The third of our short series of posts from Jack Richards’ Key Issues in Language Teaching looks at English as an international language, and the often contentious issue of English as an international commodity, rather than the ‘property’ of English-speaking countries.
In the past, English was often regarded as the property of ‘native speakers of English’ and of countries where it has the status of a mother tongue, or first language, for the majority of the population. It was these varieties of English (and particularly the standard accents within these varieties) that were considered legitimate models to teach to second or foreign language learners. And it was also assumed that English had to be taught in relation to the culture(s) of English-speaking countries.
This picture has changed somewhat today. Now that English is the language of globalization, international communication, commerce, the media and pop culture, different motivations for learning it come into play. English is no longer viewed as the property of the English-speaking world, but is an international commodity. New goals for the learning of English have emerged. The cultural values of the United Kingdom and the United States are often seen as irrelevant to language teaching, except in situations where the learner has a pragmatic need for such information. The language teacher no longer needs to be an expert on British and American culture, or a literature specialist either.
When it was taken for granted that the variety of English which learners needed to master was a native-speaker one, the choice was often determined by proximity. In Europe, due to its proximity to the United Kingdom, British English was usually the model presented in teaching materials. In many other parts of the world, North American English was normally the target. In some places (e.g. Indonesia), learners are more likely to encounter Australian English, and this may be the variety of English they feel most comfortable learning. However, in recent years, there has been a growing demand for North American English in places where British English was the traditional model, particularly among young people for whom American English is ‘cool’. It seems, perhaps, that it more closely resembles their ‘idea’ of English.
The two schools of thought concerning how closely learners should try to approximate native-speaker usage can be summarized as follows: The traditional view is that mastery of English means mastering a native-speaker variety of English. The presence of a foreign accent, influenced by the learner’s mother tongue, was considered a sign of incomplete learning. Teaching materials presented exclusively native-speaker models – usually spoken with a standard or prestige accent – as learning targets.
The second school of thought is that when English is regarded as an international language, speakers may wish to preserve markers of their cultural identity through the way they speak English. In such cases, learners may regard a French, Italian, Russian or Spanish accent in their English as something valid – something they do not want to lose. This is a question of personal choice for learners, and teachers, therefore, should not assume that learners always want to master a native-speaker accent when they learn English. As one learner puts it, ‘I am Korean, so why should I try to sound like an American?’
Jack has released a series of posts, exploring how teaching can be viewed as ‘skilled improvisation’. Click the link to find out more about Key Issues in Language Teaching.