RECONSIDERING CLIL IN HIGH AND LOW CONTEXT CULTURES
Abstract
Purpose. The goal of the research is to analyze psycholinguistic peculiarities of the development of communicative competence and intercultural abilities and skills of university educators and students with reference to high and low context cultures. The emphasis is on the need for introducing cross-cultural aspects to the curricula of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) courses at tertiary level in Ukraine, especially in the conditions of international academic mobility. Thus, referring to Ukraine as a host country, the relevance of the issue under consideration is determined by the challenge for foreign students to be adapted to Ukraine's socio-cultural conditions and for Ukrainian students to become aware of intercultural values, traditions, and norms of verbal and non-verbal interaction. Methods. The goal of the research has been achieved through comparative analysis which allows highlighting main dimensions of cultural differences among nationalities including Ukraine, in particular, in low-context and high-context cultures. In the process of achieving this goal we used interdisciplinary approaches as well as the methods of observation and generalization to define intercultural skills and abilities required to gain cross-cultural competence and the methods of induction and systematization to concretize general conclusions. Results. The existing inseparable relationship of language and culture serves as a key to understanding that language and culture complement each other. It is inevitable to teach foreign culture in a foreign language class. The core of students' cross-cultural competence is to be rooted in cultural sensitivity, i.e. knowledge that there exist cultural differences and similarities among people which can hardly ever be evaluated either positively or negatively. We believe that due to this very factor the ability to overcome stereotypes in intercultural relations can be developed. Conclusion. Cross-cultural aspects should be included in the curricula of CLIL courses at tertiary level in Ukraine. Hence, classroom activities targeted at building students' competences in “cross-cultural nuances” can be a useful start in preparing students to socialize and perform successfully in their academic and professional endeavors.
References
2. Волкова А.Г. Розвиток комунікативної компетенції іноземних студентів в умовах міжкультурного спілкування. Викладання мов у вищих навчальних закладах освіти на сучасному етапі. Серія «Міжпредметні зв’язки» : збірник наукових праць. 2014. Вип. 25. С. 20–27.
3. Лабунець Ю.О. Міжкультурна комунікація як засіб розуміння ментальних особливостей різних культур. Вісник психології та педагогіки : збірник наукових праць / Педагогічний інститут Київського університету імені Бориса Грінченка. 2012. Вип. 7. URL: http://www.psyh.kiev.ua/ (date access: 20.08.2020).
4. Никоненко Я. О. Мовна картина світу як засіб міжкультурної комунікації. Вісник психології та педагогіки : збірник наукових праць. 2012. Вип. 7. URL: http://www.psyh.kiev.ua/ (date access: 20.08.2020).
5. Ребрій О., Ребрій І. Системність і творчість у перекладі: психолінгвістичний підхід. Psycholinguistics. Психолінгвістика. Психолингвистика. Серія «Філологія» : збірник наукових праць. Переяслав-Хмельницький : ФОП Домбровська Я.М. 2018. Вип. 23 (2). С. 180–191.
6. Токарєва А.М. Підготовка студентів до міжкультурної комунікації в контексті формування фахівців-медіаторів культур. Вісник Дніпровського університету імені Альфреда Нобеля. 2013. Вип. 2 (6). C. 48–52.
7. Beamer L., Varner I. International Communication in the Global Workplace. McGraw-Hill Irwin, 2001. 360 p.
8. Beattie G., Ellis A. The psychology of language and communication. Routledge, 2017. 312 p.
9. Clyne M. Inter-cultural Communication at Work: Cultural Values in Discourse. Cambridge University Press, 1994. 260 p.
10. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Strasbourg: Language Policy Unit, 2001. 261p.
11. Duszak A. Cross-cultural academic communication: a discourse community view. Culture and styles of academic discourse. Berlin : De Gruyter, 1997. P. 11–40.
12. Hall E.T., Hall M.R. Understanding Cultural Differences: Germans, French and Americans. Intercultural Press, 1990. 196 p.
13. Hofstede G. Cultures and Organizations: software of the mind. McGraw Hil, 1991. 279 p.
14. LeBaron M. Communication Tools for Understanding Cultural Differences. Beyond Intractability. Conflict Research Consortium. 2003. URL: http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/communication-tools (date access: 20.08.2020).
15. Nault D. Going Global: Rethinking Culture Teaching in ELT. Contexts. Language, Culture and Curriculum. 2006. № 19 (3). P. 314–328.