozet, Liddicoat & LoBianco, 1999).
The compromise is reached through negotiations between the other and the self. In this case, the students make the decision to retain some aspects of the native culture. The students accept the idea of relinquishing some aspects of their culture, while selectively assimilating some aspects of the target culture (Crozet & Liddicoat, 1999).
In the early days, teaching and learning cultures foreign to the country required Saudi students to abandon their traditional cultures and embrace the foreign culture they were learning (Triandis, Kashima, Shimada & Villareal, 1986). The replacement of one culture with another was largely regarded as unfavourable to them, given that it meant abandoning one form of mono-cultural existence and embracing another.
However, and according to Kramsch (1993), the third place is the most suitable approach compared to the others. The third place gives the student the opportunity and freedom to identify a ground between L1 and L2 cultures. The third place theory is strongly linked to the third domain theory, which is outlined by Bhabha (1994). It is also related to dialogism theory, which is proposed by Bakhtin (1986).
What this means is that it is not enough to analyse the third place theory as a stand-alone phenomenon. The scholar should take into consideration the links between the third place theory and the other theories (Kramsch, 1993).
In conclusion, it is necessary for Saudi instructors teaching foreign language to understand the nature of the relationship between the two cultures. The instructor should be aware of the various aspects of the Saudi and target culture. The awareness will help them to effectively communicate with the learners. Furthermore, the understanding helps the instructors to transfer knowledge to the learners in a seamless manner.
In addition, teachers should communicate to the learners the differences between the target culture and the native culture. At the same time, the instructor should highlight the various aspects of the new culture that are in agreement with the local culture. Just like other Muslim nations, Saudi Arabia is a very conservative society.
The residents are very sensitive to foreign elements. In addition to “playing by the rules”, the teachers should equip their students with skills necessary to cope with life in English speaking nations. The skills will protect the students from cultural shock in their new learning environment.
Equipping the learners with these skills helps in creating a third place, where the students are allowed and able to retain most aspects of their culture. At the same time, the students learn a new language and assimilate new ways of life.
As already indicated, some of the students will remain behind in Saudi Arabia as their colleagues travel abroad for further studies. The third place will help most of the students who will remain behind to learn and appreciate the new language. They will continue to respect and appreciate their culture as they learn the new language.
References
Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Bex, A. R. (1994). The problem of culture and English language teaching in Europe. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 32(1), 57-67.
Bhabha, H. (1994). The location of culture. New York: Routledge.
Byram, M., Esarte-Sarries, V., Taylor, E., & Allat, P. (1991). Young people’s perception of the other culture. In D. Buttjes & M. Byram (Eds.), Mediating languages and cultures (pp. 103-119). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Cook, H. M. (1999). Why can’t learners of Japanese as a foreign language distinguish polite from impolite speech styles?. New York: US Department of Education, Educational Resources Information Centre.
Crozet, C., & Liddicoat, A. J. (1999). The challenge of intercultural language teaching: Engaging with culture in the classroom. In J. LoBianco, A. J. Liddicoat & C. Crozet (Eds.), Striving for the third place: Intercultural competence through language education (pp. 113-126). Canberra: Language Australia.
Crozet, C., Liddicoat, A. J., & LoBianco, J. (1999). Intercultural competence: From language policy to language education. In J. LoBianco, A. J. Liddicoat & C. Crozet (Eds.), Striving for the third place: Intercultural competence through language education (pp. 1-20). Canberra: Language Australia.
Kasper, G. (2001). Four perspectives on L2 pragmatic development. Applied Linguistics, 22(4), 502-530.
Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and culture in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lazenby, S. B. (1997). A study of pragmatic perception and strategic behaviour of adult second language learners. Language Awareness, 6(4), 233–237.
Liddicoat, A. J. (2000). Everyday speech as culture: Implications for language teaching. In A. Liddicoat & C. Crozet (Eds.), Teaching languages, teaching cultures (pp. 51-63). Melbourne: Applied Linguistics Association of Australia.
Liddicoat, A. J., & Crozet, C. (2001). Acquiring French interactional norms through instruction. In K. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatic development in instructional contexts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Liddicoat, A. J., Crozet, C., & LoBianco, J. (1999). Striving for the third place: Consequences and implications. In J. LoBianco, A. J. Liddicoat & C. Crozet (Eds.), Striving for the third place: Intercultural competence through language education (pp. 1-20). Canberra: Language Australia.
LoBianco, J. (1999). A ‘syntax of peace’? In J. LoBianco, A. J. Liddicoat & C. Crozet (Eds.), Striving for the third place: Intercultural competence through language education (pp. 10-19). Melbourne: Language Australia.
Papademetre, L. (2003). Learning languages. New York: Division of Education, Arts and Social Sciences.
Schmidt, R. (1993). Consciousness, learning, and interlanguage pragmatics. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 21-42). New York: Oxford University Press.
Tang, R. (1999). The place of ‘culture’ in the foreign language classroom: A reflection. The Internet TESL Journal, 5(8), 37-57.
Triandis, H. C., Kashima, Y., Shimada, E., & Villareal, M. (1986). Acculturation indices as a means of confirming cultural differences. International Journal of Psychology, 21, 43-70.
Trosborg, A. (1994). Interlanguage pragmatics: Requests, complaints, and apologies. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co.