[PDF] World Englishes and Applied Linguistics.

View - Download World Englishes and Applied Linguistics.

Previous PDF

Next PDF

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 347 805

FL 019 475

AUTHOR

Kachru, Braj B.TITLEWorld Englishesand AppliedLinguistics.PUB DATE91

NOTE29p.; In: Tickoo,Makhan L., Ed.Languages &Standards: Issues,Attitudes, CaseStudies; see FL019 461.PUB TYPEViewpoints (Opinion/PositionPapers, Essays, etc.)(120)

EDRS PRICE

MF01/PCO2 PlusPostage.DESCRIPTORS*Ap?lied Linguistics;*English (SecondLanguage);Foreign Countries;*LanguageStandardization;Language VariationIDENTIFIERSuWorld Englishes

ABSTRACT

This paper

addresses the issueof therelationshipbetween WorldEnglishes (WE) andapplied linguistics.The diffusionof English isseen in terms ofthree concentriccircles: the InnerCircle (first-languagevarieties, e.g.,the UnitedStates, UnitedKingdom), theOuter Circle(English-as-a-Second-Languagevarieties),and the ExpandingCircle(English-as-a-Foreign-Languagevarieties).The discussj.onis essentiallyrestricted to theOuter Circle inwn:i.chthe institutionalizednon-native varietiesof Englishare used inmultilingual andmulticultural contexts,and focuseson four majorissues, including:theoretical, applied,societal, andideological.The paper isdivided into thefollowing sections:ontological issues;conflict betweenidealization andreality; acquisitionandcreativity; the"leaking paradigms";cultural contentof English;ideological change;where appliedlinguistics failsthe Outer Circleof English;and types offallacies aboutWEs. (Authcr/JL)

Reproductions suppliedby EDRS arethe best thatuan be madefrom the originaldocument. "PERMISSION

TO REPRODUCETHISMATERIALHAS BEENGRANTEDBY

TO THE

U.S. DEP.

RTMENT OfEDUCATOONOfhce of EducahonalResearchand improvementEDUCATIONALRESOURCESINFORMATIONCENTER(ERIC).pr'rhJsdocumenthas beenreproducedesrpcerved fromthe personor organizationoriginatinuit

%nor changeshave beenmade fo unprovereproduction(lushly

Points of

view or opinionsstated in thisdocu-ment do notnecessarilyrepresent officialOERI poSitionOr policyWORLD ENGLISHES

AND APPLIED LINGUISTICS

BO Kachns

Abstract:

This paper addresses the

issue of the relationship betweenwo,:d Englishes(WE) and applied linguistics. Thediffusion of English isseen in terms ofthree concentric circles:the Inner Circle (LI varieties,e.g. the USA,United Kingdom), the OuterCircle (ESL varieties), and theExpandingCircle (EFL varieties). The discussionis essentially restrictedto the OuterCircle in which the institutionalizednon-native varieties of Englisharc usedin multilingual and multiculturalcontexts. The discussion is about fourmajor issues: theoretical,applied, societal and ideological,and focusesspecifically on (a) attitudesconcerning the ontologicalstatus of the varietiesof English; (b) generalizationsabout the creative strategics usedfor learn-ing English in multilingual/multiculturalcontexts; (c) descriptions of thepragmatic and interactionalcontexts of WEs and their implications;(d)assumptions concerning multi-culturalidentities of WEs; (e) assumptionsabout the role of English ininitiating ideological and socialchange; and (f)assumptions about communicativecompetence in English. Thepaper isdivided into the followiag sections:ontological issues; conflict betweenidealization and reality, acquisitionand creativity, the 'leaking paradigms';cultural content of English;ideological change; where appliedlinguisticsfails the Outer Circle ofEnglish; and types of fallaciesabout WEs. Thisstudy does not view applied linguisticsas divorced from social concerns: theconcerns of relevance to the society in whichwe live. This view, then,entails social responsibilityand accountability for researchin appliedlinguistics.

IntroductIon1

The choice of world Englishes

as the starting point of thispaper calls fortwo types of explanations. One,that of terminology. why'world Englishc%', andnot just world 'English'? Second,that of justification ofrelationship: why chooseworld &Wishes to addressthe issues related to appliedlinguistics? There isnosimple or shortanswer to the first question. Ananswer to this question, as weknow, entailsmore than pure linguistic issues,the issues of attitude, andadditionally several extralioguisticfactors. During the lasttwo decades areasonable body of researchhas been done to provideanswers to this question.

ErT COPY 1,,

178
(Fs)r bibliographic

references see Kachru1985 and 1986a.) WhatI would liketoattempt in thispaper, therefore, is to providea perspective for the secondquestion, that of thejustification of therelationship betweenworld Englishesand applied linguistics,a perspective which isessentially that of theuser ofEnglish who belongsto the Outer Circle ofEnglish out of thethree concentriccircles outlined below.Note that South Africa(pop. 29,628,000) andJamaica(pop. 2,407,000)are not listed. Thereason is the sociolinguisticcomplexity ofthese two countries interms of their English-usingpopulations and the functionsof English. (SeeKachru 1985: 12-14.)

The "Expanding Coda

2 China

1.088.200,000Egypt50273,000Indonesia175,904,000Israel4,512,000Japan122,620,000Korea42,593,000Nepal18.004.000Saudi Arabia12,972,000Taiwan19,813,000USSR285,796,000Zimbabwe8,878.000

The 'Outer

Bangladesh

Ghana India Kenya

Malaysia

Nigeria

Pakistan

Philippines

Singapore

Sri Lanka

Tanzania

ZambiaCircte

107,756,000

11,754,000

810,806,000

22.919,000

16,965,000

112.258,000

109,434.000

58.723,000

2.641,000

16,606,000

23.996,000

7,384,000

The 'Inner Cade"

USA2 t5,800,000

UK57.006,000

Canada25,880.000

Australia16,470,000

Now Ze alarms 3,366,000

179
3 It seems to me that this perspective not only defines my approach to our understanding of the global spread of English, but to some extent it also defines the goals which I set for the field of applied linguistics. The relationship between world Englishes and applied linguistics as a field of research and inquiry is motivated by several types of issues: theoretical and applied, as well as societal and ideological. I wfil start with what I consider the theoretical issues. Since the 1950s there has been intense activity in the linguistic sciences for analysis and description of two main varieties of the English language, American and British. Extensive data banks have been established on English at the centers of research at the universities of Birmingham, Brown, London, and Lund, to name just four. And such data banks are also being developed in Asia and Africa (see e.g. Greenbaum 1989 and Shastri 1985). The largest number of applied linguists in various parts of the world are working in ESL/EFL related contexts. And, at some places, the term 'applied linguistics' is often wrongly equated with the teaching of ESL/EFL.

The research on second language acquisition, first language acquisition, anddifferent aspects of sociolinguistics has primar;ly focusedon English.Additionally the interdisciplinary fields of stylistics, and bilingual and

monolingual lexicography have also concentrated on English. The major insights gained in the theory of translation are derived from the translation oftexts of English into other languages of the world, and of those languages into English. Generalizations about natural languages, their structural characteristics, and the

possible categories of language universals usually begin with analyses of andexamples from English.In short, what we see, linguistically and

sociolinguistically speaking, is that the field of linguistics and its applications are closely linked to one major language of our time, English. And almost the total spectrum of applied linguistic research, its strengths and limitations,can be demonstrated with reference to this language. One might, then,say that the last four decades have been the decades of English. Moreover, English has acquired unprecedented sociological and ideological

dimensions. It is now well-recognized that in linguistic historyno language hastouched the lives of so many people, inso many cultures and continents,'in so

many functional roles, and with so much prestige, as has the English language since the 1930s. And, equally important,across cultures English has been successful in creating a class of people who havegreater intellectual power in multiple spheres of language use unsurpassed byany single language before; not

by Sanskrit during its heyday, not by Latin during its gripon Europe, and not byFrench during the peak of the colonial period.

The reasons for the diffusion and penetration of English

are complex, andthese have been extensively discussed in earlier literature.3However, onedimension of the diffusion of English is especially importantto us, particularly

4 180
those of its who represent the developing

world, who are directly influenced bythe research in applied linguistics, and whoare considered the main beneficiariesof the insights gained by suchresearch. Again, it is the developing worldinwhich the English language hasbecome one of the most vital tools of ideologicaland social change, and at thesame time an object of intense controversy.It is this developing world which formsan important component of thethree Concentric Circles of English: theInner Circle, the Outer Circle, and theExpanding Circle. These three circles,as has repeatedly been mentioned in theliterature, bring to the English language(and, of course, to its literature, too)aunique cultural pluralism, anda variety of speech fellowships. These threecircles certainly bring to Englishlinguistic diversity, and letus not underestimate- as some scholars tend to do - the resultant cultural diversity.One is tempted tosay, as does Tom McArthur (1987), that the threeCircles of English haveresulted in several English 'languages'.Tru; the purist pundits find this positionunacceptable, but that actually isnow the linguistic reality of the Englishlanguage.

The world Englishesare the result of these diverse socioculturalcontextsand diverse uses of the language inculturally distinct internationalcontexts. Asa result, numerous questions andconcerns come to the forefront. Appliedliuguists, primarily of the InnerCircle, have articulated theirpositions aboutthese concerns; they have interpretedvarious contexts of theuses of English, andthey have provided research paradigmsand methodologies.The range of aspects of appliedlinguistics such scholars havecoverld intheir paradigms is wide,e.g., sociolinguistics, stylistics, language teaching,theacquisition of Englishas an additional language, andso on, The impact of suchresearch has been significant; it hasraised daunting questions whichhave neverbeen raised before, particularlyconcerning the standards, models,anddiversification in English, concerningthe functions of English inthe OuterCircle, concerning the functionalpower of English, and concerning the socialissues and-if I may add-theresponsibility of applied linguists(see e e. Quirk &Widdowson [eds.J 1985 Kachruand Smith 1986, and Lowenbergle LI 1988).And here, two things needstressing: the terms 'appliedlinglistics' and'social concern'. The dichotomybetween 'theoretical' and 'applies' linguistics isessentially one of difference infocus rather than of distinctidentities. CharlesFerguson and Michael Flallidayhave repeatedly warnedus that the separation ofthe two (pure vs. applied) isnot very meaningful. However, appliedlinguistics,in whatever manifestation, isessentially an area which revealscertain concernsand certain responsibilities.And the term 'socialconcern' brings in anotherdimension, thoughan extralinguistic one.I believe that 'social concern'refers to the responsibility ofa disciplinetoward relevant social issues,and application ofan appropriate body ofknowledge to seekanswers to such issues. The term 'social issues'naturally

181
opens a Pandora's box: what is a social issue? And, how can a profession be evaluated on its response to such issues? These are, of course, controversial questions, and as Bolinger (1973: 539) rightly says, the answers to these questions have to be rediscovered by each generation. However, now and then, a profesrion must address these questions as an exercise in evaluation of the field and its direction. It is true that in the USA during the 1940s and 1950s we passed through a long phase 'across the semantic desert'. There was a feeling that 'life had lost all meaning, except perhaps differential meaning' (Bolinger

1973: 540). We had stopped asking questions concerning 'meaning' and

responsibility. And, thankfully, even in the USA, that phase is over now. During the last two decades, strious questions have been asked: questions about the evaluation of the field, about the linguists' responsibilities, and about the goals and areas of applied linguistic:, (see e.g. Labov, particularly 1982 cited in Trudgill

1984; La 'coif 1975).

However, a caveat is in order here: whenever such questions are asked they are naturally concerned with issues related to the USA or the United Kingdom. Very rarely have questions of concern, of responsibility, and of linguistic pragmatism been raised with reference to world Eng fishes,

In other words, to

quote Bolinger (1973: 540) again, 'the linguist up to very recently has been a more or less useful sideliner, but not a social critic'. And, so far as world Englishes in the Outer Circle are concerned, that role of the linguist still persists. 2,0

Major issues of concern

Now, I do not propose to take up the role of a social critic here. What I propose to do is to select some of the issues related to world Englishes and applied research, and share with you my concerns about such research. I will, of course, not go into all the issues and their ramifications.

I will merely present a

commentary on the following issues which I consider vital for our understanding of English in its world context: (a) attitudes concerning the ontological status of the varieties of English; (b) generalizations about the creative strategies used for learning English as an additional language in multilingual and multicultural contexts; (c) descriptions of the pragmatic and interactional contexts of world Englishes, and their relevance to pragmatic success and failure; (d) assumptions about the cultural content of the varieties of Engl:sh and the role of such varie- ties as the vehicles of the Judeo-Christian (or, broadly, Western) traditions; (e) assumptions about the role of English in initiating ideological and social changes; and (f) assumptions about communicative competence in English and the rele- vant interlocutors in such communicative contexts. I shall discuss these points one by one in the following sections. But before I do that, I must briefly discuss the current dominant and less dominant approaches to world Englishes to provide a theoretical perspective for the 182
discussion. In recent

years the following approaches havebeen used to studyworld Eng fishes: (1) thedeficit approach; (2) thedeviational approach; (3) thecontextualizational approach;(4) the variationalapproach; and (5) theinteractional approach.

However, out of these fiveapproaches it is the firsttwo (the de4icit and thedeviational approaches) thathave dominated the field.And, it is thesetwoapproaches which, I believe,are the least insightful. The followingcommentsare thus a critique primarily of thesetwo approaches, and the attitudesthat suchapproaches reflect.

2.1 Ontological issues: Conflictbetween idealization and reality

The initial question

takes us to thecore of the problem, the issues ofattitudes and identity. Theattitudes towarda variety of English are onlypartially determined bylinguistic considtrations.The other considerationsareof assigning a place anda status to the user of the othervariety, o: marking thedistance of aperson in the social network.We see two major positionsconcerning the varieties ofEnglish in the OuterCircle: one, the nativistmonomodel pcsition; and second,the functional polymodelposition.The first position, perhapsin an extreme form, iswell-articulated in twoparadigm papers,one by Clifford Prator (1968) andthe other by RandolphQuirk (1988). Thesetwo studies were presentedalmost a generationapart. ThePrator study was originallypresented in 1966. Quirkpresented his views firstatthe 1987 GeorgetownUniversity Round Tabledevoted to language spread(seealso Quirk 1988 and 1989).

The functional polymodelposition entails theuse of theoretical andmethodological frameworkswhich relate the formaland functionalcharacteristics of English inthe Outer Circle to appropriatesociolinguistic andinteractional contexts. I havepresented this positionsince the 1960s, andover aperiod of timemany studies have been writtenfollowing this approach,atvarious centers. (Forbibliographical referencessee Kachru 1986a).The Quirkpapers, representing the first position,deserve special attentionfor several reasons: thesepapers are written byone of the most venerableamintellectually influential scholarsof the English languageduring our time, and hispapers take us back to some of thefundamental questions whichconcern all whoare working in the areas of appliedlinguistics. Furthermore,the papers reopensome questions, which some ofus believed had been putto rest during the pastrather productiveyears of research on world Englishes.The main points ofwhat I have called 'theQuirk concerns'may besummarized as follows. Quirksecs language spread primarily withreference tothree models: thedemographic, the econo-cultural,and the imperial. Thedemorraphic model implieslanguage spread withaccompanying population

7 183
spread. The econo-cultural model suggests language spread without u seriouspopulation spread, essentially for scientific, technological and cultural information. The imperial model applies to language spreadas the result of political (colonial) domination. The demographic model has resulted in several varieties of English in the Inner Circle (e.g. American, Australian, Canadian, New Zealand). The econo-cultural and imperial models have, over a period of time, resulted in the endocentric varieties of English in Africa, Asia, and the Philippines (see e.g. Bailey and Gorlach 1982, Kachru 1982 and 1986a, Plattet al. 1984, and Pride

1982).

However, Quirk's concerns are about the endocentric models in the Outer

Circle and their implications for pedagogy, the internationalcurrency of English,and generally, the good linguistic health of the English language.These

concerns raise a number of questions relevant to serious practitioners of applied linguistics.Consider, for example, the following: (a) Do the Outer Circle

varieties of English, primarily second language varieties, havean ontologicalstatus - that is, sociolinguistically speaking? (b) Whatare the needs-analyses forthe uses of English in the Outer Circle: econo-culturalor intranational? (c)

What is the relevance of various types of ontological labelsused for the varietiesof English in the Outer Circle? (d) What is the relationshipbetween the

sociolinguistic identity of a variety of English, and the availabledescriptions of

the variety at various linguistic levels?, and (e) What is the formal andfunctionalrelevance of distinctions such as ESL and EFL?

Quirk, in his usual elegantway, has not nly raised these questions for the

profession to ponder, but he has also broug,, into the open a concern which isshared by several scholars.

In brief, Iris position on the above five questions is

as follows. Quirk rejectsthe sociolinguistic identity of the varieties of English inthe Outer Circle andconsiders the recognition of such identityasthe false extrapolation of English"varieties" by some linguists', (1988: 232). Hesees the international needs ofEnglish essentially as econo-cultural ('the econo-culturalmodel of languagespread applied in our timesmore to English than to any other language', 1988:231). He rejects theuse of identificational terms such as 'Nigerian English','West African English', 'South Asian English','Singapore English', andcharacterizes them asmisleading, if not entirely false...' (1988: 234); he Coesnot believe that the varieties of Englishare adequately described at var;ouslinguistic levels and, therefore, thesecannot be used as pedagogically acceptable(or ontologically recognizable) models. Andfinally, he rejects the generally

recognized dichotomy between ESL and EFL CIignore it partly because I doubtits validity and frequently fail to understand itsmeaning' (1988: 236).

184
In other words, for Quirk, among the English users of the world there is another kind of dichotomy: one between us (the Inner Circle) and them (the Outer Circle and the Expanding Circle). This dichotomy has serious sociolin- guistic and attitudinal implications: one being that the power to defme the other group i:, with us and not with them. This is an interesting way of making a dis- tinction between 'inclusive' and `exclusive' members of English-using speech fellowships. I am not saying that that is what Quirk has in mind---far from that. However, we should not forget that labels have a value, they provide a definition. And, Bolinger (1973: 541) is right when he says that 'a loaded word is like a loaded gun, sometimes fired deliberately, but almost as often by accident.' I will not digress here to discuss why Quirk's ma.;or points cannot je accepted in terms of the sociolinguistic reality of world Englishes, and how they cannot be supported by the linguistic history of the spread of other major languages of the world. This has already been done in a number of studies (forquotesdbs_dbs8.pdfusesText_14

[PDF] kaedah-kaedah pesuruhjaya sumpah 1993 pdf

[PDF] kakao talk english contact

[PDF] kako se brise advokatska kancelarija

[PDF] kako se brise facebook nalog

[PDF] kako se brise instagram

[PDF] kako se brise kes memorija

[PDF] kako se brise profil na instagramu

[PDF] kako se brise servis golf 4

[PDF] kal ho naa ho english subtitles

[PDF] kalami bac economie

[PDF] kalami bac libre

[PDF] kalami bac libre lettre

[PDF] kalender 2017

[PDF] kalnirnay 2018 pdf

[PDF] kalnirnay hindu calendar 1991 pdf