For the purpose of clarity, it is necessary to review the key concepts that are relevant to this research study. It is essential to indicate where the researcher stands and explain her choices regarding the use of terms.
2.2.1 Intercultural awareness
In today’s world, intercultural awareness has become a prerequisite for successful intercultural communication. Therefore, intercultural awareness is required if a foreign language learner is to achieve intercultural communication competence, which is now considered the major goal of foreign language learning (Han, 2013). According to Chen and Starosta (1996), intercultural awareness is one of the three interrelated components of intercultural communication competence. They see it as the minimum prerequisite for intercultural communication and interculturally competent individuals. Intercultural awareness refers to the understanding of
cultural conventions that affect thinking and behaviour, in which self-awareness and cultural awareness are the two main components.
Just as with the concept “culture”, for which a number of definitions and
approaches are in use, the concept of cultural awareness is different depending on the conceptualisation of culture it is derived from and reasons for its development, be that a reflexive role, cognitive and affective, national or its relation to teaching English as a foreign language (Risager, 2000). “Cultural awareness is the term to describe sensitivity to the impact of culturally-induced behaviour on language use and communication” (Tomalin & Stempleski, 1993, p. 5). Baker (2012) argues that cultural awareness is “a conscious understanding of the role culture plays in language learning and communication (in both first and foreign language)” (p. 65). According to Tomalin and Stempleski (1993, p. 5), cultural awareness
encompasses three qualities:
• awareness of one’s own culturally-induced behaviour;
• awareness of the culturally-induced behaviour of others; and
• ability to explain one’s own cultural standpoint.
Liddicoat (2002) also mentions that there are generally two views toward cultural awareness: the static and the dynamic. The static view does not recognise the link between language and culture. On the contrary, the dynamic view requires
learners to have an understanding of their own culture and also actively engage in culture learning. In everyday language teaching and learning environments, language can be considered as a tool used for conveying meaning, and meaning is typically obtained by cultural awareness (Ogeyik, 2011).
In addition, Tomlinson and Musuhara (2004) point out the problem of cultural awareness and its significance for language teaching by making a distinction between “cultural knowledge which is information about a particular culture, and cultural awareness which is a perception of both our and others’ culture” (p. 6). They also claim that an increased cultural awareness helps learners broaden the mind, increase tolerance and achieve cultural empathy and sensitivity. “To be competent in intercultural communication, individuals must understand the social customs and social system of the host culture as understanding how a people think
and behave is essential for effective communication with them” (Jandt, 2007, p. 47).
However, cultural awareness is not always included in language teaching activities (Tomlinson & Musuhara, 2004, p. 11). For better understanding of others, it has been suggested that cultural awareness should evolve into intercultural awareness (Baker, 2012).
The use of the term “intercultural” reflects the view that foreign language learners have to gain insight into both their own and the foreign culture (Kramsch, 1993). A basic definition of the term “intercultural awareness” is given by Baker (2011):
Intercultural awareness is a conscious understanding of the role culturally based forms, practices, and frames of understanding can have in intercultural communication, and an ability to put these conceptions into practice in a flexible and context specific manner in real time communication. (p. 198)
Furthermore, Kramsch (1999) defines it as a place of “thirdness” (a third place or a third culture), that is, a space between learners’ own culture (C1) and the target culture (C2) in which learners can create their own understanding. She strongly advises teachers and learners to create a third place in their language classroom. Moreover, Lo Bianco, Liddicoat, and Crozet’s (1999) “third place” concept has a similar aim to “thirdness.” Liddicoat (2008) later states that the third place is a place of accommodation between C1 and C2 which leads to a new cultural
positioning, created and negotiated in response to cultures. Language teaching that is truly intercultural “prepares language learners to know how to negotiate
comfortable third places between the self and the other” (Lo Bianco, et al., 1999, p. 1). Intercultural learning must become a critical engagement with cultural practices embedded within and integrated with language in use (Crozet & Liddicoat, 2000).
Chen and Starosta (1996) even divide intercultural awareness into three levels: awareness of superficial cultural traits; awareness of significant and subtle cultural traits that contrast markedly with ours; and awareness of how another culture feels
awareness is a learning process by which we become aware of our own cognitive growth, learning, and change regarding a set of cultural situations and cultural principles stemming from intercultural communication.
Based on the discussion above, in this study, the researcher chose the term intercultural awareness as the focus of the study because she felt it most successfully encompassed the qualities this research study was designed to develop.
2.2.2 Second language and foreign language
In language teaching such terms as “second language” and “foreign language” have been used interchangeably (Valdes, 1986). In pedagogy and sociolinguistics, a distinction is often made between them. Richards and Schmidt (2010) define foreign language as follows:
A “foreign language” as a language which is not the native language of large numbers of people in a particular country of region, is not used as a medium of instruction in schools and is not widely used as a medium of communication in government, media, etc. Foreign languages are typically taught as school subjects for the purpose of communicating with foreigners or for reading printed materials in the language. (pp. 224-225)
Richards and Schmidt (2010) also provide the definition of “second language” as a language that “plays a major role in a particular country or region though it may not be the first language of many people who use it” (p. 514). Stern (1983)
recognises that in contrasting the terms second language and foreign language: There is consensus that a necessary distinction is to be made
between a non-native language learnt and used within one country to which the term “second language” has been applied, and a non- native language learnt and used with reference to a speech
community outside national or territorial boundaries to which the term “foreign language” is commonly given. (p. 16)
Given these plausible common sense definitions for the two key notions of the topic of this study, it is of great importance to keep them in mind. In addition, and taking the Australian context into consideration, it might be acceptable or more appropriate to deem all the languages offered at the University of Tasmania foreign languages. Consequently, the terms “foreign language” and “intercultural awareness” will be used consistently throughout the thesis to represent the university discourse.