1

INTRODUCTION

In this day and age, it has become increasing more common for people to

have opportunities to study, conduct, business or even do missions work abroad.

This is an exciting phenomenon. However, along with its thrills, living abroad

also has its own set of challenges. When living in a new country and culture

different than one’s own, cross-cultural communication must take place. Culture

is at the core of every person’s life. Thus, in order to cope and communicate with

people from other cultures, it is helpful to be aware of the cultural differences in

different parts of the world, so as to avoid miscommunication and

misunderstanding. Every person around the globe carries within him or herself

patterns of thinking, feeling, and behavior which are learned and acquired through

out their lifetime. Greatly, it has been acquired since the early childhood for

during that time a person is most prone to learning and assimilating. This is

simply defined as Culture. The culture itself lies within the social environment. It

may starts in the family, work place, at school, within the neighborhood, or even

in a certain community. Culture has often been described as “multi-layered” – like

an onion. The outer layer has to be pulled back to reveal the layer beneath, and so

on and so forth. Trompenaars and Hempden-Turner (1997) offer a three layer

version of culture: The outer layer is formed by artifacts and products, including

language and food, architecture and style etc. Spencer-Oatey (1999) also includes

rituals and behavior in this outer layer. According to Trompenaars and Hempden-

2

Turner (1997), the second inner layer, consists of norms and values. Norms are

“the mutual sense what is right and wrong” while values represent the “definition

of what is good and bad”. The innermost layer, basic assumptions, represents the

core assumptions of life – beliefs and methods for handling everyday problems

and situations. Therefore, this paper will explore the best ways to cope with and

overcome the inherent problems and difficulties all sojourners experience in

cross-cultural situations. To be specific, there will be some identifications and

investigations on how the sojourners deal with the cross-cultural situations. It is

not only to surmount the problems that happen but also to analyze and examine

why they occur and what causes them.

The famous proverb says it well: “A fish out of water.” That perfectly

describes a person who is living outside his own home culture. And in all such

cross-cultural situations, one big difficult always arises: culture shock. This layer

of culture, of course, is to strengthen what the previous source has stated about

and the reason of bringing up these theories is that they describe the real matters

of culture shock itself. It is believed that almost everyone will have one moment

in time facing culture shock if they happen to be in a different cultural

environment compared to their own. Normally, most children can easily adapt

with a certain new environment because they are still in the process of growing up

and absorbing many inputs from their surroundings. But unlike children, most of

the adult people often find it a bit difficult to adjust with a new cultural

environment for some of them have already had a kind of mindset and habit that

3

lie within them ever since they were little. Just like a shield, this mindset strongly

keeps us accustomed to a particular culture. So, the university students,

missionaries, teachers, social workers, or even researchers are those who will

likely to face the culture shock the most.

According to Guanipa (1998), “Culture shock is a type of homesickness.

The term refers to the stresses and strains which accumulate from being forced to

meet one’s everyday needs (e.g. language, climate, food, cleanliness,

companionship) in unfamiliar ways. Some symptoms of culture shock are:

frustration, mental fatigue, disorientation about how to work and relate to others,

boredom, lack of motivation, and sometimes physical discomfort”. The process of

recovering from culture shock takes varied amounts of time, depending on the

person – anywhere from a couple of months or even a year of living in the new

place. Often, the traveler will get stressed and feel distracted because he will be

suffering from coming to a new place that is totally different from the original

place where he came from as described by (Hess, 1994), “Consequently, culture

shocks occurs, followed by a series of psychological confusion and emotional

discomfort.” Often, the way he acts is not accepted as normal or it is considered

weird compared to the social life in the new place. It is just like being a child

learning to crawl and walk – he has to learn almost everything from the very

beginning. However, although culture shock is painful, it can be advantageous as

well, providing insight and new perspectives into the new culture’s social values.

4

Suffering through culture shock can also result in a better understanding of

oneself, stimulating self-improvement and personal creativity.

According to Guanipa (1998), Culture Shock has five stages. The first

stage is the incubation stage. In this stage, the new arrival may feel euphoric and

be pleased by all of the new things he is encountering. This time is also referred to

as the “honeymoon” stage, as everything encountered is new and exciting. Then,

the second stage presents itself. The basic form of intercultural encounter is

between one foreign individual and a new cultural environment. A person may

encounter some difficult times and frustration in his daily life. This is the crisis

stage – the stage where a person first feels culture shock. For example,

communication difficulties may occur such as not being understood. In this stage,

there may be feelings of discontent, impatience, anger, sadness, feeling

incompetence, and even not knowing how to deal with the problems. Hofstede

explained that “These (values) have been acquired early in our lives, and they

have become so natural as to be unconscious. In a way, the visitor in a foreign

culture returns to the mental state of an infant, in which he or she has to learn the

simplest things over again. This usually leads to feelings of distress, of

helplessness, and of hostility towards the new environment. Often one’s physical

functioning is affected.” Hence, this is the most stressful part. During this

transition, strong feelings of dissatisfaction may arise, as stated by (Ferraro,

2006), “Most important is that when people fail to defeat the symptoms of culture

shock, they are likely to become hostile to host nationals, which may lead to a

5

handicap of interpersonal relationship.” A good example of an acculturation curve

is shown by Hosfstede (1991, p. 210) to illustrate this stage.

Fig. 1 The acculturation curve

Hofstede explained further that “In this diagram, feelings (positive or

negative) are plotted on the vertical axis; time on the horizontal one. Phase 1 is a

(usually short) period of euphoria: the honeymoon, the excitement of traveling

and of seeing new lands. Phase 2 is the period of culture shock when real life

starts in the new environment, as described above. Phase 3, acculturation, sets in

when the visitor has slowly learned to function under the new conditions, has

adopted some of the local values, finds increased self-confidence and becomes

integrated into a new social network. Phase 4 is the stable state of mind

eventually reached. It may remain negative compared to home (4a), for example if

6

the visitor continues feeling alien and discriminated against. It may be just as

good as before (4b), in which case the visitor can be considered to be biculturally

adapted, or it may even be better (4c). in the last case the visitor has gone native.”

The third stage is characterized by obtaining some understanding of the

new culture. A new feeling of pleasure and sense of humor may be experienced in

this stage. Afterward, in the fourth stage, the person realizes that new culture has

good and bad things to offer. This stage may include double integration or triple

integration depending on the number of cultures that the person has to process. As

what (Janssens, 1995) revealed, “In this phase, people are able to solve problems

and manage new cultures successfully, and sypmtoms of culture shock disappear

largely.” The person starts to define him or herself and establish goals for living

and therefore, accept the differences, and enjoy living in the new culture. The fifth

stage is the stage that is called the “re-entry shock”. This happens when a return to

the country of origin is made. For example, some of the newly acquired customs

are not in use in the old culture. Each person has their own approach of reacting in

the different stages of culture shock. As a result some stages will be longer and

more difficult than others. These stages (as described by Guanipa), are fairly

universally accepted. Hofstede, Oberg, and Bennet – experts as well as

researchers, also use the same terminology.

There are two main things to consider in order to cope with culture shock:

flexibility and knowledge. First: Flexibility. When we are faced with the culture

shock, we are actually forced to naturally adapt to the surroundings just to keep

7

living life. For example, even if we move to a completely different environment,

of course, we still have to be able to speak, act appropriately, or know how to

operate or use things well in order to get around and have good interaction with

the local people. We have to be aware of all the differences so that we can live

well in the environment and gain knowledge in our new situation. We, as human

beings, have to be flexible in life. Second of all, according to Gudykunst and Kim

(1995, p. 158), it has been revealed that “the key to effective cross culture is

knowledge”. In this case, knowledge itself means strategies. Because it is so easy

for misunderstanding to take place in cross-cultural communication, some

strategies for cross-cultural communication are needed, so as to be effective as

possible in our communication. Researchers have developed five key strategies to

deal with cross-cultural communication problems. They are as follows. First:

Understanding Communicative Competence. Canale and Swain, writers in Fraech

and Kasper’s book (1984, p, 37) provide three components of communicative

competence: “grammatical competence which is the understanding of what is

grammatically correct in a language, sociolinguistic competence which is the

knowledge of what is socially acceptable in a language., and strategic competence

which is the knowledge of how to use communicative strategies to balance the

grammatical deficiencies.” Second: Adjusting Properly. “In trying to adjust, one

should assume that cultural differences, which cause misunderstanding

interpretation, bring bad impacts by causing cross cultural misunderstanding”,

Robinson (1988, p. 34). More to the point, by knowing our own culture, it will

8

help us out to make good assumptions toward other cultures. This is meant that

we can also pay respect to other cultures along with ours because by doing so, we

can decide what it is good and what is wrong in order to make us survive in the

host culture later on and not to show off that one culture is better than the others.

Third, Knowing Yourself. We have to be in control of our own emotions in order

to overcome culture shock. Impatiently jumping to conclusions without thinking

wisely is never a good thing; it only leads to a mess. William Ury (2004), adds

that when we are in “heated conflicts”, we must “go to the balcony” (to stop,

listen, and think). Meaning, we have to pull ourselves out of the situation, and

take a moment to think twice about how to go about overcoming the problem at

hand. Fourth: Appreciating the Other Culture. According to Robinson (1985,

p.139), we have to understand and learn to appreciate others’ values. Therefore, to

reduce uncertainty involved in cross cultural communication, we need to learn to

be close to someone, in order to know his or her culture more deeply. Last but not

least, the Fifth Strategy: Learning and Listening Well. According to Gudykunst

and Kim (1995, p.67), misinterpretation is the source of the most cross cultural

misunderstandings. Misinterpretation happens when someone does not listen well

and makes quick conclusions without taking time to consider the whole thought or

situation. Thus, listening to others and thinking deeply are key to interpreting

things correctly. Archer (1991, p. 196) said that we should try to diminish our

habits of forming value judgment without knowing why we do it. As a result,

avoid making such assumption that can lead to stereotypes. Coodman (1994),

9

believed that the more thorough the understanding of a new culture, the smaller

the negative impact will be, because knowledge about the host culture enhances

an individual’s capacity to adjust well to the new environment. To sum up, we

have to have both the knowledge and flexibility to help us adjust well with the

cross cultural communication and place ourselves in proper situations in order to

thwart misunderstandings.

In this study I would like to explore some common cross-cultural

communication problems which often occur among students at IMLAC

(Indonesian Multicultural Language Acquisition Center which is located in

Salatiga, Central Java). I will focus more on the experiences of Stage Two culture

shock (as described above) and strategies to deal with problems that arise from

that culture shock, such as feelings of anxiety or homesickness, lack of interest in

the new surroundings, frustration and depression, and not wanting to speak in the

foreign language. The aim of this study is to show the effects of culture shock in

the lives of two IMLAC students; then discuss how the strategies of cross cultural

flexibility can be applied to help these students cope with the problems they are

facing. Therefore, the readers will expand their comprehension and knowledge

concerning cross-cultural communication and culture shock issues. Moreover, the

readers will have an opportunity to glean some precious lessons from these two

IMLAC participants.

In attempts to answer the general problems discussed above, this study

poses two key questions. First, what forms of culture shock have the research

10

participants dealt with? Second, what strategies have they employed to deal with

their shock?

THE STUDY

A. Participants

Two people participated in this study. They were both Americans who

were living here in Salatiga, Indonesia for the missionary service and intensively

taking an Indonesian language course at IMLAC (Indonesian Multicultural

Language Acquisition Center). The course consists of 9 units, each of which takes

1 month to complete. After finishing the language course at IMLAC, they hope to

relocate to a different island in Indonesia to do missionary service. The

participants selected because they were currently dealing with learning both the

Indonesian culture and language. Both the participants had been living in

Indonesia for about 8 months when I interviewed them. My goal in interviewing

them was to discover what sort of culture shock they had experienced since

moving to Indonesia, as well as their perspective about it and the ways they coped

with it. I wanted to know how they, who were from a developed country, felt

when they came to a developing country here in Indonesia. Since the purpose of

this study was to analyze intercultural matters and culture shock, it seemed natural

to select these students, who were still in the midst of adjusting to a new culture,

to become my research participants. I only have two participants; however, I

believe their varied experiences provided more that ample information for this

11

study. Additionally, the bulk of this paper is aimed at discussing how to overcome

intercultural problems; therefore, once I interviewed the participants and

discovered the problems they faced, I wanted to spend a large amount of time

analyzing possible solutions.

The first subject is a twenty four-year-old woman. She is from America.

Her native language is English and she speaks it very well. She knew nothing

about any words in Indonesian during her first arrival in Indonesia. Before

coming to Indonesia, she had been to some overseas countries such as Mexico,

Canada, Brazil, and Grenada for months. She first came with a friend to Indonesia

in February 18, 2011 and she chose Salatiga as a place to live in. Currently, she

has been staying in Salatiga as a missionary.

The second subject is a twenty six-year-old woman from America who

speaks English as her native language. Besides Indonesia, she had been to Canada

and Thailand twice. Before coming to Indonesia, she did not know any words in

Indonesian. She first came to Salatiga in February 18, 2011. She is doing the

missionary service here in Indonesia.

B. Instrument of the Data Collection

In attempt to discover the forms of culture shock which the participants

had been dealing with, and the strategies they have used to cope with them, I

developed a list of questions to gather the data. I chose to collect the data via

questionnaires and interviews because I believe these methods would provide me

with the broadest and most complete answers to fully study and analyze. The

12

questions focused on an assortment of some issues regarding the subjects’

opinions about the customs they found here, the new environment they were in,

the people they interacted with, the problems they encountered, and the process of

how they adjusted to their new cultural surroundings. There were 38 questions in

the questionnaire asking about the subjects’ opinion and perceptions concerning

culture shock and ways to cope with it. Further details of the questions are

attached on the Appendix. The interviews scheduled for each subject lasted for

approximately 25-28 minutes. Both the questionnaire and interview were in

English. Any particularly interesting answers given by the subjects were further

pursued. The interviews were recorded.

C. Procedures of the Data Collection

First of all, I set up an interview appointment to meet with the participants.

Both of them were busy with the school assignments, so I had to wait a week to

actually speak with them. However, I did finally interview them both and received

very valuable information.

Secondly, the interviews were held on the different days due the schedule.

The interview with the first subject was done on Thursday, November 10, 2011 at

5.30 pm in the subject’s house. Then on the next day on Friday, November 11,

2011 at 4.30, the interview with the second subject itself took place at a house of

the second subject’s friend’s. Each interview took around 25-28 minutes.

13

D. Data Analysis

The types of qualitative approach (data collection) that I used were

questionnaire and interview. I picked these two approaches because they seemed

the most likely to produce clear, broad, and detailed information from the

subjects, which I could use to do a complete and through analysis. After the

interviews were conducted, I transcribed the data. Afterward, I analyzed and

discussed the transcriptions to figure out the result. Lastly, the conclusion was

depicted based on the discussion.

Analysis

A. Before Arrival ( Feelings before encountering the new culture )

Both Subjects 1 and 2 felt excited and had positive feeling but Subject 2

kind of imagined that some minor problems would arise upon arrival. Bond

(1988) stated, “In social psychology, the core (values) appears to be a concern for

how a person perceives, cognizes, and reacts to social reality in achieving

interpersonal goals, typically, but not always, in short-term interaction

sequences.”

In the interview, Subject 1 said, “Before I came, I really had heard a lot of

really good things about Indonesia. I thought that everyone would be friendly, it

would be pretty and that the food would be really good and I thought the weather

would be a lot hotter than in America. But it is really hot here. I also thought that

14

once I got here, I would feel a lot more overwhelmed but I did not feel like that.

So coming here was not really that hard. I thought it would be harder but it was

actually kind of fun.” From what she revealed, Subject 1 seemed very excited

about her coming to Indonesia and did not worry too much about what would

happen later. It is because she had already looked for some information to picture

in her mind. Otherwise, Subject 2 also shared almost the same thought but she had

a little worry about things that would occur after her arrival. “Before I came here,

I did not know a lot about Indonesia. But I had some friends here already and I

emailed them and I knew a little bit. I thought it was going to be a lot harder than

it was. But I was really excited to move here.” Before moving to Indonesia,

Subject 2 was a little apprehensive about what would happen when she moved

here. This, at least in small portion, will most likely influence the way she

perceives the host culture she is going to be in.

B. Arrival

Subject 1 in some ways, was quite surprised with differences of the

condition of the street, people, buildings, weather, and food. “I thought it was a

lot busier, everyone had motorcycles, and there are a lot more small stores and

restaurants. In America where I lived, everything was a lot bigger. And I thought

that the food would be a lot more vegetable but people fried things a lot more than

I thought they would.” She found it almost completely opposite with what she had

expected previously. In the meantime, Subject 2 was nervous because she had no

15

idea of how to communicate with the local people at the first coming but managed

to stay in high spirits as she met some local people who could even speak her

native language. She said, “I did not know how to speak Indonesian so if there

was any problem, I did not know how to fix anything at all.” Moreover, she

added, “I was astonished at how many people could speak English. I could still

communicate with a lot of people. But now I try to use Indonesian. I was

surprised that the weather was not as hot as I thought and I was also surprised at

how friendly all the people were. They were just being friendly, very welcoming

and I did not expect that.” This could be interpreted that both Subject 1 and 2 did

not have any “breakdowns” or immediately visible culture stress like some people

do. Besides, based on the reliable sources (subjects’ close friend), the hardest

thing for them both was having to depend on other people for so much – rides into

town (because they did not know where to go), translating, helping to shop,

setting up a house, making decisions, cooking. They had to rely on those close

friends and some other friends to help them do a lot of basic things. So, both of

them experienced a bit of initial shock when faced with the new and unexpected

part of this culture. This left them with a feeling of confusion concerning how to

fix things or overcome problems when they occurred. As what Bond (1980) has

stated, “Culture shapes what is to be learned by offering standards, norms, and

models to be emulated it provides the reinforcements and, through values, the

broader socioeconomic, religions, and moral context that encourages some

behaviors while discouraging others.” Two of them later found things a bit

16

startling during their first arrival as this will be investigated more in the next

section.

C. Getting to know the local environment

Since their arrival in Indonesia, both the subjects managed to build

relationships with their neighbors by talking with them quite often. Subject 1,

revealed that she developed a good relationship with the owner of a store down

the street (near their house). So, it is believed that Subject 1 had a more out-going

personality for she was more willing to just go outside and try to meet people.

While on the other hand, Subject 2 was not quite as out-going, but she still had

been able to get to know people. Both girls were faithfully involved in a religious

fellowship and also went to Indonesian church every Sunday. This helped them

developed a good base of friends. One thing that shocked them at first was that

most of the people in their neighborhood woke up very early in the morning to

clean up the yard and then do their daily chores. Although later on Subject 2

discovered some things that gave her cultural insight as to why people get up so

early here, her initial impressions were: “They get up really early in the morning

and I am not used to that.” To her, it seemed a bizarre thing to do. She may feel

that it is too early, but for the local people, it is a different case. It is normal,

something that they always do everyday because it is a habit, and also because

they think it is good to clean up the yard before doing anything else. This might

17

fit with what Bond (1998), has said, “Culture, therefore, influences how

individuals deal with members of different groups.”

D. Learning Indonesian language and problems related to the new culture

One interesting thing that captures the attention is both the subjects did not

start learning the Indonesian language while they were still in their home country.

They waited until they came to Indonesia in order to learn from the actual

Indonesian context so as to sound more natural. Perhaps, this is because of their

experiences to have been abroad before and have faced new languages, they

already had anticipated it by having such positive thought that they would still

survive when they arrived in Indonesia. Later, language was really hard for

Subject 1, but she was very committed and spent lots of hours studying and doing

homework for school (IMLAC). According to a trustworthy friend who was close

enough with Subject 1, Subject 1 struggled because language learning did not

come the easiest for her, but she plugged along and progressed at an average rate.

She was always willing to be corrected and asked for corrections and she wanted

to learn more. And after a year, she was making good progress. For Subject 2,

language learning was not as difficult. She was able to understand grammar

concepts, etc easily. But because it seemed easy to her, she did not work as hard,

and now, after a year she still has a long way to go before she is fluent, even

though she is done with school. Subject 2 had progressed at an average rate, she

18

maybe could have gone faster, but she was able to communicate what she needed

to for daily things and was just now starting to get some of the deeper level

vocabulary down. It was reported that Subject 1 had motivated her whole time

here, whereas Subject 2’s motivation had waned over the course of the year.

Regarding her interaction with the local Indonesian people, Subject 1 felt that

most everybody she talked to was really friendly and easy to talk to. But she often

found it difficult to understand when she listened to what others are talking about.

She frequently got totally lost listening to others’ conversation because she did

not know the content and also because of the slang and speed used when they

talked to each other. But it was kind of different when they, Indonesian people,

talked to her directly. They tried to talk slower so that she could understand the

information delivered. According to Moran (2001), “Language and culture

convey both unification and separation. It acknowledges that we can deal with

each separately and with both together. To state the obvious, language embodies

the products, practices, perspectives, communities, and persons of a culture. To

fully reveal the culture, we must examine the language. Moreover, he added,

“Language is a product of the culture, as any other, but it also plays a distinct role.

The words of the language, its expressions, structures, sounds, and scripts reflect

the culture, just as the cultural products and practices reflect the language.

Language, therefore, is a window to the culture. So, it is pretty much depicted in

the experience that Subject 1 had with the local people. They in a way tried to

slow down and changed the way they speak by using simple dictions so that

19

Subject 1 could get what they meant to say. Consequently, there is a similarity

between the theory above and the language experience that she encountered. It

was a bit hard for her to converse the information with the local people because

she was still new and not a part of that particular community. So she needed to

master the language first in order to get used to the host culture. Moreover, in

regards to the cultural matter, Subject 1 said that she had been uncomfortable

when she went to an Indonesian friend’s house because she did not know how to

act. She said, “I do not know how could be like the way that Indonesians would

be, so I feel a little strange when that happens.” As what Byram (1991, p. 19)

stated, “For one, believes that the goal of culture instruction cannot be to replicate

the socialization process experienced by natives of the culture, but to develop

intercultural understanding”. This of course, is pretty much common in every part

of the world. During the first encounter, it is a little bit hard to mingle and go start

a conversation with people from different culture. According to a official source

(Subject’s friend) both subjects interacted a lot with locals. Subject 1 hung out

with a wider variety of people and loved them, so she was very intentional about

finding people to hang out with and creating opportunities to do things with

people, making relationships priority, and prioritizing Indonesians. Hence, it is

pretty much equivalent with the theory. By forming a large base of friends and

often interacting with them, Subject 1 subconsciously was improving her

intercultural understanding and without any doubt, would probably be able to act

like the way the local people did. Kordes (1991, p.302) expresses a similar view

20

in claiming that even though a foreign culture is less learnable than a foreign

language, intercultural learning is feasible to at least some degree.” Furthermore,

Subject 1 said that Indonesian people do not always tell others how they really

feel because they are afraid of hurting or offending others’ feeling. Indonesian

people are embarrassed to say things directly so it is sort of like not all the way

honest sometimes. Here, I assumed that Subject 1 was open to people so she

wanted people to do the same in exchange, to share some mutual cultural

relationships. This can be a serious deal for people who come from different

countries and cultures as it might cause some misunderstandings and negative

stereotypes.

On the other hand, according to Subject 2, she did not live nearby any

Indonesians and she did not talk very often with her neighbors unless she met

them on the street and asked them how they are doing. One thing that really

surprised her a lot is when she first came in Salatiga and saw there were a lot of

American people, too. She revealed that it was fun to connect with them,

especially because she already knew some of them. She added, “Well, a lot of

times, we just get together and talk or we go to the coffee shop and talk about how

our lives are going and how our days have been.” This can be interpreted that

Subject 2 felt a lot more comfortable knowing that she is not alone in the new

country because there were some people from her home country who shared the

same experience, too. This is proven by a close friend of hers that revealed,

“Subject 2 tended to hang out with the same core group of people (Indonesians

21

and westerners). Subject 2 interacted with the locals, but I still feel that she is

more comfortable with westerners. She has not developed as many deep

friendships in Indonesia as Subject 1 did, but really they both did great!” Of

course, it is always great to have people from the same background and culture to

be a companion because it creates some emotional feelings of being safe and

understood. This kind of occurrence almost happens in every part around the

world. Additionally, she later figured out some cultural things that she thought

were quite diverse from her original one. In accordance with her statement,

Subject 2 stated “They get up really early in the morning and I am not used to

that. In America, we do not typically get up that early do a lot of housework, but

here they wake up very early and always sweep outside their lawn and road.” On

the other hand, she felt self-conscious about her language ability. In this case, I

assume that she was nervous about making pronunciation and grammar errors

when talking with the local people. Additionally, as she mentioned, sometimes the

conversation was hard because she did not know what was appropriate to ask

people. It seems like Subject 2 was kind of careful in carrying on the conversation

with people as she thought it hard to understand what the social rules are in

Indonesia. Hofstede (1975, p. 212) stated that having to express oneself in

another language means learning to adopt someone else’s reference frame. It is

doubtful whether one can be bicultural without also being bilingual. So, I really

agree that in order to get involved well in the community and be understood by

the nationals from the new culture, one has to open up one’s self by learning the

22

language of the host country and try to act “normally” – in other words, act just

like what the locals do. It is, of course, impossible to be able to act normally in the

new culture without understanding its language, too. So, there has to be a balance

that stands between knowing the culture and its language. In this case, Subject 2

happened to be lost in delivering the message or getting the information with the

local people because she was not able to understand the language yet.

Nonetheless, according to Subject 2, the local people are very open and

welcoming, and readily invited her to take a part in the special occasions in their

life. Above and beyond, both subjects disclosed two things that bothered them.

First, was Jam Karet (Rubber Time). But they “adapted” really well and just

started getting used to it. Secondly, their Indonesian friends openly comparing

them (both subjects) about their language ability, looks, personalities, right in

front. I believe that this might irritate them so much because those things are very

private – or at least not usually discussed when person is in the room.

E. Attitude towards the new culture and strategies to cope with problems.

Having visited some countries before such as Mexico, Grenada, Brazil,

and Canada, Subject 1 did not seem to face any serious problems in encountering

the new culture in Indonesia, especially in Salatiga where she was living. She

revealed that most of the people that she got to talk to were really friendly and

welcoming. However, she frequently became lost in conversations. She later

noted that it was because of the slangs or idioms, the content, and the speed of

23

people’s speech that all contributed to her confusion. Thus, in order to understand

and be understood, she forced herself to read some books and search for useful

information, acted things out if she needed to, as well. She would then seek help

from others or ask a friend what she should do. Subject 1 reported that most of the

people here are more community oriented which she thought is a good thing for

she felt people cared and watched out for her. For this reason, Subject 1 tried to be

open and adapt to the cultural things and environment in order to be accepted in

the community. This is interesting because she wanted to mingle with the new

people to share some new information which will be useful for her as well. And

also because she was challenging herself to try out new things in the host country

where people are more community oriented in the way they act in the society.

Similarly to what revealed by Subject 1, Subject 2 also shared almost the same

experience of living in the completely new cultural environment in Indonesia

especially in Salatiga. In her opinion, it was pretty much easy for her to keep up

with the cultural things and the people that she interacted with. It was all because

she managed to interact and make herself surrounded by the local people. By

doing that, Subject 2 believed that she could get through and be accepted by the

new culture. Yet, according to a close friend, when facing difficulties in using

Indonesian language when speaking with the locals, Subject 2 tended to just

forget it, if she could not get her point across she just dropped it and did not worry

about it. She tended to then just try to figure stuff out on her own. Conversely,

Subject 2 was very impressed by the way people treated her, especially on some

24

special occasions because, even though the people did know her very well yet,

they were still willing to open up their homes to her and let her come to their

events and the special times in their life. So, it can be assumed that she was

accepted in the new culture, especially because she stated that Indonesia

especially Salatiga, was like a second home to her. Although she did feel like

Salatiga was her new home, she still found it annoying when she was on the street

or in public places and people just stared at her strangely from head to toe. In

order to cope with such matters, she managed to stay calm and think, “That is

how it is done here,” and she had to be patient toward the local people and accept

that this is the way how it is culturally done. Again, it seems that Subject 2 finally

could get through the cultural matters and appreciate the new culture that she was

facing, which means that she was picking up new things and letting them become

part of her life. Overall, based on the observation from the trusted close friends

who I asked, both subjects endeavored to be courteous and respectful and have a

very welcoming attitude. They were still open to learning cultural things and

understanding why people do what they do because, they knew this was where

they were going to be living so they needed to know as much as possible. It can

be inferred that they had positive attitudes toward the host culture and prepared

themselves very well since the very beginning to anticipate and alleviate culture

shock that happened to them by equipping themselves with learning Indonesian

language, asking for help and corrections from people, and mingling with the

local people. For this reason, culture shock did not appear as a severe predicament

25

to both Subject 1 and Subject 2. Subsequently, this can be influenced by their

experience living overseas before, so they already had a type of thinking that they

would survive in the new place as well as the previous places. Lastly, having

assorted encounters to a few cultures helped strengthen their personality and state

of mind toward the cultural matters.

Conclusion

This study begins with a belief that encountering the cross-cultural

communication will completely happen for people who have opportunities to

work, study, or do missions abroad. For that reason, this study has achieved its

aims to identify the forms of culture shock and also to figure out the strategies

that Subject 1 and Subject 2 have employed with their shock. It is identified that

Subject 1 and Subject 2 seem to have little amount of difficulties when

encountering cultural problems. They were only aggravated during their first

arrival but as throughout the time, Subject 1 and Subject 2 could simultaneously

adapt to the new language, interacting with the local, food, etc. Having faced

several cultural things overseas before, seems to build up their personality and

enhance them to anticipate some possible cultural matters that arise upon their

cultural adjustment such as accepting the values of how they are culturally done,

always using Indonesian when attending or participating in cultural events, and

creating self-motivation to seek out help by asking people, acting things out and

26

whatsoever when having difficulties in particular circumstances. Hence, making

themselves exposed to cultural problems and values, in a positive way, makes

them culturally accepted by the local people. Yet, during the process of their

adaptation to the language and culture in Indonesia, Subject 1 seemed to perform

better in some areas such as encouraging herself to ask for help from others or

acting things out, and building up a wider relationship with various kinds of

people, compared to Subject 2 who only relied on her own and had a tendency to

stick with a core group of people. Therefore, this study found that equipping one’s

self to learn about certain information of the host culture, being exposed to the

cultural events by often participating in some occasions, and constructing

networks with various kinds of people will result the best in being accepted in the

host culture as well as open up one’s mind or perspectives in a broader way

towards the cultural values.

References

Archer, C (1991). Living with strangers in USA. Eagle Wood Cliffs.

Baron, L. (1991). Culture Shock. Retrieved in the Internet

http://www.colorado.edu.(April 25, 2006).

Bennet, M.J, (1998). Basic Concepts of Intercultural Communication; Selected Readings.

Intercultural Press. Yarmouth, ME.

Bond, M. H. (1988). The Cross – Cultural Challenge to Social Psychology. Sage

Publications.

27

Coodman, N. R. (1994). Training for the global executive. In Brislin, R. W., & Yoshida ,

T. (Eds), Improving intercultural interactions: Modules for cross-cultural training

programs. London: Sage Publications.

Ferch, C., & Kasper. G. (1984). Strategies Interlanguage Communications. Singapore.

Ferraro, G. P. (2006). The cultural dimension of international business (5th ed.). New

Jersey: Pearson Education.

Guanipa, C. (1997). Culture Shock. Retrieved in the internet http://clutshock.com//

(December 2, 2010).

Guanipa, C. (1998). Amigos: Culture Shock. Retrieved in the internet

http://edweb.sdsu.edu/people/cguanipa/cultshok.htm (December 2, 2010).

http://ic.intermundo.net/faq/whatis.shtml. Retrieved in the internet.

Gudykunst , W. and Kim, Y. (1995). Communication with the strangers : An Approach to

Intercultural Communication. Third Edition. London. SAGE Publications.

Hess, J. D. (1994). The whole world guide to culture learning, Yarmouth: Intercultural

Press.

Hofstede, G. (1991). Culture and Organization Software of the Mind – Intercultural

Cooperation and its Importance for Survival. London: McGraw Hill.

Janssens, M. (1995). Intercultural interaction: A burden on international managers.

Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 16(2), 155-167.

Moran, P.R. (2001). Teaching Culture – Perspectives in Practice. Heinle, Cengage

Learning.

Oberg, L. (1991). Culture Shock. Retrieved in the Internet

http://www.worldwide.edu/planning_guide/culture_re-entry_shock.html. (April25, 1996).

Robinson, G. (1980). Cross Cultural Understanding: Processes and Approaches For

Foreign Language As A Second Language and Bilingual Educators. New York. Prentice

Hall.

Schneider, R. (1997). Culture Shock. Retrieved in the Internet

http://www.cultshock.com// (July25, 2004).

28

Simpson, J and Weiner E. (1989). The Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford, Clarendon

Press.

Ury, W. (2004). Culture Shock. Retrieved in the Internet http://www.hsc.unm.edu/(April

12, 2004).

University of Nebraska International Student Services. Retrieved in the Internet

http://www.jyu.fi/mclinic/cis/coping.html