0% found this document useful (0 votes)
16 views5 pages

Understanding Deep Structure of Culture

Uploaded by

mano mano
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
16 views5 pages

Understanding Deep Structure of Culture

Uploaded by

mano mano
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

University of 8 mai 1945 -Guelma Culture and FLT

Departme nt of Letters and Englis h Language


2nd year, Master

Understanding the Deep Structure of Culture

Content
1. Models of culture
1. Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner’s Onion Model of Culture
2. Hofstede’ and Hofstede’s Onion Model of Culture
3. The Three P’s Model of Culture
4. The Iceberg Model
2. Surface Vs. Deep Structure of Culture
3. Summary

1. Models of Culture

1.1. Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner’s Onion Model of Culture (Graini, 2017)

Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner (1998) proposed a model of culture, called the onion model. The
model is made up of three different layers; the outer layer, the middle layer, and the core. The first
(the outer layer) consists of artefacts and products, i.e. explicit products, defined as “the observable
reality of the language, food, buildings, houses, monuments, agriculture, shrines, markets, fashions
and art” (p. 21). The second (the middle layer) includes norms, which are defined as “the mutual
sense a group has of what is right or wrong” (pp. 21-22), and values which are “closely related to the
ideals shared by a group” (p. 22) and which decide on what is good and what is bad. The core
constitutes basic assumptions about existence which are believed to be evident by people sharing the
same culture. These basic assumptions are said to have an impact on the middle layer.

Figure: Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner’s Onion Model of Culture

1
1.2. Hofstede and Hofstede’s Onion Model of Culture (Graini, 2017)

Hofstede and Hofstede (2005) developed the onion model of culture that is similar but not identica l
to Trompenaars’ and Hampden-Turner’s as it offers a set of four rather than three layers. According
to this model, symbols constitute the outer layer; values represent the core while heroes and rituals
stand between the two. Symbols, heroes, and rituals fall under the big term practices. The model’s
five components can be briefly explained as follows:

1. Symbols are “words, gestures, pictures, or objects that carry a particular meaning” (2005, p.
7). This meaning can be recognized only by those sharing the same culture.
2. Heroes are people who have a considerable esteem amongst their cultural group to the point
that they become “models for behavior” (p. 7).
3. Rituals are “collective activities” (p. 8) that are significant at the societal level so as to achieve
a particular aim.
4. Practices are, as aforementioned, the embodiments of the previous three layers through which
they (symbols, heroes, and rituals) can be seen by outsiders.
5. Values are “broad tendencies to prefer certain states of affairs over others” (p. 8) such as
normal versus abnormal, permitted versus forbidden, etc.

Figure: Hofstede’ and Hofstede’s Onion Model of Culture

1.3. The three P’s Model of Culture

This model is made up of three components: Practices, Products and Perspectives.

1. Practices are patterns of social interactions, behaviours. They represent the knowledge of “what
to do when and where” and how to interact within a particular culture.
2. Products are the tangible or intangible creations of a particular culture. They reflect a culture’s
perspectives. Tangible products: paintings, a cathedral, a piece of literature, etc. Intangib le
products: an oral tale, a dance, a sacred ritual, etc.

2
3. Perspectives are meanings, attitudes, values, beliefs, ideas that underlie the cultural practices and
products of a society. They represent a culture’s view of the world. (CARLA)

Figure: Macian and Robinson Model

1.4. The Iceberg Model

3
2. Surface Vs. Deep Structure

Why do people of some cultures frantically cling to youth, whereas others welcome old age and even
death? Why do some cultures worship the earth, whereas others mistreat it? Why do some cultures
believe that great insight can be found in silence, but others feel that words contain the world’s great
wisdom? Why do families in some cultures have children living at home even after marriage, and in
others children can hardly wait to flee their homes? According to Samovar et al. (2015), such
questions are important, as answers to these questions help understand how members of a given
community/culture view the world and behave in that world.
Practices and behaviours are significant to the specificity of a given culture, and what is more
important is what motivates these behaviours and practices, i.e. what motivates people to engage in
one action rather than another. Samovar et al. (2015) believe that the key to how members of a culture
view the world can be found in that culture’s deep structure. “It is this deep structure, the conscious
and unconscious assumptions about how the world works, that unifies a culture, makes each culture
unique, and explains the “how” and “why” of a culture’s collective action—action that is often
difficult for “outsiders” to understand.” (pp. 68-69)

Culture’s deep structure organisations


At the core of any culture’s deep structure there are the social organizations. They are social
institutions, structures, or systems that members of a culture turn to for lessons about the most
important aspects of life. The most important deep structure institutions are: family, state/history, and
religion. But we also have government, schools/educational systems, etc.

These social organisations provide cultures with (create, define, transmit and maintain) values,
norms, goals, attitudes, beliefs, etc. Deep structure organisations: transmit culture’s most important
beliefs and values; help supply much of culture’s identity; carry the most influential, enduring and
deeply felt aspects of culture. Samovar et al. (2015)

4
3. Summary

The Pyramid Model of Culture (Badji, W.)


Illustrations of surface culture elements cover the community's way of dressing (national costumes),
food (national cuisine), music and dance heritage, literary works (be it oral or written), and celebrated
holidays (national days).
Shallow Culture constructs the unspoken rules that are implicitly dictating a cultural group's ways
of communicating. It can be perceived in the people's manners of signalling messages to each other
either verbally or non-verbally.
Deep Culture encompasses the totality of conscious and unconscious assumptions that a certain
culture internally conceptualises about the world. At this level, people are hardwired to embrace
particular thoughts, beliefs, and ideologies as a result of subscribing to their respective social
organisations (namely family, state, and religion). (Badji, W., G3)

References
- Graini, D. (2017). The Impact of Culture-based Content on EFL Learners’ Communicative Competence. Case Study:
Third Year LMD Students at the Department of English, 8 Mai 1945 University-Guelma (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from
http://dspace.univ-guelma.dz:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/678/discover
- CARLA, Cultural practices, Products and Pers pectives , accessed 1 October 2019
<http://carla.umn.edu/cobaltt/modules/curriculum/textanalysis/Practices_Products_Perspectives_Examp les.pdf>
- Macian, J. and Robinson D. W. (2015). Understanding the Proposed Statewide Japanese Learning Outcomes. The
Modes of Communication and Performance Descriptors, accessed 1 October 2019
<https://www.ohiohighered.org/sites/ohiohighered.org/files/Understanding%20the%20Statewide%20Japanese%20Lear
ning%20Outcomes_0.pdf>
- Samovar, L. A., Porter, R. E., MacDaniel, E. R., and Roy, C. S. (2015). Communication Between Cultures. USA:
CENGA GE Learning
- Students’ contribution, 2nd year Master students (Group 3), academic year 2019, 2020.

You might also like