Intercultural competence as an aspect of the communicative ...

contact with other nations we are big nationalists […] but not among ourselves’ (I2). This
is an interesting view, since it is only in relation to others that one nation can show this
‘attitude’. In many instances the interviewees wanted to stress their appreciation of
equality of cultures, they wanted to show respect and understanding towards cultural
practices. However, while trying to be objective and politically correct, they did
interpolate remarks that pointed to their preferences and actual opinions. For example
‘We are of a friendly disposition, more than some western countries’ (I4). This might
show that the students were in the Defense stage, where they experienced their own
culture ‘as the only viable one – the most “evolved”’ (Bennett 2004: 65). The individuals
at the Defense stage are more adept at noting difference, but their worldview is not
complex enough to account for equally ‘human’ (Bennett 2004) experience of others,
which might be detrimental for individuals’ further learning and might aggravate future
IC contacts.
In a related question the interviewees were asked to state whether their views of
what constitutes a typical Serb are shared by their peers. The question aimed at showing
whether the interviewees perceived themselves as typical representatives of their culture,
or whether they saw different representations of their culture. Most of them claimed they
did not know the attitudes of their peers but still managed to provide an answer, usually
distancing themselves from the peers who were ‘radical’ or ‘nationalistic’ (I1, I8, I9 and
I10), ‘like we are some heavenly people’ (I4), ‘more extreme’ (I3). The answers showed
that the interviewees did not see themselves as typical representatives of their people
(There are many groups, like Obraz, or something like that, and that is all wrong (I3), I
wouldn’t say I’m a typical, stereotypical Serb (I9), [the peers] share my opinion on
culture, but they don’t show it enough (I2)). One interviewee stated that her peers are not
patriotic enough, unlike her (I2), while another stated that her peers idealized other
nation, but not the people, mentioning America as an example.
While this might be an attempt to present oneself as different, or to provide
socially acceptable answers, what might support the answers is the ‘incident’ that
happened during this study. Some students of the History department declined doing the
questionnaire because it was typed in the Latin and not Cyrillic alphabet. They also
declined participating in interviews, when hearing that they were about learning English
among other things.
The importance of these findings is seen when compared to the results of the GPI,
which showed that the whole sample had a high mean score for Identity, 3.9 for
205