Power culturally and polically defined

Cao Duy Trinh Tạp chí KHOA HỌC & CÔNG NGHỆ 105(05): 15 - 19 15 POWER CULTURALLY AND POLICALLY DEFINED Cao Duy Trinh* College of Sciences - TNU SUMMARY The study of power is as important as the study of culture and politics for a successful foreign language teaching. More than just mastering language skills and rules, the students of English language should know what and why they are learning in their language curricula. Being aware of the power and power handling in the English lessons should be part of their jobs. In this paper, the concepts of culture, politics and power are revised before an introduction of power which is then culturally and politically defined. The paper is part of a further Critical Discourse Analysis in which culture, politics, power and values as well as their relationships are carefully considered. Key words: culture, politics, power. INTRODUCTION* Power has much to do with culture and politics as it belongs to them. The what-so- called “hard power” and “soft power” may have rooted from the cultural and political origins. The study of power, together with the study of culture and politics, is part and parcel of foreign language teaching, especially the English Language Teaching. It is power that influence the decision what to teach and how to teach in an English lesson. We need to revise these concepts before looking into power from the cultural and political aspects. CULTURE AND POLITICS What is culture? Apart from academic interpretations, culture can simply be seen as your ways of treating the family members and friends, flying a flag on the national day or celebrating a religious event. This is why Samovar et al. assumed that culture had subjective elements such as: “values, attitudes, beliefs, orientations, and underlying assumptions prevalent among people in a societythe subjective cultural beliefs and values you hold that influence your interpretation of the world and the interaction in it. Your view about American flag, work imagination, freedom, age, ethics, dress, property rights, etiquette, healing and health, death and mourning, play, law, individualism, magic and superstition, * Tel:0912.621.599 modesty, sex, status differentiation, courtship, formality and informality, bodily adornment, and the like are all part of your cultural membership.” Samovar et al. (2007:20) In the book “Communication between Cultures” (2007: 18), Samovar and other scholars also mentioned cultural elements: history, religion, values, social organizations and language. They assumed that culture had its own characteristics: it was learned, shared and transmitted from generation to generation. These scholars indicated that it was family, community and religion that initially made up a culture: “family, community (country) and worldview (religion) were three of the earliest markers in the evolution of what we now call culture.” Samovar et al. (2007:7) In an official understanding, culture can be known as the finest knowledge of and the best attitudes towards human’s mind and heart creations. This was especially right in Hornby’s statement (1992) when he declared that culture was a refined understanding and appreciation of art, literature, customs, arts, social institutions and so on of a particular group or people. Back to everyday life understanding, culture can be simply understood as people’s habits, their behaviors and ways of life. In fact, people live in some places, speak their languages, eat certain foods and vote for the 20Số hóa bởi Trung tâm Học liệu – Đại học Thái Nguyên Cao Duy Trinh Tạp chí KHOA HỌC & CÔNG NGHỆ 105(05): 15 - 19 16 people they trust in their own ways. These people enjoy certain literature works, some pieces of music or specific kind of amusements and do their jobs in their routines. That is their culture. Culture of the society can be abstract or concrete: it is tangible and intangible, ranging from the enamels of the ancestors’ potteries to the respect of a wife towards a husband in an Asian country. Together with culture (and even above culture in terms of power), politics is another part of a civilized society. The word ‘politics’, as for Beard (2000) had the original meaning in Greek as ‘city’, ‘citizen’, ‘civic’. He was very serious to see that the use of the word "political" has to do with social and economic change. He said if we talked of the politics of food production, that would mean there was something wrong with the production of the food or the food production supporting system and change must be made. The politics of sport, he then further clarified, included analysis of the changing social and economic structure of professional sport. Johnston arrived at a broad and practical dimension of the term 'political' which involved power and control of resources. He thought that for most people, this term would apply only to the making of laws by nation and local officials, the election of those officials, the credos and actions of political parties, relation among national governments etc. However, he pointed out: Yet in fact, the term political has a much broader field of reference. It refers to anything that has to do with power and the control of resources of every conceivable kind. In this understanding, a great many things about language teaching are political. Johnston (2003:53) Thus, many issues of political nature do not look like what the term brings to them. Poverty, unemployment, gender issues or even a distant addressing in party conversation may be political or have deeply rooted in politics. In fact, Thomas et al (2004) mentioned George Orwell’s claim that ‘ in our age there is no keeping out of politics. All issues are political issues’. Anyway, politics cannot work if it is not turned into some kinds of power. Politics is nothing without power: Politics is concerned with power, the power to make decision, to control resources, to control other people’s behavior and often control their values. (Thomas L. et al 2004: 36) POWER AND POWER IN TERMS OF CULTURE AND POLITICS Power is a complex and abstract concept, but an influential force in our lives. Power is invisible, indirect and, many a time, hidden from our perception. We, the citizens of a society and members of a community, can direct other people and can be directed by some others. People tend to protect their rights and to consider obedience the duty of other people. Thus, the New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought (1999) defined power: Power isthe ability of its holders to exact compliance or obedience of other individuals to their willThe strongest man is never strong enough always to be master unless he transforms his power into right and obedience into duty. Fairclough helped us to answer the questions what the power looks like or what it does to us in our lives with the statement: Power exists in various modalitiesPower is often enough exercised through depriving people of their jobs, their homes, and their lives. Fairclough (2001:3) And Coultas reminded us of power: Power can rarely be said to exist unless it is related to another feature, like gender or ethnicity or occupation, and combined with a particular set of contextual circumstances. Coultas (2003:45) We can see power as a body of culture and politics with the feet standing in the ground of culture and the head supporting the politics. In other words, power is seen to be built of culture and politics as a continuum: the foundation is culture and the governing top is politics (Figure 1). 21Số hóa bởi Trung tâm Học liệu – Đại học Thái Nguyên Cao Duy Trinh Tạp chí KHOA HỌC & CÔNG NGHỆ 105(05): 15 - 19 17 POLITICS: LAW & REGULATIONS/INSTITUTIONAL POWER /POLITICAL VALUES (IDEOLOGY) CULTURE: FAMILY BRINGING UP/SCHOOLING /CHURCH/CULTURAL VALUES Figure 1. Power built of culture and politics Table 1. Key Differences between small and large power distance societies - general norm, family, school, and workplace. (Hofstede, 2000:139) Small power distance Large power distance 1. Inequalities among people should be minimized Inequalities among people are both expected and desired 2. There should be, and there is to some extent, interdependence between less and more powerful people Less powerful people should be dependent on the more powerful; in practice, less powerful people are polarized between dependence and counter dependence 3. Parents treat children as equals Parents teach children obedience 4. Children treat parents as equals Children treat parents with respect 5. Teachers expect initiatives from students in class Teachers are expected to take all initiatives in class 6. Teachers are experts who transfer impersonal truths Teachers are gurus who transfer personal wisdom Table 2. Key differences between small and large power distance societies - politics and ideas. (Hofstede, 2000:139) Small power distance Large power distance 1. The use of power should be legitimate and is subject to criteria of good and evil Might prevails over right: whoever holds the power is right and good 2. Skills, wealth, power, and status need not go together Skills, wealth, power, and status should go together 3. The middle class is large The middle class is small 4. All should have equal rights The powerful have privileges 5. Powerful people try to look less powerful than they are Powerful people try to look as impressive as possible 6. Power is based on formal position, expertise and ability to give rewards Power is based on family or friends, charisma, and ability to use force In the paradigm of power body in figure 1, I assume that politics rests on a culture (as history, traditions, beliefs, values and so on to decide the governing policies) but politics (authorities with institutional power) then drives the culture to the goals beneficial to the governing people. In terms of values, we can say a political values (ideology) are, to a large extent, shaped by the (dominant) cultural values of a society. 22Số hóa bởi Trung tâm Học liệu – Đại học Thái Nguyên Cao Duy Trinh Tạp chí KHOA HỌC & CÔNG NGHỆ 105(05): 15 - 19 18 The ideology will then, in its turn, decides this culture. From here, we can find one end of the continuum as a cultural power, or “soft power” of a society - what you personally should obey (advice of your parents, teachers and vicars) and the other end as “hard power” – what you officially must obey (rules of the lawyers, the policemen, the courts). Both culture and politics are powerful with their powers. Hofstede (2000) wrote about different societies with different power distances as partly described in the following Table 1 & 2. He assumed that: “Power distance as a characteristic of a culture defined the extent to which a less powerful person in society accepts inequality in power and considers it as normal”. Looking at the table, we can find out the distinction of the societies can be made by different gaps of power. This is then reflected in this statement: What Hofstede discovered was that in some culture, those who hold power and those who are affected by power are significantly far apart (high power distance) in many ways, while in other cultures, the power holders and those affected by power holders are significantly closer (low power distance). (Samovar et al, 2007: 146) People do not stay in the same level of power. They are people of more or less power, of power or powerlessness and always fight for it. In their struggle, the ideologies of the powerful will be more influential and accepted, as a rule. The win-win policy is somehow an utopia. CONCLUSION As indicated, power has much to do with rights and duty, do and don’t, have and have not. At times, power seems to stay away from language education. It is not always expressed explicitly by the certain sounds, words or grammar. In a language, power is related to and exercised through the decision-makings, attitudes, viewpoints, choices or even the neglects of the speakers, listeners, readers or writers. In an English lesson, power may impose on the choices of values to be taught, who and whom to teach and to be educated, what to teach and learnt, how to teach and learn and so on. Power always involves and go first in language education. REFERENCES 1. Beard A., (2000), The Language of Politics, Routledge, London & New York. 2. Coultas, A., (2003), Language and Social Context, Routledge, London & New York. 3. Fairclough N. L. (2001), Language and Power, Longman, London. 4. Johnston, B., (2003), Values in English Language Teaching, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Mahwah, New Jersey, London. 5. Hofstede, Geert (2001). Culture's Consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. 6. Samovar, L. A., Porter, R.E., McDaniel, E. R., (2007), Samovar, L.A.,Porter, R.E, McDaniel, E.R., (2007), Communication between Cultures, Thomson, Belmont. 7. Thomas, L., Wareing, S., Singh, I., Peccei, J. S., Thornborrow, J., Jones, J., (2004), Language, Society and Power, Routledge, London & New York. 23Số hóa bởi Trung tâm Học liệu – Đại học Thái Nguyên Cao Duy Trinh Tạp chí KHOA HỌC & CÔNG NGHỆ 105(05): 15 - 19 19 TÓM TẮT QUYỀN LỰC DƯỚI GÓC NHÌN VĂN HÓA VÀ CHÍNH TRỊ Cao Duy Trinh* College of Sciences – TNU Việc nghiên cứu quyền lực có tầm quan trọng như nghiên cứu văn hóa và chính trị nhằm phục vụ cho việc dạy ngoại ngữ thành công. Không chỉ nắm được các kỹ năng ngôn ngữ, người học tiếng Anh nên biết học gì trong chương trình ngôn ngữ của mình và vì sao họ học như vậy. Ý thức về quyền lực và việc điều hành quyền lực trong các bài học tiếng Anh nên là một phần nhiệm vụ của người học. Trong bài báo này, những khái niệm về văn hóa, chính trị và quyền lực được nhắc lại trước phần giới thiệu về quyền lực dưới góc nhìn văn hóa và chính trị. Bài báo là một phần của một phân tích diễn ngôn phê phán sâu hơn trong đó văn hóa, chính trị, quyền lực và các giá trị cũng như các mối liên hệ của chúng được xem xét kỹ càng. Từ khóa: Văn hóa, chính trị, quyền lực. Ngày nhận bài: 28/02/2013; Ngày phản biện: 07/3/2013; Ngày duyệt đăng: 06/6/2013 * 24Số hóa bởi Trung tâm Học liệu – Đại học Thái Nguyên