Intercultural communication is often understood as a technical act of translation. However, this perspective overlooks a more complex reality: every language is shaped by power relations, historical experiences and cultural contexts.
In cultural, journalistic and institutional practices, the question is therefore not only about meaning, but about the conditions under which meaning is produced and circulated.
Language as a structure of perception
Language does not merely describe reality; it structures it.
Words, narratives and forms of expression are embedded in historical and social contexts that shape their interpretation. The same expression may generate different meanings depending on cultural environments.
Intercultural communication therefore involves contextualisation rather than equivalence.
The limits of translation as a neutral act
Translation is often perceived as a transparent process. In reality, it is based on interpretation and decision-making.
Cultural, social and political concepts are rarely directly transferable. They contain implicit meanings that go beyond linguistic form.
Without context, translation can distort or oversimplify complex realities.
Professional responsibility in cultural practice
In journalistic and cultural fields, communication is never neutral.
Actors involved in producing and circulating content contribute to shaping public perception. This requires a reflective stance towards one’s own categories and frameworks.
Intercultural communication therefore demands a critical and self-reflective practice.
International cooperation and structural differences
In collaborations between Europe and Africa, these dynamics become particularly visible.
Different institutional frameworks, historical experiences and structural inequalities significantly shape communication processes.
While international cultural institutions provide frameworks, their effectiveness depends on how they are enacted in practice.
Conclusion: communication as a space of negotiation
Intercultural communication cannot be reduced to a technical skill.
It is a continuous space of negotiation between languages, contexts and systems of meaning.
Communication, in this sense, is not simply transmission, but the active construction of situated and shared meaning.
