1. Purpose

The main purpose of the present paper is to show how and the way people talk about cultural differences. More specifically, I will investigate different discourse topics related to cultural differences.

This study will focus on:

a) As form of the discussion e.g., topic change, and

b) Its content e.g., cultural differences, topics between Sweden and Middle East / Arabic culture.

2. Mode of Presentation

The style of the present article was described in the theoretical background. We have started by mentioning the main books and articles were used, then a discussion was given and comparison between some selected studies and the present one, analyses with discourse was described as well as definitions for scientific terms i.e.,

Grammatical topic, Discourse topic, Topic fragment, Speakers topic, and Topic formulation including the examples from the topic.

Later, we have generalized the whole conversation under the result’s chapter we have given through this study an explicit picture of how this conversation was started, developed and the main points that the participants talked about.

The technique we used in the present study as follows:

1. Before recording, the researcher asked the participants to speak freely, continuously and were recommended to avoid interruption unless there are significant reason/s

2. The participants were given the following samples: A, B, C, and D

3. An interpretation of the present conversation was given in order to make it as clear as possible

4. Under the conclusion, some important comments related to the main topic was given

5. A clear description of what happened in the conversation in sequence e.g., topic change, development, etc).

3. Theoretical Background

We have introduced some important concepts were taken from various and previous writers are: Shi-Xu, Adelswärd, and Brown and Yule in the study of the Intercultural Communication.

Nine different topics was included. Participants have tried to explain some of the main concepts arose for each topic, comparison with their culture and opinions was illustrated. The participants have found themselves changing topics simultaneously. Sometimes they give their evaluations, sometimes they leave it to each other, and sometimes leave it to the interviewer's interpretation.

3.1. Topic Change into Sequence

We have adopted the idea of Shi-Xu's paper 'Discursive Attributions and Cross-Cultural Communication of dividing the topics into sequences. The arrows show topic to topic change. Examples for each one of the below items were given, topic-topic change will be demonstrated. Sequences as follows:

Table 1. Topic to Topic Change

Examples:

Discussed topic (A)

Discriminatory views

Translated examples of the recorded conversation were listed below. Then to continue as sequence of topic (initial topic) - and topic change (new topic).

Example (1)

E: They have said that there are two black players and that one of them scored the goal.

A: and no one tried at least to answer them?

E: no, it is normal, and a while ago they mentioned on TV that we do not want foreigners.

A: I think. the racist phenomenon exists everywhere but it should not cover advertising also, and should not cause many people to react on this bad phenomenon, we are human beings and we live on this planet which is not yours or mine, because you did not choose where are you are going to be born here or there. You might be born in my place or the opposite.

As we have seen the above topic was discussing discriminatory views and below we will see that this topic is changed to:

Talked topic (B)

Comparison between two cultures

Example (2)

B: and this is the difference between us and them // for example now we are playing football anyone would like to share us he or she welcome that beside our religion which orders us to treat everyone the best we can, no difference between black and white or Arab or African or even European. the only difference between me and him is our behaviors (according to our belief) if he/she respects me and I do the same it's OK he/she has the right to be a believer or a non- believer this is his choice, then if he is doing his job well I have to give him or her his right, not to discriminate him otherwise what is the difference between us and the animals in jungles? and I think they have this kind of racists on a high level.

The above example shows how the topic - topic change occurs in the present conversation. We will continue demonstrating and in table the sequence of topic - and topic change:

Table 2. Sequence of Topic and Topic Change

3.2. Discourse Topic

Brown and Yule (1983) have explained the "discourse topic" that is distinct from the notion of topic notion used by the grammarians (Keenan and Schiffelin 1976 p:71). We still think that it is interesting to discuss both "grammatical and discourse topic" even though the present study is to show how people speak about different cultures but not describing the grammatical analysis in Arabic.

Thus (Brown and Yule P:75) all reasonable judgements according to this point was explained carefully. We have given each topic and topics change its own explanation during changing the topic. This has been done to make the idea easier to understand and for each topic. To follow the main topic of the conversation the data that has been studied in discourse analysis is always a fragment of discourse and the discourse analyst always has to decide where the fragment begins and ends.

On the other hand there are of course points where one speaker stops and another starts speaking, but every speaker change isn’t necessary concluding a particular coherent fragment of conversation. Which point of speaker change among the many could be treated as the end of one chunk of the conversation? This type of decision is typically made by appealing to an intuitive notion of Topic.

Example (3)

B: I have known some people who’ve lived here for 30 or 35 years and have forgotten their habits and cultures completely. But this is what I did. I met some people and not all of them they had forgotten their habits and cultures.

A: and do you think after that, the Swedes are going to respect them?

The above example has shown us how speaker A interrupted and continued the speech from speaker B and changed into completely different topic.

We would like to account and identify the following terms as which we have found it is worth to mention here which are related to our topic.

• Grammatical topic

We identify this term as referring to a constituent in the structure of a sentence (or the deep structure analysis, at least). This is also noticeable in the work of grammarians such as Dahl (1969) and Sgall (1973).

Note, according to Hockett, the distinction between a topic and the comment in a sentence, is that the speaker announces a topic and then says something about it. In English and the familiar languages of Europe, topics are usually also subjects, and comments are predicates (1958 p: 201).

• Discourse topic

Keenan and Schiffelin (1976 p: 380) emphasized that; "discourse topic" is not a simple NP (= noun phrase), but a proposition. Maybe because their investigation is primarily concerned with children's speech, but in describing the discourse topic as the "questions of immediate concern", Keenan and Schiefflin appear to replace the idea of a single noun phrase as expressing the topic with the idea of a single correct phrase or, sentence.

Example (4)

A: maybe we can move to another point now// if we tried to know the personal opinions for each one of people who have come to Sweden and changed their habits or cultures or both.

The above example shows how speaker A (as a topics introducer) was very often the responsible of opening and changing the topic/s.

• Topic framework

Is a characterization of ‘topic’ that would allow each of the possible expressions, including title (for each topic changed), to be considered (particularly), thus incorporating all reasonable judgements of "what is being talked about". In addition, there are aspects of the context that are directly reflected in the text, and which need to be called upon to interpret the text, we shall refer them as activated features of context and suggest that they constitute the contextual framework within which the topic is constituted that is, the topic framework.

Changing unnecessary behaviors = (the title)

Speaker A pointed out that there are different kinds of behaviors and how it is important to replace a bad behaviour to a good one instead.

Example (5)

A: but I’ve here pointed out that // it is good to replace some bad behaviors of your culture to a positive one in here.

B: but what happened if this family came (?) more than three generations behind. [no way, the basic is the most important?! a] Yes, but they look at people who lived here for quite long time and became having good positions in Sweden as Swedes even if their grand fathers or mothers are basically from France or Germany, etc.

Speaker B and regarding the above example has shown us the relation between the title and the topic of the latest conversation.

• Speakers' topic

If we would treat any piece of conversational data as a process in which two, or more participants speak within the topic framework; we should also find in their contributions' elements that characterize their own personal speaker's topic on the other hand, there are two points worth noting about the fragment of conversational discourse:

First. It is a feature of much conversation that topics are not fixed beforehand, but are negotiated in the process of conversing.

Second. There is a large number of other conversational fragments, where personal topics are frequently introduced through first person reference in one form, or another.

Concerning the above discussion we have observed that none of the aforementioned writers could give an exact definition of the terms they introduced. They gave only explanation/s, besides we think it is still difficult to give a precise definition to any one of these terminologies.

So we should always remember that it is speakers, and not conversations or discourses, who have topics.

3.3. Topic Initiation

People from the Middle East have their own culture which has to be taken into account. When a person speaks the others should listen to him without unnecessary actions e.g., putting their legs on disks, lying down, not giving attention to the speaker, etc. These are important for people who come from this part of the world. On the other hand, we note that, such behaviour/s does not mean impoliteness to the people who live in other parts of the world e.g., Sweden. Because of this it is important to explain this point to the readers or persons who might communicate with person/s from that culture.

In chapter "5" of the present study, Brown and Yule (1983) speak about "Information Units” which are realized phonologically by intonation (B&Y p.155.) In Arabic (any dialects) intonation is very important. Maybe the accent face many differences through the history.

Another reason, Arabic is wide language in dialects, including different sound articulations and synonym words. These are among the main reasons that make this language include number of intonations.

The other point in chapter 5 includes syntactical and structural information.

3.4. Topic Change

The study of Shi-Xu (1994) (Discourse Attribution and Cross Cultural Communication) gave an explanation about topic change. The attributions in, or outside communication. He says that, "the notion of attribution is regarded as of great relevance to cross - cultural communication and relations when members of different cultures come into contact, communicative difficulties may arise, because of culturally different ways of explaining beliefs, behaviour and events. To avoid communicative problems it is considered as crucial to obtain scientific knowledge of culture - bound attributions, which can then be applied to the engineering of cross - cultural communication" (Shi-Xu p:337).

Then, Shi-Xu moves to define these problems by dividing them into two points, and says that, such a conception of attribution is problematical in at least two respects:

Firstly, it neglects the role of language and interaction in constructing and orienting attributions.

Secondly, using attribution as theoretical abstraction, i.e. as culturally shared cognition, in accounting for cross - culture phenomena, or in engineering cross - cultural communication, may involve a risk of ethnocentrism (Shi-Xu p:338).

The analytical preliminaries. Under this title Xu mentions a basic view of language and communication in everyday life, which will be central to the understanding of discursive attributions. This view consists of a number of inter - related components such as language discourse, and the language user. The language user is according to Shi Xu seen primarily as a socially accountable and creative person (Shi-Xu p: 339).

According Shi-Xu’s discussion and corresponding to the present data conversation, there is topic change example, will be listed below, is that when the speaker A has created the different topic/s and speaker B who has contributed in language discourse and language user too.

Example (6)

A: // what do you think of education in Sweden, what is the positive and the negative respectively?

B: there is something they have included in their education especially to children’s education which they should not give in this age, and of course we do not give these education to the children in early age because this might create problems we do not need and maybe we may lose them.

The cultural attributions as communicative acts. Shi-Xu says that to understand the nature of cultural attributions, so we must perforce take into account this communicative action dimension. Moreover, he continues that, it is necessary, therefore, to examine people's formulations of cultural and social psychological knowledge regarding to the functional uses to which they are put in everyday life (Shi-Xu P: 340).

Example (7)

A: of course we are with you in this view. Because of the principles of our belief and habits we have observed here that sexual education might be given to the students but gradually (in stages) but not at once; in addition not mix males and females together. Yes // and not to say and show the unlimited which relates to this information. Let me add also that, we have this idea, that it is mothers who supposed to give them this information in detail, rather than their teachers or other sources, because they (the mothers) are the most important members of the society (according to our concepts), especially when it deals with this type of information.

E: we have private books that have spoken about these things in detail which you can buy or borrow to know these things without putting your sister or mother or even // ?! yourself in an unnecessary situation.

And about the principles of interpretation. Shi-Xu gives two types of meaning - interpretation of attributional discourse:

1. The contextual semantics at the descriptive level, the "saying" of the discourse - to use a metaphor from speech act theory,

2. The cultural pragmatics at the performative level, the "doing" of discourse.

3.5. A Simple Comparison

Below a comparison between Shi-Xu's study and the present study will be given:

1. My interviewees are 4 participants, and Shi-Xu's interviewees are 40 participants which make the present study simpler and much accurate.

2. Xu's study was made in Holland and my present study was made in Sweden. Xu's informants are Chinese, my informants are Arabs came from Palestine.

3. Xu's interviewees, are scholars (students in general). Our participants are almost labors; two students and two labors who came to Sweden as refugees.

4. Both studies use non - questionnaire, and informal style, in order to give participants wider opportunity to speak freely.

5. Shi-Xu's study focused on attributional relationships between propositions, hence sentences because the formulations of the cultural properties are more explicit at this level. However, the present study was focused on how people try to speak about different cultures.

6. Shi-Xu, divided his study into three parts, each speaks about different attributional representation as follows:

a) Implicit, explicit in more, or some such structure.

b) Attributional discourse, refers to, a belief type of behaviors.

c) Cultural attribution, which involves a cultural / national group, or characteristics of the cultural / national group, etc.

While the present study was divided into a sequence which includes nine topics, each related to the topic (initial topic), and topic change (new topic), except two of them: one and six.

3.6. More on Topic Change

Under "topic change" some definitions, including the one we are going to present as well, we have realized that it is important and difficult area to discuss, and define. According to Brown and Yule (p: 84), an extreme example of "speaking about a topic" would be in a debate where one participant ignored the previous speaker's contribution on "capital punishment", for example, and presented his talk quite independently of any connection with what went before".

Regarding the same reference, p: 85 "it is quite often the case that a speaker will treat what he was talking about in his last contribution as the most salient elements, and what the other speaker talked about, though more recent, as less salient".

The second speaker has changed the topic of conversation, the first speaker will get back to the topic of his previous speech again, and this represents a sequence of the topic change.

Furthermore, and with regard go "topics change", we suggest the following definition; topic change, is to change the main core of the conversation, in both direct or indirect way/s.

See the examples below,

1. The direct way, is to change and deliberately to another topic during the speech.

Example (8)

A: did you go to school ?

B: I have seen my sister

As we observe speaker B might has changed the topic of the speech to another topic deliberately.

2. The indirect way, is to change to another topic by using, sometimes, idiomatic ways/metaphors, and very much happened with or even without reason.

Example (9)

A: what do you think of your father?

B: I have seen an old man in the street.

However, the above answer is ambiguous, and has two different interpretations:

1. He meant that he has seen his real father, and he is an old man.

2. Or his real father who was seen, was doing something childish.

The above two cases direct and indirect could depend on the context. Going to see sister may be an indirect way of saying "no" to the question.

Another example from the present study is to show a clear case of topic change.

Example (10)

B: for example in Jeddah (Saudi Arabia) there are two universities: one for girls and one for boys /// do you think it is useless? or have they been charged and paid all these amounts for nothing!?

A: when the Arabian woman is going to marry // the last, and most important question the judge will ask her/: do you have any condition/s?// Then she has the right to answer him positively or negatively immediately. But there are some people who do not want to know this fact in the world not only in Sweden, but this is a fact.

The above example has shown us how speaker B has spoken about the females education, then speaker A has changed the topic to the females marriage, and each topic differs from the other one.

Another question may occur here, how do we know that any person/s has changed topics?

I could say that, it is difficult and might be complicated to know how the topic is going to change during any conversations, sometimes topic changes even if we agreed that we don't want to. So it can be said that topic change is a difficult phenomenon to control.

• Topic formation:

Let us see the following example from the present data conversation,

Example (11)

A: what do you think is important to your study?

B: any open subject, but to be completed.

C: you mean our life in Sweden //, or religion/, or even politics

B: no, we don't want to dive into religion, or politics.

The above example has shown us that speaker B and from the beginning of this conversation has made a "topic formation" and wanted to avoid speaking about religion or politics, and he suggested to influence his suggestion on the others. On the other hand the same speaker during this conversation was the person who spoke about politics, and religion more than the other informants.

Comment,

We think that speaker B was affected by the politics and social life of his area, which made it a bit difficult to speak about 'politics and religion '. Moreover, the stress from this speaker was immediate, and recognized through his loud voice. The observation is that speaker B has found himself forced to speak, explain, defend and even to compare between these two situations, to show his attitudes and beliefs that concern him.

4. Data Collection

A tape recording contains four persons were participated in the conversation. Name of participants: A, B, C, and D. All of them are Arabs of Palestinian nationalities, educated, and between 22 and 30 years old. The tape was recorded in a private house and by the end of the year (1993), in Gothenburg city, Sweden.

5. Results

5.1. General Comments on the Present Study

Three steps has been listed:

1. The sequences of speech which the informants have talked about will be shown in the table below:

Table 3. Sequence Based Subjects are Talked

2. The arrows show the transition from topic to topic changes, the person who plays the main role of changing most of these topics was speaker A. How each topic change has happened will be described below;

a) Education principle, C speaker discussed the reason behind supporting their home education then speaker A started to speak about the difference between the two societies.

b) Social variation, speaker B has discussed the differences between the two societies (Swedes and Arabs), then speaker C has taken the floor and changed the topic to describe the situations in each culture.

c) Both culture situations, speaker D has ended this topic by giving an example to support his claim, then speaker A has taken the floor and changed the topic by simply giving a simple picture friendship in Sweden through the topic (social relationship).

d) Social relationship, speaker B concluded this topic by giving his view according to his own experiences, and speaker A has changed again the topic to discuss the cultural roles.

e) Discriminating views, speaker B has given his view and supported his opinion with examples which goes against the Swedish people, then speaker D agreed with him and suggested more examples and changed the topic to the comparison between these two cultures.

f) Education’s method, speaker B has changed the topic with motivation. He has also mentioned the reason behind all problems related to the educational system, relationship. etc.

Speaker A has taken the floor again and changed the rest of this topic to discuss the positive and negative sides of education in the Middle East.

3. What topic/s they didn’t speak about?

This is more hypothetical question, however, based on their conversation there have been some topics were not completed and/or did not suggest the solutions:

a) Problem solving instead of listing them only

b) Future expectations about Sweden

c) Development of technology and it affects on people’s social life

If we have discussed some points regarding the following discourse; we will say that each participant has given his view based on his particular experience, however, we have found that most of the analyses of these experiences is connected to their culture, habits and belief.

For example, their topic "education principle" includes important parts related to their belief, tradition and their role in the society.

The interesting observation here is that such comparison between Middle East and Western society require the informants to gain more experiences before understanding lots of behaviors, habits, etc. of the Western culture.

Moreover, since we have concentrated on people from the Middle East, we have realized that they are between 'two difficult choices' are:

1. To accept this change, or

2. To refuse it

Then they have to choose between, living in Europe or to move back to their homes. Of course this also is a difficult choice. To risk with your principles and children's future is a price you might pay. These principle/s (according their belief) is important to keep their dignity. Yes many of them are looking to this choice as destroying the family connection and their identities as well.

Example (12)

B: // Swedes think that we do not allow our women to have a job because they are illiterate no this view is wrong, we look at women // as great mothers who deserve to be in their right place between their families and society, not to spend her night everyday with one man and to go to the night club to let this or. that person touch her, where is the clean life then? would this also be a freedom? God, I and We refuse this opinion from this point of view.

C: then we can say that the mother (woman) is the root and the greatest school to generation/s in the world if she has used her role in the society as we have explained above.

D: the woman in Europe is a device//

B: she looks like a man from home to work and from work to home yes!.

The example above shows both: the way of looking to women and respect.

5.2. The Difficult Choice

Some groups in the world have their own strategies to educate their children, and to build their children's future etc. If this strategy has been related to their belief; it will be hard to find a solution that makes these groups satisfy to stay in a place where it contradicts some of their principles e.g., behavior, religion, or culture in general.

5.3. Society and Relationships

Viveka Adelswärd book (1988) "styles of success” has also distinguished the need of the job and what is the best way to find etc. This article has been useful and very helpful to make the present study more systematic, point by point. The topic of the present study is different from Adelswärd's studies by: topics she has discussed however the similarity between her and the present study was in giving the right to everyone to explain his/her views freely.

The participants in the present study tended very much to move to work topics related to social relationships (we can say that, 95% of the speech topic was focused on this point).

Furthermore, we can not blame the participants at all, why?

Most of people who came to Sweden have their own reasons which forced them to leave their places. They noticed that many Swedes think that they were happy to come to Sweden and to live in different place and to experience different culture even though they miss their homelands.

Example (13)

E: the difference between us and them as they have seen it that we have come to their place as refugees and emigrants, but if they come to our place they come as visitors, then we came for an important reason and they came for another, then how we are going to treat them as the same as they do here?

B: yes, my brothers but why have we come to here? Because of war what happens to them if there was a war in their country?

D: now a days no one would stay at home?!.

B: because they did not experience any wars or suffer, people used to live always in safe, wants to live although they have money, for example I came here during the war time but before this I have lived a great life in my country, I didn’t need anything, they have not felt that because as we have said they have not had any wars, I want them to put themselves in our situations then to judge, look for instance at many foreigners how did they reach here? yes there are people who came for money and to sleep without doing anything but of course not all.

Example (14)

B: some of them yes?! because some of them wanted people who come from abroad to forget their cultures and habits and may be their history too

A: and most of Swedish / /

B: I believe most of them prefer those and few only respects people who still preserve and proud of their identities, but the first group I mean the majority, wanted the Arabs or the rest of foreigners to forget their cultures and even their languages anywhere they have come from never mind.

A: and later on if I have become like them how do you think that they are going to consider me? as Swedish, or what am I going to be considered here?

B: no, I think.// at the same time you won't be considered as Swedish.

Corresponding to the above conversation we have seen that participants have been disagreed on certain changes, because of this they would like to preserve the minimum degrees of their identities' as possible. They got surprised and shocked from the Swedish society. They think that it is fine to keep and show some of their behaviors without neglecting the Swedish social life. This may assist them to protect their identities on the one hand, and to take into account the main characteristics of Swedish social life on the other hand. This is difficult, but as soon as they chose to leave their homelands they have to accept the new life change.

In along with the above explanation, it is not wrong for the Swedes or any European to listen to these people and show them some concerns, also to try to consider their past life, background etc as well. Because they did not mean to ignore the Swedish culture, no, however it is very difficult to forget theirs as well.

5.4. The Culture

The informants have been talking about their culture and how its affected by the people who live in Scandinavia. Some of them have given up and agreed to change their identities, and the other group have objected to change their identities and preferred to try to live with this situation for some time. The question here, which type of these two groups deserve to be more accepted? It is not easy to judge here which one of them.

We think that we may accept the first group if and only if they have taken away the negative behaviors of the new society. However, we can accept the second group if and only if they could hold the stick from the middle, we think they have to make the balance between reserving their culture, identity's etc. and showing appreciations with respect to the other culture and try to live with this new situation as much as possible.

The questions have arisen of the "interviewer who is the responsible alone for doing the beginning and the ending of the interaction, for introducing new topics and ending existing ones and for formulating the talk" (Silverman & Jones, 1976:146 p: 10).

Moreover, we may add that speaker A was the most active informant who has controlled and led many topics in the conversation more than the other informants.

This article as far as I have explained is to show how several topics has been changed throughout the conversation which based on the speakers background, knowledge and information.

I see the present article as useful for several reasons:

1. In providing an interesting discussion to the reader

2. It followed, as possible, the main points were discussed by several writers regarding topic and topic-change, etc.

3. It shows randomly of how the sequence of speech may occurred through similar conversations

6. Conclusions

We need to remind you of the participant A who was the one who suggested most of the topics were discussed. Participant B was eager to participate by giving his views very often, and he has given several opinions that offered wide information related to their culture and in comparison with the Swedish culture. Participants C and D were very often play the role as listeners in the conversation. We think that means they agreed with the other informants' opinions and views. Otherwise they would have interrupted the conversation so often. The general atmosphere of the conversation was normal. One of the main characteristics for people who come from this area is to interrupt and to show their views especially if they disagree on certain point.

The other interesting observation is that all participants have been very happy to discuss these variations and to speak about the different cultures from their points of views, nevertheless they have known that people from the Swedish culture have their own thoughts of life and thinking. They would like to transmit their message to the public if possible.

Several points we need to list:

1. Not all subjects were demonstrated in the conversation.

2. Subjects e.g. grammar, phonetics, semantics etc. were avoided to discuss

3. Sometimes the participants have used a metaphorical/idiomatic styles, but it was clear, and not ambiguous.

Finally, not covered all topics were covered. Topics are vast, several points from each culture were discussed and we try to make things clear and as coherent as possible to the reader. We hope that we have succeeded in presenting useful information and added new cooperation in the linguistic field, showing how people speak about different cultures.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, thanks to God who gives me the well and strength to complete the following article, I am deeply in debted to my Parent/mother, for her support and prayers all the time.

Thanks to the University of Business and Technology/UBT especially to the Research and the Consultation Center/RCC for their continuously support to the faculties to submit their researches all the time.

My special thanks go to my college i.e., Jeddah College of Advertising/JCA and my department Communication in Advertising, Jeddah/Saudi Arabia who has given me the courage and confident to submit the present article represented by the head of JCA Dr. Abdullah Ba Nakhr.

I thank all Participates in the conversations which are used in the present study as case study and main data.

My special gratitude goes to my Wife and Kids who were and still give me all inspiration and support I need till I complete the present research.

I am also obliged to thank my dear and previous Department of Linguistics at Göteborg University/Sweden for their previous and continuous support and literature.

Appendix

I have used symbols referring to a speaker's reaction in this text. However, I have noticed that, there is some difference (by using the same variables between different articles).