»language«

Nowadays, German is still spoken in the higher management level at Volkswagen as well as at Panopa. In the second level both companies mostly employ Polish people who also speak German.

In general Panopa is sending fewer expatriates to Poland every year. In the beginning jobs in the strategic division were filled project-specific with German expatriates. Nowadays the job is done by two fixed employees and help is only sent in emergencies. Instead Panopa makes sure to grant their employees qualification trainings to build up competencies on site.
This redundantizes the business with expatriates which is comparably expensive and takes a lot of energy from the company as well as from the employees concerned: motivating employees to leave Germany and to stay abroad for weeks and months at a time for single projects, permanent shuttling, ... Dr. Hucht resumes that it is simply easier and less expensive to establish methods of qualification at the respective location. ("Wenn ich in Deutschland jemanden motiviere da rüber zu gehen, dann redet der erstmal über mehr Geld." Dr.Hucht, 13.45 min.)

One of the first few phrases that one generally learns in any new language to get around. :)

(1) "ahn-yeoung-ha-se-yo" = "Hello! How do you do?"

(2) "gamsa-hahp-ni-da" = "Thank You"

While I needed the summaries to understand what Hall was actually talking about, I summarize my own little reflections on it here:

Hall bases most of his findings on his experiences with the Navajo and Hopi. This sometimes makes it difficult to transfer his theories on expatriates encountering a new cultural environment. Nevertheless he provoked quite some thoughts.

1. language.
I had always thought of language to reflect the life of the respective culture. I had thought of the Inuit for example whose language offers them ten words for white while we have only one. Thus: since they experience a lot of different "whites" they need more words to articulate this experience. Vice-versa: since white is not important in our all-day life, we did not invent any words for it. Hall says that man's explanation of nature tells much more about man than about nature. It shows how he sees the world.
At the same time language, according to Hall, is limiting: while it reveals how man perceives the world, it also limits him in his perception. This becomes obvious when you learn a new language and there are simply no equivalent words to express yourself in just the same way as you would in your mother tongue. English for example is regarded as action-orientated and expressing thoughts in another language can provoke completely different images.
I actually get a little stuck in this concept because experience does not equal language. Language is just a model to structure and share experiences and thoughts.
This leads to another of Hall's ideas: we mistake the model, the symbolization of something as the thing itself. This means that we take poor expression for little intelligence. Thus poor English skills is often interpreted as incompetence. This becomes especially awkward regarding the fact that in most cross-cultural encounters English is not the mother tongue for either party. Culturally-learned concepts are transferred into the foreign language which already does not make sense and are then further translated/interpretated by yet another understanding of language. On official meetings this means that it might make sense to rely on professional translators.
This relates to another of Hall's concept: situational frames. People always approve to be addressed in their situational dialect (e.g. ordering something in a restaurant asks for a special style of talking, acting, ... just like any other situation consists of an appropriate catalogue of language, actions, behaviors). Using the situational dialect tags the speaker as insider and earns him recognition. But using the dialect wrong ultimately declares him as outsider.

2. situational frames and action chains
Hall defines all human interactions as situation which are culturally bound by situational frames and follow patterned action chains. While action chains are not explicitly expressed, they define which behavior is culturally appropriate. Not following the expected action chains is ultimately disrupting.
This shows in all aspects of life. While the question "How are you?" seems to be universal, the answers can be very different. Germans, I generalize at this point, like to hold a monologue on how bad everything is. North-Americans on the other hand regard this question only as an opener and are always fine. North-Americans are regarded to be superficial while Germans are just big whiners. Good start for a talk.
On a higher business level all organizational aspects are defined by action chains: who takes part in a meeting? Where does the meeting take place? Who is seated where? Who gets to talk? Who gets involved in conflict resolution?
On a political level this is worked out in the diplomatic etiquette (sag ich mal so!): which country is visited first? Which at all? Which officials are honored with a meeting?...

While being quite happy to write in English, I still face some problems: style of writing. While in German a sophisticated level of language is expressed in the use of context-related difficult vocabulary (you are the expert!), the state of the art in English seems to be to put things as easy as possible (you are only the expert if you can explain it to ordinary people!). I actually much favor the later but agree that sometimes it seems to oversimplify things...

A nice article on this in German.

In Poznań Panopa employs about 700 people which are responsible to store materials and parts as well as assemble some of them ready for delivery and distribute them just-in-time and just-in-sequence at Volkswagen. The smooth functioning is guaranteed by regular communication between and within the companies. ("Weil einfach die Verzahnung der ganzen Kette so eng ist, dass die Information ein wesentlicher Bestandteil ist; ansonsten können Sie den Job nicht machen." Vieth, 04.00min) Every morning at 8a.m. Panopa and Volkswagen sit together to review the last 24 hours: where did something go wrong? Were there distributional bottle necks? How can we avoid them next time? In this Volkswagen, Panopa and in this case Mr. Vieth follow the claim that nothing is worse than a mistake happening twice. Thus all operational departments, and Panopa as service provider is taken as just another operational department, sit together and make sure everything is set for the next day. Quite naturally the cooperation between Volkswagen and Panopa offered more possible sources of friction in the beginning than it does nowadays were the daily meetings can be performed within half an hour.

Start-up problems were diminished by the fact that both parties were basically run by German expatriates: the top two levels of management were occupied by Germans. Consequently, German was enforced as first language within the organizational structures. The situation was further eased by the fact that Volkswagen is the biggest employer in the area which facilitates the communication with the municipal authorities and communities. In terms of infrastructure for example the authorities renovated a quite decrepit bridge which was connecting Panopa's warehouse with Volkswagen's factory 6km away.
Dr. Hucht resumes that it was quite helpful for them to work for a well-known client who is conducting projects which are of public interest and widely appreciated. Nevertheless there were no networks Panopa could fall back onto. Their first project manager, interestingly enough a French, looked for a contact person on site who was then responsible for getting all the necessary admissions (water, electricity, ...). Without knowing a single word in Polish it would have been impossible to talk to the authorities and to apply for permits. ("Weil wenn Sie kein Polnisch sprechen, haben Sie keine Chance." Vieth, 09.14min) The only thing that was not run by their contact person was the building of the storehouse. That was done by a German architect who was already living in Poland since 14 years which left Panopa with hardly any work on that topic of admissions. ("Das ganze übrige Geschäft [..] haben wir eigentlich eingekauft." Vieth, 09.30min) Meanwhile several societies and groups came into existence which establish and open up networks to foreign entrepreneurs. This certainly facilitates start up and the possibilities to gain information.

When Panopa first came to Poland they also faced problems with the different legislation. Since it used to very be difficult for foreigner to actually buy a piece of land in Panopa built their first storehouse onto a site which did not belong to themselves. While they were putting up the lease contracts they had to find out that by Polish Law the building belongs to the owner of the site. ("Weil man eben doch die deutschen Zusammenhänge und Gepflogenheiten überträgt auf das andere Land und dann eventuell auch in eine Falle rein rennt, wo man gar nicht mit gerechnet hat." Dr. Hucht, 11.02 min.) Problems in that direction piled up because as a company you were not allowed to build a house before you were not operating in Poland since two years - but which company can actually wait two years. Thus you need somebody who talks with the parties concerned and explains that Panopa is interested in being a reliable partner and a future employer. ("Sie müssen da irgendeinen Sachverständigen haben, der für Sie dort hingeht und klar macht, dass Sie da eine Halle bauen dürfen; [...] dass Sie ein guter Partner sind, die nächsten Jahre in Polen auch für Arbeitsplätze sorgen und so weiter und so fort." Vieth, 11.52 min)

Hall states that every organism controls and changes nature by means of extension. Extensions can either be materialistic (for example a knife extends the teeth in their function of cutting things) or .... (like language for example). "Extensions often permit man to solve problems in satisfactory ways, to evolve and adapt at great speed without changing the basic structure of his body. However, the extension does something else: it permits man to examine and perfect what is inside the head. Once something is externalized, it is possible to look at it, study it, change it, perfect it, and at the same time learn important things about oneself." (p.29)
To summarize it in a broad sense, Hall sees extensions to improve human talents: take the example of eating or speaking as introduced, or the idea of bridging distances faster by taking the car, seeing things better by taking a microscope, taking photos to extend the visual memory, ...
As in the chapter before he takes the example of language which to him is the "symbolization of something that happened, could have happened, or is in the processes of happening" (p.28) but language is never the event itself and it is not even the thought itself (mistaking the symbol and its reference is what Hall calls "extension transference"). Language is just an extension, just like mathematics is an extension as well. Einstein, for example, could have visualized his ideas in words as well but decided mathematics to be more suitable. His insights were externalized into a constructed system so that they could be put to use.
Words and numbers are different descriptive system and as extensions they have their disadvantages or limitations. Just like a knife is good for cutting but not for chewing or a car extends certain functions of the legs but not all (it can't climb for example, or dance).

So, summarizing this: models as introduced in chapter 1 are extensions, right?!

back to the table of content
further to chapter three

Hall describes culture to be a screen between man and the outside world. A screen is needed to give structure and prevent "information overload" by organizing what we pay attention to and what we ignore (cp. p.85). While information is simplyfied it loses its characteristics which can only be regained by contextualizing.
Hall compares this to the system of language: one word might mean different things but contexts gives it a specific meaning. This is why translating machines still fail to substitute man: "the problem lies not in the linguistic code but in the context, which carries varrying proportions of the meaning. Without context, the code is incomplete since it encompasses only part of the message." (p.86)
He especially picks out the Chinese language in which - in order to look up a word - you have to know the significance of 214 radicals (a grammatical phenomena not even known in our languages): to find the word "star" you would have to look it up on the sun-radical. (cp. p.90ff)
Another simplified example would be the laws of perception in which it was proven that colors are perceived differently depending on their background. (cp. p.95)
Contexting works the other way round when people are well acquainted to each other and develop their "own" language in which words and sentences are shortened or new words are invented. (cp.p.92)

His example of contexting in a cultural sense goes back on the idea of body movement. "[I]ntrusion distance (the distance one has to maintain from two people who are already talking in order to get attention but not intrude). How great this distance is and how long one must wait before moving in depends on: what is going on (activity), your status, your relationship in a social system (husband and wife or boss and subordinate), the emotional state of the parties, the urgency of needs of the individual who must intrude, etc." (p.98ff) This explains quite clearly why body movement cannot be split into units independent from the context.

back to the table of content
further to chapter seven

Looks like a prototype model for James Bond: the glasses with a small display added show the translated speech of a person talking to you in a foreign language. It goes as follows: the speech is recorded by a microphone [1], transferred into text [2], translated [3] and given as subtitles on the display [4]. The key component of course is the software that performs the speech-to-speech translation [step 3] as speech recognition and output (or synthesis for an ear plug) already work reasonable good. The prototype is developed at U of Karlsruhe, Germany, in the group of Alex Waibel. He told me recently that the performance in the language pair english/spanish is already fine, for instance, to follow a lecture. The pair english/german is moderate just to grasp an idea on what the speaker is saying.

Interesting is the software's approach to 'learn' a foreign language: just assume that any sentence or phrase is already translated somewhere on the Internet. Now, let the search engines collect the paired phrases and do some intelligent data interpretation. If it works for one language pair, it will do it for any other pair with only slight modifications of the software, hopes Waibel. image (c) University of Karlsruhe

Hall gets around to define what culture is stating that definitions are just models. Models are actually to be understood in the broad sense: parents are models for the young, mechanical models might explain the construction of a machine, grammar and the system of writing are models of language, ...
"The purpose of the model is to enable the user to do a better job in handling the enormous complexity of life. By using models, we see and test how things work and can even predict how things will go in the future." (p. 13)
Models are based on drawbacks: man's explanation of nature actually tells much more about man than about nature, the model or explanation just expresses how he sees the world. Accordingly, it is impossible for an anthropologist to define the things that make up culture. Every model about culture would just reflect the specific culture from which it originates.
Therefore, instead of developing generalized models he introduced two specific cultural models: language and time.

He quotes Saphir who says that "[L]anguage is much like a mathematical system which previsages all possible experience in accordance with certain accepted formal limitations.... [C]ategories such as number, gender, case, tense, mode, voice, 'aspect' and a host of others... are not so much discovered in experience as imposed upon it." (p.15) He gives an example of Navajo kids who in school had to learn how to express themselves in English and failed because the language didn't offer them the words they needed for articulating their experiences.
At this point I was thinking of the Inuit whose language offers them 10 or more words for the color white while we have only one. I always saw the language to reflect the daily experience while Hall introduces the idea of a language-model vice-versa: it sure reflects experience but it limits experience as well. (While at the same time it has to be questioned if language equals experience...)
While it sounds as if this as nothing to do with expatriates encountering different cultures it has to be remembered that language is one of the most obvious parts of communication and that it is the very use of words that shape how the other person is perceived. (I'll work on this later: perceived level of language treated as indicator for intelligence, English -> action-orientated, not only the right words but the right use, better have a professional translator, ...)

Another big concern of Hall lies in the modelling of time. He differentiates into monochromic- and polychromic time. Monochromic refers to time as linear, "segmented like a road or a ribbon extending forward into the future and backward to the past. It is also tangible; they speak of it as being saved, spent, wasted, lost, made up, accelerated, slowed down, crawling, and running out. [...] M-time scheduling is used as a classification system that orders life." (p.19) M-time people do one thing at a time, acknowledging the most time to the most important things, ... This means that life gets divided into units. This way time is shaping perception just as much as language is: I only perceive those things I put my attention, too.
Hall puts up a nice connection to space. Only upon the time arriving in the office, I am perceived as to be working. The fact that I might have been sitting at home or might have discussed the problem with friends at night, is not acknowledged as work. This becomes obvious in P-time-cultures. In those cultures, following Hall, everybody is always involved with everybody else. Time and space reveal many more layers which interrelate with each other. Work might not only be about sitting in the office but about being outside and making things happen.

Hall ends this chapter emphazing that models are learned. Language and its used are learned. Time is learned. Our perception of space is learned. Models are not existential in nature but cultural agreements. The problem is that they are felt to be natural.

Back to the table of content
Further to chapter two

Means... "Jakob learns Korean and forgets German"



(Short intro to Jakob - Jakob is a co-intern who is working with me at Samsung Design Europe. The man is a Product Designer from Berlin, Germany. However he has been living in London for 10 yrs. now.)

Jakob is getting better with his Korean but unfortunately is forgetting his German. In a matter of a day and half he has managed to learn quite a few words & phrases or has atleast been trying hard ! :) Brava Jakob...

Here's what he's learnt & is in the process of learning right now:

+ Ko Ma Wa - Thank You

+ Gwen cha na - Welcome

+ Nong Dam - Just Kidding

+ Jo a - Good

+ Mo ya ? - What?

+ Man na sou ban Gab Sub Ni Da - Nice to meet you