{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02982848620432513, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002982848620432513, 'mean_word_length': 4.834782608695652, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
`The Hopi in Me'

A `voice', the central concept in the theory of the dialogical self (e.g. Hermans & Kempen, 1993), is located neither `in' the person nor `in' culture, but comes into being as a relation between person and culture. An extensive example of everyday life is presented that on a phenomenological level illustrates the formation of a particular voice: `the Hopi in me'. It is the major goal of this paper to analyze this example in sound theoretical terminology. Both cultural psychology and cross-cultural psychology are sub-disciplines that deal with culture in general, and the relation between culture and the individual in particular. The discussion of the different foci of both disciplines leads to the conclusion that only a cultural psychological framework allows for an elaboration of the concept of voice. More specifically, the theoretical approaches of the German sociologist Georg Simmel and the cultural psychologist Ernst Boesch are introduced and applied to the conceptual analysis of the example. `The Hopi in me' is a `cultural voice' as it refers to a cultural collectivity. In the final part of the paper it is asked how cultural voices emerge and interact with each other. One result of this analysis is that the simplistic notion of `having' only one, personally felt national identity can be challenged.