HUE UNIVERSITY

INFORMATICS AND OPEN INSTITUTE



ASSIGNMENT ON

CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION 2

TOPIC:
THE ROLES OF CROSS - CULTURAL COMMUNICATION
AND HOW VIETNAMESE CULTURE INFLUENCE ON
LEARNING AND TEACHING ENGLISH

Lecturer: Nguyễn Văn Tuấn

Student: Phan Văn Long
Class: Nghệ An 2

Vinh, 2021
1
 I. Introduction
“As the world becomes smaller, the need to understand each other's faith
grows”, said Tony Blair. The understanding mentioned by the UK president
is the one in both culture, economy, politics and so on. In this integrating
world, there will be no single country that can any longer develop alone.
Thus, the understanding is critical. And the understanding should start with
cross-cultural one and typically with linguistic understanding. Linguistic
understanding as well as cultural one is performed first by translators
who transfer meanings from a language to another. But different languages
have different systems which are not easy to be translated equivalently. Both
English and Vietnamese languages also have their unique addressing term
system. In these two languages, a few basic addressing terms share the same
semantic constants. However, cross-cultural researchers find that addressing
terms of a society that uses one system cannot be fully translated
equivalently
into the language of a society that uses a different system. Thus, as an
English major student, I would like to have a modest Cross Cultural
Communication Study on Using Addressing Form and its potential culture
shock in my minor thesis.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW.
1. Overview on culture and language.

Culture
No one can make a unity definition for Culture. The reason is that there are so
many different ones.Culture, as Nguyen Quang‟s thought (1998:3), is “a share
background(for example, national, ethnic, religious) resulting from a common
language and communication style, custom, beliefs, attitudes, and values.
Culture in this text does not refer to art, music, literature, food, clothing styles,
and so on. It refers to the informal and often hidden patterns of human
interactions, expressions, and viewpoints that people in one culture share. The
hidden nature of culture has been compared to an iceberg, most of which is
hidden underwater! Like the iceberg most of the influence of culture on an
individual cannot be seen. The part of culture that is exposed is not always that
which creates cross-cultural difficulties; the hidden aspects of culture have
significant effects on behavior and on interactions with others.”

2
Integrated pattern of human knowledge, belief, and behaviour that is both a
result of and integral to the human capacity for learning and transmitting
knowledge to succeeding generations. Culture thus consists of language, ideas,
beliefs, customs, taboos, codes, institutions, tools, techniques, works of art,
rituals, ceremonies, and symbols. It has played a crucial role in human
evolution, allowing human beings to adapt the environment to their own
purposes rather than depend solely on natural selection to achieve adaptive
success. Every human society has its own particular culture, or sociocultural
system. Variation among cultures is attributable to such factors as differing
physical habitats and resources; the range of possibilities inherent in areas such
as language, ritual, and social organization; and historical phenomena such as
the development of links with other cultures. An individual's attitudes, values,
ideals, and beliefs are greatly influenced by the culture (or cultures) in which she
lives. For the above mentioned features, I see the shortest and most concise
definition of culture in Moore‟s words (1985:4): “culture is the whole of
knowledge, ideas and habits of society that are transmitted from one generation
to the next.”

Language
It is impossible to separate culture and language. The ability to create and use
language is the most distinctive feature of humans. Language is a system of
conventional spoken or written symbols used by people in a shared culture to
communicate with each other. Language can be viewed as an expression of
culture. People use language to communicate, to express their ideas, to pass their
achievements from generation to generation. Thus, culture is transmitted
through language and people learn their culture through their language.
Language, as David Crystal (1992: 2) stated, is “the systematic, conventional
use
of sounds, signs, or written symbols in a human society for communication and
self-expression.”
Language is shortly defined as a "human system of communication that uses
signals such as voice sounds, gestures, or written symbols." But frankly,
language is far too complicated to be adequately explained by a brief definition.
Vladimir Lenin identified language as “the most important communication mean
of human being.” Each language has a complex structure that can be analyzed
and systematically presented. All languages begin as speech, and many go on to

3
develop writing systems. All can employ different sentence structures to convey
different meanings. They use their resources differently for this purpose but they
seem to be equally structurally flexible. The principal resources are word order,
word form, syntactic structure, and, intonation in speech. Different languages
keep indicators of number, person, gender, tense, mood, and other categories
separate from the root word or attach them to it.

The relationship between Culture and Language

Wardhaugh (2002, 219-220) reported that there are two claims to the
relationship between language and culture: The structure of a language
determines the way in which speakers of that language view the world or, as a
weaker view, the structure does not determine the world-view but is still
extremely influential in predisposing speakers of a language toward adopting
their world-view. The culture of a people finds reflection in the language they
employ: because they value certain things and do them in a certain way, they
come to use their language in ways that reflect what they value and what they
do. Of course, just because people talk differently, they think differently. The
idea that language, to some extent, determines the way we think about the world
around us is known as linguistic determinism with „strong‟ determinism stating
that language actually determines thought, and „weak‟ determinism implying
that
our thought is merely influenced by our language (Campbell, 1997).
In another word, language is used to maintain and convey culture and cultural
ties. A language both reflects and affects a culture's way of thinking, and
changes in a culture influence the development of its language.

2. Some features of Vietnamese culture

2.1 Collectivism
There is a significant difference exists in educational situations in individualist
and collectivist cultures. As other collectivism culture, in Vietnam homes and
schools, the children are expected to take their opinions from others and to go
along with what is best for the group. In other words, collectivism cultures are
group-oriented (Gudykunst, 1991: 93). Collectism refers to a value system in
which a person’s identity, attitudes and actions are determined to a large degree
by the groups to which he or she belongs, especially so-called “in-groups” with
which there is regular and close interaction (e.g. those based on family ties on,
4
in some societies, the working unit). A person does not claim rights which
would affirm individual interests in opposition to those of in- groups (Kim et.
al., 1994 and Triandis, 1995). Vietnamese usually use ‘we’ as personal pronouns
when starting a personal idea. They feel more comfortable working as a team
member (Burns, 1998: 11).
In contrast with individualism cultures “confrontation can be salutary; a clash of
opinions is believed to lead to a higher truth” (Hofstede, 1991), even reward for
excellence also goes to the group and responsibility for performance is owed to
the group. Even the choice of study and occupation is a group decision rather
than a personal one. Interdependence is always important and goes betweens are
relied upon (McLaren, 1998: 167). Moreover, keeping a good relationship is
very important and it even more important than success. “If success eluded you
this time, you can always try again if the relationship is intact.” (Vamer and
Beamer, 1995 in McLaren, 1998). Individuals define their identity by their
relationships to others, through group membership, and strive for a sense of
belonging. Schneider (1997: 38) gave an interesting example about the two
cultures (collectivism and individualism): In Japan, ostracism is the most
devastating punishment. This is evident of the fear of Japanese children of being
locked out of the house; while for American children, punishment is being
locked in.
One of the features which have great influence on education is that decisions are
often based on means, not ends. All decisions about career and tertiary study
fields are made by family, not individuals. Students may have their fees and
living expenses paid by their extended families. The assumption is that they will
always return to their homes and when they do all the family will share in a
greater income the graduate can then earn.
2.2 Face saving
No matter where you are, inside or outside classroom, face saving is important
in the knowing and learning process. Face is a universal phenomenon because
everyone would like to be respected; everyone needs a sense of self-respect but
the importance of face is fare greater in Asian cultures where behaviour and
relationship focus on maintaining, saving, or honouring face for the group.
Saving face becomes important to reserve harmony; there is more concern with
feelings than absolute facts.

5
As in Ting-Toomey (1988) in Gudykunst (1991), face is defined as the public
self-image. And in collectivistic culture as Vietnam, the concern for face is
predominately other-oriented. However, to Asian face is a mutual concept, for
giving face means allowing room for the other person to recover their face. The
issue of giving face, especially to people with higher status, is important in
collectivistic cultures. According to Burns (1998: 16), most Asian people
understand how much face they have; to have a greater face implies they are
more powerful in organizations or know more people in the system. They learn
how to deal with higher people (greater face); and with subordinates (lesser
face) who handle many of the job details and are influential. Face is always
inseparable from the ‘webs of relationship’ in Asian cultures. In a sense
everyone is interlocked in the group face. That is one of the reason why
Vietnamese student are accustomed to listening to the teachers and accepting
what s/he says and it is difficult for students to ask question in class. They are
afraid of losing face and also afraid of causing the teacher to lose face as though
disagreeing with what he or she says is adverse criticism, implying that the
teacher is less than perfect. One way to avoid that is Vietnamese students will
try to ask in private afterwards or rather ask their classmates.
2.3 High context
The context level refers to how much you have before effective communication
can occur. Collectivist cultures belong to high context and individualist cultures
belongs to low context. In high context culture like Vietnam, they have a lot of
implicit meaning in what is said, using a shared code, concentrating on group
orientations and stressing nonverbal communication.
Members of high context culture tend to use an indirect style of speech because
the image of group harmony is essential (Gudykunst, 1991:96). They want to
know others' status and background in order to reduce uncertainty and know
which version of the language to use (as there are different ways to speak to
people who are superiors, equals or inferiors). With the same ideas, Triandis
(Personal communication, 1990 in Gudykunst, 1991: 50) points out that: "since
in collectivist cultures relationships with others are extremely important, people
learn to play attention not only to what is said, but also to the context of what is
said - the gestures, the orientation of the body, the objects associated with what
is being said. In other words, they pay more attention to context than people in
individualistic cultures. "

6
People in high context cultures seem to make greater distinction between insides
and outsiders than low context cultures do. When they talking about something
in mind, they expect the interlocutors to know what's bothering them, so that
they do not have to be specific. They just talk around the point and putting all
pieces in place except the crucial one. They suppose that their interlocutor will
place it properly. Ambiguity and subtlety are expected and highly valued.
You are not supposed to come tight out and say it. This creates embarrassment
and discomfort (Hall, 1976: 98). McLaren (1998: 164) points out, in high
context cultures open conflict is almost always destructive as Confucian, Taoist
and Buddhist philosophy all oppose debate and confrontation. Any interaction
resulting in discord means one or all lose "face". All the conflict should be
supposed, not talk out. Students' questions and teacher disapproval will be
indirect, accommodating, worded to ensure no face is lost. In Vietnam as well as
other collectivist culture, everything base on the basic rule:
Honour the hierarchy first, your vision of truth second" (Bond, 1991: 83).
Gudykunst (1991:52) summarize high context cultures' features and compare
with low context
cultures features as follow:
High context Low context

Most of the information is contained in Most of the information is contained in

the person/situation. the message.
Easier when population are Necessary when populations are
homogenous. heterogeneous.
More typical of traditional societies More typical of changing situations
and/or stable situations. and societies.
Verbal communication shorter, Verbal communication direct,
indirect, ambiguous, less detailed. instrumental, detailed.
Silence is valued s more credible. Silence not trusted.
Direct questioning discouraged. Direct questioning necessary
Open conflict discouraged as Direct conflict essential to arrive at
damaging to communication and truth, not necessarily damaging to
harmony. good communication.
Greater emphasis on intuition and Greater emphasis on clarity, meaning,
reading nonverbal behaviour, and achieving ends rather than on
contextually appropriate ways to relationships
maintain relationships.
7
2.4 Vietnamese communication practices:
Once of the most important feature of Vietnamese communication practices is
the differentiation between ingroup and outgroup members. Ingroup members
are the people have close relationship, same value system, cultural standards,
symbols and beliefs. Ingroup members are considered as "I" or "we" and are
behaves as "members of the family". On the other hand, outgroup members are
strangers who seems to not have "the same voice" or "on the same boat".
Vietnamese tend to treat them in a safe and effective way as "honor guest."
The agreement and the hierarchy is the crucial part in communication within
members of ingroup. All members volunteer to follow the conformism.
Behaviour should base on propriety and formals which were agreed before is
considered ad communication standard. The outstanding, strange or new
behaviours are not encouraged (even be crictized) as it has influence on
community or group. All people who take part in the communication process do
not dare and do not have chances to change the hierarchy positions or the roles
in communication. Members try to avoid conflict which cause face-losing within
group. Communication among ingroup members usually has the colour of
feeling, compromise and open. This is one of behaviour rule in communication
of Vietnamese. With outgroup members, Vietnamese of ten have two
communication practices: saving face for the whole group and hesitate when
communicates as individual. When Vietnamese communicate as group or on
behalf of group, the face of group is considered as the first priority. As in Le
(2003: 253) members of ingroups want to be seen as a united group with high
agreement in all activities or sayings. When talking part in communication as an
individual, Vietnamese tend to "hold their mouth". In other words, they seem to
not express their real feeling and try to be modest through using personal
pronouns (always self-address as lesser face). This strategy is usually used when
Vietnamese has not to understand about their interlocutors in order to ensure the
safety of their individual face.
3. Vietnamese education background
Vietnam was dominated for a long time by more than one nation. Therefore,
Vietnamese culture also was influenced, especially from Chinese culture.
According to Nguyen (2003: 124), we can see anywhere with “worship
Confucianism, venerate Taoism” and that was an elemental moral lesson for all
students in feudal time. Even now, most schools have slogan “Tien hoc le, hau
hoc van” (Learn social propriety first, after that learning lesson). The position of
teachers was equal with the position of the King or father “Vua, thay, cha ay ba
ngoi - Kinh tho nhu mot, tre oi ghi long” (The King, the teacher, the father
occupy three different positions; but children remember that you should venerate
them equally as one unified person) (Phuoc, 1975: 106). The aim of education in
Vietnam is to educate people to become good citizens in both knowledge and
morality. Teachers themselves are thus automatically assumed to be moral
guides or role of models (the Constitution of Vietnam, the Education Law of
8
Vietnam). It is often believe that teachers tend to develop themselves both in
knowledge and morality to meet the social, cultural and educational expectations
as moral guides. As such, teachers in Vietnam
Or teacher was considered as children‟s parents “Mung mot Tet cha, mung hai
Tet me, mung ba Tet thay” (Visit father at the first day of the New Year, visit
mother at the second day of the New Year, and visit teacher at the third day of
the New Year). It means that students should show their respect to their teachers
(Ellis, 1995). As a result, teacher should share the responsibility for the learning
result of students. Today, teachers have the same responsibility for students‟
result at the end of school year, especially with teachers in high school because
their students are going to take part in the two biggest exams (final exam and
university entrance exam). The learning routine does not change much from the
past until now. In the past, students had to pass three levels of exams: huong
(communally), hoi (provincially) and dinh (nationally) which happen every three
years. People seems to think that earning high ranking on those exams is the
only way to get honour for their families and to become mandarin instead of
being a poor student with low social status. And now, students still go through
the same way to get to the highest level as national excellent students in specific
subjects every year. And those who get pass can go directly to the university
they like without having entrance exams.
The education system is absolutely teacher-centred, closed, non-feedback and
applicable to conformist (Phuoc, 1975 in Ellis, 1995). Overtime, when
Vietnamese shift from feudalism to socialism, the influence of Confucianism
seemed to decrease on education system. They change language from Chinese
alphabet to “chu quoc ngu” (Latin language). Before 1995, education system in
Vietnam operated with variety of models such as Soviet model (in the North),
American model (in the South), French model (both in the North and the South)
which show its eclecticism. In Tran (1998: 291), he shows the significant
characteristic of Vietnamese lifestyle is the flexibility in the way it is open to
new values, selecting aspects that are suitable with the local culture and
applying those new values into appropriate contexts. This is one of the important
“culture constant” constituting the current Vietnamese education system (Tran,
Quoc Vuong, 2003: 278).
4. The relationship between teachers and learners.
In their work, Ballard and Clanchy 1997: 9) argue that: “different cultural
traditions do embody different attitudes to knowledge. After more than 1,000
years of Chinese domination, Vietnamese cultural value, especially the nature of
education in Vietnam is affected by Confucian system of ethics (Nguyen, 1972).
Learning styles of Vietnamese also based on three key Confucian values:
cooperation, the concept of "face" and self-effacement (Flowerdew, 1998).
Phuoc (1975) realize Confucian model is teacher-centred, closed, suspicious of
creativity and predicate on an unquestioning obedience from the students. If the
students fail to comply, teacher will actively inhibit the students' creativity. On
the other hand, students might reverse their own opinions to save the face of the
9
teacher, even when they are aware that the teacher is wrong. Liu & Littlewood
(1997) once again confirm that most English teaching in East-Asia countries is
dominated by a teacher-centred, grammar-translation method and emphasis on
rote memory. As application of teacher-centred method, students highly respect
their teachers and they consider teachers as the transmitter of knowledge.
Vietnamese teachers provide all details of the lesson an all learners have to do is
absorbing those knowledge.
As Hofstede (1991), communities with strong uncertainty-avoidance, learners
expect their teachers to know. Therefore, Vietnamese education is dependent
learning, not independent study. Bodycatt & Walker (2004: 88) quotes idea
which shows the same thought from one Vietnamese teacher:
“Another related issue was the perceived status of academic staff and reluctant
student expectations. The students in our classes seemed to view us, as teachers,
as the fonts of all knowledge and to accept what we told them without question.
Very few students seemed willing to question any of the ideas we presented in
lectures either in classroom or individual settings. We found it somewhat
daunting that the general expectation of students war that we have the answer to
all questions.”
Vietnamese teachers valued hard work, which they measure partly in terms of
the amount of studying done outside class (Lewis & McCook, 2002). Therefore,
the model “pairs of good students” is very popular in Vietnam. The good
students are assigned to help bad students both inside and outside classroom to
help them make progress. This also reflects sense of community of Vietnamese
which relates to “the Confucian notion of mutual obligation and membership in
a group” (Nguyen, 1973 and Nguyen 1989 as sited in Sullivan, 1996: 34).
Influenced by traditional educational objective “Tien hoc le, hau hoc van”
(Learn social propriety first, after that learn the lesson), “the role of morality in
teacher identity and the teaching profession in Vietnam reflect its local
relevance, morality has long been an indispensable an inseparable part of
education in Vietnam” (Phan, H. and Phan, Q., 2006). Generally, it is believed
that parents give the child its body, the teacher give it its mind (Brick & Louie,
1984: 41). Teachers are considered as models for students to follow.
In the Constitution of Vietnam- The Education Law of Vietnam states that
teachers themselves are thus automatically assumed to be moral guides or role
models. Therefore, teachers in Vietnam often find it necessary and important to
educate students morally, no matter what subject they teach (Phan, H. & Phan,
Q., 2006: 136).
5. How these cultural features affecting on teaching and learning English in
Vietnam and some recommendations.
Firstly, the typical characteristic of Vietnamese which have influence on
learning is the hesitation and shyness. As Duong, Diller and Sutherland (1975:
126) states:

10
“According to Vietnamese custom, one should remain modest and humble,
showing the extent of knowledge or skills only when asked. In Vietnam, there is
the motto of saying less than what one actually knows, often and admirable
characteristic. Modesty and humility for Vietnamese are very important social
graces, and deeply ingrained into their identity”.
Besides, as Tomlinson & Bao Dat (2004) find out “one student started a little
but correctly is more important than verbalizing a lot but wrongly, and attitude
that came from many of her teachers in the past who had paid much emphasis on
perfection. This coincides with Lewis & McCook (2002: 147) view that verbal
perfection has been traditionally valued across many Asian cultures. This makes
learners are rather quiet in class and seldom volunteer to express their ideas or to
contribute to the lesson, let alone asking question to the teachers. It leads to “one
way question” all the time in class. In other words, only teachers give out the
question and learners just wait for the answer. And when they are asked to make
questions, their response questions usually carry practicing characteristic.
Secondly, when discussing and presenting ideas before their group or the whole
class, learners‟ ideas are all prepared beforehand which lack of quick reaction in
communication. Even when teachers encourage debate or discussion, the
conflict or discussion still occupy with very small percentage of the time. That is
because of harmony characteristic of Vietnamese. As it result, Vietnamese
people tent to concede to others and “try to avoid disagreement to the extent that
they may express agreement while privately disagreeing” (Brick & Louie, 1984:
53). Besides that, the reason for conflict avoidance also is the fear of losing face.
Because when people feel that they have been shamed or lost face, they may
“react impassively and withdraw from the situation or relationship” (pp. 53).
Finally, with the “suspicious of creativity” (Ellis, 1995: 10), both teachers and
learners feel more comfortable when teaching and learning strictly base on
textbook (with teachers are lesson plans). They prefer the concrete-sequential
and linear manner. All improvisation or variations which out of preparation are
not highly evaluated from both sides. This create a tedious or repetition and also
create no motivation for teachers and learners.
Hofstede (1991) shows that “one of the reasons why so many solutions do not
work or cannot be implemented is that differences in thinking among the partner
have been ignored”. Therefore, with the Vietnamese learners, they should show
their willingness to make any necessary changing to adapt new way of learning
to take them closer to the new language as the same as new culture.
With the teachers, in order to have a better result in teaching, they should have
an open-minded to realize what they should apply or what hey should adjust in
teaching. Firstly, teacher should realize the obstacles, needs and abilities of
learners, and accept their learning styles and find the way to help them develop
the suitable learning strategies. Base on learners learning styles to readjust
teachers‟ teaching methods and techniques. Teachers can ask students about
11
their favourite ways of learning, what assistance they need from their teachers or
let them write diaries (for days, weeks, or months)
about what they like and what they dislike, or what they thinking about English
periods. In this way, teachers always can update with their learners‟
information. Secondly, when having enough data about their students, teachers
try to alter teaching style to create the matching for both students and teachers.
When learners are provided with a variety of learning activities to meet the
needs of each student, then all students will have at least some activities that
appeal to meet their needs and ability. They are more likely to successful in
those activities. Thirdly, teachers should create a friendly and trustful
environment to facilitate learners to a feeling that “teachers as a member of their
family” as Vietnamese learners are very open when they think their teachers and
themselves both in one group with the same interest. Teachers should not let
students think that “all teachers are outsiders to the cultures of their students”
(Holliday, 1994). The comfort and trustfulness are crucial psychology and
cultural factors in learning and teaching English.
III. CONCLUSION
To conclude, this paper focused on the cultural features of Vietnamese people
such as the shyness and reserve characteristic, saving face, conflict avoidance
and suspicious of creativity which have influence on teaching and learning
English. Sometimes, such differences on culture are not easy to realize
immediately which leads to misunderstanding or misjudgment. Consequently,
these differences can reduce the effectiveness of learning and teaching activity.
Therefore, both learners and teachers should be aware of these distinctive
features to help themselves overcome cultural barriers in learning and teaching
process with the best achievement.

REFERENCES
Brick, J. (1991) China: A handbook in Intercultural Communication National
Centre for English Teaching and Research. Macquarie University. Sydney NSW
2109.
Brick, J. & Louie, G. (1984) Language and culture: Vietnam. Commonwealth of
Australia.
Ballard, B. & Clanchy, J. (1997) Teaching Internal Students. ACT: IDP
Educational Australia.
Burns, R. (1998) Doing business in Asia, Longman, Melbourne.
Bodycatt, P. & Walker, A. (2000) Teaching abroad: Lesson learned about inter-
cultural understanding for teachers in higher education. Teaching in Higher
education, Vol 5, No 1, 2000. ISNN 1356-2517100/0100 79-16, Taylor &
Francis LTD.
Bond (1991).

12
Cynthia, G. & Victor, C. (1997) Communication and Culture: A guide for
practice. Canada.
Ellis, G. (1995) Teaching and learning styles in Vietnam: lessons for Australian
Educators. Journal of Vietnamese Studies, No. 8, May, 1995.
Flowerdew, L. (1998) “A cultural perspective on group work”. ELT Journal,
Vol. 52, No 4, pp: 323-328.
Gudykunst, W. (1991) Bridging differences.
Holliday, A. (1994) Appropriate methodology and social context. Cambridge
University Press. Hall (1976).
Huard, P. & Durand, M. (1990) Vietnam, civilization and culture.
Hofstede, G. (1991) Cultures and Organizations: McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead,
London.
Kim, U., Triandis, H. C., Kagitcibasic, C., Choi, S. C. and Yoon, G.; editors
(1994) Individualism and Collectivism: Theory, method and applications.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kramsch, C. (2000) Second language acquisition, applied linguistics, and the
teaching of foreign languages. The modern language Journal 84.
Liu, N. F. and LittleWood, W. (1997) Why do many students appear reluctant to
participate in classroom learning discourse? System, 25/3, 371-384.
Lewis, R. (1999) When cultures collide. London, Nicholas Brealey, pp. 54-114.
Lewis, M. & McCook, F. (2002) Cultures of teaching: Voices from Vietnam.
ELT Journal volume 56/2 April 2002, Oxford University Press.
Le (1999).
Le, Viet Dung (2003) Tim hieu phong cach giao tiep cua nguoi Viet Nam qua
tuc ngu, hy yeu Hoi thao Ngu hoc tre 2003, Hoi ngon ngu hoc Viet Nam (Study
Vietnamese communication practices through idioms, Summary record of
Young linguistic 2003, Vietnam linguistic association) pp. 387-391.
Maley, A. (1996)
McLare, M. (1998) Interpreting culture differences. Peter Francis Publishers,
UK.
Nguyen, Quang Ngoc (2003) Tien trinh lich su Viet Nam (The process of
Vietnamese history), Hue, Education Publishing House. Nguyen, Dinh Hoa
(1972) “Some aspects of Vietnamese cultures. In Nguyen Dinh Hoa (ed.)
Vietnamese language and literature. Carbondale: Center for Vietnamese Studies,
Southern Illinois University, pp 1-8.
Phuoc, N. H. (1975) Contemporary Educational Philosophies in Vietnam, 1954-
1974: A completive Analysis, Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Southern
California.
Pauwells, L. & others (1998) Development of sociocultural Understandings
through the study of languages. South Australia DEET, pp. 9 -16.
Papademetre, L. & Scarino, A. (2000) Integrating culture learning in the
languages classroom: A multi-perspective conceptual journey for teachers.
Melbourne: Language Australia, University of South Australia, pp. 33.
13
Phan, Le Ha and Phan, Van Que (2006) Vietnamese educational Morality and
the discursive construction of English language teacher identity. Journal of
multicultural discourses, Vol. 1, No. 2, doi: 10.2167/md 038.0
Pennycook, A. (1997)
Sullivan, P. N. (1996) Sociocultural Influences on classroom interactinal styles.
TESOL Journal Volume 6, No. 1
Schneider, S. & Barsoux, J-L. (1997) Meaning across cultures. Prentice Hall,
London.
Scollon, R. & J. Scollon (1991) Intercultural communication, Blackwell,
London.
Saville-Troike, M. (1982) The Ethnography of Communication. An
Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.
Tomlinson, B. & Bao Dat (2004) Language teaching research 8, 2, pp. 199-222.
Tran, Ngoc Them (1994) Co so van hoa Viet Nam (Foundations of Vietnamese
culture) Danang Publishing House.
Tran, Quoc Vuong (2003) Co so van hoa Viet Nam (Foundations of Vietnamese
culture) , Hue, Education Publishing House.
Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview.

14