Cultural Assimilation (Communication)

A range of pathways taken by an outsider to integrate and resemble others in the predominant culture. The broader term outsider is often used, and most scholarship uses the term immigrant to denote that the study of and the discussion around cultural assimilation should not be viewed narrowly. The imposition is suggestive. Milton Gordon (1964) developed a dichotomy distinguishing cultural assimilation from structural assimilation. According to Gordon, cultural assimilation requires outsiders to become collectively alike. Structural assimilation occurs only when one becomes institutionally incorporated.

This terminology should not be confused with acculturation. Assimilation presumes full integration, while acculturation refers to partial amalgamation or, rather, an exchange of cultural parts wherein the individual picks and chooses what new aspects are [Page 125]incorporated into his or her identity. Acculturation is a partial exchange, and much of the native culture remains and is transformed, thus creating a new identity partially alien to both new and native cultures. Assimilation assumes a rewrite of the native culture; as such, cultural assimilation in its strictest form does not occur. Both processes transform the new and old cultural environment: The outsider both takes and leaves behind a cultural fingerprint influencing the social structure, thus making full assimilation an ideology rather than a practical matter. Assimilation is not unidirectional. To understand this, we must also examine the various conceptions of culture.

Culture is a medium used to conceptualize and experience the world. Essentialists view culture as fixed, while others argue that culture is transient and a vague conglomeration of forms differing in depth and attributed to a group. Such forms include beliefs, values, norms, behaviors, and social structures that have developed and evolved historically: in essence, passing the test of time. Certain aspects have become fixed, while others continue to evolve. Therefore, culture is both fixed and transient, allowing it to be studied. The underlying theoretical constructions used are recurrent forms of interactions.

The field of communications examines how various forms and patterns of communication influence the way an individual both constructs and receives confirmative signals indicative of integration into the predominant culture. Forms and patterns of communication and indicative cues include verbal and written language, various forms of media and telecommunications, communicative actions, and communicative expressions. Examples include books, magazines, various forms of mass media, music, humor, and slang. Forms of communication affect the way an individual assimilates into the culture and can be used to label the individual. For example, the use of specific words labels the user ideologically and can be used to identify the user's particular place of assimilation. More specifically, an English-speaking Chinese educated in Hong Kong will use “pardon” as a form of etiquette, as compared with an English-speaking Chinese educated in New York, who is more likely to use “excuse me.” Language, the use of specific words or phrases, is a medium that creates a reality or an identity.

Moreover, the advent of modern communicative technology has changed the old conceptions of assimilation. In addition, political movements— beginning in the 1960s—that emphasized pride in racial and ethnic identities and created a hyphenised culture— mitigated against full cultural assimilation, as was the case in the United States in the 19th and 20th centuries with immigrants from southern and eastern Europe. It is becoming easier to both maintain the native identity and adopt a global identity. As technology expands its reach within the global economy, the discussion will shift, and key theories will need to be able to account for such developments. For more information, see Gordon (1964), Heller (2006), and Pedraza (1999).

...