In reading a foreignA linguistic communication text, we extract three degrees of significance: lexical significance, structural or grammatical significance, and sociocultural significance ( French friess, 1963 ) . For lexical or grammatical significances pupils may turn to a dictionary or grammar text edition. It is a sociocultural significance that is the most hard for a 2nd linguistic communication scholar to penetrote for it involves the values, beliefs, and attitudes of the address community. Reading is a complex accomplishment. It is non merely a decryption operation. It is non plenty for pupils simply to decode the surface significance of the text. Teaching a foreign linguistic communication hence forms a serious job, particularly in a state where cultural biass are great. The success of a 2nd linguistic communication plan, hence, depends on cut downing the civilization bondage of a pupil and actuating him to understand the civilization of the mark linguistic communication.
One of the aims of foreign linguistic communication instruction is to advance international apprehension ‘ and cooperation by enabling pupils to derive entree to the life and idea of people who speak another linguistic communication. This nonsubjective becomes unrealistic when there is ill will towards the civilization of another group. The survey of a foreign linguistic communication non merely enables an person to develop his cultural apprehension of that linguistic communication ; but besides promotes his personal civilization through contact with great heads and literature. For civilization! is frequently defined as that preparation which tends to develop the higher modules, the imaginativeness, the sense of beauty and rational comprehension.
A Many linguistics have questioned the utility of nonculture baund reading stuffs in foreign linguistic communication instruction. Texts are designed on a subject familiar to the pupils and reflecting their ain civilization. This destroys the integrity of linguistic communication, break uping it from it ‘s societal context. Language and civilization are inseparable, the one can non by learned without the other. No two linguistic communications represent the some societal world. Even the most familiar objects, such as nutrient and house-hold points, have different intensions in two linguistic communications.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
3.1. Relation of Language to Culture
In the early 1950 ‘s linguists and anthropologists developed a great involvement in the relation of linguistic communication and civilization and they come to recognize that they are two related phenomena. Culture has different significances in different Fieldss of survey. By anthropoholigsts it might be defined as life manners of population ( Oswalt 1970, 15 in Chastain 1976, 388 ) .
This definition of civilization is the one which is most normally taken as the footing for choosing cultural content for the foreign or 2nd linguistic communication categories. Chastain ( 1776, 388 ) indicate that this definition encomposses the types of information the types of information that would look to be of most involvement and most of import to the typical pupil enrolled in a 2nd linguistic communication category. Ideally, at the terminal of their surveies the pupils will hold a functional cognition of the 2nd civilization system merely as they have one of the 2nd linguistic communication system. Taking this position point into consideration, the EFL instructor should be cognizant of the fact that the scholar needs to derive penetration into the foreign linguistic communication. Relatedly, the instructor needs to clear up the scholars ‘ ain cultural behavior in a peculiar state of affairs for a comparative survey.
Becker ( 1972 ) defines civilization as “ the job of corporate action of how people manage to move together ” . He adds that “ civilization is shared understanding ‘ ” . This shared understanding enables people to move jointly because they have shared thoughts about how a certain activity might be carried on in certain state of affairss. Becker ( 1982, 518 ) provinces that the civilization procedure consists of people making something in line with their apprehension of what one might outdo make under the given fortunes. Others, recognizing what was done as appropriate, will so confer with their impressions of what might be done and do something that seems right to them, to which others in return will react likewise.
Hall ( 1959 in Nababan 1974 ) sees civilization as “ a complex message system by which the members of the community exchanges messages ” . The sharing of one civilization makes, the members of the community capable of understanding one another, makes one cognize what other members expect and what to make in order to do one ‘s wants, feelings and attitudes known the other members of the group. Therefore, civilization can be said to be the “ medium of the flow of information ‘ ” as Nabadan ( 1974 ) puts it. Not merely among the modern-day members of the group but besides between coevalss of the society.
From this treatment we can see how of import civilization, in the same manner, they have a linguistic communication which enables them to pass on. Therefore, civilization and linguistic communication are really much related. This is pointed out by Nababan ( 1974, 14 ) who indicate that one of the most obvious dealingss of linguistic communication to civilization is that of portion to whole. Language qualifies as an component or subsystem of civilization in all the definitions and facets of civilization ; it is the cardinal portion of it and is involved in peculiarly all the other parts of culture.A After saying the definitions of civilization and the relation of linguistic communication to civilization, Nababan concludes that “ the foreign linguistic communication instructors should cognize plenty about the foreign civilization, including kinesics and paralinguistic communication to give their pupils an equal ability in transverse cultural communicating, i.e. apprehension and utilizing the foreign linguistic communication decently ” .