American Directness and the Japanese
American and Japanese ways of speaking are so different that they often cause culture shock to both Americans and Japanese who visit each other's country. Most Japanese who come to the United States are at first shocked and have a problem with the American direct way of speaking.
Culture shock occurs because most Japanese cannot easily escape from the formula "politeness= indirectness." Compared to the American way of speaking, Japanese speak much more indirectly. Directness is considered a form of impoliteness in Japan. Therefore, when we want to be polite, we speak and act very indirectly. For example, we seldom say, "I'll go to a bathroom," except when we are with close friends. Usually, we say, "I'll go wash my hands." Especially when we are at the table or with an important person, we say only, "Excuse me. I'll be back in a minute" because we do not want to remind other people of the bathroom, which is considered a dirty place, even though it is actually clean. Also, other Japanese can infer that we are going to a bathroom from this phrase. But Americans cannot. They ask where we are going since they have no idea what we are going to do: make a phone call? buy something? Yet, in this case, these questions make Japanese frustrated, wondering why these Americans do not understand our polite expression.
Basically, expressing our desire directly is not considered polite, and culture shock happens to Japanese when Americans expect us to express our feelings honestly. Concerning appetite, when we are guests, we are unlikely to say, "I'm hungry." We put up with hunger until we are asked, "Aren't you hungry?" Even when we answer the question, we want to stay polite, so we never say, "Yes....
... middle of paper ...
...ure shocks to Japanese who come to the States.
The difference between American and Japanese ways of speaking can cause us some bad experiences at first; however, once we get accustomed to the direct speech of Americans, it is more convenient than the Japanese way. First, we can say what we want. Second, we do not have to hesitate to tell the truth in order to be polite. Finally, it frees us from unnecessary misunderstandings. The third point makes us happy because it makes us feel we have adjusted ourselves to American society at last. Compared to Americans trying to learn the Japanese way of speech, we are supposed to have much less difficulty learning the American way. At first, it might seem to be difficult, but in a few months, we will find ourselves comfortable in the direct speech of the Americans and may be in trouble when speaking with newcomers from Japan.
For years, people have always felt that the Japanese school system was superior or more effective than that of the United States. Although some feel this way, others feel that the Japanese system is too strict and not flexible enough for those who may need extra help along the way. Through researching two different case studies, and also reading other materials, I have found many similarities along with many differences between the two, including teaching methods, overall emphases, and student involvement. Both countries have developed very effective and intricate systems of teaching, which compliment, and clash against one another. The Japanese system is not in all ways superior to that of the United States; however, there are a few different reasons why people may feel that the Japanese are in fact “smarter” than us. To begin with though, one must have an understanding of both systems and a basic knowledge of how they work.
Over the years, drug abuse has been a rising problem in almost every country in the world. Day by day more people are involved in this endless cycle of drug craving, money shortage, and drug related crimes. Congressmen and politicians of United States, seeing this unstoppable crime wave which is about to spread throughout the country, begin to address various kinds of possible solutions to end this crisis in the most efficient and effective way. As discussed in Alan M. Dershowitz's "The Case for Medicalizing Heroin" and Charles B. Rangel's "Legalize Drugs? Not on Your Life," the most popular proposition set forward by growing number of leaders now is to legalize the use of drugs; but will it help solving the problem or make it even worse? I agree with Rangel that in order to end drugs abuse completely, we have to find the root of the problem and use any forces necessary and retain the determination to keep on fighting because it will not be an easy battle.
The topic of alternate policies to the U.S. Drug War has always been an interesting and thought provoking topic for me. Over nearly the past four decades, the U.S. government, along with state and local agencies, have spent billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of man hours, and many lives with little to show for stopping the flow of drugs into or the use of drugs in this country. The only true outcome from these expenditures and all of this enforcement are more robust resupply networks, more refined and potent drugs, deepening psychological issues, and alienating specific aspects of American society.
The war on drugs, which started in the United States, has become widespread in many countries around the world, and increasingly so in Canada (Odeh, 2013). It has been shown that the war on drugs is an inefficient way to minimize or even control drug use and possession (Odeh, 2013). This begs the question then as to why the war on drugs is still being waged with increasing force. The United States, which started the war on drugs, now has the highest prison population per capita in the world, with 730 of every 100,000 people imprisoned (Odeh, 2013). Furthermore, more than half of these people in prison are serving sentences for drug crimes (Odeh, 2013). Despite the fact that it costs taxpayers a lot of money, with no results; drug use and the amount of drugs in the US hasn’t decreased, the war on drugs has not stopped. While some Americans, even very conservative ones (CBC, 2011) have come to the conclus...
Wood, E., Werb, D., Marshall, B., Montaner, J., & Kerr, T. (2009). The war on drugs: a devastating public-policy disaster. The Lancet, 373(9668), p.989-990.
To show politeness when accepting a gift, in Taiwanese culture, people reject couple times before accepting it to show that the receiver is not greedy. However, American culture is opposite from Taiwanese culture. In American culture, the rejecting a gift is considered as rude.
Apparently many American have been infected with the rudeness virus. Some might get it from the stressful and hectic life style they live or maybe the adult was just raised in an environment where manners didn’t matter.
The current situation of drug control in the United States is imperfect and inadequate. Millions of men and women, both young and old, are affected by illicit drug use. It costs the United States about $6,123 every second because of drug use and its consequences (Office). Moreover, 90 percent of all adults with a substance use disorder started using under the age of 18 and half under the age of 15. Children who first smoke marijuana under the age of 14 are five times more likely to abuse drugs as adults than those who first use marijuana at age 18. Finally, the children of alcoholics are four times more likely to develop problems with alcohol (Prevent). Current legislation that has to do with the United States’ drug control policy is the Controlled Substances Act, which regulates the manufacture, importation, possession, use, and distribution of certain substances (Shannon). In 1966, Congress passed the Narcotic Addict Rehabilitation Act also known as the NARA. This legislati...
When it comes to fighting the war against drugs it has come to our attention that for more than fifty years since the war on drugs was declared, the other international laws like those of human rights and public health have been continuously absent and are viewed as irritative by many UN agencies and governments (War on drugs report 2011). Human rights abuses associated with drug control policies present in different countries are not just perpetrated by the individual governments but by the drug control system itself (Joanne Csete p.1). The drug control system by its aims, current operation, interpretation and implementation of the policies makes the abuses more likely to happen. It is evident that the system focus their energy and every other resources on illicit manufacture or production etc. while intentionally avoiding to combat important but controversial issues just to preserve their international consensus. Therefore, it is right to say that human rights abuses associated with drug control policies are systematic in its nature, that is the drug control system itself is the one that is causing the abuse of other international laws and if a stop is to be made to these abuses, there must be an immediate attempt to resolve the institutional weaknesses and gaps in the international drug control regime itself (Barret Damon).
The criminal justice system is mainly intended for punishing individuals who cannot live peacefully within society and is an ineffective and blunt system when it is intended to address health issues (Paley, 2014). Efficiency is, not the case however for the United States since the policy on fighting drug abuse have been left to the criminal justice system. A collaborative approach that treats all participants and engages the community with respect is more humane and also more effective. Harsh methods are the reasons these policies are not working and cannot solve the problems of drug abuse.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) 2002, Globalization, Drugs and Criminalisation: Final Research Report on Brazil, China, India and Mexico, viewed 3 April 2014, http://www.unesco.org/most/globalisation/drugs_vol2.pdf
Everyone deals with culture shock differently. People can often have preconceived notions of a specific culture that can cause them to be pleasantly surprised or disappointed (Ting-Toomey & Chung, 2012). Some cultures are also more different than other cultures. Someone moving from the United States to Canada is not going to have as much of an adjustment as someone moving from the United States to India, especially if they do not speak the language. The adjustment also can relate to certain personality attributes, like how open minded or stubborn someone is.
The country had no adequate and enabling law in the eighties to handle the sordid condition created by drug abuse and the related issues.The Government of Bangladesh enacted the Narcotics Control Act in 1990 repealing all the colonial laws with a view to
Law 35 of 2009 regulates most drug related activities in Indonesia. The objectives of the law are (a) ensuring the availability of narcotics for the purpose of health and scientific advancement, (b) protecting the people from drug abuse and (c) providing medical and social rehabilitation for drug addicts. While admirable in its intentions, the law falls short on achieving these objectives due to its focus on prohibition and punishment.
The other fundamental issue is about politeness in conversation. There is a very simple example: “Good morning.” Students can say “Good morning” to their teachers as well as to their friends in English, whereas people speaking Japanese cannot. When a student speaks to his/her teacher “Good morning” in Japanese, he/she should add some words (letters) to what he/she would speak to his/her friend.