EDUCATIO : Journal Of Education Volume 1 , Number 2, November 2016 ISSN : 2579-8383 (Print) ISSN : 2579-8405 (Online) zzzzzz z Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Lilis Rahmawati STAI Miftahul 'Ula Kertosono Nganjuk elrahmawati22@gmail.com Published: November 29 2016 Reviewed: September 13 2016 Accepted: August 11 2016 Abstract: A language contains an implicit classification experience. The language system as a whole contains a vision of the world which by its speakers receipt and projected into reality. Language does not make speakers blind to the facts of the real world, but instead indicate the existence of relationships. Culture is actually an integral part and the interaction of language and mind. Cultural patterns, customs and way of life are expressed in the language, and culture- specific worldviews reflected in its language. Keywords:language, thought, culture, vision of the world. Introduction There are several terms used to refer to the concept of vision of the world. Some of them are cosmovision, worldview. 1 In addition, Hymes also mentions several other termenologi used in turns for the same concept as ethos, configuration, pattern, theme, metaphysics, Logica-meaningful Intergration. The term weltanschauung often appears as a synonym vision of the world.2 Vision of the world is one of a number of concepts in cultural 1 AlfinoFantini, Exploring Language andCulture.(Brattleboro: St. School for International Training. 1987). 2 Dell Hymes, Language in Culture and Society (New York: Harper and Row, 1964), 115. mailto:elrahmawati22@gmail.com Lilis Rahmawati Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Volume 1, Number 2, November 2016 | 172 zzzzzz anthropology that is used for the characterization and comparison of culture in a holistic manner. Vision of the world is "... the sum of ideas which and individual within a group and / or that group have of the universe in and around them".3 Vision of the world according to the definition above are the ideas from the perspective of individuals who have it from within a particular culture, not from outside that culture. Meanwhile, Geertz claimed that the vision of the world is "... the cognitive, existential aspects of a given culture, combining with the ethos and values (the moral and the aesthetic aspects), underpins religion to give a set of social values what they perhaps need most to be coercive; an appearance of Objectivity ". The implication of this definition is important for the study of symbolic systems and ethics.4 Or in other words, the vision of the world is the concept of culture5 or cultural.6 This paper discusses the relationship between language and vision of the world. The questions posed are: 1) whether the components of the vision of the world, 2) whether the paradigm differences lead to different visions of the world, and 3) how the implications of different visions of the world that intercultural communication. Although the discussion in this paper to explain the relationship between language and vision of the world, a touch of culture and mind would have been unavoidable. This phenomenon three-crochet hook with a vision of the world melatarinya. The concern is about the interaction between language and culture, language and thought, or culture, language, and thought.7 3 David L.Sills,International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (New York: The Mc Millan Company and The Free Press, 1986), 576. 4 David L.Sills,International Encyclopedia. 579. 5 David L.Sills,International Encyclopedia, 576. 6 Need H. Seelye, Teaching Culture: Strategies For Intercultural Communication (Lincolnwood: National Textbook Company, 1987), 25. 7 H. Doughlas Brown, Principles Of Language Learning And Teaching (Englewood Cliffs New Jersey: Prentice Halls, in 1987). Lilis Rahmawati Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Volume 1, Number 2, November 2016 | 173 zzzzzz World Vision Components theory of communicative competence should be able to explain what is known speakers of a language of his language, which allows it to produce and understand utterances of the new (novel) in unlimited quantities. Competency model rationalistic ala Chomsky was unable mengakomo tie theory of communicative competence and rejected based on three reasons: 1) The empirical test the theory does not support, 2) rationalistic theories are not able to accommodate the relationship of pragmatics between the speaker and the symbol(sign),which is fundamental in determining both the acceptability grama tikal and the meaning of an utterance, and 3) the implications metaphysical theory of universal grammar is not acceptable.8 Empiricist with cognitive models ofacquisition languaageitsconsiders that the meaning of speech (ie meaning intended by the utterance in context), and the acceptability of grammatical utterance is ultimately determined by pragmatic relations speakers and emblem.9 This view seems inspired by Charles Morris semiotic theory which distinguishes between, syntax, semantics and pragmatics as the study of the relationship between 1) symbols, 2) symbol and referent, and 3) the emblem and human users.10 A symbol is anything that occupies a semantic function --- whether as arbitrators, ikonikal, or indexical. Do something that symbol or not depends on its usefulness(use)or functions in relation to a subject. In this context, the level of pragmatics provides the foundation for sintatik and semantic relationships. In other words, an interrelation between the three components, namely component 8 Carol A. Kats, Pragmatics And An Empiricisst Semantic Theory (Itcha: Cornel University Press, 1980), 12. 9 Carol A. Kats, Pragmatics AndSemantic,12. 10 Carol A. Kats, Pragmatics AndSemantic,104. Lilis Rahmawati Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Volume 1, Number 2, November 2016 | 174 zzzzzz pragmatics(use),sintatik, and semantics, which led to the communicative competence. Realization of the vision of his world seems to depend on the interrelation of these three components that interact with one another.11 Thus the world vision components include the following components. A. Pragmatics This component includes speakers of a language and its socio-cultural context. Sociocultural aspects meme gang a crucial role in the communication process, an aspect which is still part of the egocentirce transak sional self in the process.12 Sociocultural aspect is the cultural core. Larsen and Smalley, culture ... a blueprint that guides the behavior of people in a community and this is incubated family life. It governs our behavior in groups, make us sensitive to matters of status, and helps us know what others expect of us and what will happens if we do not live up to Reviews their expectations. Culture help us to know how far we can go as individuals and Wahat our responsibility is to the group. Different cultures are undrlying structures wich make-round community square round and square community.13 Thus, determining the cultural context of cognitive and affective behaviors for each person, a pattern for personal and social existence. However, people tend to look reality in the context of his own culture. It is a reality that is created and is not necessarily the objective reality. A meaningful world where every human life is not a universal reality, but a reality category consisting of the order characteristics selectively marker deemed important by the community 11 Alfino Fantini, Exploring Language andCulture. 12 H. Doughlas Brown, Principles OfLanguage,122. 13 H. Doughlas Brown, Principles OfLanguage,122. Lilis Rahmawati Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Volume 1, Number 2, November 2016 | 175 zzzzzz where he lives.14 B. shape This componentis a symbol of a system that includes elements of linguistic, paralinguistic, and socio-linguistics. Linguiistik element includes phonetics, phonology, morphology, and syntax. Paralinguistic vocal cues that accompany the spoken language, nonverbal information that color with elements of personality, attitudes, and emotional state. Variations accretion sound can have a positive impact on kepri badiaan, poor sound quality can affect the perception of the listener. Ekstralinguistik was nonverbal also called the hidden dimension. So mangasyikkan cultural expression in nonverbal communication so that obstacles in the greater cultural understanding on nonverbal dimension.15 Competence ekstralinguis tick consists of 1) proxemics: the use of distance and space, 2) haptics / kinesthetics: pattern for touch, 3) kinesics: gestures and body movements, 4) oculistics: eye contact, 5) chronemics: use of time / space, 6) olfactics: smell, and 7) artefacts: clothing and jewelry. Berke sociolinguistic aspects nan with stylistic variations are influenced by the context and defined by cultural criteria of appropriateness / inappro priateness, including behavioral marked /unmarked.Which is a determinant of stylistic variation is setting, participant (age, sex, role, relations). medium, topics andpurpose. C. Meaning / semantics psycholinguists assume that language is nothing more than a tool for knowledge exchange between speakers and listeners. In the process, the meaning of words depends on the system kenseptual speakers and listeners and the 14 H. Doughlas Brown, Principles OfLanguage,123. 15 H. Doughlas Brown, Principles OfLanguage,209. Lilis Rahmawati Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Volume 1, Number 2, November 2016 | 176 zzzzzz context in which the word / speech is uttered. An utterance containing a message. That message is determined by the knowledge of the speaker and the contextual situation in which the speech was uttered. Meaning, therefore, is built with linguistic utterances by speaker-listener pairs in the context of certain pragmatic.16 Meanwhile, Kempson clicking revealed that there are three main characteristics that made by linguists and philosophers in explaining the meaning of natural language, namely by mendefi ned 1) the nature of the meaning of words, 2) the nature of the meaning of a sentence, and 3) the communication process.17 Pragmatics Speakers (Context Sosiokultular) World Vision (VD) Symbol System Meaning / Semantics Figure 1: Interaction Component Meaning 16 David S. Palermo and Lyle E. Bourne, Psicology Of Language (Glenvie, III. Scott Forresman and Company, 1978), 159. 17 Ruth M. Kempson, Semantic Theory (Cambrige: Cambrige University Press, 1977), 11. Lilis Rahmawati Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Volume 1, Number 2, November 2016 | 177 zzzzzz With sociocultural context, system triengles can be described as a symbol, and meaning / semantics follows: different, two or more interactive symbolic system includes components linguistics, tick paralinguis components, component ekstralingusitik (non-verbal), and components of sociolinguistics. D. Paradigm Different, Different World Vision'sVision terepresen the separate world as a result of the interaction of the three components, namely components build communicative competence of speakers, symbolic systems, and semantics. Berkaiatan with this reality, Allen and Corder says that "... a world-view of Might, indeed, be represented by an overall system of structure of calasifications".18 18 JPB. Allen and S. Pit Corder, Reading For Applied Linguistics (London: Oxford University Press, 1973), 133. Lilis Rahmawati Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Volume 1, Number 2, November 2016 | 178 zzzzzz As shown in Figure 2 above that a vision of the world reflected in a specific language. This means that a different vision of the world reflected in a different language. Speakers of different languages, thus, will see the world in a different way and evaluate it differently. In connection with this phenomenon, Sampson suggests that the contrast in the vision of the world can be either sharp differences and controversial. Boas, for instance, pointed out on snow English word can have several connotations in the Eskimo language, like snow falling, snow on the ground, driftingsnow.At a more concrete level is the gap between the conceptual schema in different languages quite obvious, and this fact must affect perception can thus be said that the human perception of the environment is modified by the conceptual categories owned language.19 Sapir-Whorf proposed a hypothesis known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesisd, ian Whorf hypothesis, linguistics relativity or linguisticdeterminism. 20 Whorf proposed two hypotheses, which reads as follows 1) That all higher levels of thinking are dependent on language, 2) That the structure of the language are habitually uses influences the manner in the which one understands his environment. The picture of the universe shifts from tongue to tongue.21 The first hypothesis fairly broad support. Yulian Huxley, biologist, for example, said that "the evolution of the concept of verbal opens the door for any further achievement of the human mind". Language, Whorf said, is the best show men puts on. Other creatures have developed a communication system rude, but not the language in the true sense. Language is the main means of foster children, in organizing the system of the human community, the legacy of a culture from 19 Gefrey Sampson, Schools Of Linguistics: Competition And Evolution (London: Hutchinson, 1980), 85-86. 20 H. Doughlas Brown, Principles OfLanguage,139. 21 John B. Carroll, Language, Thought and Reality: Selected Writings Of Benyamin Lee Whorf (Cambrige: The MIT Press, 1956), vi. Lilis Rahmawati Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Volume 1, Number 2, November 2016 | 179 zzzzzz generation to generation.22 Chase himself recounts about the role of language on thought processes. He said: "Maybe everyone has brainstorms (emergence of the idea suddenly) too quickly verbalized. In writing, often it happened to me. But, before I could manage such a thought blobs of blue sky, I must memverbalkannya, expressed with words to me reflect wisely. Brainstorms that can not diverbalisasikan can not appear on the paper ".23 Greek thinkers were the first to examine the logic and sense. Aristotle created the famous syllogism as Three Laus ofThought.They turned out to underestimate the things that are behind the language and considers that the essence of the mind is the universal, shared by everyone, at least by thinkers. The implication of this view is that a train of thought which is expressed in a language can be dialihba hasakan without loss of meaning in any language.24 The establishment of this kind, which has grown for thousands of years, is opposed by Whorf hypothesis that the second principle above. Whorf said: "A change in language can transform our appreciation of the cosmos". Edmund Glenn prove this hypothesis by examining the translation of texts of the UN to find differences caused by language concepts. In a case of the cases faced Glenn is so; an English speaker says I assume, transfer my French interpreter translated into I deduce, Russian interpreter translate the I Consider. Glenn conclusions on these cases is that on the surface looks smooth translation techniques, but the level of communication between Russia and the UK delegation does not seem so.25 22 John B. Carroll, Language, Thought andReality,vi. 23 John B. Carroll, Language, Thought andReality,viii. 24 John B. Carroll, Language, Thought andReality,viii. 25 John B. Carroll, Language, Thought andReality,vii. Lilis Rahmawati Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Volume 1, Number 2, November 2016 | 180 zzzzzz Another example can be mentioned here in connection with the second hypothesis, namely in English, speakers say Look at thewave.But the wave 'surf' in nature never appears as a single phenomenon. Hopi say Look at thatslosh.Hopi word that is closest to thesynonyms wave in the English language is the slosh and this word can indeed provide a closer equivalent in accordance with the physics of the motion of the waves, which connotes the mass movement ". Based on the fact that, Stuart Chase concludedthat:There is no one metaphysical pool of universal human thought.Speaker of different language see the Cosmos differenly, Evaluate it differenly, sometimes not by much sometimes Widely. Thinking is relative to the language learned. ... Research is needed to discover the world view of many unexplored languages, some now in danger of extination.26 E. Whorf Hypothesis Logic David McNeill did an analysis of the Whorf Hypothesis. The results of the analysis concludes that Whorf Hypothesis states three interlocking claims about the habits of thought, as follows. 1) Linguistic determinism: the gramatical and lexical patterns of a lnguage are transparent and a projected onto raelity, and this guide habitual beliefs and attitudes aboutreality,2) Linguistic relativity: if one language has a Certain pattern and associated meaning, the projection onto reality of the people who speech language Reviews These will be different in ways predictable form the linguistic patterncontast,3) World view: linguistic patterns embody a world view, or a model of the world. This embodied constitues distinctive models thought the world. It is accepted by speakers as the contruction of the world. Thus Spake the culture Reaches into habitual thought patterns of its members.27 To understand the interrelatedness of the three statements, some of the 26 John B. Carroll, Language, Thought andReality,v. 27 David Mc Neill, Psycholinguistics: A New Appoach (New York: Harper and Row Pub, 1978), 178. Lilis Rahmawati Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Volume 1, Number 2, November 2016 | 181 zzzzzz illustrations can be raised by using a comparison between English and Hopi about time nomen-clature. In English there is the construction of ten days, as well as ten stones, which projected into reality to demonstrate the existence of groups simultneus days and groups of simultaneous stones. This example illustrates the proposition (1) is linguistic determinism. Furthermore, the plural pattern psentasikan mere vision of the world: A- form and substance that days,stones,and the like are included in the category that can be grouped and cause these cultural beliefs affect English speakers. Illustration supporting statement number (3) that worldview. Sikan memproyek Hopi language speakers of different models of reality, especially in this case that the days and stones included in the different categories of objects in reality. This is an example statement number (2), namely linguistic relativity. The third statement, said McNeill, is the key to Whorf Hypothesis testing. Predictions of the most dramatic and the most convincing test is the linguistic relativity. However, claims world view and determinism is more fundamental and more than it claims world view should be viewed as a primer. Because of this, any proposal must be based on testing of linguistic relativity progression of arguments in a row (3) - (1) - (2).28 F. Exceptions element as a continuation of the vision of the world claim that (number 3) can happen that two or more languages has a different shape to a certain extent, but does not project a vision of the world. This means that the same model can be realized in different forms in the two languages and in accordance with the Whorf 28 David Mc Neill, Psycholinguistics: A NewAppoach,179. Lilis Rahmawati Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Volume 1, Number 2, November 2016 | 182 zzzzzz hypothesis, the effect of differences in this form of the mind must be the same.29 For example, Whorf said at the SAE languages such as French and English. In these languages there is no difference considered vision of the world because of the history that is so long, so that European countries are said to have the same culture (common culture).30 BHS.JAVA DESCRIPTION BHS. BALI Janur young leaves edema Blarak old leaves danyuh Sada leaves the bone sticks Plapah where the leaf is attached to papah Tebah bunch of sticks to repel flies sampat Korek broom sampat manggar flowers troktokan Mandha coconut seeds are white and can empol edible Bluluk coconuts are young andyet bungsil juicy Cengkir coconutsvery young, bungkak soft-shell reinforcededible, but not fleshy. Degan young coconuts that have fleshy kuwud soft glugu woodcoconut Seseh control ormidriblayer that can be worn smooth rope. For the record needs to be added right that there may be a system similar symbols on languages archipelago in the region there is a coconut tree. Nevertheless, there had to be differences between the Balinese and Javanese due to the vision of the world, for example at the level of paralinguistic, 29 David Mc Neill, Psycholinguistics: A NewAppoach,179. 30 GefreySampson, Schools OfLinguistics,85. Lilis Rahmawati Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Volume 1, Number 2, November 2016 | 183 zzzzzz ekstralinguis tick, and others. G. Cross Cultural Communication Public phenomenon Perhaps nobody denies that a baby born to a world seemingly without armed with nothing (tabula rasa). Then the baby was growing along with the development of attitudes, beliefs, religion, personality, including his vision of the world largely because it is formed by the environment. This means that man, wherever he lives, must have been influenced by family, community, country, and even language. In other words, the environment affects human developm ment it is the cultural environment, which is manifested by the principles that exist and spread in the environment. Such a human being can be regarded as civilized human beings. He has been nurtured in oneculture.The man has actually become a culturalbeing.However, when a man, who has a certain culture confronted with another human right that has a different culture: what happened? Very likely persaan feelings that arise in him is hatred, frustration, fear, strangeness, intrusions, denial, confusion, etc.31 Why is that? Actually, and it should be, concerned conscious of itself as a cultural creature. But his affection, most human beings, whatever their nationality, sees himself and his relatives are not as culture, but as a standard (which is true), and other groups as konglemerasi strange behavior.32 Such an attitude really is not healthy because it is colored by etnocentrism or my group is a standard of right. As a consequence of this Trism etnocen is that in view of other individuals, groups, the etnocentrism will use his own glass as a filter (standard). The result is certainly mostly mismatches. 31 Joys V. Valdes, Culture Bound: Bridging the Culture Gap In Language Teaching (New York: Cambrige Language Teaching Library, 1987), vii. 32 Joys V. Valdes, Culture Bound, vii. Lilis Rahmawati Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Volume 1, Number 2, November 2016 | 184 zzzzzz If both groups have to communicate, which happens must have cross- cultural in misunderstan perceptual ding caused by mismatches between them that has a different culture, such as schemas, cues, values, and interpretation.33 On the other hand, Robinson states that "... the perceived dissimilarity and mismatching cues and schemas would contributes to the negative impressions of people from cultures different from one'sown".34 Citing the opinion Gumprerz, Jupp, and Roberts, Robinson noted four types of differences that cause cation communion between people of different ethnicities were cut off.1)Different culture Assumptions about the situation and about the approriate behavior and intentions within it, 2) Different ways of structuring information or an argument in aconversation,3) Different ways of speaking; the use of different sets of unconcious linguistic convention (such as tone of voice) to emphasize, to signal connection and logic, and to imply significance of what is being said is terms of overall meaning andattitudes,4) Different ways of interacting Reciprocal versus non-reciprocal forms ofconversatrion.35 H. Overcoming Cross Cultural Communication Gaps To address gaps in cross-cultural communication, there must be the assumption that every individual culturally sensitive. That is, the concerned recognize that other people are also cultural products, like himself, which is based on the difference in the vision of the world. In line with the development of that attitude, Valdes menyim pulkan that "... (people) are (now) prepared and more willing to look at the behavior of persons from other culture and accept themnonjudgmentally".36 Or in other words, they now understand "...why (other) people act the waydo".37 33 Gail L. Nemetz Robinson, Cross Cultural Understanding (New York: Prentice Hall, 1988), 49. 34 Nemetz Gail L. Robinson, Cross CulturalUnderstanding,55. 35 Nemetz Gail L. Robinson, Cross Cultural Understanding, 55. 36 Joys V. Valdes, Culture Bound, vii. 37 Need H. Seelye, Teaching Culture, 28 Lilis Rahmawati Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Volume 1, Number 2, November 2016 | 185 zzzzzz Along with the acceptance of mental nonjudg, continues also with the acceptance of the language, including the relationship between language and culture. It can be a signal that there is a willingness to enter the area of language and culture.38 Clearly, Robinson proposes that such communication gap can be bridged by knowledge on both partners of speech, ie knowledge about the different cultural assumptions. With reference to the opinion that embraces Seelye rational approach to teaching culture. Robinson stressed that Seelye Definition underscored the importance of understanding why people act the way they do. Robinson also stressed that the assumptions underlying is "... by understanding the reason behind a particular event, bet it eting different foods, speaking in load voices, or speaking in close poximity, the learner will better understand and tolerate the person who is participating in the event".39 Effective communication right come into one's vision of a two-way communication process that requires two treatments. In every conversation has to do is "... each partner to check the other's purposed and cultural Assumptions about the conversation; each partner must learn about the diverse ways people structure informations; each must leave the different meanings associated with different ways of speaking and different forms of interaction; and each must learn to Anticipate and engage in reciprocal and non-reciprocal forms of speech"vision40 of effective cross- cultural understanding as a two-way process has important implications for bilingual programs, second language education programs, and foreign languages. Conclusion Based on the above description, it seems that there are three dimensions 38 H. Need Seelye, Teaching Culture, 28. 39 Nemetz Gail L. Robinson, Cross CulturalUnderstanding,9. 40 Gail L. Nemetz Robinson, Cross Cultural Understanding, 67. Lilis Rahmawati Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Volume 1, Number 2, November 2016 | 186 zzzzzz on which the discussion in this paper, the culture, the language and the mind, with the vision of the world as his starting point. Culture, language, and thought interrelated with the vision of the world as essentially elements. Culture (with a vision of the world as a referent) is an integral part of the interaction between language and thought. Cultural patterns, customs, and lifestyles tereksperesikan in the language, as well as the vision of the world - that is culture-specific - are reflected in the language. When between culture and language is questionable whether the language or culture first, then this question can not be answered in black and white. So far, the burning question explanation of this is that both grow and evolve together, each memenga Ruhi. Nevertheless, if the culture and language are separated, Whorf says that language that is far more established, more systematic and more robust. Such a view is clearly visible on the statement of Whorf following "We dissect nature along lines laid dowan by a our native tongues ... the world is presented in a kalkeidoscopic flux of impressions, the which has to be organized by our minds ... and this means largelly by the linguistic systems in our mind "Itshould be noted that the language difference occurs more due to differences in the vision of the world. Van Humbolt says "... the differences between languages derives less from differences in sounds and signs than from differens of world-view". In addition, with respect to the relationship between language and thought, Allen and Corder suggests that "... language structure not only as interactingly reflective of cultural thought but as directly formative of individual thought. Long before, Chase illustrates that just as Einstein in demonstrating the relativity of space and time, Whorf is a person who is able to reach the relationship between human language and the human mind, how language can actually form the innermost thoughts of men. Lilis Rahmawati Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Volume 1, Number 2, November 2016 | 187 zzzzzz REFERENCES Allen, JPB and S. Pit Corder. Reading for AppliedLinguistics.London: Oxford University Press. 1973. Brown, H. Douglas. Principles of Language Learning andTeaching.Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, In. 1987. Carroll, John. B. Language, Thought and Reality: Selected Writings of Benyamin LeeWhorf.Cambrigde: The MIT Press. 1956. Fantini, Alfino. E. Exploring the Language andCulture.Brattleboro: St. School for International Training. 1987. Hymes, Dell. Language in Culture andSociety. New York: Harper and Row. 1964. Kats, Carol.A.An empiricist Pragmatics and SemanticTheory.Itcha: Cornel University Press. 1980. Kempson, Ruth. M. SemanticTheory. Cambrigde: Cambridge University Press. 1977. McNeill, David. Psycholinguis tics: A NewApproach.New York: Harper and Row Pub. 1978. Palermo, David. S. and Lyle E. Bourne, Jr. Psychology ofLanguage.Glenview, Ill. Scott: Forresman and Company. 1978. Robinson, Gail L. Nemetz. Understanding of cross-cultural.New York: Prentice- Hall, Inc. 1988. Sampson, Gefrey. Schools of Linguistics: Competition andEvolution.London: Hutchinson. 1980. Seelye, H. Need. Teaching Culture: Strategies for InterculturalCommunication.Lincolnwood, Ill .: National texbook Company. 1987. Lilis Rahmawati Teaching Language and World Vision: As a Cross-Cultural Communication Volume 1, Number 2, November 2016 | 188 zzzzzz Silss, David. L. International Encyclopedia of the SocialSciences.New York: The McMillan Company and The Free Press. 1968. Stern, H. Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching.London: Oxford University Press. 1983. Titus, Harold. H., et. al ,. Issues ofPhilosophy,trans. HM Rosidi. Jakarta: Bulan Bintang. 1985. Valdes, Joys.V. Culture Bound: Bridging the Culture Gap in LanguageTeaching.New York: Cambridge Language Teaching Library. 1987. Wahab, Abdul. Issue Linguistics: Language and LiteratureTeaching.Surabaya: Airlangga University Press.1991.