Language Personality in the Conditions of Cross-Cultural Communication: Case-Study Experience

The article is devoted to the problem of identification of a language personality’s traits under conditions of cross-cultural communication. It is shown that effective cross-cultural communication is revised under globalization and increasingly intensive social interactions. The results of the authors’ research prove that it is possible to develop a new perspective on the heuristic possibilities of the concept of language personality to ensure the effectiveness of cross-cultural communications. This applies above all to the understanding of culture, cultural codes, verbal, non-verbal communication and preverbal, development of value measurement and understanding, and behavior adoption patterns. We propose to identify a language personality as a nationally specific communicant type that has a culturally caused worldview and value system and is capable of cross-cultural transformation. We identified transitions from a “mono” language personality to a “multi” language personality. We offer communicative training as a way of resolving cultural gaps in communication. We insist that only a new type of a language personality can effectively integrate and communicate while taking into account cultural peculiarities. Language personality currently acquires multicultural traits resulting from two main types of mobility: virtual and physical. Empirical research shows that two types of mobility are widespread, with typical high demands for the study of an international communication language (English) and local culture (Hebrew).


Language and Communication: Traits of a New Personality
Language is a communicative process in its pure form in every society expressed by means of communication, it helps communication, and it is the most important, the most explicit, and the most formal and socially recognized form of communicative behavior.Language preserves cultural values -in its vocabulary, grammar, idioms, proverbs, sayings, folklore, and in the fictional and the scientific literature, in both written and spoken language.According to Hirsch (1988) modern personality should have the ability to understand and participate fluently in a given culture, so called "cultural literacy".Hall (1977) points that to interact in intercultural communication each personality should mind the peculiarities of high and low contextual cultures.According to Veltkamp, Recio, Jacobs, and Conrad (2013), language pays the biggest role in modulating the personality.
As a result, language personality is emerging, due to its socio-cultural environment.Vorozhbitova and Issina (2014) argue that from the standpoint of linguistic and rhetorical paradigm a hierarchically dominant monoposition of category "linguistic personality" is substantiated, while such concepts as "speech personality", "communicative personality," etc. represent only certain aspects of linguistic and rhetorical functioning.Today, in terms of activation and massification of social mobility, the world is transformed into a multicultural space everywhere.Personality is involved in the different types of mobility (physical, virtual, etc.) and faces numerous socio-cultural challenges that cause different changes in types and forms of communication.In such

•
In ethnolinguistic: the representative of basic and marginal cultures.
Language personality includes all the communication codes.We offer to define the following levels in the development of communicative personality: 1) Denial of cross-cultural differences 2) Denial of another culture 3) Understatement, minimizing cultural differences 4) Cultural relativism 5) Adapting to other cultures 6) A higher level of cultural adaptation Since we research language personality mainly through its communicative function, we consider "communicative personality" to be a synonym of a "language personality".
Research by Andreichik (2012) points out the need to create a "literacy package" designed to facilitate the adaptation of individuals and groups in society.We share this viewpoint, which in fact calls for an expansion of the interpretation of literacy beyond the linguistic competence of the individual.
Today, there is an increasing need to use technologies of "global literacy" ("cross-cultural literacy"), especially among young people.In UNESCO policy documents, such as Global education monitoring report (2016) pointed on the necessity of implementation of lifelong education as condition of sustainable development: "Learning, creating awareness and building competencies to take action can take place in communities and through education that is based in the interaction between people and their local environments.Indigenous knowledge and belief systems can inspire better stewardship of the planet.Lifelong learning can help people live more sustainably all their lives.A multistakeholder, collaborative approach should involve government, civil society and the private sector inside and outside schools to shape values and perspectives, and contribute to the development of competencies to reduce or stop unsustainable practices and to adapt to consequences such as climate change due to the overstepping of planetary boundaries by humankind".So, cross-cultural literacy was considered in the context of cross-cultural education (cross-cultural education) in the 80s.In the analysis of the principles and approaches implemented in these concepts, synonymy and the essential unity of the concepts of "global education" and "cross-cultural education" have been identified.Cultural pluralism, diversity and interdependence are recognized in the UNESCO principles of cross-cultural education.
From a global perspective, education includes at least the following components: 1) The ability to anticipate and understand the complexity of a multinational system; 2) Knowledge of the world culture and international events; 3) Understanding of the diversity and unity of human values and interests.
Today there is a demand for the knowledge, skills and belief systems required to become responsible citizens.However, global education should not be limited to these principles.At a minimum, it is necessary to add the following components (Apanasiuk, 2002):

•
The ability to realize the complexity of interdependence in terms of a certain system of concepts;

•
The ability to do justice to the differences and similarities in different peoples' systems of values and interests.

The Aim of This Research
In our research we want to reveal the heuristic potential of the concept of "language personality" to analyze the effectiveness of cross-cultural communication at the micro level in local social group of participants of the international exchange program MASA-16 program at Ariel University.To achieve this goal, we conducted an empirical study to define the features of the current language personality of MASA-16 participants (MASA-ATZiL-Ariel: description of the program, 2017).

The Main Hypothesis
Our hypothesis is that transition from mono-to multi-language personality directly correlates with engagement in various types of social mobility.

Data Analysis Section
To receive the results we used several methods such as analysis and synthesis (while describing role of the language in modern life), the unity of the historical and logical (to determine the origin of "cultural literacy" and identifying indicators of successful cross-cultural communication), generalization and comparison (to identify the essence of the theoretical approaches to language personalities).

Methodology of Obtaining Primary Sociological Information (Empirical Survey)
We used a quantitative sociological survey, namely the case-study of the students participating in the MASA-16 Ariel program, with the help of a prepared list of questions.Additionally, all the respondents could add their comments to each question, which were analyzed after the survey.There were sixty participants, and fifty-two of them (86%) were interviewed.All respondents were asked to complete the questionnaire anonymously.We controlled the following characteristics: age, sex, country of origin, major at Ariel University.The remaining participants who were not interviewed are matched in these features to the interviewed group.To control the quality of received results we used substantial and logical control of the received answers.As a result, the findings of this survey are representative, accurate and valid.Table 1 presented short description of the sample (those, who were interviewed).To analyse the results of empirical survey we used program "PASW Statistics 18" and implemented such method as: categorical analysis (to identify different types of used languages, etc.), comparison method (to compare mother and daily used tongue), index method (to identify language skills and necessity of studying foreign languages), ranking method (to identify the place and the role of different factors, influencing on the appearance of communicative personality) etc.

Key Findings
Under the conditions of intensification of cross-cultural communications, only a new type of a language personality can be effectively integrated taking into account cultural peculiarities.Such type of language personality should have a specific competence of understanding different cultural codes and values.Language personality today acquires multicultural traits due to two main types of mobility: virtual mobility (social media language personality) and physical mobility.The participants in the Masa-Ariel project demonstrate the features of both types of mobility, with high demand for the study of international communication language (English) and local culture (Hebrew).Both demands indicate a willingness to remain highly mobile, which is typical for the younger generation in the twenty-first century.At the same time, there is a demand for knowledge about Jewish culture in general, which proves the formation of a multicultural language personality.To meet the need, we propose specialized communicative training as an addition to the existing ulpan, in order to facilitate the rapid acquisition of specific cultural codes while practicing the Hebrew language.In addition, our findings can form the basis for t special PR campaigns, promotions and other events to promote specific programs and enhance their appeal in their target audiences.

Technologization of Individuals and Group Training in Cross-Cultural Communications in the Context of the Dictionary of Cultural Literacy by E. Hirsch
We rely on such structural elements of communicative competence as communicative competences, communicative skills, and communicative knowledge.Communicative knowledge includes understanding 1) the nature, types, patterns of communication; 2) communication methods and techniques, their capabilities and limitations; 3) the most effective forms and methods of communication for various individuals, groups and different situations; 4) the extent of communicative skills of individuals and groups; 5) methods and techniques of communication for which particular individuals (groups) are ready or not ready (Zinchenko, 2010).
Communicative ability is usually seen as a natural endowment on the one hand, and on the other -as a communicative performance that manifests itself in the ability to perform communicative tasks of different complexity in specific historical multicultural situations (Zinchenko, 2010).
The notion of cultural literacy is becoming extremely relevant today in the scientific educational environment.Many scientists, pedagogues, and public figures talk about low level of general culture of their peers, trying to find solutions to this problem (Vorontsov, 2009).
The theory of American culture scientist E. Hirsch, which he called "cultural literacy," is devoted to the problem of cultural literacy development (Hirsch, 1988).Hirsch defines the term "cultural literacy" as follows: "the network of information that all competent readers possess.It is the background information, stored in their minds, that enables them to take up a newspaper and read it with an adequate level of comprehension, getting the point, grasping the implications, relating what they read to the unstated context which alone gives meaning to what they read" (p.2).Cultural literacy focuses on the cultural information included in a nation's basic cultural foundation (mainstream culture), designated in the forms of the national literary language.This information is usually quite superficial and, as noted by G. G. Slyshkin, roughly in line with what in colloquial Russian language is called "banal erudition" (Slyshkin, 2000).
The existence of a single literary language as a means of communication requires a homogeneous form.Cultural uniformity in the presentation of E. Hirsch is limited to "citizenship," resulting in the following texts: the oath in the name of God, freedom of religion, respect for the anthem and the flag, and the facts of world history, geography, modern science, and politics (Kondratiev, 2017).Hirsch insists on the necessity of the dictionary that selects and interprets the names, phrases, events and other units known to people.Hirsh admits that only a small share of "educated Americans" know the content of each dictionary entry, while most of them are familiar with a large part of the information given in the dictionary, even if they are unable to give a precise definition of each word or phrase.We can conclude that the Dictionary of Cultural Literacy according to Hirsh demonstrates an extremely simplified domestic view of various aspects of culture, history, science, contemporary reality; clearly, there are stereotypes of mass consciousness.According to Hirsch, successful language knowledge requires a good awareness of the various cultural symbols of the target national culture.This kind of knowledge encompasses language values, communication peculiarities, text meaning and discourse specificity of a particular linguacultural community.For successful communication with other cultures, each person must possess the necessary minimal cultural knowledge of his partners in communication.In cross-cultural communications such competencies as linguistic, cultural and communicative are connected.Depending on the importance and role of this or that competence in specific situations of communication, Hirsch identifies the following levels of cross-cultural competence: necessary for survival; sufficient for entry into the foreign culture; providing a full existence in a new culture − its "interiorisation"; allowing to fully implement the identity of a language personality (Hirsch, Kett, & Trefil, 2003).
Just as a single person cannot normally exist in isolation from other people, so no culture is able to fully function in isolation from the cultural achievements of other nations.In the course of their vital functions, they have to constantly refer to the past, or to the experience of other cultures.Today there are almost no cultures that are completely isolated from other cultural communities, except for small native tribes in the most secluded corners of the planet.Today, it is natural that nations are open to perceive the cultural experience of others and at the same time are ready to share with the other peoples the products of their own culture.This appeal to the cultures of other nations is known as "cultural interaction" or "cross-cultural communication".Typically, these concepts are treated as synonyms, although they have some distinctions.
In our view, the indicators of successful cross-cultural communication are as follows: • Availability of communicative intentions, desire to send a message; • focus on cooperation; • The ability to distinguish between collective and individual in the communicative behavior; • Ability to overcome stereotypes; • Possession of a set of communication tools and their correct choice depending on the situation of communication (tone, style, speech genres); • Adherence to the logic of discourse; • Desire for communication symmetry; • Adherence to etiquette rules.
Language of communication knowledge based on non-verbal, non-verbal and culturally conditioned paraverbal features must be added to this list.

The Concept of Linguacultural Literacy
Modern society, especially the younger generation, sometimes have a low level of knowledge of linguacultural units, which seem to be well known to all native speakers.To overcome this, Ansimova (2014) offers the concept of linguacultural literacy, which can serve as a basis for creating a dictionary or lexicographical interpretation unit that contains minimal background information and is focused on communication.
Apanasyuk indicates that students' cross-cultural literacy, or the understanding of the culture of another nation is the unity of knowledge about their own and other cultures, their understanding and positive attitude towards them.Development of students' cross-cultural literacy can be successful when the following pedagogical conditions obtain (Apanasiuk, 2002): -The content of students' development of cross-cultural literacy is defined; -Students' mastery of the different types of scientific knowledge is combined with the development of their capacity for pedagogical reflection, which brings them into the sphere of philosophical understanding of cultural values both of their own and of other people, and for theoretical pedagogical reflection, which regulates and directs students' engagement in the culture of another nation; -Reflective work, serving as a prerequisite of equality understanding of different cultures, recognition of the value of diverse cultural worlds, gives students the opportunity to make a choice of cultural values, to discover the informative and valuable contents of their own and other cultures; ies.ccsenet.
-The dev enhanced the interac unanimous -The proc process of combined

Indicat
In our emp Ariel Univ data: We correl calculated

Results
The One of the features of the participants is knowing several languages (see table 2).Half of the participants know English on the level that is sufficient to communicate with others, and about 15% also mentioned other languages that they can use in daily communication (e.g., German, French, Italian,).Hebrew is still difficult to use for the majority and Arabic is totally "terra incognita" for all participants.Such a situation shows that the language personality of MASA-participants has international features (they know English), but they might have problems understanding the culture and worldview of local inhabitants.The necessity to know the official state language of the country of destination is understood by all the MASA-participants (see table 3), which is an important aspect of life in a new country.The need to know Hebrew, which is the official language of Israel, is acceptable to the respondents.However, in some cases, such as communication in public places (transportation, cafes), while communicating with people in the street English can be a competitor.More these, English is more appreciable while communicating with the representatives of different nationalities.Russian language is important for communications between МАSА participants and teachers (indexes higher than 4 points), in other cases, Russian is not useful.An exception is while communicating with people in the street.From the respondents' point of view, Russian is more important even than Arabic, which received indexes of less than 2 points.An exception is for communication with other nationalities (2.15) and for better understanding the culture of Israel.

Comm Communi
The impor share this including t In our opin accordance opinion, to the concep of intercul certain qua (Beleniuk,   but in most c see Figure 6).Language personality is a specific type of national communicant, which has a culturally caused worldview and value system and is capable of cross-cultural transformation; these communicative skills can and should be trained and developed.It is crucial to show young people how these skills can be implemented in practice, help them learn the culture of a foreign country through the perspective of its language.In order to become a language personality, it is not sufficient to travel and communicate with native speakers -although, it is the most pleasant part of the learning process.It will definitely give a person a general impression of what a culture is, but it is incapable of making one share the values and orientations of this culture, and become a part of it.For this, only time and specific techniques are helpful.Let us put time aside, as it is the most precious human resource, and try to think of means that require fewer efforts.Communicative training is certainly one of the most effective focused technologies for developing language personality.
The theoretical and methodological foundation for organizing and conducting communicative training, focused on effective cross-cultural communication, can be the theory of high and low-context cultures developed by Hall (1977) and the theory of cultural literacy developed by Hirsch.High-context cultures distinguish unexpressed, hidden manner of speech, ambiguous and numerous pauses; leading role of nonverbal communication; extra information as for communication it is enough to have primitive background knowledge; no public showing of dissatisfaction with any conditions and results of communication.Low-context cultures are characterized by the following features: direct and expressive manner of speech; a small proportion of non-verbal forms of communication; a clear evaluation of all the discussed topics; rating understatement as a weak awareness of an interlocutor; open expression of discontent.In specific communicative situations, Hirsch identifies such levels of cross-cultural competence that become the foundation for communicative training, and necessary for survival; sufficient for entry into the foreign culture; they provide full existence in a new culture − its "assimilation," allowing one to become a language personality (Sidorenko, 2008).
Communicative training is designed to prepare participants for informational exchanges and consideration of the layered structure of communicative knowledge.The content of communicative training should take into account cross-cultural features of cross-cultural such as "the difference between man and machine, gender, age, cultural, educational, ideological, social status, personal, family, dialectical language, situational characteristics speakers of languages and cultures" (Leontiev, 2006).Researchers outline the following structural features in which cultures differ from one another: "1) national character, identity baseline; 2) perception of the world; 3) the experience of time; 4) the experience of space; 5) thinking; 6) language; 7) non-verbal means of communication; 8) the value orientation; 9) patterns of behavior, customs, norms, roles; 10) social groups and relations" (Hirsch, 1988).
A manifestation of inefficient cross-cultural communication is a cultural shock that is often provoked by cultural distance, and more precisely, its subjective perception.Cultural shock is the stressful impact on a person of a new culture, a short-term sense of disorientation and discomfort experienced by an individual in a new culture and accompanied by psychological illness.Oberg introduced the term in 1960 to describe the mechanism of culture shock.He coined the term "U-shaped curve."U: Good, bad, very bad, better, good.The stages of cultural shock are: 1) Enthusiasm; 2) The negative impact of the environment; 3) Critical point; 4) Optimistic mood; 5) Adapting to a foreign culture.
Reverse (reverse) cultural shock can be described as a "W" -steps to the rehabilitation of their own culture (L.Khyzhniak & K. Khyzhniak, 2014).
Therefore, the objectives of communicative training must inevitably include exercises (technologies) for reducing the cultural distance between speakers from different cultures and for mitigating culture shock.One of these means of communicative training is development of individuals' linguistic competence, which promotes understanding of different cultural codes.
Such culture shock causes communicative drama.With the help of communicative training, it can be possible to overcome communicative dramas, which in practice are divided into five dramas: the drama of listening (the ability to listen to another person), the drama of understanding (the ability to understand another person), the drama of action (the ability to act according to one's understanding), the drama of self-expression (the ability to express one's thoughts and feelings), the drama of emotion (the ability to regulate emotional stress in correlation with a representative of another culture) (Zinchenko, 2010).The list of the given dramas, in our opinion, is not exhaustive and may be supplemented with dramas generated by a crisis of consciousness, which is inherent instability and inconsistency.For example, there are the drama of inertia (unwillingness to overcome difficulties in the process of communication, such as lack of motivation to learn the language, history and culture of the environment in which the individual intends to reside permanently or temporarily), the drama of dogmatism (the lack of desire to get rid of old ideas, views).
In practice, the following types of communicative trainings are used: 1) professional communicative training designed for professionals, which is based on communication with people (managers, salespeople, teachers, service workers and others).2) Communicative training serves to build relationships with the opposite sex. 3) Communicative training for specific age groups, because communication difficulties are often age related (young, middle-aged, the elderly).4) Communicative training for practicing behavior in extreme or crisis situations (hostage seizure, pressure from colleagues, classmates, relatives, bosses pressure and so on.).5) Basic communicative training for all individuals who have problems communicating.This is the basis of all communicative training, regardless of the specific type (Palagar, 2013).
In communicative training, language is essential.Language is the leading means of communication.In the communicative process, language is recognized worldwide as a thinking tool that allows images to provide certain values and signs and transfer of experience and knowledge.Knowing the host country's language helps to avoid cross-cultural misunderstandings that arise when working through an interpreter.Language skills greatly accelerate and facilitate the process of establishing local acquaintances and professional contacts.

Conclusions
Today, understanding literacy in its broader social context has become widespread.Cross-cultural communications entail a number of risks and barriers.Under the condition of globalization and the intensification of social interactions, building effective cross-cultural communications is becoming relevant.Building effective cross-cultural communications requires a comprehensive multi-layered approach, taking into account the specificity of different forms of cross-cultural communications.
According to the results of our study, we believe it is possible to adopt a new perspective on the heuristic possibilities of the concept of language personality to ensure the effectiveness of cross-cultural communications.
We offer to define a language personality as a nationally specific communicant type that has culturally caused worldview and value system and are capable of cross-cultural transformation.
Following Hirsch, we believe that language personality cannot be viewed from the perspective of evaluating language skills.This applies above all to the understanding of culture, cultural codes, verbal, non-verbal communication and paraverbal development of value measurement and understanding, and in some cases, adoption of behavioral patterns.Today, conditions are created for the mass formation of multicultural language personalities that have come to replace the mono-cultural language personality, limited by the specificity of its culture.
Educational institutions play a decisive role in developing a multicultural language personality.
We agree with Apanasiuk (2002) who indicates that students' cross-cultural literacy, or the understanding of the culture of another people, is the unity of knowledge about their own and other cultures, their understanding and positive attitude towards them.Universities throughout the centuries have been the centers of science, culture and education.Today, in view of growing academic mobility of teachers, students,) knowledge and competences, the need for learning foreign languages has increased, and specifically the need to acquire an education.At the same time, a new type of highly mobile individual is forming, who, in the words of Bauman, "hovers" in everyday life.In such circumstances, there is a growing need in the short term, not merely for learning a language for communication, but also for understanding the culture of the host country.
In terms of our empirical research of the participants of the Masa program at Ariel University, we identified the following: little knowledge of English is sufficient for everyday use; high demand for the study as an international language of communication (English), and the local language (Hebrew); a desire to know the culture of the host country, which in this case is Israel; appreciation of the importance of knowing the local language of communication for the development of a new culture, etc.We also found the key features of this group, namely the formation of the social network language personality, as most of the participants use the Internet in general and social media in particular as the main channel of communication and knowledge of the world and interactions with others.Thus, our hypothesis was partially confirmed: Social mobility directly correlates with the need and knowledge of foreign languages, but there was no statistically significant association between mobility and the transition from a mono-to a multi-language personality.The researched group is an example of how specific technologies can be developed to improve cross-cultural communications.
In view of the findings, we propose communicative training as one of the technologies to achieve this goal.
Communicative training constructs a certain model of communication: a schematized, simplified display of a real communicative process.It becomes a necessary tool to study and control the communicative process.
Communicative training becomes a manipulative technology if its members are not aware of its explicit and latent functions.The value context of a communicative training promotes multiculturalism, by providing the logical justifications for the transition from monoculture to multicultural person.In addition, multiculturalism is manifested not only in external communications, but also in internal communication.
We offer using communicative training as a technology for developing a language personality.We argue that such training should be specialized and aimed at specific target groups.We offer the following key principles: • take into account the specifics of the countries of origin of the similar MASA programs participants.For example, the states focused on democratization or the construction of the authoritarian regime; • take into account the specifics of the countries of origin.For example, what religion is dominant, what type of culture (individualistic or collectivist-oriented), etc.; • take into account the cultural distance, including what values, norms participants can immediately be accepted and eventually followed, and that practically do not change in their communications.
Such training must set the goal of the "language" the alignment of the participants when they do not just learn the language (ulpan is used for this), but learn to understand and accept a new culture in the communication with new thinking.From our point of view, such training should become a sort of a "bridge" between adaptation to Israeli culture and the culture of participants' country of origin.Namely, training involves the development of new skills in a short period of time, so it can perform a logical addition to the training calendar.
We know that the history of communication development is related to the development of data transmission, and has undergone three communicative revolutions: the invention of writing; the invention of the printing press (the beginning of "the era of Gutenberg"); the development of electronic media.In the future, it is reasonable to study the role of training in improving the efficiency of communication in the virtual world, the expansion of which humanity is now experiencing.

Table 1 .
The description of the sample (%)