Е. Ф. Тарасов главный редактор
| Вид материала | Документы |
СодержаниеAnnika Lux |
- Серия «Мастера психологии» Главный редактор Заведующий редакцией Ведущий редактор Литературный, 6744.57kb.
- 4-5 38—41 Методическая газета для педагогов-психологов. Выходит 2 раза в месяц Учредитель, 534.94kb.
- Методист кабинета общественных дисциплин арипк; А. В. Нашемук, 1313.16kb.
- Главный редактор Зав психологической редакцией Зам зав психологической редакцией Ведущий, 16568.8kb.
- М. Н. Кедров (главный редактор), О. Л. Книппер-Чехова, А. Д. Попов, Е. Е. Северин,, 7543.75kb.
- 7 ноября/понедельник, 345.99kb.
- -, 406.21kb.
- А. В. Федоров главный редактор, 1896.68kb.
- Тощенко жан Терентьевич член-корреспондент ран, главный редактор журнала "Социологические, 322.26kb.
- Предварительная программа, 64.81kb.
Annika Lux
ANALYZING DIFFERENT ATTITUDES TOWARDS “FEMINISM, ABORTION AND THE ROLE OF WOMEN” AMONG GERMAN AND POLISH UNIVERSITY STUDENTS: ASSOCIATION EXPERIMENT
Originally Russian ethnopsycholinguistics have been investigating the translation of written texts from one language and cultural group to another. Thus, research in this area analyses among other things the perception and understanding of texts written in a foreign language (1). Within the field of ethnopsycholinguistics, the lacuna model has been developed.
The origins of this term can be found in the Latin language where it is explained as a gap or opening. In the field of medicine it means a bulge on the surface of an organ. Sorokin and Markovina defined lacunae as phenomena of a culture that have no equivalents in another culture regarding both linguistic as well as cultural specifics (2).
The lacuna model had been primarily introduced by J.A. Sorokin and continually established by I. Markovina. It represents a framework “for the systematic characterization, operationalization and classification of cultural differences in communication” Schröder [1995: 10]. In the field of cultural studies, one explores differences between cultures, the specifics of cultures. Hence, it is of great importance to be aware of dangers that might be results of these differences, how to become aware of them and how to deal with them. These differences can be gaps in a text or in a broader sense, gaps in cultural habits, ideas or features. Thus, “lacunae are generally speaking a term for describing items that exist in one culture, but not in another” Schröder [1995: 12].
Before we proceed to the classification of lacunae, it is important to elaborate on the idea of “culture” and “gap”. Culture can be defined as a system of signs or codes using a semiotic definition of this term. Such a code consists of semantic system, has a network of meanings and can be used as a functional substitute term for culture. The border of a culture represents a semiotic means of translation, which enables the exchange of information between cultures and subcultures. In cases, where such cross-cultural transfer of signs is only partly possible or not possible at all, one experiences a lacuna. Lacunae occur if the decoding mechanism of the culture into which the text or cultural specific is going to be translated does not have (or only few) semantic means to identify the elements that accompany the cross-cultural transfer. The semantic meaning potential of the original cultural and the target culture are not congruent. A gap of different semantic degree has emerged. Hence, lacunae can be defined as a cultural invariant, which determines the degree of semantic difference between cultures. As already mentioned, the recipient of the target culture perceives lacunae as something, which does not exist in his/her culture, or it might exist but it receives different meanings.
However, these missing features are not just words that cannot be translated. Moreover, lacunae also capture cultural specific features. If we consider the term ”feminism”, it can be translated both into German (Feminismus) and Polish (feminizm), but the cultural connotations in these two cultures are different. Therefore, the semantic degree cannot be reduced to the function of indicating a missing word. Moreover, the meaning of a cultural feature is not static, not fixed, but it might vary over time and it also depends on extra linguistic characteristics. Asking somebody about his or her associations about abortion will result in answers that are influence by the personal and educational background of the person, it may differ asking elderly or young people (3).
Turning to the definition of “gaps”, lacunae are linguistically defined as “gaps in the text”. However this spectrum of gaps reaches from words that cannot be translated to meanings of cultural specifics that can only be created through the active construction process on behalf of the reader/ actor. Lacunae represent more than signals of specific realities, they are signals of specific processes and stages, which contradict the usual experience of a member of a different culture. Lacunae are gaps of experience, deficits of knowledge and niches (4).
Furthermore, the recipient perceives lacunae as something not understandable, unusual, exotic, foreign, unknown, incorrect, astonishing, unexpected, something that cannot be predicted. Lacunae are fragments that strike the recipient, which require interpretation or which are lying beyond the borders of his/her attention. According to Sorokin, one important characteristic of a lacuna is its ambivalence, which is attractive through its incomprehensibility and oddity (5).
The next paragraph will represent a classification of lacunae. Sorokin and Markovina have formed a classification of language and cultural lacunae. Due to the restricted framework of this paper, I will concentrate in cultural lacuna. These can be roughly subdivided into four groups (6):
- Subjective or national-psychological lacunae
- Lacunae of communicative activity
- Lacunae related to cultural space
- Text lacunae
Important for this work is the first group, subjective or national-psychological lacunae. By the means of the association experiment that is the base of this paper, I investigated among other things the images of Polish and German women. The different associations of respondents are character lacunae. For female Polish and German respondents, thinking about a “typical Polish and German woman, they are dealing with auto stereotypes and their sense of self-definition. Thinking about their counterpart from the other culture, they are dealing with “the stereotypical reception of the national character of other countries” Schröder [1995: 14]. The latter is also valid for male respondents of both nations. The feature “typical German/ Polish woman” can thus be defined as cultural lacunae.
Furthermore, the same feature can be classified as behavioural-specific lacunae, which are part of the second group “Lacunae of communicative activity”. As “typical German/ Polish woman” concerns also associations about appropriate roles and status of women in society, behaviour and rules of etiquette are closely related. The terms “feminism” and “abortion” can be integrated within the third group, “Lacunae related to cultural space”. These terms are symbolic; they reflect a particular way of discussion.