English as a lingua franca

Last updated

English as a lingua franca (ELF) is the use of the English language "as a global means of inter-community communication" [1] [2] and can be understood as "any use of English among speakers of different first languages for whom English is the communicative medium of choice and often the only option". [3] [4] ELF is "defined functionally by its use in intercultural communication rather than formally by its reference to native-speaker norms" [5] whereas English as a second or foreign language aims at meeting native speaker norms and gives prominence to native-speaker cultural aspects. [6] While lingua francas have been used for centuries, what makes ELF a novel phenomenon is the extent to which it is used in spoken, [7] written [8] and computer-mediated communication. [9] ELF research focuses on the pragmatics of variation which is manifest in the variable use of the resources of English for a wide range of globalized purposes, in important formal encounters such as business transactions, international diplomacy and conflict resolution, as well as in informal exchanges between international friends. [10]

Contents

Globalization, geopolitics and ELF

Major technological advances in the 21st century have enabled instant global communication, thus breaking the barriers of space and time between different locations on the planet. The world has turned into an interconnected global system, which requires a shared means of communication. English fulfills the need for a global lingua franca, as it has spread to large areas of the world due to various factors such as:

Because of the use of English as a lingua franca in international trade and intercultural communication, native speakers of English are outnumbered by non-native speakers. [11] A consequence of this is a sense of ownership of the language which is shared by different communities. For instance, international communication via ELF has facilitated exchange between China and the rest of the world, thus sustaining international trade. [12] But once a language is appropriated by new communities, it is then adapted to their specific needs. Consequently, the English language is undergoing change, and this change is being brought about mostly by its non-native speakers.[ citation needed ]

Features of spoken ELF communication

The way English is used as a lingua franca is heavily dependent on the specific situation of use. Generally speaking, ELF interactions concentrate on function rather than form. [13] In other words, communicative efficiency (i.e. getting the message across) is more important than grammatical correctness, [14] provided that the grammar is good enough for the message to be intelligible. As a consequence, ELF interactions are very often hybrid. [15] Speakers accommodate to each other's cultural backgrounds and may also use code-switching into other languages that they know. [16] [17] Based on the Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English (VOICE) and additional research, the following features of ELF lexicogrammar have been identified: [16] [18]

However, these features are by no means invariant or “obligatory”. Rather, these forms do not seem to compromise effective communication within an ELF setting when they do occur.

"Neutrality" of ELF

Although some researchers hold that English as a lingua franca is a neutral and culture-free tool, [22] [23] others hold that it carries the culture and language of its speakers. [24] [25] [26] [27] Recent linguistic discussions by ELF experts treat the interactants' cultural and linguistic background as a factor influencing language performance. For Hülmbauer, for instance, “it seems likely that the ELF users develop their own markers of identity (be they a common 'European' or 'international' nature or more individual ones which are created online, depending on the community of practice they are emerging in).” [28] In this view, ELF is multicultural rather than culture-free.

ELF and the native speaker

ELF is used most often between non-native speakers of English, but this does not mean that native speakers are excluded from ELF communication. [13] However, very often they form a minority of the interlocutors. [29]

Existing corpora of ELF (VOICE and ELFA, for example) tend to focus on interactions that involve primarily native speakers [30] (Kimura, 2017). More recently, there have been attempts at creating corpora that include native speakers and systematically explore how they interact with non-native speakers. [31]

In ELF interactions, the importance lies in communication strategies other than nativeness, which can lead to communicative situations where those English native speakers who are not familiar with ELF and/or intercultural communication are at a disadvantage because they do not know how to use English appropriately in these situations. [32] [33]

Most data on ELF interactions has been drawn from the domains of business and higher education, [34] and that in largely European contexts, perhaps factors accounting for the relatively rare instances of miscommunication. [35] Studies of Medical English as a Lingua Franca (MELF) [36] provide opportunities to investigate ELF interactions where communicative precision is critical, and the migration of healthcare practitioners across international borders (a phenomenon consistent with the "deterritorialisation" of ELF generally), [37] has created conditions where MELF interactions are increasingly commonplace. A research study of MELF interactions where nurses negotiated a patient handover simulation indicated that areas of unintelligibility represented a potential threat to patient safety, through misrecognition of vocabulary related to medication, as well as other areas of lexical imprecision. [38]

One study of a Japanese medical English as a lingua franca (MELF) context [39] showed that student doctors made use of empathic accommodation and solicitation strategies to make interactions more intelligible. Applying nonverbal cues was seen as being of importance to encourage simulated patients to express concerns, because silence may be interpreted as a sign of potential problems. Empathic doctor-patient communication then means not only understanding and sympathizing but having the ability to bridge the gap when patients are not willing to talk.

An important issue when discussing ELF is the notion of speakers of ELF being active language users in their own right, who do not need to adhere to native speaker norms but use ELF to meet their communicative needs. [13] Proponents of ELF thus reject the notion that it is a form of ‘deficient’ English, and describe ELF speakers as users of English, not as learners. [40] [41] Indeed, studies of communication breakdowns in ELF interactions demonstrate that successful lingua franca communication is far from 'anything goes'. [17]

Attitude and motivation

Several attitude studies on the topic of English as a foreign language (ELF) have already been conducted. One overarching factor seems to be a discrepancy between perceptions on the role of ELF in everyday interactions all over the globe on the one hand, and the dominance of as well as reliance on native speaker norms on the other hand. [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] Breiteneder argues that learners of EFL often have an integrative motivation for learning and using English since they wish to identify with the culture and values of English native speakers. [50] Thus, native speaker norms occupy a central place if English is studied as a foreign language. In contrast, English as a lingua franca users tend to focus on effective communication with speakers of other linguistic backgrounds. In ELF interactions, intelligibility is key, which may not necessitate an advantage for native speakers (see above).

Debates in ELF

Colin Sowden [51] opened the debate with a paper in which he discusses which version of English to teach to second language (L2) learners. He argues that some ELF scholars want ELF to replace Standard English as the model to be used in learning English.

Sowden claims that Standard English, especially British English, has a colonial baggage that still affects the status of English in post-colonial countries and it is this negative value that has led ELF researchers to an attempt to describe and posit a neutralized version of English and to make it a universal one that belongs to every speaker, both native and second language speakers. Sowden argues that introducing ELF in ELT will lead to differences between schools where this is implemented, and schools which have the freedom to use a native standard model, favouring the latter. He concludes that ELF will not replace Anglo-Saxon native-speaker models in the near future as there are too many constraints linked to ELF. For Sowden, the use of multilingual and local teachers can also be beneficial for L2 learners, as these teachers have knowledge of the local culture and spoken languages and the constraints they have on learning English. The way forward according to Sowden is to focus on communicative ability, not on universal conformity.

Alessia Cogo [52] challenged Sowden's critical paper on ELF in 2012 by stating that his arguments were based on outdated research and a confusion between the terms World Englishes (WE) and ELF. First, she argues that ELF is not one monolithic or single variety, but rather that it is used by highly varied socio-/linguacultural networks which leads to a more fluid use of the language building on the different ways in which people use a language to communicate with each other. Secondly, Cogo draws on the importance of studying accommodation in ELF interactions by emphasising the different ways in which people adjust their English at the level of words, grammar and discourse in ELF communication instead of focusing on the core features of ELF as suggested by Sowden. Here, the speaker's ability to move away from the traditional speech patterns of the native varieties is argued to be an important part of ELF research.

Lastly, Cogo contests Sowden's view on ELF researchers themselves. Sowden argues that ELF researchers encourage ELF speakers to use specific varieties of English over others, an argument that Cogo refutes by stating that researchers only use empirical data to show what happens in ELF interactions, and never to tell speakers what to use. Cogo further cites various studies in the field that have demonstrated that ELF communication is fluid and innovative, with an emphasis on highly variable linguistic forms.

Sewell [53] argued that the debate about ELF between Sowden and Cogo fails to acknowledge the variation that characterises language use today. He claims that it is counterproductive to polarise ELF and non-ELF and native and non-native speakers, as there is great diversity in all areas of English language usage. Whilst recognising Cogo's clarifications regarding several misconceptions of ELF, Sewell also points out and discusses some of the questions Cogo's article arises. He disagrees with the definition of ELF being based on a distinction between non-native and native language use. He claims that Cogo's approach is too essentialist, because her definition of ELF is based on language features. The approach to ELF should be more non-essentialist according to Sewell who points out that ELF does not involve a set of features or skills that distinguishes it from languages in general, as all language usage is varied. Sewell then considers the implications of the ELF debate for ELT professionals and learners of English, and he highlights the importance of acknowledging language variation when teaching and learning English. Furthermore, he emphasises the importance of presenting this variation to learners, at the appropriate level, and he wishes that this dynamic relationship between ELF and ENL (English as a native language) will be central to how we view language usage.

Dewey [54] criticises Sewell's critical position on the debate, showing how it lacks substance and largely misrepresents the field. Dewey argues that even though Sewell's article is meant to be a critique of ELF, several of his ‘non-essentialist’ views on language are compatible with those of Cogo and other ELF researchers, thus undermining his argument. However, Sewell's paper, according to Dewey, does raise awareness of the need to rethink the terms used when talking about ELF. Dewey defends ELF by emphasising the importance of variability and the dynamic nature of ELF. The distinctiveness of ELF comes from the rapid pace of language evolution and innovation, enhanced in the ELF context due to the linguistic and cultural diversity of English speakers, where understanding is more important than using Standard features.

Criticism

Criticism of ELF generally falls into three camps:[ citation needed ] Those who argue that the language studied consists of learner errors rather than authentic variation; those who argue that ELF scholars are perpetuating the idea that ELF is a reified variety of English; and those who feel it is upholding notions of neutrality in the face of global domination through languages and discourse.

Regarding the first stance, some linguists claim that variation in ELF is completely haphazard and devoid of any patterns, and therefore not worth studying. Most importantly, proponents of this view reject the idea that emerging insights into how English is used as a lingua franca can provide useful input with regard to the aims and methods of English language teaching.[ citation needed ]

Regarding the criticism of ELF and variety building, some claim that ELF research has inherited the legacies of traditional linguistics, which contain some obstacles when considering language use in context. For example, there are claims that variationist discourses have entered into some ELF accounts, creating too much emphasis on accounting for language forms and authenticating them numerically, rather than considering all the contextual factors and variations that constitute communicative practices across ELF settings. [55] [56] [57] This leads to linear connections between intention, behaviour, culture, etc., and English usages, which can be false lines of correlation. It also creates a focus on what is different rather than what is there, which moves from a descriptive agenda to a pragmatic (and, arguably, problematic) one. Such criticisms tend to be cooperative and complementary to the ELF field of enquiry, and not as overtly confrontational as those who either take the previous or following stance.

The other line of criticism argues that concepts such as ELF provide a useful (terminological) veneer for continued (linguistic) domination by English-speaking countries through their political, educational, and cultural institutions. This concept of linguistic imperialism has been developed and heavily used by Robert Phillipson. [58] Although Phillipson suggests this idea, there are some controversial facts[ which? ] which put Phillipson in a contrast situation.

Another example is the case of Juliane House, [59] a German scholar who explains in her article "English as a lingua franca: A threat to multilingualism?" her relation to English after World War II. Contrastingly, Davies criticises the concept and argues that it is “inhabited” by two cultures: one is a culture of guilt ("colonies should never have happened") the other is that of romantic despair ("we shouldn’t be doing what we are doing"). [60]

Other terms with slightly different meanings have been used in the debate and research on the global spread of English, including "English as an International Language" (EIL), "Global English", "Global Englishes", "International English", "World English" and "World Englishes", and "Globish" (Global English). [61] "Global Englishes" (GEs) is generally seen to align closely with ELF, [62] [63] seeing that language use is variable and is very much intermingled with cultural flows, situated contextualisation, and complex interactional alignment between people; whereas the other terms mentioned above tend to be seen as more linguistic in nature (e.g., "'Globish", proposing forms of simplified English needed for communication, vs. ELF and GEs, describing what people actually do when communicating [simple or not]; and "World Englishes", generally accounting for language features and commonalities by region/group, vs. ELF, looking at situated communicative use of English).

One of the key aspects of terminology used in the ELF field of enquiry is that a standardized version of any English variety is not implied, with the dynamic, situated and complex nature of language brought to the fore. [64]

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ Examples by other world powers also exist, such as the United States colonization of the Philippines, among others
  1. ↑ Murata, Kumiko (2015-07-16). Exploring ELF in Japanese Academic and Business Contexts: Conceptualisation, research and pedagogic implications. Routledge. ISBN   978-1-317-55511-7.
  2. ↑ Seidlhofer 2016, p20
  3. ↑ Seidlhofer, Barbara (2013-01-10). Understanding English as a Lingua Franca - Oxford Applied Linguistics. Oxford University Press. ISBN   978-0-19-442620-6.
  4. ↑ Seidlhofer 2011, p7
  5. ↑ Hülmbauer, Cornelia et al. 2008 "Introducing English as a lingua franca (ELF): Precursor and partner in intercultural communication." Synergies Europe 3, 25-36. p.27 http://ressources-cla.univ-fcomte.fr/gerflint/Europe3/hulmbauer.pdf Archived 2011-07-21 at the Wayback Machine .
  6. ↑ (cf. ibid 2008: 27-28)
  7. ↑ Vienna Oxford International Corpus of English [VOICE]: FAQ
  8. ↑ "WrELFA corpus". University of Helsinki. 2019-02-08. Retrieved 2020-05-30.
  9. ↑ Martin-Rubió, Xavier (2018-09-30). Contextualising English as a Lingua Franca: From Data to Insights. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. ISBN   978-1-5275-1696-0.
  10. ↑ The TEFLology Podcast (1 February 2018). "TEFL Interviews 4: Henry Widdowson & Barbara Seidlhofer on English as a Lingua Franca". youtube. Retrieved 31 May 2020.
  11. ↑ Crystal, David (2019). "cited in Creating Canadian English". Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK: 247 (fn 21).
  12. ↑ Wang, W. (2016). "Chinese English in as lingua franca in global business setting". SHS Web of Conferences: 25.
  13. 1 2 3 Paradowski, Michał B. 2013. Understanding English as a Lingua Franca: A Complete Introduction to the Theoretical Nature and Practical Implications of English used as a Lingua Franca. Barbara Seidlhofer. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 7(2) [Special Issue: English as a Lingua Franca. Implications for Translator and Interpreter Education], 312–20 [review article]. doi : 10.1080/13556509.2013.10798856
  14. ↑ Cogo, Allessia. 2008. “English as a Lingua Franca. Form follows function.” English Today 95 (3), 58-61.
  15. ↑ Firth, Alan. 2009. “The lingua franca factor.” Intercultural pragmatics 6: 2, 147-170. p.161-163
  16. 1 2 Cogo, Alessia and Dewey, Martin. 2006. “Efficiency in ELF communication. From pragmatic motives to lexico-grammatical innovation.” Nordic Journal of English Studies. http://gupea.ub.gu.se/handle/2077/3148
  17. 1 2 Pawlas, Elżbieta; Paradowski, Michał B. (2020). "Misunderstandings in communicating in English as a lingua franca: Causes, prevention, and remediation strategies". In Koutny, Ilona; Stria, Ida; Farris, Michael (eds.). Role of Languages in Intercultural Communication/Rolo de lingvoj en interkultura komunikado/Rola języków w komunikacji międzykulturowej. Poznań: Rys. pp. 101–122. doi:10.48226/978-83-66666-28-3. ISBN   978-83-66666-28-3.
  18. ↑ Seidlhofer, Barbara. 2006. “Towards making ‘Euro-English’ a linguistic reality.” In: Bolton, Kinglsey; Kachru, Braj B. (eds.). World Englishes. Critical Concepts in Linguistics. Volume III. London: Routledge, 47-50.
  19. ↑ Grove, Kenna (2021-12-31). ""Where Is They?": The Globalization of English and Gender-Inclusive Language". The English Languages: History, Diaspora, Culture. 7: 10–21. ISSN   1929-5855 . Retrieved 2023-01-31.
  20. ↑ Pauwels, Anne; Winter, Joanne (2004-01-01). "Generic pronouns and gender-inclusive language reform in the English of Singapore and the Philippines". Australian Review of Applied Linguistics. 27 (2). John Benjamins Publishing Company: 50–62. doi:10.1075/aral.27.2.04pau. ISSN   0155-0640.
  21. ↑ Jacobs, George M. (1998). "Ripple Effects: The Case of Gender-Inclusive Language". Asian Englishes. 1 (2). Informa UK Limited: 17–33. doi:10.1080/13488678.1999.10801006. ISSN   1348-8678.
  22. ↑ House, Juliane. 2002. “Developing pragmatic competence in English as a Lingua Franca.” In Knapp, Karlfried; Meierkord, Christiane (eds.). Lingua franca communication. Frankfurt am Main: Peter, 245-267.
  23. ↑ House, Juliane. 2003. “English as a lingua franca: A threat to multilingualism?” Journal of Sociolinguistics 7: 4, 556-578.
  24. ↑ Klimpfinger, Theresa. 2005. “The role of speakers' first and other languages in English as a lingua franca talk.” Unpublished MA Thesis, University of Vienna. http://www.univie.ac.at/voice/page/abstracts/klimpfinger_2005.pdf.
  25. ↑ Pölzl, Ulrike. 2005. “Exploring the third space. Negotiating culture in English as a lingua franca.” Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Vienna
  26. ↑ Pölzl, Ulrike; Seidlhofer, Barbara. 2006. “In and on their own terms. The ‘habitat factor’ in English as a lingua franca interactions.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language 177, 151-17.
  27. ↑ Meierkord, Christiane. 2002. “’Language stripped bare’ or ‘linguistic masala’? Culture in lingua franca conversation.” In: Knapp, Karlfried; Meierkord, Christiane (eds.). Lingua franca communication. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 109-133.
  28. ↑ Hülmbauer, Cornelia. 2007. “'You moved, aren't?' The relationship between lexicogrammatical correctness and communicative effectiveness in English as a lingua franca.” Views 16: 2, 3-36. http://anglistik.univie.ac.at/fileadmin/user_upload/dep_anglist/weitere_Uploads/Views/Views_0702.pdf Archived 2011-07-06 at the Wayback Machine
  29. ↑ Paradowski, Michał B. 2008, Apr. Winds of change in the English language – Air of peril for native speakers? Novitas-ROYAL (Research on Youth and Language) 2(1), 92–119. http://www.novitasroyal.org/paradowski.pdf Archived 2016-03-04 at the Wayback Machine
  30. ↑ Kimura, D. (2017). "L1 English speaker participation in ELF interaction: A single case analysis of dyadic institutional talk". Journal of English as a Lingua Franca. 6 (2): 265–286. doi:10.1515/jelf-2017-0013. S2CID   149157666.
  31. ↑ Verzella, Massimo; Tommaso, Laura (2021). "A new path for TAPP: Reflecting on communication strategies used in ELF interactions between native and non-native speakers of English" (PDF).
  32. ↑ Hülmbauer, Cornelia et al. 2008 “Introducing English as a lingua franca (ELF): Precursor and partner in intercultural communication.” Synergies Europe 3, 25-36. http://ressources-cla.univ-fcomte.fr/gerflint/Europe3/hulmbauer.pdf Archived 2011-07-21 at the Wayback Machine .
  33. ↑ Seidlhofer, Barbara. 2004. “Research Perspectives on teaching English as a Lingua Franca.” Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 24, 209-239.
  34. ↑ Jenkins, J.; Cogo, A.; Dewey, M. (2011). "Review of developments in research into English as a lingua franca" (PDF). Language Teaching. 44 (3): 281–315. doi:10.1017/S0261444811000115. S2CID   7361419.
  35. ↑ Firth, A. (2009). "The lingua franca factor". Intercultural Pragmatics. 6 (2): 147–170. doi:10.1515/IPRG.2009.009. S2CID   143700273.
  36. ↑ Tweedie, M.G.; Johnson, R.C. (2018). "Listening instruction and patient safety: Exploring medical English as a lingua franca (MELF) for nursing education". Journal of Belonging, Identity, Language, and Diversity. 2 (1).
  37. ↑ Wang, Y. (2018). "Chinese English as a lingua franca: an ideological inquiry.". In Jenkins; et al. (eds.). The Routledge handbook of English as a Lingua Franca. Abingdon: Routledge. pp. 151–164.
  38. ↑ Tweedie, M.G.; Johnson, R.C. (2018). "Listening instruction: Exploring nursing education where English is a lingua franca". In Siegel, J. (ed.). International perspectives on teaching the four skills in ELT. London: Palgrave. pp. 65–77.
  39. ↑ Nozawa, Yukako; Yamauchi, Kazuyo; Salcedo, Daniel (2018). "'Empathy' in English as a lingua franca: How student doctors solicit concerns from simulated patients by turn-taking". Journal of Medical English Education. 17 (3): 97–99.
  40. ↑ Firth, Alan. 1996. “The discursive accomplishment of normality. On 'lingua franca' English and conversation analysis.” Journal of Pragmatics 26, 237–59, qtd. in Lesznyák 2002.
  41. ↑ Björkman, Beyza. 2008. “'So where we are?' Spoken lingua franca English at a technical university in Sweden.” English Today 94 (2), 35-41.
  42. ↑ Adolphs, Svenja. 2005. “’I don’t think I should learn all this.’ – A Longitudinal View of Attitudes Towards ‘Native Speaker’ English.” In: Gnutzmann, Claus; Intemann, Frauke. (eds.) The Globalisation of English and the English language classroom. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag, 118-131
  43. ↑ Grau, Maike. 2005. “English as a global language – What do future teachers have to say?” In Gnutzmann, Claus; Intemann, Frauke (eds.). The Globalisation of English and the English Language Classroom. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 261-274.
  44. ↑ Jenkins, Jennifer. 2007. English as a Lingua Franca: Attitudes and Identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  45. ↑ Kalocsai, Karolina. 2009. “Erasmus exchange students. A behind-the-scenes view into an ELF community of practice”. Apples – Journal of Applied Linguistics Series 3 (1), 25-49. http://apples.jyu.fi Archived 2010-09-01 at the Wayback Machine (6 July 2010).
  46. ↑ Mollin, Sandra. 2006. Euro English. Assessing Variety Status. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
  47. ↑ Timmis, Ivor. 2002. “Native speaker norms and international English: a classroom view.” ELT Journal 56, 240-249. http://biblioteca.uqroo.mx/hemeroteca/elt_journal/2002/julio/560240.pdf Archived 2011-07-22 at the Wayback Machine
  48. ↑ Seidlhofer, Barbara; Widdowson, Henry G. 2003. “House work and student work. A study in cross-cultural understanding. Übersetzen, Interkulturelle Kommunikation, Spracherwerb und Sprachvermittlung—das Leben mit mehreren Sprachen“. Festschrift für Juliane House zum 60. Geburtstag. Zeitschrift für interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht. 8: 115-127. http://zif.spz.tu-darmstadt.de/jg-08-2-3/docs/Seidlhofer_Widdowson.pdf Archived 2011-07-19 at the Wayback Machine .
  49. ↑ Zeiss, Nadine. 2010. English as a European lingua franca. Changing attitudes in an inter-connected world. Berlin: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller.
  50. ↑ Breiteneder, Angelika Maria. 2005. “Exploiting redundancy in English as a European Lingua Franca: The case of the ‘third person –s’.” Unpublished MA Thesis, University of Vienna. http://www.univie.ac.at/voice/page/abstracts/breiteneder_2005.pdf
  51. ↑ Sowden, C. (2011-05-16). "ELF on a mushroom: the overnight growth in English as a Lingua Franca". ELT Journal. 66 (1): 89–96. doi:10.1093/elt/ccr024. ISSN   0951-0893.
  52. ↑ Cogo, A. (2011-12-08). "English as a Lingua Franca: concepts, use, and implications". ELT Journal. 66 (1): 97–105. doi:10.1093/elt/ccr069. ISSN   0951-0893.
  53. ↑ Sewell, Andrew (2012-10-08). "English as a lingua franca: ontology and ideology". ELT Journal. 67 (1): 3–10. doi: 10.1093/elt/ccs061 . ISSN   0951-0893.
  54. ↑ Dewey, Martin (2013-03-22). "The distinctiveness of English as a Lingua Franca". ELT Journal. 67 (3): 346–349. doi: 10.1093/elt/cct014 . ISSN   0951-0893.
  55. ↑ Baird, Robert (2012). English as a lingua franca: the study of language practices. Englishes in Practice, Issue 1, 3-17. http://www.southampton.ac.uk/cge/working_papers/ Archived 2013-12-13 at the Wayback Machine
  56. ↑ Mortensen, J. (2013). Notes on English used as a lingua franca as an object of study. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 25-46.
  57. ↑ Pennycook, A. (2010). Language as a Local Practice, London: Routledge.
  58. ↑ Phillipson, Robert (1992), Linguistic Imperialism, Oxford University Press
  59. ↑ Juliane House
  60. ↑ Davies, Alan. 1996. “Review Article: Ironising the myth of Linguicism.” Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. 17:6, 485-596.
  61. ↑ Spichtinger, Daniel. 2000. The Spread of English and its Appropriation. Unpublished MA Thesis, University of Vienna. http://spichtinger.net/Uni/sp-dipl3.pdf.
  62. ↑ Jenkins, Jennifer (2014). English as a lingua franca in the international University: The Politics of Academic English Language Policy. Oxford: Routledge.
  63. ↑ Galloway, Nicola & Rose, Heath (2015). Introducing Global Englishes. Arbingdon, UK: Routledge.
  64. ↑ Baird, Robert, Baker, Will and Kitazawa, Mariko (2014). The Complexity of ELF. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca.

References and further reading

Related Research Articles

International English is the concept of using the English language as a global means of communication similar to an international auxiliary language, and often refers to the movement towards an international standard for the language. Related and sometimes synonymous terms include: Global English, World English, Common English, Continental English, General English, and Engas. Sometimes, these terms refer to the actuality of the situation, where English is spoken and used in numerous dialects around the world. These terms may acknowledge the diversity and varieties of English spoken throughout the world.

The following outline is provided as an overview and topical guide to linguistics:

A lingua franca, also known as a bridge language, common language, trade language, auxiliary language, vehicular language, or link language, is a language systematically used to make communication possible between groups of people who do not share a native language or dialect, particularly when it is a third language that is distinct from both of the speakers' native languages.

Linguistic imperialism or language imperialism is occasionally defined as "the transfer of a dominant language to other people". This language "transfer" comes about because of imperialism. The transfer is considered to be a sign of power; traditionally military power but also, in the modern world, economic power. Aspects of the dominant culture are usually transferred along with the language. In spatial terms, indigenous languages are employed in the function of official (state) languages in Eurasia, while only non-indigenous imperial (European) languages in the "Rest of the World". In the modern world, linguistic imperialism may also be considered in the context of international development, affecting the standard by which organizations like the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank evaluate the trustworthiness and value of structural adjustment loans by virtue of views that are commonly foregrounded in English-language discourse and not neutral.

Intercultural communication is a discipline that studies communication across different cultures and social groups, or how culture affects communication. It describes the wide range of communication processes and problems that naturally appear within an organization or social context made up of individuals from different religious, social, ethnic, and educational backgrounds. In this sense, it seeks to understand how people from different countries and cultures act, communicate, and perceive the world around them. Intercultural communication focuses on the recognition and respect of those with cultural differences. The goal is mutual adaptation between two or more distinct cultures which leads to biculturalism/multiculturalism rather than complete assimilation. It promotes the development of cultural sensitivity and allows for empathic understanding across different cultures.

Communicative language teaching (CLT), or the communicative approach (CA), is an approach to language teaching that emphasizes interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of study.

Henry George Widdowson is a British linguist and an authority in the field of applied linguistics and language teaching, specifically English language learning and teaching.

Nagamese is an Assamese-lexified creole language. Depending on location, it has also been described and classified as an "extended pidgin" or "pidgincreole". Spoken natively by an estimated 30,000 people in the Indian northeastern state of Nagaland, it developed primarily as a means of marketplace and trade communication. Despite the official language of the state being English, Nagamese functions as a lingua franca and is spoken by nearly all Nagaland inhabitants. It is also used in mass media as well as in official state-regulated domains, including news and radio stations, education and political and governmental spheres. Nagamese is classified as a creole as, despite it being spoken as an "extended pidgin" by the majority of speakers across Nagaland, it is also spoken as the native mother tongue of the Dimasa community in Nagaland's largest city, Dimapur.

World Englishes is a term for emerging localised or indigenised varieties of English, especially varieties that have developed in territories influenced by the United Kingdom or the United States. The study of World Englishes consists of identifying varieties of English used in diverse sociolinguistic contexts globally and analyzing how sociolinguistic histories, multicultural backgrounds and contexts of function influence the use of English in different regions of the world.

István Kecskés is a Distinguished Professor of the State University of New York, USA. He teaches graduate courses in pragmatics, second language acquisition and bilingualism at SUNY, Albany. He is the President of the American Pragmatics Association (AMPRA) and the CASLAR Association. He is the founder and co-director of the Barcelona Summer School on Bi- and Multilingualism, and the founder and co-director of Sorbonne, Paris – SUNY, Albany Graduate Student Symposium (present).

A world language is a language that is geographically widespread and makes it possible for members of different language communities to communicate. The term may also be used to refer to constructed international auxiliary languages such as Esperanto.

Globish is a name for a subset of the English language formalized in 2004 by Jean-Paul Nerrière. It uses a subset of standard English grammar and a list of 1500 English words. Nerrière claims that it is "not a language" in and of itself, but rather it is the common ground that non-native English speakers adopt in the context of international business.

Anat Ninio is a professor emeritus of psychology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel. She specializes in the interactive context of language acquisition, the communicative functions of speech, pragmatic development, and syntactic development.

Translanguaging is a term that can refer to different aspects of multilingualism. It can describe the way bilinguals and multilinguals use their linguistic resources to make sense of and interact with the world around them. It can also refer to a pedagogical approach that utilizes more than one language within a classroom lesson. The term "translanguaging" was coined in the 1980s by Cen Williams in his unpublished thesis titled “An Evaluation of Teaching and Learning Methods in the Context of Bilingual Secondary Education.” Williams used the term to describe the practice of using two languages in the same lesson, which differed from many previous methods of bilingual education that tried to separate languages by class, time, or day. In addition, Vogel and Garcia argued that translanguaging theory posits that rather than possessing two or more autonomous language systems, as previously thought when scholars described bilingual or multilingual speakers, bilinguals and multilingual speakers select and deploy their languages from a unitary linguistic repertoire. However, the dissemination of the term, and of the related concept, gained traction decades later due in part to published research by Ofelia García, among others. In this context, translanguaging is an extension of the concept of languaging, the discursive practices of language speakers, but with the additional feature of using multiple languages, often simultaneously. It is a dynamic process in which multilingual speakers navigate complex social and cognitive demands through strategic employment of multiple languages.

Jennifer Jenkins, FAcSS is a British linguist and academic. She was Chair Professor of Global Englishes at the University of Southampton until her retirement in 2019. She is a leading figure in the study of English as a Lingua Franca (ELF), and is an expert on communication in English between non-native speakers. This is a relatively new field of study and her opinions are sometimes seen as controversial. Her interests include attitudes to the international range of "Englishes", English as a lingua franca in higher education, and the implications of ELF for ways of teaching English as a foreign language. She has published and lectured widely and is a founder editor of the Journal of English as a Lingua Franca.

Virtual exchange is an instructional approach or practice for language learning. It broadly refers to the "notion of 'connecting' language learners in pedagogically structured interaction and collaboration" through computer-mediated communication for the purpose of improving their language skills, intercultural communicative competence, and digital literacies. Although it proliferated with the advance of the internet and Web 2.0 technologies in the 1990s, its roots can be traced to learning networks pioneered by Célestin Freinet in 1920s and, according to Dooly, even earlier in Jardine's work with collaborative writing at the University of Glasgow at the end of the 17th to the early 18th century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Diane Larsen-Freeman</span> American linguist

Diane Larsen-Freeman is an American linguist. She is currently a Professor Emerita in Education and in Linguistics at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, Michigan. An applied linguist, known for her work in second language acquisition, English as a second or foreign language, language teaching methods, teacher education, and English grammar, she is renowned for her work on the complex/dynamic systems approach to second language development.

Adrian Holliday is Professor of Applied Linguistics and Intercultural Education at Canterbury Christ Church University. His teaching and research includes intercultural communication and ideology, discourses of culture, the politics of international English language education, English in the world, cultural imperialism, and qualitative research methods.

The Lingua Franca Core (LFC) is a selection of pronunciation features of the English language recommended as a basis in teaching of English as a lingua franca. It was proposed by linguist Jennifer Jenkins in her 2000 book The Phonology of English as an International Language. Jenkins derived the LFC from features found to be crucial in non-native speakers' understanding of each other, and advocated that teachers focus on those features and regard deviations from other native features not as errors but as acceptable variations. The proposal sparked a debate among linguists and pedagogists, while Jenkins contended that much of the criticism was based on misinterpretations of her proposal.

Jef Verschueren is a Belgian linguist, academic, and author. He is an emeritus professor of Linguistics at the University of Antwerp.

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.