Riassunto esame Lingua inglese I, prof. Seidlhofer, libro consigliato Understanding English as a lingua franca, Seidlhofer

What's in a name? A note about terminology

What is called the 'World Englishes paradigm' offers a framework of thinking about the role and history of English in the world. It is a convenient way of referring to the distinction between English used as:

• English as a Native Language (ENL)
• English used as an additional/second language in post-colonial settings, especially in special and official situations (ESL)
• English being learned and used as a foreign language (EFL)

Even if criticized, the Kachruvian model is established because no alternative models have been suggested. One of the main objectives of this book is to explore how the use of English and the numbers and kinds of its speakers have changed dramatically over recent decades and for this reason the connotations of the terms native speaker and non-native speaker are bound to change too. When we see the important role Englishes play in people’s lives all over the world outside 'native speaker' communities, being a 'native speaker' ceases to be an asset.

English as lingua franca (ELF)

The term 'lingua franca' means 'any lingual medium of communication between people of different mother tongues, for whom it is a second language' (Samarin 1987:371). Often these lingua francas have no native speakers. ELF often is a 'contact language' between people who don’t share a common native tongue nor a common national culture, and for whom English is the chosen foreign language of communication (Firth 1996:240). ELF interactions are defined as 'interactions between members of two or more different linguacultures in English, for none of whom English is the mother tongue' (House 1999:74).

I like to think of ELF 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. Due to the numbers of speakers involved worldwide, this means that ENL speakers will generally be in minority, and their English will therefore be less and less likely to constitute the linguistic reference norm. Whatever the setting that ELF is used in, we find ourselves in an unprecedented linguistic situation. For the first time in history, a language has reached global dimensions, across continents, domains, and social strata.

The English language, therefore, is being shaped, in its international uses, by its non-native speakers as its native speakers. This process has been accelerated by the dramatic expansion of electronic communication through the internet. English as means of communication has taken on a life of its own and ELF is the preferred term for this phenomenon. The original lingua franca spoken as a kind of trade language in the Mediterranean region between the 15^th and 19^th centuries was a mixture of Italian dialects with elements of Spanish, French, Portuguese, Arabic, Turkish, Greek and Persian (Knapp and Meierkord 2002:9). This 'plurilinguistic composition exemplifies the intrinsic and key feature of a lingua franca: it’s hybrid nature' (Jenkins).

Towards a reconceptualization of English

European sociolinguists discuss whether English poses a threat to the European ideals of individual plurilingualism and societal multilingualism. 'There is a transformation in the sociolinguistic regime of Europe: from coercive monolingualism to coercive multilingualism, resulting in a regime of superdiversity' (Susan Gal). There is also a broader conception today of the profession and role of the English teacher. There is a new educational/pedagogic vision and teaching methods like 'learner-centredness' (Tudor 1996), 'learner autonomy' (Dam 20010), 'teacher cognition' (Borg 2003; Breen 2001), '(self)-reflection/ reflective practice' (Pennycook 1999; Schon 1983; Atkinson and Claxton 2000), 'action research' (Burns 2007), 'exploratory practice' (Allwright and Hanks 2008), and 'critical, transformative, and listening critical pedagogy through English' (Pennycook 1994; 326).

With the global spread of English, there has also been the questioning of the native speakers’ 'ownership of English' (Brumfit and Widdowson 1994, 2003). But where the discourse about English teaching has changed, the actual content of courses has not and still doesn’t take into consideration practical modern pedagogy.

A conceptual gap

ENL is full of conventions and markers of native speakers’ world such as characteristic pronunciations, specialized vocabulary, idiomatic phraseology, references and allusions to their shared experiences and the cultural background. This is why 'educated non-native speakers of English are resigned and feel defeated about the 'glaring defects' in their knowledge of it. They cannot, by definition, be members of that NS community, no matter how hard they try, no matter how long they study' (Medgyes).

But for most contexts in which English is used around the world, the native-speaker community is irrelevant anyway. If non-native speakers using English as an international language (the vast majority) would simply embrace the more relevant model of a competent ELF speaker, their supposed disadvantage would become an advantage because they can speak more than one language and so adapt the languages to be good communicators in intercultural interactions. They would benefit from what Kramsch (1997) calls the 'privilege of the non-native speaker'.

We have outdated ideas about native-speaker’s privilege. As House points out (1999:74), ELF is successfully used by countless non-native speakers in 'influential frameworks', i.e., 'global business, politics, science, technology, and media discourse', and as Brumfit indicates 'the ownership (by which I mean the power to adapt and change) of any language in effect rests with the people who use it'. It’s high time for applied linguists and English language teachers to develop fresh ways of thinking critically about what 'English' is, given its changed role and status in the world.

English: foreign language versus lingua franca

EFL. When you learn English as a foreign language, you strive to do 'as the natives do'. You accept their authority as distributors of their language, on which they have a sort of franchise, with institutions such as the British Council, the Fulbright Program, and publishers based in English-speaking countries acting as the main 'distributing agents'. These learners have interest in the English speaking cultures and want to identify with the community that speaks it. Maybe they love literature, have friends in England or America, want to study there or emigrate where English is the dominant/official language.

In this case, it’s normal that the linguacultural norms of the native speakers of English are a model. Learners will learn grammar, ways of saying and expressions, and what is appropriate to say in different situations. They will also strive to catch the nuances of the language. The more they get close to the model, the more they will be praised and accepted and feel they are succeeding.

ELF instead is different. It is English spreading in various and varied manifestations and adapted to the needs of intercultural communication, in settings such as a business meeting in Sao Paolo with participants from Brazil, China, Germany, and the USA, or a press conference with participants from 20 different countries at the EU Commission in Brussels. The main objective here is to make use of English as lingua franca to communicate. Millions of these situations happen every day in the entire globe. Usually, it is taken for granted that everybody has enough knowledge of English to speak and understand.

The participants gauge a level of language at which they can operate. The crucial point is that this is primarily established during the interaction and regulated by interactional exigencies rather than by what native speakers would say or find correct or appropriate. In these ELF interactions the goal is to communicate whether it is negotiating a business contract, arguing about scientific experiments and politics or having a good time with a group of tourists in a seaside tavern. In such situations, it would be interactionally counter-productive, even absurd, for the speakers to adhere to ENL linguacultural norms (like idiomatic phrases and cultural allusions) when no ENL speakers may even be present.

It is time we recognize the vital role and authority of ELF users as active contributors to the development of the language by appropriating the language in a 'process called macroacquisition, the second language acquisition by speech communities, that links language change to its spread' (Brutt Griffler). There is a vast literature about Inner Circle and also the Outer Circle Englishes. But what is happening linguistically in the Expanding Circle and across all circles has only now begun to be recorded.

The need for description

We must overcome the assumption that ELF is a globally distributed, franchised copy of ENL, and consider that it is being developed independently with a great variation and enough self-regulating stability to be viable for lingua franca communication. TEFL with its aim of distributing English in its established and encoded ENL forms, has moved ahead considerably but always examines English spoken and written as a first language, enhancing the prestige and authority of ENL. (see Chapters 2 and 3).

For example, when you use a Collins Dictionary, 'you are one of the best informed language users in the world' (this is what their website says) but it’s a specific kind of English very far from the global reality. Until not so long ago the only well-documented varieties of English were British and North American, but now the International Corpus of English (ICE), founded in 1990, includes 20 varieties of nations or regions where English is either an official language or a majority first language.

'ICE’s principal aim is to provide the resources for comparative studies of the English used in countries where it is the first language or an official additional language. In both language situations, English serves as a means of communication between those who live in these countries' (Greenbaum). Excluded from ICE is the English used in countries where it is not a medium for communication between natives of the country. So ELF across Inner, Outer, and Expanding Circles (and within the Expanding Circle) is again left out. ICE collects data from countries in which English is the first language or second official language.

We have been taught that real English is ENL as captured and described in sophisticated analysis of large ENL corpora (see Chapter 3). This English may be real for some but in a global perspective ENL is not the real English but ELF. This is why there is the urgent need for rich, empirically well-founded descriptions of how ELF speakers use the language and demonstration that they are communicating effectively. This is how ELF can be made a linguistic reality for academics and educators.

VOICE, the Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English (VOICE 2009) was created with this intent. VOICE is a computer corpus of audio recordings and transcriptions of spoken ELF interactions. The primary interest of ELF research is to understand how the language develops when used by non-native speakers, so the first ELF corpora focuses on capturing how ELF is spoken more than how it is written. The compilation of a corpus of spoken data is incomparably more difficult and time-consuming than of written data. The interactants’ negotiation of meaning in real-time and spontaneous talk is free of the self-monitoring pressure of writing, and allows us to observe the use of the 'vernacular' (Labov), where attention is paid to communicative content rather than to linguistic forms. In addition, when the speech events are highly interactive, researchers can also gain insight into how mutual understanding among the interlocutors is co-constructed. The 151 interactions recorded in VOICE are speeches of various types (conversation, interview, meeting, press conference, interview etc.). The speakers come from 50 different (mainly European) first-language backgrounds, including a minority (7%) of native speakers of English. The corpus is freely accessible for research purposes.

Assumptions and presumption

'The true repository of the English language is its native speakers, and there are so many of them they can afford to let non-natives do what they like with it so long as what they do is confined to a few words here and there'. (Peter Trudgill: Sociolinguistic Variation and Change).

Anglo-Saxon attitudes

The realization of the global role of English has not led to any radical reconceptualization of this English. Instead we find a deep-seated assumption that the language remains and should remain the same and the property of its native speakers. Many native speakers encourage the belief that English is their property also for considerable economic advantage. For example, it is written in this British Council report that 'Britain’s real black gold is not North Sea oil but the English language. It has long been at the root of our culture and now is fast becoming the global language of business and information. The challenge facing us is to exploit it to the full.' (British Council Annual Report 1987-8).

10 years later it seems that the challenge was successfully met. 'The incredible success of the English language is Britain’s greatest asset. It enhances Britain’s image as a modern, dynamic country and brings widespread political, economic and cultural advantages, both to Britain and to our partners.' (The British Council, Conference prospectus, ELT conference 1998). 'There are no limits to the range of English language courses offered in the UK. Over 600,000 learners a year come to the UK to achieve their ambitions, to experience modern UK life and to use the language in its natural home. Why not join them?' (British Council’s Education website 2011).

'There is something sinister about these pools of corrupt English lying about the world. They are unpleasant for the English people to encounter and for foreigners who care about speaking pure English. One also feels that they could grow and spread and eventually invade good English itself. They are like pools of language disease.' (The Times, May 2000). The view we find so passionately argued here is that English as an international language must conform to the 'pure' English used by its real 'owners' who are, by the way, only to be the English people (not the British or the Americans or Australians). The opinion expressed here is that the English language is the language of the English and its integrity needs to be protected. Any deviation from 'pure English' constitutes corrupt English and there is danger that these barbarisms may spread like a disease.

The assumption of native-speaker authority

Studies have shown that perceptions of ethnic, racial, and linguacultural differences can lead to expectations of intelligibility problems which are independent of the actual linguistic forms that speakers produce. Native speakers 'react to factors extraneous to just language proficiency' (Rubin).

Convictions and contradictions

'Native speakers have greater facility in speaking the language, but not necessarily greater sensitivity in using it appropriately. In many international fora, competent speakers of English as a second language are more comprehensible than native speakers, because they can be better at adjusting their language for people from different cultural and linguistic background.' (Phillipson). (Story of Rushdie and Danish Prime Minister who used I don’t have the ability instead of I am not able to protect the writer. Page 39-40).

There is a deep-seated assumption shared by both popular and scholarly opinion, across the whole spectrum of linguistic laypersons, linguists, activists, and governmental institutions, that the only proper English is the English of its native speakers (ENL). Though it is acknowledged that variable versions occur, these are seen in terms of deviations from established and supposedly stable norms which alone are regarded as constituting the legitimate language.

From this point of view, ENL is assumed to be not only the norm against which any ELF non-conformities are seen as in some way defective, but also represents the model to which all learning of the language should aspire. What arguments are given to support this assumption? This will be examined.

Standard English and real English

'This is Standard Future: The old measures, or existing grades, are inadequate, and we will aim at something better. It is a very interesting use. Instead of referring back to a source of authority, or taking a current measurable state, a standard is set, projected from ideas about conditions which we have not yet realized but which we think should be realized. There is an active social history in this development of the phrase'. (Williams: Keywords. A Vocabulary of Culture and Society).

Standard English ideology

The belief that imposed language uniformity is good for society and that the standard variety is the only legitimate one is referred to as 'standard language ideology'. But the standard form of English is difficult to define. Generally speaking, it is considered the written and spoken English of educated speakers in England and, with certain differences, in Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa. (Trudgill). Due to the lingua franca function of English, many people use this convenient means of communication but do not feel the desire to 'master' it and use it properly.