Posts

Posted on

Interview with Lena

Lena is a friend of mine who happens to be German, and was a student at Humboldt Universität in Berlin. However, national boundaries have never really been an issue for her: alongside traveling all across Europe, she’s also had extended stays in South Korea and the United States. I figured she’d be an ideal candidate for a conversation about the cultural stereotypes surrounding American students.

The main thing that stood out to her was school spirit. When she thought of American college kids, they were always wearing university-branded merchandise, attending pep rallies or football games, and going to a ton of extracurricular activities. I suppose this is understandable, given all the movies taking place on college campuses; Lena cited Legally Blonde (2001) and House Bunny (2008) as her main inspirations. I can’t say that I’m familiar with either movie, so I can only hope that they’re faithful ambassadors of American culture.

Lena thought that American school spirit had both advantages and disadvantages. On the one hand, it seemed to be a great way to bond with others, given the preexisting community which greets you when you set foot on the quad. On the other hand, she worried about the kind of peer pressure and conformity that would come from such a powerful campus culture. Indeed, the extent of the relationship between European students and their universities is their commute to campus and then their time in the classroom. For them, the university is primarily an institution dedicated to learning, and only secondly a cultural hub. I think that this would lend European uni students a higher sense of independence, as they are able to more freely choose the activities and friends they want to engage with.

This paints a fairly accurate picture of Notre Dame. I always thought of ND as a very traditional college , with a very strong sense of school spirit. Most of my peers certainly embody this stereotype, and I’ve personally seen both the advantages and disadvantages of school spirit play out in my four years here. However, it was certainly interesting hearing this same perspective from across the Atlantic.

Posted on

Let the Journey Begin!

It is the evening before the beginning of my German intensive courses at the Goethe Institut Dresden, and I am very excited. German is essential in my field (biblical studies) not only because of important untranslated works in the history of interpretation, but also because new research is regularly published in German in the top journals and monograph series. However, most people in biblical studies have never studied German in a traditional way; instead, we typically either independently work through a “German for theological reading” type of book or take a “German for graduate reading” type of course. In other words, we get a crash course on grammar but typically don’t have the opportunity to actually learn the language. Actually learning the language is, of course, valuable in its own right; however, this also increases reading facility.

For this reason, I am incredibly excited for the opportunity to study German in Germany this summer at the Goethe Institut in Dresden and grateful to the Summer Language Abroad and Center for the Study of Languages and Cultures for the grant that made this possible. In addition to the same reasons that everyone in my field would be excited to study German in Germany, for me there is an extra reason. I actually lived in Germany when I was a child (after China and before the US) and acquired fluency naturally in situ. However, I unfortunately forgot German very quickly after moving to the US. For a long time I have longed for the opportunity to have an immersive experience in Germany and see how the language “comes back.”

I have been very much looking forward to the immersive language experience in Germany and expect significant improvement in my German. I have had a crash course in German grammar and have read academic literature since then, but have had no opportunities for speaking and listening since living in Germany as a child. This immersive experience will, of course, also increase the reading facility that is essential to my academic research. At the end of my courses this summer, I will be at the B1.2 level.

Posted on

#5: Power and Collectivism in Japan and Ecuador

When it comes to hetero-stereotypes of Japan, I often hear the following cultural tendencies from my non-Japanese friends:

  • Polite
  • Slow decision-making, beaurocracy
  • Hierarchical power relationships
  • Collectivistic, prioritizing the harmony of one’s group over an individual’s benefit

I personally believe that these observations are more or less true. We have to behave politely to older people (even if they are only one year older than us), and we even use different verb forms to talk to them. It is preferred to behave ourselves in public places (e.g., “don’t talk on the phone on public transportation, don’t eat while walking, don’t talk loudly; there are simply many social “don’ts” in Japan) so that we don’t harm the public benefit.

So, I was expecting that the “Power distance” index would be higher and the “Individualism” index would be lower in Japan than in Ecuador. However, the actual data showed the opposite.

(Orange on the left: Ecuador, Blue in the middle: Japan, Purple on the right: USA)

The figure above shows that the power distance index is higher and the individualism index is lower (that is, more collectivistic) in Ecuador, and Japan’s indices are around the middle.

This was unexpected data for me, but once I read the details of these scores, I could see why they are as they are. In short, the power distance metric shows the degree of social inequalities in the country. Though Japan does have a hierarchical structure based on age and sex, Ecuador has structural inequalities based on social classes and race (for example, mestizo/white over indigenous groups). I think that this power distance is directly affecting the endangerment of many indigenous languages of Ecuador. The Kichwa people I met in Ecuador told me that it was often the case that parents did not want to teach their children the Kichwa language because it is socially stigmatized and they might be looked down on if they speak the language in public.

As for individualism, it is understandable that the US is extremely individualistic, as symbolized by the Statue of Liberty. In contrast, Ecuador is one of the most collectivistic countries on that metric on the contrary to my intuition. As the Hofstede metrics explain that “In Individualist societies people are supposed to look after themselves and their direct family only,” this is the case in Japan. Nuclear families are the most common type of household in modern Japan, and family relationships seem to be not so tightly united. For example, I rarely call or text my parents now who live in Japan (not that we are in a bad relationship; we are doing well), but I saw my host family call or text their extended families almost every day.

All in all, it was interesting to compare the results of Hofstede indices for Japan, Ecuador, and the United States. However, I still think that the power distance and collectivism in Japan are stronger than it is represented in the data. I never feel like talking to Japanese professors in a friendly manner because of the strong sense of power distance, and I never feel like saying “No” to any offer or suggestion because I do not want to damage the harmony among my group. As explained in the Hofstede metrics, their criteria are based on only a few aspects of the society, and I am sure that they are not perfectly representative of the culture of each country (also, different ethnic groups in one country may have very different cultural behaviors, such as Mestizos and Kichwas in Ecuador). Though these metrics are useful to compare cultural tendencies of different countries, I am skeptical about the metrics and think that it should not be used to make judgements on countries.

Posted on

Contrast of Transporation

When my flight landed in Munich, I immediately noticed the difference in how people traveled from one place to another. I was able to take a train and a bus directly from the airport to my accommodation, and since I arrived here, I have not needed a car at all. The public transportation in Munich has enabled me to easily reach everywhere I wanted to go. In contrast, in the United States, it is impossible to get around without a car. People rely on cars because there are no other transportation options available. In Munich, however, trams, trains, bikes, buses, shared vehicles, and more are all accessible for getting around the city. For me and many others, public transport is a more logical choice in Munich.

Another notable difference in transportation is the treatment of pedestrian walk signs. Every day, as I walk to class at the Goethe-Institut, I have to cross a road. In the United States, it is common for people to treat pedestrian walk signs as a suggestion and cross the road when no cars are coming. However, whenever I encounter a pedestrian walk sign here, I have not seen a single pedestrian cross until the light changes from red to green. Every time, everyone waits patiently. I was surprised by this consistent behavior of waiting before crossing the street, regardless of the context. It surprised me even more to observe that people didn’t wait to cross at crossings without pedestrian waiting signs. In the U.S., cars do not wait for people to cross the street, and pedestrians have to wait for an opening. However, in Munich, people confidently walk across the street while cars patiently wait for them to cross. In the USA, cars control the roads, and everyone relies on them for transportation, whereas in Munich, people have various other means of getting around, and cars yield to pedestrians.