Implications of World English and Quote Paradigm for Language Teaching - Literature review Example

IMPLICATIONS OF WORLD ENGLISHES & QUOTE PARADIGM FOR LANGUAGE TEACHING {Insert student’s name} {Insert university’s name} {Insert university's name} June 1, 2013 IMPLICATIONS OF WORLD ENGLISHES & QUOTE PARADIGM FOR LANGUAGE TEACHING In most countries, English is identified as a foreign language without any official status. Nonetheless, English is increasingly used as the language for wider communication due to British colonial legacy as well as the USA emerging as a super power in the 20th century. In multilingual nations than have more than two languages, English is learned as a third language. This essay will discuss implications of world Englishes & quote paradigm for language teaching According to Kachru (1992), the spread of English worldwide can be classified into three classical concentric circles: the inner circle, the outer circle and the expanding circle. The inner circles entails those nations where English is the first language of the majority like in UK, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Ireland and USA. Nonetheless in the aforementioned countries, English is in contact with the immigrant population language or the heritage language and hence it is not only the spoken language. The outer circles include nations whereby English language is used as second language particularly at the institutional level as a result of colonization for instance in India, Philippines and Nigeria. Lastly, the expanding circles include nations where English language has no official status and is taught as a foreign language for instance Japan, South America, Europe and china among others. The mentioned three types represent the pattern of acquisition, the types of spread as well as the functional allocation of English in different cultural context. The contact between English language and other languages in the mentioned three circles as well as the spread of English in the expanding and outer circles carry psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic implications. According to Phillipson (2008) in the sociolinguistic perspective, the spread of English has implications on the ownership of English as well as varieties of English. For instance, the spread of English as a lingua franca has threatened its ownership. World Englishes such as the Nigerian English has been developed as a result of English being in contact with other languages. However, at the psychological level, English language is acquired by individuals not only as a second language but also as a fourth or third language and in most cases it is linguistic repertoire of the multilingual. Scholars have pointed out that over the years, scholars such as Rajagoplan (2004), Jenkins (2003) and Matsuda (2003) among others have argued that English is universal due to the fact that it has become heterogeneous in nature with multiple grammars and norms. Additionally, English language holds a status both locally and globally whereby the Englishes varieties worldwide relate to one another not on a three hierarchies as outlined by Kachru but on a single level. Additionally, English language has been regarded as functional; due to the fact that it is used as a communicative tool. The scholars has further argued that English language is intercultural that is there is no specified political or cultural system. For the mentioned scholars English language has become world Englishes. This is because the language belongs to everyone who uses it and hence no one owns it (Kachru, 1992), hence no nation can have custody over the language as Widdwson (1994) claims in his study. In this context, world Englishes embraces all the aforementioned arguments in addition to undergirding the recent models of English labelled by distinct terminologies such as English as an international language, English as a lingua franca and English as a family of languages. According to Jenkins (2003) world Englishes is conceptualized as the local Englishes varieties used by people for the purpose of communicating nations. Distinguished from the Kachru (1992) categorization of the world Englishes, world Englishes do not only claim expanding circles legitimacy among all the English varieties but also seeks the most dominant position of the circle Englishes in developing/shaping near-future English. Phillipson (2008) on the other hand points out that the concentricity of the three circles highlights the idea that the centeredness of the native speakers can be removed and hence the English varieties i.e those spoken by non-native speakers, functionality native speakers and genetically native speakers is likely to be on parallel with each other. The idea to eliminate Kachruvian model concentricity emerges from the idea that within the current century, ESL will be in a position to establish their varieties firmly to an extent that they will not seek correct models in North America, British and other English varieties spoken by genetically native speakers from the inner circle. Therefore, the possibility of reducing the role of English native varieties as the source of correctness and therefore the native speakers will join the ESL speakers on a particular varieties of English. On the other hand, ESL speakers from the outer circle will not only increasingly feel but also identify themselves as native speakers of their own varieties via extensive and intensive exposure as well as use of English language despite Kachru in his study did not refer to EFL speakers. For example in the European Union, English language is used daily not only in businesses and media but also in higher education, professional discourse as well as in other intra-national communication together with other mother tongues as a global lingua franca. Nonetheless in the due course, in countries such as Asia, South America, Middle East and Africa a similar shift from EFL to ESL can take place. Pertaining to pedagogy in world Englishes, Englishes of the inner-circles nations may no longer be the key objective for most learners. The proficiency/competence in world Englishes is deeply rooted in multi-dialecticism which needs to be proficient in at least one English varieties and be in a position to accommodate another person’s speech to be intelligible to the speakers of other Englishes varieties. Hence, teachers/speakers of English language need to have necessary skills and knowledge with English variability as well as appropriate attitudes towards the mentioned variability (Jenkins, 2003). Consequently, with respect to culture learning and teaching in world Englishes, scholars such as Phillipson (2008) have suggested that international language learners do not require to internalize native speakers cultural norms of that particular language because international language ownership becomes denationalized. If the mentioned is the case, teachers should consider important which cultural aspects should be listed in the world Englishes education curricula. For the world Englishes, target culture does not need to be British or American but need to entail a variety of cultures in other terms the world itself. Kachru (1992) in his studies emphasizes that English in the postmodern era is a representation of a repertoire of cultures and not a monolithic culture. In fact culture diversification linked to language is a fact and teachers/learners of world Englishes need to be prepared to be competent in diverse cultural backgrounds. The key aspect here is preparing first language learners from distinct backgrounds to interact with each other so as to raise awareness. Jenkins, (2003) further adds that it is important for the learners to be sensitive to the fact that people from diverse cultures in most cases use English language differently and managing the mentioned difference is the responsibility that need to be shared by all who take part in the world Englishes community. According to Jenkins (2003) almost all language teaching approaches suggests particular ways of thinking of what languages are for as well as imply how human beings learn new languages. Drawing upon theories like behaviorist psychology and structuralism linguistics, the assumption is that a language is a set phonological and complex grammatical structures and human beings it with heavy practices of repetition. However, the mentioned audio-lingual approach of teaching, however was displaced by the communicative approach which perceives language primarily as a channel of information exchange and in one way or the other embodies communicative competence that is what a speaker needs to know in order to communicate effectively with a particular speech community. Nonetheless, world Englishes makes language teaching to be perceived to be involving more than information exchange. Language via world Englishes is the means through which learners not only construct but also maintain their sense of social and personal identity. Phillipson (2008) emphasis that world Englishes is a means through which people become aware of themselves as cultural beings as well as appreciating others as cultural beings. The mentioned change in human beings understanding of the role of language an aspect that has caused a shift in the curriculum of the language education. Hence it is essential for the IELT curriculum to focus less on exercises/tasks for the purposes of information exchange while on the other hand more on the aspects that enables individuals to explore how learners construct a sense of cultural identity, whether that construction takes place in larger or smaller conversational groups or national communities (Lin, Wang, Akamatsu & Riazi, 2002). It is essential for learners to only observe but also describe cultural and social groups. The aforementioned can be attained by reflecting and observing how other cultures effectively manage their social relationships via language and this is important as learners are likely to become intercultural speakers/learners. Phillipson (2008) points that IELT makes learners to avoid have unified or monolithic view of culture. This is because if students focuses on one culture, they are likely to see a monolithic and unified culture. Bolton (2000) in his study argued that in circumstances whereby speakers of more than one culture or country interact, more than one set of cultural and social assumptions are likely to be in full operation. Jenkins (2003) in his study emphasizes that if the curriculum has only one culture associated with a specific group of people, a specific territory or a specific language, the curriculum need to be replaced with intercultural approach relying on not only complex but also expanding target cultures. According to Goldstein (2002) IELT encourages teachers/learners not only to be exposed to their culture but a number of cultures. Alpetekin (2002) as a Turkish ELT professional points out that there have been a number of instructional materials where cultural content emerges from indigenous and familiar features of the local setting in this case Turkish culture (Kachru,1992). He emphasizes that even though the materials can motivate learners and enhance language learning experience, they are not efficient in the world where English is taught as an international language, the culture which is the world not the home culture. Additionally, he emphasizes on the need for new pedagogical model of successful bilinguals characterized with intercultural insights in the world Englishes community. Alptekin in his study advocates for global and local need of intercultural English teachers learners just as suggested by Goldstein (2002). In a study which entailed analyzing 11 Korean EFL high school conversation textbooks, Jenkins (2003) invested the aspects of culture teaching/learning that need to be included and taught. In the study, he found out that most of the text books used in teaching English language had neglected the small c target culture learning which entails the invisible as well as deeper aspects of the target culture such as sociocultural norms, values and beliefs and the target culture learning. In his study Phillipson (2008) identifies good pedagogy in a certain sociocultural context. For example put into consideration Wendy and Mr. Qi’s bilingual teaching strategy peers code-switching and code mixing which have assisted with gain both fluency and confidence in using English for purposeful communication. The mentioned communicative practices and bilingual teaching are likely to be frowned or devalued under present Anglo-based orthodox discipline pedagogies, which lacked the benefit of gaining a perspective that is sociocultural situated. In regard to globalization of English, it is important for that appropriate pedagogy in English learning and teaching should adapt EIL ideology. In other terms EIL should be the most idealized approach to inform learning and teaching on both practical and theoretical grounds (Lin, Wang, Akamatsu, & Riazi, 2002). Braine (Ed.) (1999) in his study argues that theoretically, English language learners should be made aware of the sociopolitical and sociolinguistic profiles of the language. For instance the spread of English all over the world as well as its implications, English ownership, the notion of standard English as well as distinction between the use of English in monolingual society in opposition to multilingual society. On the practical grounds it is important to make learners aware of the English varieties. This is because according to Jenkins (2003) exposure to English varieties assists in facilitating learners communicative abilities in circumstances where they are confronted with diverse types of English users and uses. Goldstein (2002) in his study acknowledges that an understanding of the English diversity for the purpose of comprehension as well as production makes one to be a better communicator. Adapting from the Kachru’s proposal, the exposition activity in teaching world Englishes within the classroom setting may entail familiarizing learners with major non-native and native users and uses , demonstrating key instances of spoken genre in contexts characterized by multifarious interactional. Consequently, Phillipson (2008) adds that it is important nurturing learners via the mentioned activities under world Englishes framework may assist in creating a sense of diversity in linguistics in addition to enriching linguistic repertoires of the learners in circumstances whereby they cross culturally interact with interlocutors emerging from a great range of mother tongue backgrounds. Jenkins (2003) on his study however points out that if learners are exposed to limited varieties of English language, they may not only resist linguistic variations but also form confusion ideas when they interact with different types of English users and uses in contexts that are authentic in nature. However, just as other scholars have stated, it is important to have other openings for covering English varieties aside from the popular Anglo-American English so that the learners can become internationally minded speakers who are aware of the role of English in the world as well as the world in English language. Additionally, the incorporation of world Englishes into the curriculum has attain recognition worldwide particularly in the expanding circles nations. For instance in Japan, the department of world Englishes at Chukyo university has showed their aim of enhancing students recognition as well as appreciation of the world Englishes via exposing them to major English varieties and sending them to other English speaking nations so that they can experience different types of English users and uses. Nonetheless, in countries such as Thailand where the concept of linguistic diversity and EIL is still at its infant stage, there is great concern on how to teach world Englishes (Bolton, (2000). The key concern however is the implementation of world Englishes into language pedagogy seems to be challenging in not only searching for but also developing materials for teaching world Englishes for instance world Englishes pronunciation. However as a result of advanced technology, a number of internet sources provide millions of speech samples around the world who speak different English varieties. Jenkins (2003) points out that teachers can take advantage of technological advancement by incorporating the world Englishes authentic videos such as radio, films and news into the classroom teaching materials so that the learners can have the opportunity to internationally expand their repertoire as they are exposed to English wider varieties. Pertaining to classroom implementation, several EIL scholars such as Kachru (1992) have put great effort in incorporating the notion of world Englishes into the classroom practices. For instance some of them have come up with essential pedagogical activities and ideas that are believed to assist language learners to focus on realistic learning goals in becoming effective EIL users. The next section will highlight some of pedagogical activities or ideas. Phillipson (2008) proposed a 15 week plan for teaching world Englishes through the internet. The aim of their internet based course was to learners’ awareness of the existing English varieties. During the 15 weeks the learners were exposed to 18 varieties of English and it was proven that they reacted positively and they were able to discuss further pursue of world Englishes. However, in Japan, Phillipson (2008) came up with a project with an aim of raising advanced language learners awareness of the English varieties as well as appreciating world Englishes speakers. Japanese EFL classroom assessment tend to focus mainly on how closely language learners conform to the native norm mainly the British and American. Due to the fact that japan is a norm dependent-county without any localized English variety. According to Kachru (1992) EFL assessment in japan requires inner circle model. Nonetheless, the pluralistic standard present in the use of EIL challenges the existing assumption that inner circles always provides the best assessment norm Jenkins (2003). However, scholars such as Goldstein (2002) have argued that the best way to address the aforementioned is to assess learners on communicative effectiveness instead of depending on grammatical correctness based on British or American norm. According to Phillipson (2008) English is characterized by variety an aspect that prompt him to favor the concept of world Englishes over English as an international language. In his study, he emphasizes the importance of a teacher in determining the needs of the learner after critically analyzing the local context. According to him, it is only through the aforementioned that a teacher is in a position to choose English variety for a particular class. His major examples are drawn from chosen varieties from East Asian countries where the appropriateness of the native models as well as the cultures associated with them need to be critically questioned. Instead a cultural model that is more regional and accurate which is endonormative can be more relevant to teaching. In other terms, he suggests that teachers intending to work in expanding and outer circles nations needs not only to be multilingual but also multicultural in addition to understanding the cultural and local linguistic situation. This is because the decisions that teachers make are related to the aforementioned identity-communication continuum model in circumstances whereby the identity end, can be linked with the mathetic, that is creativity-oriented functions which is characterized of, for instance Malaysian culture as well as the communication end characterized with interactive, pragmatic (EFL) European context typical use. In the aforementioned context, mathetic is defined as marking/performing/creating identity via language (Kachru, Kachru, & Nelson (Eds.), 2006). Consequently, it is possible for teaching materials to improve their EIL representation via incorporating world Englishes. For instance, the textbooks can include more key characters from the expanding and outer circles and assign the character bigger roles in the chapters’ dialogues than what they presently have. The mentioned will reflect the increasing roles that NNSs have in defining world Englishes. Additionally, the presence of characters from the expanding and outer circles makes the inclusion of pictures and cultural topics from other countries easier. According to McKay (2002) the inclusion of the uses and users in the expanding and outer circle nations that are learners are unfamiliar with is likely to assist them in perceiving English uses as not limited to the inner circle. According to McArthur (2003) one way to expose learners to world Englishes in the classroom setting is to invite speakers of multiple English varieties. For instance the JET program which presently recruit from the inner circles should start recruiting English speakers from other parts of the world. Alternatively, teachers can invite international residents and visitors to the class. This is because the interaction not only gives the learners a chance to interact in English but also prove to them that being an effective EIL use does not need being a native speaker. Additionally, it is likely to have a positive impact on the ability of the learners to comprehend world Englishes (Braine (Ed.), 1999).The mentioned is due to the fact that in most cases English users find it easier to understand familiar varieties as compared to unfamiliar ones. Consequently, teachers can make use of face to face interactions if possible by introducing English varieties via email exchange as well as projects that learners need to visit web sites in various Englishes or showing videos on world Englishes speakers. Consequently, according to Jenkins (2003) the distinction between the use of English language in the domestic daily life and international communication can be represented in terms of the social dialectal concept of basilect and acrolect that have been used in the studies of creoles. Kachru, Kachru, & Nelson (Eds.) (2006) in his study emphasis that the use of English for public and formal inter-action and in international communication is acrolectal. This is because it is characterized by formality of linguistics forms as well as absence of indigenous and local sociocultural and linguistic aspects. However, according to Kortmann & Schneider (Eds.). (2005), the use of English language for the purpose of domestic communication is basilectl due to the fact that it is colloquial, indigenous and informal in terms of sociocultural aspects and linguistic forms. Drawing from the above arguments, in a nutshell it is evident that there has been a shift in the English language from a language that was used by the native speakers to an international medium. As a result of its phenomenal spread, it functions as a communicative tool not only for native to non-native, native-to-native but also as a tool for meaningful interactions among the native speakers. As a result of its geographical spread, English language has shifted to be learned as a second language or being spoken by high percentage of people. With no doubt English language has acquired the international status and has become an international language. To highlight the international functions of English, many scholars have tried to introduce English in relation to its worldwide roles like English as a global language, English as a world language and English as a lingua franca. References Bolton, K. (2000). The sociolinguistics of Hong Kong and the space for Hong Kong English, world Englishes, vol. 19, issue 3,pp. 265-285. Braine, G. (Ed.). (1999). Non-native educators in English language teaching. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Goldstein, T. (2002). Teaching and learning in a multilingual school: Academic and linguistic dilem- mas. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Jenkins, J. (2003). World Englishes: A resource book for students. London & New York: Routledge. Kachru, B. B., Kachru, Y., & Nelson, C.L. (Eds.). (2006). The handbook of world Englishes. Oxford: Blackwell. Kachru, B.B (1992).Teaching the world Englishes, the other tongue: English across cultures. Illinois: university of Illinois. Kortmann, B. & Schneider, E.W. (Eds.). (2005). A handbook of varieties of English: A multi- media reference tool. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter. Lin, A, Wang, W, Akamatsu, N & Riazi, AM (2002), I Appropriating English, expanding identities, and re-visioning the field: from TE50L to teaching English for glocalized communication (TEGCOM)" Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 295-316. McArthur, T. (2003). The Oxford guide to world Englishes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. McKay, S. L. (2002). Teaching English as an international language: Rethinking goals and approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Phillipson, R. (2008). Lingua franca or lingua frankensteinia? English in European integration and globalisation. World Englishes, 27, 250-267. Yano, Y (2001), 'World Englishes in 2000 and beyond', World Englishes, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 119- 131. Read More

Additionally, English language holds a status both locally and globally whereby the Englishes varieties worldwide relate to one another not on a three hierarchies as outlined by Kachru but on a single level. Additionally, English language has been regarded as functional; due to the fact that it is used as a communicative tool. The scholars has further argued that English language is intercultural that is there is no specified political or cultural system. For the mentioned scholars English language has become world Englishes.

This is because the language belongs to everyone who uses it and hence no one owns it (Kachru, 1992), hence no nation can have custody over the language as Widdwson (1994) claims in his study. In this context, world Englishes embraces all the aforementioned arguments in addition to undergirding the recent models of English labelled by distinct terminologies such as English as an international language, English as a lingua franca and English as a family of languages. According to Jenkins (2003) world Englishes is conceptualized as the local Englishes varieties used by people for the purpose of communicating nations.

Distinguished from the Kachru (1992) categorization of the world Englishes, world Englishes do not only claim expanding circles legitimacy among all the English varieties but also seeks the most dominant position of the circle Englishes in developing/shaping near-future English. Phillipson (2008) on the other hand points out that the concentricity of the three circles highlights the idea that the centeredness of the native speakers can be removed and hence the English varieties i.e those spoken by non-native speakers, functionality native speakers and genetically native speakers is likely to be on parallel with each other.

The idea to eliminate Kachruvian model concentricity emerges from the idea that within the current century, ESL will be in a position to establish their varieties firmly to an extent that they will not seek correct models in North America, British and other English varieties spoken by genetically native speakers from the inner circle. Therefore, the possibility of reducing the role of English native varieties as the source of correctness and therefore the native speakers will join the ESL speakers on a particular varieties of English.

On the other hand, ESL speakers from the outer circle will not only increasingly feel but also identify themselves as native speakers of their own varieties via extensive and intensive exposure as well as use of English language despite Kachru in his study did not refer to EFL speakers. For example in the European Union, English language is used daily not only in businesses and media but also in higher education, professional discourse as well as in other intra-national communication together with other mother tongues as a global lingua franca.

Nonetheless in the due course, in countries such as Asia, South America, Middle East and Africa a similar shift from EFL to ESL can take place. Pertaining to pedagogy in world Englishes, Englishes of the inner-circles nations may no longer be the key objective for most learners. The proficiency/competence in world Englishes is deeply rooted in multi-dialecticism which needs to be proficient in at least one English varieties and be in a position to accommodate another person’s speech to be intelligible to the speakers of other Englishes varieties.

Hence, teachers/speakers of English language need to have necessary skills and knowledge with English variability as well as appropriate attitudes towards the mentioned variability (Jenkins, 2003). Consequently, with respect to culture learning and teaching in world Englishes, scholars such as Phillipson (2008) have suggested that international language learners do not require to internalize native speakers cultural norms of that particular language because international language ownership becomes denationalized.

If the mentioned is the case, teachers should consider important which cultural aspects should be listed in the world Englishes education curricula.

Read More