I cut and pasted from from A. Cottrell's research on Indian-Western couples living in India
which is an exerpt from the book "The use and misuse of Language" the article by Edmund S Glenn entitled "Semantic difficulties in international Communication" Good and cheap book, worth the read


Glenn, in "Semantic Difficulties in International Communication" (also in Hayakawa) argues that difficulties transmitting ideas of one national or cultural group to another is not merely a problem of language, but is more a matter of the philosophy of the individual(s) communicating which determines how they see things and how they express their ideas. Philosopies or ideas, he feels, are what distinguish one culture group from another. "...what is meant by (national character) is in reality the embodiment of a philosophy or the habitual use of a method of judging and thinking.: (P 48) "The determination of the relationship between the patterns of thought of the cultural or national group whose ideas are to be communicated, to the patterns of thought of the cultural or national group wihich is to receive the communication, is an integral part of international communication. Failure to determine such relationships and to act in accordance with such determinations, will almost unavoidably lead to misunderstandings." Glenn gives examples of difference of philosophy in communication misunderstandings among nations based on UN debates. Also some examples which might be experienced by cross-cultural couples. For example: to the English No means No, to an Arab No means yes, but let's negotiate or discuss further (a "real" no has added emphasis) ...Indians say no when they mean yes regarding food or hospitality offered.