Intercultural Communicative Competence: Making Sense of Symbols, Rituals, and Language in Everyday Life

 Understanding and navigating cultural differences isn't just an academic pursuit—it’s a practical skill that shapes how we teach, learn, and interact in real life. For bilingual teachers in training, especially those developing their intercultural awareness, grasping the essence of Intercultural Communicative Competence (ICC) is key. But what does that mean in practice?

What is Intercultural Communicative Competence?

At its core, ICC is the ability to understand both our own cultural patterns and those of others, so we can communicate meaningfully and respectfully across cultural boundaries (Studies in Ethnopragmatics, Cultural Semantics, and Intercultural Communication, 2020). It’s not only about speaking a language correctly—it’s about understanding the cultural values and beliefs that shape how people use language, both verbally and non-verbally.

Language Mirrors Culture

Language reflects the heart of a culture. As scholars have shown, each culture has unique communicative behaviors rooted in its beliefs and social values. This means that everyday expressions, gestures, and even silences carry meaning.

The Power of Symbols

Symbols are everywhere—in alphabets, emojis, traffic signs, and even emojis. According to Kendall et al. (2005), pragmatics studies how symbols function in context, while semantics looks at what they mean more abstractly. Think of how the letter "A" stands for a sound, or how a red circle with a line through it universally signals “not allowed.”

Ideograms represent concepts (e.g., ♻️ for recycling), while pictograms resemble the objects they signify (e.g., 🚻 for restrooms). These symbols are often language-independent but culturally grounded. Understanding them helps us decode the world more effectively.

Signs vs. Symbols

Carl Hausman (1989) described signs as icons that require interpretation—they don't mean anything until we assign them meaning. Byron Kaldis (2013) explains that signs can be:

• Indexes (linked by cause or effect),
• Icons (based on resemblance),
• Or symbols (arbitrary and agreed upon).

James Forte (2014) reminds us that both signs and symbols gain meaning through social interaction. In teaching, recognizing this can help students better interpret classroom instructions and cultural cues.

Rituals: Language in Action

Rituals, from daily greetings to holiday traditions, are cultural practices built on shared trust. According to Bax (2010), rituals maintain coherence in society and often express values non-verbally. Whether it’s a birthday celebration or a religious ceremony, these actions carry messages just as powerful as words.

Historical pragmatics explores how rituals have evolved over time, showing us how cultures change yet maintain core symbolic practices.

Taboos and What They Reveal

According to Yule (2010), taboo terms are avoided because they challenge norms related to religion, politeness, or societal rules. Swear words, for example, shift with cultural change (Gehweiler, 2010), and what’s taboo in one society might be perfectly acceptable in another (Senft, 2010).

Taboos can involve language (e.g., expletives), actions, or behaviours. Understanding them is crucial to avoid miscommunication and to show cultural respect.

Liminality: The Space Between

Victor Turner (1969) described liminality as the “in-between” stage—transitional moments in life when people undergo change, such as a student becoming a teacher. These stages are often marked by rituals, which help individuals and societies cope with transformation.

Bax (2010) and Thomassen (2016) connect liminality with imagination and social reconstruction. It’s in these “in-between” spaces that we open ourselves to new cultural understandings.

Courtesy and Politeness in Language

Politeness is more than good manners—it’s a cultural transaction. Geoffrey Leech (2014) argues that positive politeness builds closeness through offers, compliments, or apologies, while negative politeness avoids intrusion or offense.

Indirect Speech Acts (ISAs), like "Can you close the window?", rely on shared understanding. They often reflect a society’s value on politeness and are culturally bound. For example, hedging phrases like “sort of,” “rather,” or “maybe” soften speech and are part of pragmatic competence (Lakoff, 1972).

Euphemisms: Softening the Message

We often use euphemisms to talk about sensitive topics—death, unemployment, or bodily functions. Saying someone "passed away" instead of "died" is a classic example. Euphemisms protect emotions, maintain social harmony, and sometimes even express sarcasm (Hojati, 2012).

False Friends, Proverbs, and Idioms

False friends are tricky—they look similar in two languages but mean different things. Proverbs and idioms are also culturally dense: “Kick the bucket” means “to die,” not a physical action. Understanding them requires more than translation—it needs cultural immersion.

Intercultural communicative competence is not about mastering perfect grammar. It’s about learning how language, culture, and meaning weave together in our daily lives. For bilingual teachers in training, this competence is a bridge to creating inclusive, respectful, and effective learning environments.

References (APA 7th Edition)

Bax, M. (2010). Ritual and ritualization. In Journal of Pragmatics.

Forte, J. (2014). Signs, symbols, and society: A sociocultural theory of symbolic interaction.

Gehweiler, E. (2010). Taboo and language change. In Pragmatics and Society.

Hausman, C. (1989). Metaphor and art: Interactionism and reference in the verbal and nonverbal arts.

Hojati, A. (2012). A sociolinguistic study of euphemistic strategies in English and Persian.

Kaldis, B. (2013). Encyclopedia of philosophy and the social sciences.

Kendall, D., Murray, J. H., & Linden, R. (2005). Sociology in our times. Cengage Learning.

Lakoff, G. (1972). Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts.

Leech, G. (2014). The pragmatics of politeness. Oxford University Press.

Senft, G. (2010). The Tongan taboo system. In Language and Culture.

Thomassen, B. (2016). Liminality and the modern: Living through the in-between.

Turner, V. (1969). The ritual process: Structure and anti-structure.

Yule, G. (2010). The study of language (4th ed.). Cambridge University Press.