CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION ISSN 1712-8358 [PRINT]

Vol. 7, No. 1, 2011, pp. 62-72 ISSN 1923-6700 [ONLINE]

www.cscanada.net
www.cscanada.org

At Crossroads of EFL Learning and Culture:

How to Enhance Cross-cultural Awareness in EFL College
Students

AU CARREFOUR D'ENSEIGNEMENT DE EFLET CULTURE:

COMMENT AMÉLIORER LA CONSCIENCE MULTICULTURELLE DANS DES
ÉTUDIANTS UNIVERSITAIRES EFL

Abdul aziz Fageeh 1

Abstract: It may be a truism that culture and language are intricately interwoven and
that language is the basis of culture, but this tradition has been mostly absent in the
concern for second culture acquisition. Theoretically, there is a solid recognition in
pertinent literature that teaching English cannot be isolated from teaching its culture.
This article, basically a discussion paper, introduced cultural awareness as a significant
step towards activating a sound theory of English teaching and learning pedagogy.
Towards this purpose, the article has outlined the concepts of culture in English
language teaching (ELT), acculturation, cultural competence and cultural awareness as
basic steps for inducing effective communication. The differences between Arabic and
English cultures, and the need for cultural awareness were also discussed. The article has
also discussed how to foster students’ cross-cultural awareness in EFL teaching, and the
implications of this in EFL teacher education programmes.
Key words: Cross-cultural awareness; Language; Culture; EFL; ELT; Acculturation;
EFL teacher education

Resumé: Cela peut être un truisme que la culture et la langue sont complexent entrelacés
et cette langue est la base de culture, mais cette tradition a été surtout absente dans la
préoccupation pour la deuxième acquisition de culture. Théoriquement, il y a une
reconnaissance solide dans la littérature pertinente apprenant l'anglais ne peut pas être
isolé d'apprendre sa culture. Cet article, essentiellement un journal de discussion, la
conscience culturelle présentée comme une étape significative vers l’activation d'une
théorie du son d'enseignement d’anglais et l’étude de pédagogie. Vers ce but, l'article a
souligne les concepts de culture dans l'enseignement de l'anglais (ELT), l'acculturation,

1
Currently, Assistant Professor of Applied Linguistics, in Department of English and Translation, Faculty of
Languages and Translation, Abha, King Khalid University, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. He obtained his Ph.D. in
Applied linguistics, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, USA, 2003. He obtained his MA in Teaching English to
Speakers of Other Languages in Michigan State University, Michigan, East Lansing, USA, 1994.
*Received January 22, 2011; accepted March 4, 2011.

62
 Abdul aziz Fageeh/Cross-cultural Communication Vol.7 No.1, 2011
la compétence culturelle et la conscience culturelle comme des étapes de base pour
inciter la communication efficace.Les différences entre des cultures arabes et anglaises
et le besoin de la conscience culturelle ont été aussi discutées. L'article a aussi discuté
comment favoriser la conscience multiculturelle des étudiants dans l'enseignement
d'EFL et les implications dans l'enseignement des professeur EFL.
Mots-clés: Conscience multiculturelle; Langue; Culture; EFL; ELT; Acculturation;
EFL enseignement(éducation) de professeur

INTRODUCTION

Language is an aspect of culture, whereas the latter denotes the totality of the humanly created world,
including, but not restricted to language, arts and sciences, spirituality, social activity, interaction and
communication (Kroeber and Kluckhohn, 1952). According to a classical definition by Tylor, the term is
defined as follows:
"Culture, or civilization, taken in its broad, ethnographic sense, is that complex whole which
includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits
acquired by man as a member of society." (Tylor, 1974, p. 1)

Culture has also been defined as the

“integrated pattern of human behaviour that includes thoughts, communications, languages,
practices, beliefs, values, customs, courtesies, rituals, manners of interacting and roles,
relationships and expected behaviours of a racial, ethnic, religious or social group; and the ability
to transmit the above to succeeding generations” (Goode, et al, 2000).

In the field of TESOL and EFL, some authors, Atkinson (1999) for instance, distinguished among three
different notions of culture currently operating in the TESOL field: the first one accepts what he calls
"received" (i.e. traditional) view of culture as an identifiable entity associated with national boundaries; the
second one moves away from such a view in a theoretical sense, but in analyses of practices still sees
culture "in some sense as repositories of shared possibly normative values" (what Atkinson terms
‘received-but-critical view’); and the third, a ‘critical view’ that problematizes the usefulness of the concept
of culture (p. 629). According to Atkinson, within the third subfield
“... terms such as identity, hybridity, essentialism, power, difference, agency, discourse,
resistance, and contestation have been used to describe and call into question more traditional
views of culture. So used, these terms indicate the shared perspective that cultures are anything
but homogeneous, all-encompassing entities and represent important concepts in a larger project:
the unveiling of fissures, inequalities, disagreements, and cross-cutting influences that exist in
and around all cultural scenes, in order to banish once and for all the idea that cultures are
monolithic entities.” (1999, p. 627)

Having conducted a thorough review of current re-examinations of the concept of culture, Atkinson has
creatively and critically suggested six maxims informing research in acculturation as a method of teaching
English in TESOL and EFL contexts: according to the author,
“... all humans are individuals; individuality is also cultural; social group membership and
identity are multiple, contradictory, and dynamic; social group membership is consequential;
methods of studying cultural knowledge and behaviour are unlikely to fit a positivist paradigm;
language (learning and teaching) and culture are mutually implicated, but culture is multiple and
complex (pp. 641-647).

63
 Abdul aziz Fageeh/Cross-cultural Communication Vol.7 No.1, 2011
These maxims which Atkinson suggested help to indicate an appropriate and commensurate consistency
with conceptualizations of culture in the fields of anthropology and culture studies, such as the call for
recognizing the complexity of culture and culture's implication in questions of identity (Ilieva, 2005).
By the same token, Kubota (2003) has proposed the employment of four key concepts in analyzing
culture for the purposes of second language education: a focus on descriptive rather than prescriptive
understanding of culture (1), a focus on diversity within a culture (2) and culture's dynamic nature (3), and
a focus on the discursive construction of culture (4) by which she means that our knowledge about and
experiences of culture are constructed in discourses.
Kubota elucidates that the first three conceptualisations have their limitations that a focus on the
discursive construction of culture addresses by recognizing the politics of difference and inviting a critical
exploration of cultural characteristics in relation to politics, power, and discourses.
In a similar vein, Kramsch (2003) adds another richer reconceptualisation of the term culture as applied
to ESL/EFL research and practice: according to Kramsch, culture is seen not as a product, but as a process
of meaning ascription through language use and in various subfields of applied linguistics culture is
perceived as (1) ways of categorizing, i.e. as belief or ideology, as (2) ways of interacting, i.e. as habitus or
socialization, and (3) as ways of belonging, i.e. as social and cultural identity.
However, language is the most important aspectual component of culture. This is clear in the classical
cognitive definition of culture provided by Geertz (1973); according to this anthropologist, culture is ...

"... an historically transmitted pattern of meanings embodied in symbols, a system of inherited

conceptions expressed in symbolic forms by means of which men communicate, perpetuate, and
develop their knowledge about and attitudes toward life" (Geertz 1973, p. 89).

Such definitions, in the case of English or Arabic, imply that neither of the two languages language is the
only a component of its speaking countries’ culture, but it also exhibits and transmits it (Peterson and
Coltrane, 2003); “For culture is only transmissible through coding, classifying and concentrating
experience through some form of language” (Stern, 1983, p. 200). In each language, there are so many
dialects, for each of which is widely spoken as the native tongue of so many countries spread all over the
continents.
The case being as such, some anthropologists have adeptly observed that culture would not be possible
without language. And yet, language is shaped and greatly impacted by its culture now that language
contains the symbolic manifestations of interpersonal communications in a given society, comprising as
such the socio-cultural and historical backdrops of people and their approaches to life, living and thinking
(Yanchang, 1989).
Some authors have claimed that foreign language learning is intimately related to culture learning (Ando,
1997; Harumi, 2002; Eoyang, 2003; Tanaka, 2006; Janzen, 2008; Tochon, 2009).
In this vein, the importance of culture in language learning and teaching. Hall (1981, p. 36), accordingly,
maintains that language is ‘one of the dominant threads in all cultures’.
Consequently, foreign language learning requires a significantly more amount of foreign culture learning,
now that “learning new languages opens students' minds to the ways of other peoples and increases the
opportunities for cross-cultural understanding” (Citron, 1995, p. 105). Overtly or covertly, culture has often
been taught in the foreign language classroom (Brooks, 1969; Citron, 1995; Harumi, 2002; Ilieva, 2005;
Deters, 2009), but not as formally emphasised as it should be.
Therefore, inasmuch as English in a foreign language learning setting is concerned, some authors believe
that teaching EFL well means more than just teaching learners the vocabulary, structures and grammar
points of the language. In addition to these, ELT also involves learning how to slip into the English culture
as smoothly and as naturally as can be possible. Learners should be informed how native speakers of
English see the world and how the English language reflects the ideas, customs, and behaviour of their
society. In other words, to have a good command of grammatical rules of a language contributes to
correctness of sentence structures while familiarity with as much cultural knowledge of that language as

64
 Abdul aziz Fageeh/Cross-cultural Communication Vol.7 No.1, 2011
possible guarantees appropriateness of discourse. Only with the combination of language competence and
cultural awareness can language achieve its communicative function.
Therefore, it is necessary to foster cultural awareness by teaching culture incorporated in the learners’
consciousness of the hidden assumptions and premises underlying their belief and value systems
(Humphrey, 1997, p. 242) and, most importantly, to show that our own culture predisposes us to a certain
worldview by creating a
‘cognitive framework….[which] is made up of a number of unquantifiables, embracing
assumptions about how the world is constructed’ (ibid.). But this cognitive framework is, to a
great extent, maintained and sanctioned through the very use of language, which is arguably ‘the
most visible and available expression of [a] culture’ (Brown, 1986, cited in Valdes, 1986, p. 33).

Language reflects culture; hence it is crucial to incorporate them together in the materials (Fairclough,
1992, p. 6). The reason is that teaching linguistic knowledge alone is not sufficient for inducing to a sound
and communicative cultural interaction between EFL learners who are native speakers of Arabic (Peterson
and Coltrane, 2003). It should be noted that language teaching theorists have emphasised the importance of
language learning in gaining knowledge about a country and its people (Stern, 1993, p. 247). It is worth
mentioning here that ELT educationalists and syllabus designers in Saudi Arabia had separated the English
language from its inner circle cultures till a very recent time.
Language and culture are so intricately related that their boundaries, if any, are extremely blurred and it is
difficult to become aware of the assumptions and expectations that we hold, though (Kramsch, 1998). In
fact, students studying EFL come into the FL classes with their first cultures and sub-cultures which may
interfere or collide with the target language culture. For example, an EFL learner’s first culture (C1) has a
strong influence in second language acquisition (SLA) and yet teaching English as a Second/Foreign
Language (ESL/EFL) continues to take an approach of second culture acquisition (SCA) while denying the
students’ C1.
Based on the above introduction, this discussion paper aims at identifying the role of culture learning
(also known as acculturation) in the process of ELT and EFL learning. It also seeks to contour the
importance of cultural awareness in English language teaching and learning. To achieve this goal, the
article develops closely around how to foster students’ cross-cultural awareness in EFL teaching.

ARABIC CULTURE VERSUS ENGLISH CULTURE

Crudely put, if one wants to assess the real differences between Arab culture and English culture, one must
first consider the geographical distance between native speakers of both languages, which resulted in a
distance between Arabic culture and English culture (Bahameed, 2008). Down history, encounters with the
Indo-European languages started to exist in the Middle Ages when Arabs (sardonically referred to by
Europeans as the Saracens) invaded some parts of Europe and established a Muslim empire in Andalusia.
Cultural differences between Arabic and English exist not only in customs and habits, but also in beliefs,
value systems, mode of thinking and many other aspects which have infiltrated into the cultural component
of language use in intracultural communication. These different modal aspects of thinking in Arabic and
English spring from the differences in Oriental versus Western philosophy. For instance, the basis for Arab
philosophy is principally monistic and static. It lays stress on subjectivity. Whereas the English culture,
subsumed in a larger Western context, has its philosophical basis grounded in a clear cut between self-being
and outside-being. It tends to objectify the outside world. In other words, the Arab mind tends to be
subjective while the English tends to be objective. As a consequence, the English language and the Arab
language have different ways of interpreting the outside world. The former is hypotactic, compact and overt,
the latter paratactic, diffusive and covert.
Culture has influence on every aspect of language: lexical study, syntactical and grammatical study,
literature and reading, composition and essay writing. In vein, the socio-linguistic aspects of Arabic differ
from those of the English language (Santos & Suleiman, 1993). Santos and Suleiman (1993) explain this
point as follows:

65
 Abdul aziz Fageeh/Cross-cultural Communication Vol.7 No.1, 2011
“Some of these (sociolinguistic) features usually transfer to English in an inappropriate manner.
For example, the depth of questioning about family affairs, health, and other private matters are
culturally incompatible. Jokes are also culture-bound; what is humorous to an Arab might be
outrageous to an American and vice versa” (p. 177).

Such differences have affected not only spoken discourse as in everyday conversational Arabic, but it
also affected the written discourse of Arabic native speakers - a discoursal style that is dependent on Arabic
logic, cultural orientations and thought patterns grounded as above indicated in an Oriental monistical
philosophy. This rhetoric is tightly organised, terse, rigid, and profuse, resulting in some sort of prolix
language. When Arabs write in English, with a likely interlanguage permeating this cultural propensity,
logical presentation of ideas sounds as foreign to Arab EFL learners as English itself (Yorkey, 1977). This
rhetoric is different from the English style which tends to be expressed in short utterances in a direct fashion
free from prolixity. Arabic written style seems personal, subjective and lackadaisically embellished;
English is impersonal, cold and direct.
These differences just outlined, together with many others, reflect the diversity that exists in cultures and
the different language dialects between English and Arabic. Given these cultural and socio-linguistic
variations, ELT in the Arabic context should to take all these factors into account. However, recognising
these cultural variations, teaching language per se and teaching the cultural features of the language pose an
unfair load on the EFL teacher. And it is due to this culture load that teachers’ work and students’
cross-cultural communication have become a tough task.

THE NEED FOR CULTURAL AWARENESS IN ELT

It may be a truism that culture can lead to different interpretations and reaction to language. Therefore, it
stands to reason that students’ ability to comprehend and communicate in English should appositely be
strongly dependent on the culture background knowledge, and the deficiency of this knowledge is most
likely to render their English poor communicatively speaking.
Few researchers have scrutinised current Saudi EFL curricula, noting that they provide at least some
directives on intercultural language teaching. Those researchers believe that EFL students’ culture mistakes
when learning English fall into four categories: socio-linguistically inappropriate, culturally unacceptable,
conflict of different value systems and over-simplification or over-generalization (Zaid, 2008; 2011;
Mekheimer & Al-Dosari, 2011). It was noticeable from this prior research that any of these factors can lead
to these mistakes. Therefore, within the context of foreign language teaching, knowledge about other
cultures, openness and empathy toward other cultures, critical involvement with intercultural topics, the
readiness to put one’s own convictions into perspective, and the ability to deal with people from different
cultures are to be promoted to induce sound cultural awareness (Zaid, 2008; Al-dosari, 2010; Mekheimer
& Al-Dosari, 2011).
Nevertheless, curricula concentrate primarily on general intercultural learning goals such as overcoming
ethnocentrism, developing cultural self-awareness, and encouraging appreciation, interest and respect for
cultural diversity. But they fail to indicate how these general goals are to be taught, and thus lack a
convincing link between general intercultural learning goals and those concerned with specific cultures.
The central goals of intercultural learning in the EFL classroom can, therefore, be described as cultural
awareness, acceptance of cultural differences, and interest in the specific culture of the language being
taught, as well as in intercultural topics in general. Looking further afield, the EFL department of the
College of Languages and Translation has proposed a new syllabus plan with more literature and cultural
courses to bolster up inter-cultural competence and acculturation into the English language in order to
develop various teaching concepts for intercultural content and to acknowledge the interactive nature of
culture and transmit this idea to EFL students in EFL schools.
Therefore, it seems obvious that Arabs learning EFL in the Saudi context miss so much about the cultural
features of the English language. In addition, at the undergraduate level and earlier before, it’s very clear
that our students have never been to any English-speaking countries before they start to learn and use the

66
 Abdul aziz Fageeh/Cross-cultural Communication Vol.7 No.1, 2011
target language –English. As such, they may learn English culture mostly from books or mass media, but
surely this is going to offer them less opportunities to contact and experience English culture in person. In
this sense, it’s natural that many students may fail to master more English cultural background knowledge.
Furthermore, Arabian students of EFL students often unconsciously use their own customs of thought to
learn English, so that they comprehend English passages incorrectly. A reader, no matter how much
cultural background knowledge he has learned and acquired, couldn’t possibly have all the knowledge
needed for learning a foreign language. So the thinking customs are very important, which may serve as the
best explanation of students’ frequent failure to comprehend materials about typical English culture and
failure to communicate with English native speakers. Last, but not least, failure to give sufficient attention
to culturally-orientated courses in EFL teaching still continues to be the source of failure in a following a
sound and rigid communicative approach to ELT in a fashion that fosters acculturation into the English
language.
Consequently, it is necessary to view the teaching of culture as a means of ‘developing an awareness of,
and sensitivity towards, the values and traditions of the people whose language is being studied’ (Tucker &
Lambert, 1972, p. 26).
Therefore, it is necessary to foster cultural awareness by teaching culture incorporated in the learners’
consciousness of the hidden assumptions and premises underlying their belief and value systems
(Humphrey, 1997, p. 242) and, most importantly, to show that our own culture predisposes us to a certain
worldview by creating a “cognitive framework….[which] is made up of a number of unquantifiables,
embracing assumptions about how the world is constructed” (ibid.). But this cognitive framework is, to a
great extent, maintained and sanctioned through the very use of language, which is arguably “the most
visible and available expression of [a] culture” (Brown, 1986, cited in Valdes, 1986, p. 33).
The literature is abundant in strongly voiced claims in favour of the theory that English should be taught
through the socio-cultural norms and values of an English-speaking country (Peterson and Coltrane, 2003).
ELT then is a process of acculturation that must inevitably be conducive to the creation of individuals who
are both bilingual and bicultural (Alptekin and Alptekin, 1984). No doubt then is that integrating culture in
the language classroom practices can be understood as important, apposite and necessary. But how? In the
following sections, the author relates theory to practice.

FROM GRAMMAR-TRANSLATION TEACHING TO

ACCULTURATION

Traditional EFL learning materials in Saudi Arabia as elsewhere were in theory arranged for the
convenience of vocabulary drill and grammar presentation. Therefore, most of these textbooks available are
grammar-centred, providing little or virtually no attention to cultural content in a purposeful, overt and
planned manner. Although EFL linguists and educators still disagree as to how to produce ELT textbooks,
those which take cultural factors into consideration would be more helpful and valuable to EFL learners
than those with which have been used in teaching EFL over the past few years.
On the contrary, Peterson and Coltrane (2003) insist that ELT curriculum and resources must include
native-speakerist, culture-specific materials to help learners get involved in true cultural experiences. Such
materials can be obtained from sources like newspapers, magazines, websites, news programmes, lectures,
etc. – materials that foster EFL learning from its inner circle cultures. According to this postulation, then,
language materials must incorporate at least the essential information about the cultural values and norms
of the target culture in order to give learners the chance to understand not only the linguistic code of the
English language, but also to be able to communicate effectively with its native-speaking community in
ways that ease intra-cultural understanding, and inter-cultural communication without falling prey to
cultural misunderstandings.
However, the theory advocating the incorporation of cultural norms and values in the ELT curriculum
content is not entirely new to the theory of English as a foreign language teaching (Peterson and Coltrane,
2003). However, the current controversy advocates the appositeness of the cultural content to be included in

67
 Abdul aziz Fageeh/Cross-cultural Communication Vol.7 No.1, 2011
these teaching materials. In particular, an ELT content that should be integrated depends on the purpose of
teaching a certain foreign language. So, if the goals of ELT were to enable learners to communicate
effectively in the target language community, socio-cultural features should be regarded as an essential
ingredient of the language materials (Peterson and Coltrane, 2003). On the other hand, if the main goal was
to enable learners to communicate internationally and for plain educational or technical purposes, then the
materials of the curriculum should incorporate only those aspects of language which are assumed to be
shared by the whole world.
Therefore, as today’s Saudi college EFL students will likely interact with students and staff that are
culturally and linguistically pluralistic, with the teaching faculty being seconded from the inner and outer
circle countries speaking English as a native tongue, there is, no doubt, a need for EFL students to develop
an awareness of different varieties of English and positive attitudes towards the speakers of these varieties
in fashions that build intra-cultural awareness and foster inter-cultural communication. Interest in teaching
culture side by side with language, therefore, has led to the emergence of various integrative approaches.
According to Hanvey (1979), there are four levels of cross-cultural awareness:
Level I: This level has to do with awareness of superficial cultural traits often interpreted as exotic or
bizarre.
Level II: This level refers to the awareness of significant and subtle cultural traits that contrast markedly
with one’s own and are interpreted as unbelievable through irrational.
Level III: This level is similar to Level II, except that the cultural traits are recognized as believable
through intellectual analysis.
Level IV: This refers to awareness of how another culture feels from generally recognized that for most
people empathy is something very difficult, if not impossible, to attain.
In addition, existing intercultural didactics has made a distinction between four different approaches to
learning about another culture (Müller-Jacquier, 2004). First, there is the contact situation approach.
According to this approach, EFL students may have direct contact with the target culture. Second, another
pedagogical approach is the cognitive one, in which cognitive insights about the target culture (e.g. cultural
values, norms, and cultural practices) and their behavioural implications are taught in class. The third is the
virtual contrast approach which is another classroom-based approach; according to this approach, a virtual
interaction between one’s own and target cultures may be presented in order to enable the learners to
evaluate their cultural awareness from different socio-cultural perspectives. Fourth, there is the linguistic
awareness approach, in which cultural differences are taught by discussing linguistic differences in class.
In didactic classroom practices, some researchers have introduced a socio-cultural approach to teaching
modern languages that she describes as “teaching for intercultural L2 communication in a spirit of peace
and a dialogue of cultures” (Saphonova, 1996, p. 62). Accordingly, grammatical and other discoursal
features of language use may be provisioned in course materials, however, with a particular emphasis on
the development of socio-cultural competence. This can occur when EFL teachers may involve themselves
and their students in some sort of a ‘dialogue of culture’ (Bakhtin, 1986) in which “culture is seen to be a
concentration of all other meanings (social, spiritual, logical, emotional, moral, aesthetic) of human
existence” (Bibler, 1991, p.38).

CULTURE IN EFL TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMMES

I have already outlined the predicament of the EFL teacher in an English as a foreign language context, such
as Saudi Arabia - namely, whether to teach socio-cultural features of the English language for acculturation
or teach the plain features of language such as grammar and vocabulary - that is the question. Further, and
above all, the ELT curriculum material severely suffer from a lack of culture-specific content. Given these
limitations to teachers' manoeuvring within the curriculum mandates and structural constraints of the
institutional settings they work in, it seems to me that the EFL teacher education which focuses on enabling
teachers to question the discursive character of instructional materials would be a step in the right direction.
Besides, if socio-politico-cultural diversity in views on a given topic is part of texts themselves, i.e. if a

68
 Abdul aziz Fageeh/Cross-cultural Communication Vol.7 No.1, 2011
greater variety of discourses are allowed to inhabit instructional materials, alternatives could thus be
brought into the classroom which could perhaps open the space for a greater negotiability of students'
cultural experiences.
Further, and above all, in that context, what I believe that needs to be an integral part of classroom
practices in ELT is the accommodation of numerous occasions when the materials' constructedness from a
given social position is highlighted and students are invited to explore other possible constructions of what
this material presents for their learning about the target language culture. In this respect, Hooks (1994)
views classrooms as arenas for exploration, different cultural ways of knowing, self-actualization and
dialogue between teachers and learners. As Hooks observes,
“The classroom, with all its limitations, remains a location of possibility. In that field of
possibility we have the opportunity to labour for freedom, to demand of ourselves and our
comrades, an openness of mind and heart that allows us to face reality even as we collectively
imagine ways to move beyond boundaries, to transgress. This is education as the practice of
freedom.” (1994, p. 207)

Within such a cultural milieu, EFL teachers in varied Saudi EFL learning contexts from the primary
school to college would build on students' cultural experiences, identities and desires and see themselves as
giving the gift of thinking critically as an inherent part of developing language skills in their students.
Examples of such classrooms in higher education settings are provided by Beynon and Dossa (2003) who
explore the narratives of three educators whose dialogic ‘subaltern practices’ (Kubota, 1999) “broaden and
challenge conventional pedagogy and thus, potentially, ... benefit all students.” (p. 262). For teachers to
engage in such practices however, it would be very helpful if they were afforded the opportunity to
experience them themselves in teacher education settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Given that culture enjoys a great impact on language, it consequently appears that cultural awareness
should be given enough attention by further attending to the necessity for both teachers and students to
become aware of the discursive character of culture(s). In this respect, the ‘acculturation model’ of cultural
instruction identified by Kubota (1999) and the ‘critical multiculturalism model’ (Kachi et al., 2003) can be
functionally useful for classroom applications where
“representations of culture are understood as the consequence of social struggles over meanings
that manifest certain political and ideological values and metaphors attached to them” (Kubota,
1999, p. 27).

The purpose is to enable language learners to “appropriate the dominant linguistic and cultural codes in
order to advocate cultural and linguistic equality in the wider society" in the texts and reading materials in
ELT curriculum (ibid., p. 29). But assuming the unpredictability in interactions with texts (Canagarajah,
1993; Sunderland, et al., 2002), EFL teachers must, therefore, emphasise the range of ways specific texts
could be talked about and thus on the range of constraints and affordances of particular textual resources.
As such, EFL teachers should realize the inevitability of culture in teaching methodology.
It is also tacitly deduced from the review of literature that problems of methodology existing in the study
of language are also found in the study of culture. Down the history of language teaching methodology,
there has arisen a variety of teaching methods grounded in different theories of second/foreign language
learning and acquisition, and from pedagogical practices, such as the grammar-translation method, the
direct method, the audio-lingual method, the natural approach, and the communicative approach. In my
experience of teaching of English as a foreign culture, a comparative perspective becomes important as a
pedagogical means of raising a motivation for learning the culture of English. In this respect, it could be
argued that instead of thinking about either teaching English through the culture of its native-speaking
countries or via the learners’ native culture, it would be feasible to upgrade the students’ knowledge from
their own culture to the now new emerging global English culture of certain areas such as science, the

69
 Abdul aziz Fageeh/Cross-cultural Communication Vol.7 No.1, 2011
Internet, the media, or even through human interaction within the globalisation era. Not only does this allow
students to understand the language and the nuances of American and British culture better, but it also helps
them acquire a more conscious cultural awareness of their own culture and encourages students to dedicate
themselves to the development of their English proficiency for communicative practices. In addition, with
regard to the significance of culture, whatever approach the teacher adopts, s/he should never neglect the
significance of culture in EFL teaching and should make effort to enhance students’ cultural awareness.

REFERENCES
Al-Dosari, H. (2010). From language and literature to culture teaching: Teaching EFL beyond one standard
dialect. Paper presented at the SECCLL conference in Georgia Southern University in Statesboro, GA,
on Southeast Coastal Conference on Languages & Literatures (April 1-2, 2010).
Ando, K. (1997). Language and Culture: Motivation of Learning Japanese for the Students Who Are in
Multicultural Environment. Journal of Future Studies, 2(1), 69-76.
Atkinson, D. (1999). TESOL and culture. TESOL Quarterly, 33 (4), 625-654.
Bahameed, A. (2008). Hindrances in Arabic-English Intercultural Translation. Translation Journal, Vol. 12,
No. 1. January, Retrieved online, March 12th , 2011, from
http://translationjournal.net/journal//43culture.htm
Bakhtin, Mikhail (1986). Speech Genres and other Late Essays. Edited by Caryl, Emerson, Michael,
Holquist; translated by Vern McGee. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press.
Beynon, J. & Dossa, P. (2003). Mapping inclusive and equitable pedagogy: Narratives of university
educators. Teaching Education, 14 (3), 249-264.
Bibler, V.S. (1991). M.M. Bakhtin, or the Poetics of Culture. Moscow: Politizdat Press.
Brooks, N. (1969). Teaching Culture in the Foreign Language Classroom. Foreign Language Annals,
2(3),304-09.
Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Canagarajah, S. (1993). American textbooks and Tamil students: Discerning ideological tensions in the
ESL classroom. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 6 (2), 143-156.
Citron, J. (1995). Can Cross-Cultural Understanding Aid Second Language Acquisition? Toward a Theory
of Ethno-Lingual Relativity. Hispania, 78 (1), 105-113.
Deng, Yanchang (1989). Language and Culture. Beijing: Foreign Languages Teaching & Research Press.
Deters, F. (2009). Identity, agency, and the acquisition of professional language and culture: the case of
internationally educated teachers and college professors in Ontario. Unpublished Ph.D. Ontario
Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto.
Eoyang, E. (2003). Teaching English as Culture: Paradigm Shifts in Postcolonial Discourse. Diogenes,
50(2): 3–16.
Fairclough, N. (1992), Critical Language Awareness. USA, New York, Longman.
Geertz, Clifford (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.
Goode, T. et al (2000), ‘A Planner’s Guide ... Infusing Principles, Content and Themes Related to Cultural
and Linguistic Competence into Meetings and Conferences’, National Center for Cultural Competence,
Georgetown University Child Development Center, Center for Child Health and Mental Health Policy,
University Affiliated Program.
Hall, E. T. (1981). The Silent Language. New York: Anchor Books.

70
 Abdul aziz Fageeh/Cross-cultural Communication Vol.7 No.1, 2011
Hanvey, R. (1979). Cross-cultural awareness. In Hu Wenzhong (ed.) (1990), Selected readings in
intercultural communication. Changsha: Hunan Education Press.
Harumi, I. (2002). A New Framework of Culture Teaching for Teaching English as a Global Language.
RELC Journal, 33(2), 36-57.
Hooks, B. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice offreedom.New York: Routledge.
Humphrey, D. (1997). Integrating Intercultural Training Material in the ELT Classroom. Proceedings of the
conference at Leeds Metropolitan University, 15-16 December 1997.
Ilieva, R. (2005). A story of texts, culture(s), cultural tool normalisation, and adult ESL learning and
teaching. Unpublished Ph.D., Simon Fraser University.
Janzen, J. (2008). Teaching English Language Learners in the Content Areas. Review of Educational
Research, 78 (2), 1010-1038.
Kachi, R., Lokon, E., Wong, M. and Kubota, R. (2003). Dialogues around "Japanese culture constructed by
discourses: Implications for applied linguistics research and ELT" by R. Kubota (1999). In J. Sharkey
& K. Johnson, (Eds.). The TESOL Quarterly dialogues: Rethinking issues of language, culture, and
power (pp. 99-121). Alexandria, VA: TESOL, Inc.
Kramsch, C. (1998). Language and culture. Toronto: Oxford University Press.
Kramsch, C. (2003, October). Language and culture revisited. Paper presented within a series on Language,
Culture, and Identity at the UBC Centre for Intercultural Language Studies. Vancouver, Canada.
Kroeber, A. L. and C. Kluckhohn (1952). Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions.
Cambridge, MA: Peabody Museum.
Kubota, R. (1999). Japanese culture constructed by discourses: Implications for applied linguistics research
and ELT. TESOL Quarterly 33 (1), 9-35.
Kubota, R. (2003, February). Critical perspectives of culture in second language education. Paper presented
within a series on Language, Culture, and Identity at the UBC Centre for Intercultural Language
Studies. Vancouver, Canada.
Kubota, R. (2003, February). Critical perspectives of culture in second language education. Paper presented
within a series on Language, Culture, and Identity at the UBC Centre for Intercultural Language
Studies. Vancouver, Canada.
Mekheimer, M. & Aldosari, H. (2011). Perceptions of EFL students and faculty of impediments to literature
and cultural teaching in EFL programmes at a Saudi University. Journal of Intercultural
Communication, 26 (April).
Müller-Jacquier, B. (2004). Interkulturelle Didaktik. [Intercultural didactic]. In M. Byram (Ed.), Routledge
encyclopedia of language teaching and learning (pp. 303e307). London: Routledge.
Peterson, E. and B. Coltrane (2003), ‘Culture in Second Language Teaching’, Center for Applied
Linguistics, Retrieved December 31, 2009, from
http://www.cal.org/resources/Digest/digest_pdfs/0309peterson.pdf
Santos, S. & Suleiman, M. (1993). Teaching English to Arabic-speaking students: cultural and linguistic
considerations. Proceedings of the National Annual Association for Bilingual Education Conferences,
Tucson, Az, pp. 175-180.
Saphonova, Victoria (1996). Teaching Languages of International Communication in the Context of
Dialogue of Cultures and Civilizations. Istoki, Voronezh.
Stern, H. H. (1983). Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. UK, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

71
 Abdul aziz Fageeh/Cross-cultural Communication Vol.7 No.1, 2011
Sunderland, J., Cowley, M., Rahim, F., Leonzakou, C. and Shattuck, J. (2002). From representation
towards discursive practices: Gender in the foreign language textbook revisited. In L. Litosseliti & J.
Sunderland (Eds.), Gender identity and discourse analysis (pp. 223-255). Amsterdam: John
Benjamins Publishing Company.
Tanaka, S. (2006). English and Multiculturalism — from the Language User’s Perspective. RELC Journal,
37 (1), 47-66.
Tochon, F. (2009). The Key to Global Understanding: World Languages Education—Why Schools Need to
Adapt. Review of Educational Research, 79 (2), 650 - 681.
Tucker, G. R., and Lambert, W. E. (1972). Socio-cultural Aspects of Foreign Language Study. In J.W. Oller
& J.C. Richards (eds). Focus on the Learner. Rowley: Newbury House (pp. 246-259).
Tylor, E.B. (1974). Primitive culture: researches into the development of mythology, philosophy, religion,
art, and custom. New York: Gordon Press. First published in 1871.
Valdes, J. M. (ed.). (1986). Culture Bound: Bridging the Cultural Gap in Language Teaching. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Yorkey, R. (1977). Practical techniques for teaching Arabic-speaking students. In J. Alatis & R. Crymes
(eds.), The human factors in ESL: a series of six lectures, pp. 57-85. Washington, D.C.: TESOL.
Zaid, M. (2008). Language, Identity, and the Nativization of English: Is it the end of standard English?
Minia College of Arts Journal, 8 (2), 20-43.
Zaid, M. (2011). Caught between Scylla and Charybdis: Teaching English in a Plethora of Dialects and
Cultures. Paper scheduled for presentation at Rhizomes VI (11-12 February 2011), the University of
Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

72