Contemporary Diversity Issues in Communication

If there is 1 particularly inauspicious effect of globalization, that is the homogenization of subtlety and the subservience of minority or pagan cultures and talking tos low the predominate peerless. It is a phenomenon that if allowed to continue unabated can consort to the extinction of minority rows and culture, which in effect can lead to the way out of the uniqueness that renders individuals with their own creative individuality. In a world that purports to detect mixed bag, it is ironic that intercourse seems to be leaning towards homogenization or specimenisation of forms.Globalization necessitates the require for the homogenization of colloquy beca enforce in an age of international businesses, talking to diversity can hinder mete out relations and transactions. Using iodine form of communication quickens interaction and leaves very little room for misinterpretation. Languages cook out of the users need to express themselves. As such, it is bonnie to sa y that all languages argon equal. This equality take to bes that all languages, heedless of their characteristics and lingual qualities, all meet the social and psychological needs of the users. (Crystal, 1987, p.6)They atomic number 18 tailor made to the unique circumstances of the people and culture that created them. In the face of unrelenting globalization, these unique languages and cultures are giving way to a measuring stick form. The standard form imposes itself upon other languages in the form of linguistic prescription or prescriptive norms in culture, defining a standard form or ways of doing for a specific purpose or activity. Prescriptive norms serve as a controlling force that is exerted by the community over its members (Punder 2000, p. 141), and globalization imposes the homogenization of language and culture to facilitate communication and relations.While the usefulness and convenience of having a standard language or culture, particularly in a business environ ment, cannot be dismissed, this way of thought brings to the table a lot of complications not the least of which is stereotyping and its resultant complications ilk cultural and political contrariety. As John Fought (2007) once said, Language has eternally helped to signify who we are in society, sometimes serving as a basis for exclusion. The determination of the use of a standard language is by and large a function of political and economic power, in an act of extension of a certain cultures dominance over the rest.A standard form of language and culture will be of no use when there is no variation in the first place. There is a need to standardize because the diversity in our languages requires us to lessen the wonder and make for efficient transaction of our ordinary activities and fundamental businesses. Because language is a fundamental aspect of culture, it is therefore only natural that we be trace outlined or identified by our native language. Difficulties can arise if we are not fluent in the standard language being utilise in a particular place.In such cases, when we do not go the standard form of communication, we are immediately labeled as orthogonalers, or not born native to the place, a label that carries with it an entirely impudently set of biases and stereotypes that limits the opportunities that would energise otherwise been available to the individual. The need to conform is relate to the prestige that is associated with being able to act and communicate according to the dominant language or culture. (Abrams et al 2005, p. 120) Related to the payoff of race is the issue of social class.There are some people who have more linguistic powers at their disposal and are able to use this fluency to their advantage. (Bonfiglio, 2002, p. 12) volubility in language often connotes good breeding and education. Conversely, if you have difficulties in the standard language, other people will consider it as a statement of weakness or lack of social status. Of course it should overly be said that the bias also goes the other way. In some third-world countries, those who handle a foreign language or have foreign accents are considered first class citizens and are given preferential give-and-take in all aspects of their functional activities.What we speak and how we speak, reflects our history as an individual. How we speak makes a statement near who we are as a individual and a measure of who we could be Either way, these stereotyping based on ones communication style is very counter-productive and corrosive to the individual. Aside from discrimination and stereotyping, homogenization of communication is also adversely touch the rich diversity of our worlds languages, particularly on dialects.As prescriptive norms of standardized communication forms threaten the extinction of minority languages and dialects, it also slows language replace. Language remove is a natural puzzle out in the evolution of our langua ges. Language is eer in flux, ever adapting to the needs and realities of the times. It ever-changing and shifting its form, evolving in a process that is very much akin to natural selection. Language change is not so much a preference over one language variant, except the removal of a language that is socially hostile or no longer useful, for some reason or another.(Lippi-Green, 1997, p. 173)With the front man of a homogenized form of communication and culture, the normal evolution that should have taken place to strengthen local languages and make them constantly germane(predicate) has been forcefully suppressed by the imposition of a uniform language or code that is universal to all situations. In light of this, language change becomes almost unnecessary because the homogenized form of communication has removed the necessity for the local language to adapt because the change has been imposed artificially by the dominant culture.Globalization presupposes the interaction of various cultures. Over mans collective history, culture exchange has resulted in the constant evolution of cultures as it gets constantly exposed to another culture. This is a two-way process that enriches the culture of all those involved. In a process called acculturation, a certain crowd of people imbibe new ways of doing without necessarily changing their apparent identity. Acculturation represents the adaptation of a certain culture to change but keeping their culture uniquely their own.However, in this age of homogenization, acculturation has come to call up the slow erosion and subservience of the ethnic culture under the dominant one. (Castro 2003, p. 19) Thus, acculturation can be considered as a process of culture change where the foreigners or minorities must adapt in pose to survive. In other words, this refers to the homogenization of communication and culture in night club to flourish in a global community. This discourse does not mean to present language and cult ural homogenization in a hard light.In some cases, such homogenization is truly necessary to facilitate communication and exchange similar to what a standard currency will do. What is important to remember is that a standard form of communication can be learned without having to sacrifice our own native languages and culture. Our ability to learn a language is elastic, and we can speak as many variations without necessarily affecting the other. To learn one form of language does not necessarily mean that we have to supplant the old one..In an era of globalization where the language of trade becomes the dominant form, the ability to communicate in the standard language is a definite advantage. However with that being said, the value of the mother tongue should neer be forgotten. The respect that we have for our own cultural heritage renders us with our own unique identities. And in an era of globalization, where everything is being homogenized we need to hang on to that identity or stand to lose everything about ourselves that makes us special, and thus indispensible to our community.