Conclusion – so What?

At the end of this book, perhaps the reader is asking " so what " or " what shall I do now? " I have argued across these twelve chapters that culture and rhetoric are strongly correlated around the world; and that often these cultural and rhetorical differences not only strongly correspond to a preference for communication styles, but perhaps, more importantly they connect to deep, implicit values such as sense of sense, thinking patterns, and appropriate social behavior. Thus, using a rhetorical pattern from one culture in another culture might strike a strong discordant chord with these deeper values. If the reader does not believe this, then I will refer him or her to the first reading of Letter O, from the Guayas Transit Commission. How easy was it to read that letter? Did it confuse, frustrate, or annoy you? Most likely yes. It is an extreme, perhaps uncommon rendition, of Ecuadorian cultural values, but it does resonate for many Ecuadorian readers. Interestingly, when I first read it 18 years ago, I could hardly process it, but after having lived in Ecuador for four years and on the U.S.-Mexico border for eleven years, Letter O is just as natural to me as Letter R, but I prefer to read Letter O in Spanish and Letter R in English. They seem more natural to me that way. That sense of naturalness for both Letters kind of unnerves me on the one hand, but on the other, it shows that I can process each rhetorical and cultural system much like a language system. When professional communicators are working in intercultural contexts such as Ecuador, do they need to culturally translate their equivalent of Letter R to be more like Letter O? This is a tough question because it essentially involves almost a total rewrite, drawing on each of the eight etic borders and using the appropriate medium at the writing document or communication cycling time. Translation theorists are trying to address these issues. James (2002) explains that the cultural implications for translation may take several forms ranging from lexical content and syntax to ideologies and ways of life in a given culture. The translator also has to decide on the importance given to certain cultural aspects and to what extent it is necessary or desirable to translate them into the TL (target language). (p.1) James' definition is especially telling in the …