Understanding the Global Spread of English - Literature review Example

Assignment 1: Understanding the Global Spread of English Society is entering a phase of global English which is becoming more glamorous, more news-worthy and nearer to the leading edge of exciting ideas. Such has been shaped through making the language more global which has actually shaped its identities, cultures and economies. Actually, linguist scholars such as Tollefson (2000) regard English as a modern day lingua franca, spread to millions and famillar even to the most extreme and isolated populations. In fact, according to Phillipson (2008), current generation witness situations where there are more people learning English as a foreign and second language than the native speakers. This is basically what is known as English and Globalisation (Phillipson, 2008). The process of letting the language spread to other areas considered to be ‘foreign’ or non-native speakers comes with benefits and costs. That is, advantages and disadvantages of the global spread of English. Based on the two concepts/themes, this paper sets to critically reflect upon the two themes based on case studies experienced linking such experiences with global spread of English. Through personal and experience from people I have associated with, the essay will also attempt to understand indicators of global spread of English as well as alternative framework that can be used to analyse the impact of the global spread of English. Tollefson (2000) looks at English and globalisation as sociopolitical integrating the viewpoint its impact have on other international languages. He adds, ‘English has been growing worldwide to accomplish the utopian dream.’ (p.2) In terms of socio-politics, the spread of English has been attributed to the general desire to unite distinct nation states, need for unifying language for international communication in business, government and industries. These are the sociopolitical factors Tollefson believes has necessitated rapid spread of English to other parts of the world. To concretise my experience with these findings, actually my first encounter with English language traces back during my early years in high school. Basically, in Saudi Arabia, the spread of English has really been revolutionised. During our period, nobody knew about the language especially in the lower levels of learning. It was only taught in high schools and people did not take its study seriously. It took me close to 18 months to grasps basics but much was through periodic mingling with foreigners coming in our schools as tourists and educators. This gave me real exposure to English language and thus transcends well with what Tollefson explains as social reason behind the spread of English. Secondly, the aspect of sociopolitical as explained by the author vis-à-vis my experience is interrelated. First, in Saudi Arabia, people are interested in learning English but such are taught by either foreigners or natives who have good command in the language. The tourists in Saudi Arabia come to enjoy the holidays and see the need of mixing with school children so as to help us relate with each other through second language (English). On the other hand, the process of interaction gave me an impetus to start believing that English was no longer any other subject but a friend who would open up spaces, new challenges and new lands for me, both intellectually and socio-culturally. Interestingly, liberal-humanist researchers are giving different perspective regarding globalisation of English. Howatt and Widdowson (2004); Crystal (2003) for instance, bring the aspect of English as Second or Other Language (ESOL). They use this term in explaining other paradigms that has helped English dominate in other parts of the world. Howatt and Widdowson (2004) specifically refute the idea that English has been spread by countries fighting to establish economic dominance on others. Instead, the fact that non-native speakers taking English as Second or Other Language makes every other person to be associated with it. They say, ‘…the English language had found a place to hang its hat in every port from Gibraltar to Fiji and beyond.’ (p.127) Crystal (2003) on the other hand points out that English as Second or Other Language makes its teaching regarded as technology of congest and control. He further argues; ‘First ...the proportion of the world's population speaking English as a first language is declining, and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future as long as non-native countries take seriously teaching of English as Second or Other Language. Second, the international status of English is changing in profound ways: in the future it will be a language used mainly in multilingual contexts as a second language and for communication between non-native speakers. Third, the decline of the native speaker (will be explored) in terms of a changing ideological discourse about languages, linguistic competence, and identity’ (p. 57) There is also emerging group of writers who are trying to incorporate the aspect of ESOL with their own experience. They offer completely different perspective regarding globalisation of English. That is, they engage their readers with personal story on a personal level and of course with discourses around them. Group of this writers include Phillipson (2006); Lin et al. (2002); Phillipson and Skutnabb-Kangas (1996). Through their stories, it can be summed up that they believe globalisation of English is happening as a result of the language being regarded as not only an instrument of communication or even of knowledge, but an instrument of power. English as instrument of power is further explained by (Phillipson and Skutnabb-Kangas, 1996). However, this power is questioned by Tollefson (2000) in his research, Policy and Ideology in the spread of English. He asks, ‘Does speaking English provide such powerful benefits that the time, effort, and expense of learning it are justified?’ (p.10) From experience, I think am better placed to answer Tollefson. Like I mentioned, in Saudi Arabia we start to learn English in high school as second language. I studied language for 18 months and now I do master of education in UTS. This to the best of my experience has no any financial benefits attached. On the other hand, I have friends who attended the same class with me and what the knowledge of English now helps them with chatting with friends combining the Arabic letters with English letters where necessary. I remember the case of John who spent over 3 years and only managed basics. He is currently enjoying remunerations as school teacher and translator. I do not need to mention my case as am still struggling with this paper. The point is, Tollefson time spent studying is not, in any way, related with aftermath benefits. Besides, it becomes quite hard tracking particular benefits of English for particular learners over time. The third wave of writers regarding globalisation of English has tried to distant their ideas from their predecessors. As matters stand, I recognise writers as post-modernist and they include Llurda (2006). The spread of English to non-native speakers depends on whether the country is periphery or and non-periphery countries. ‘…periphery countries are those in which English is used for internal purposes whereas non-peripheries are those in which it is used only for international communication.’ (Llurda, 2006 p.135) So how does this relate to globalisation of English? Let me give an example of Japan which is regarded as non-periphery. Japan regards English as a tool associated with international government and business. This on the other hand means that the use of English is subject to government policies which in turn affect its acquisition. On contrary, Philippines is a good example of periphery country where English plays a significant role in the determination of access to power and wealth. These are countries Llurda (2006) refers to as ‘a multilingual country where globalisation is best felt’ (p.23). Still with Tollefson (2000), he gathers other views regarding globalisation of English and such mainly focuses on United States and Australia. In these countries, preeminent position English holds is claimed to have contributed to the extinction of other indigenous languages. Llurda further explains that globalisation has come as a result of economic globalisation which indirectly ‘killed’ local languages. This is what makes Llurda to ask, ‘should we regard English as a killer of endangered languages.’ (p. 176) What position do all these give us? One, that the process of globalising English has not, however, acted solely to homogenise and promote its use. Two, some cases of heightened political activity to gain recognition of, and promote regional languages like Welsh, Catalan, Kurdish and Scots Gaelic have been recognised. However, most of these activities have not identified their adversary as globalisation per se but rather, the dominant language of the dominant national culture, for instance, English in England. More generally, critics of the globalisation of English point out that the benefits of English are not distributed equally (Howatt and Widdowson, 2004). These can well be documented by bringing the second theme, advantages and disadvantages of the global spread of English. In a particular case study, (Garcia, 1995 as cited in Tollefson, 2000) did a research on the economic advantages of global spread of English among non-natives living in America. It was reealised that English leads to higher economic levels with particular example with the Latinos who shifted to English and are monolingual in the language. Garcia further found that when factors such as age, sex and education are controlled, Puerto Ricans and Mexican Americans who were English monolinguals economically benefit as a result of its globalisation. Garcia’s research is one of the most complete to help understand this theme. However, Llurda (2006) and Lin et al. (2002) are in agreement that his findings should be given critical review since the manner in which the language spread does not always match its economic reality. If benefits of globalisation of English are not as clear as Llurda (2006) tries to make us believe then why does it continue to spread so widely? This is because its spread widens its use and thus makes the language regarded as an indicator for equality, opportunity or national unity. English is even regarded in developing countries, especially former colonies of English speaking counties as unifying factor. Good examples are countries such as India, Nigeria and Philipines where the use of English unifies them with their former masters. On opportunities, Tollefson (2000) gives a case study of Edna Velasco who has greatly benefitted from the spread of English. He explains, ‘…fluency in English gains her many advantages in Philippine society. She has access to jobs that require English, including the teaching profession. She has the opportunity to study abroad in countries that require a high degree of English proficiency for admission to university study.’ (Tollefson, 2000 p.8) Furthermore, spread of English has been attributed to personal and collective success. Phillipson (2006) cites an article in The Indian Express about the situation in multilingual India. In this article people who cannot speak English are not given ability to work in service industry. The same situation is similar in Europe where where the correlation between English literacy levels and prosperity is evident. This is also true in my country whereby if you can exhibit good command of English then you have higher chance of landing a good job. On a different note, global spread of English has led to it being lingua franca especially between people who do not share a common native language between them. Even though researches continue to show that lingua franca(s) have been in use over years in different scopes and capacities, the rapid rise in English globalisation has seen the rise in the use of lingua franca and multinational and regional organisation currently benefit through such. A good example is the scientific and trade associations and international sports. Although ideological claims for the advantages of globalisation of English continue to grow, the inequalities associated with it are not completely hidden. For instance, the spread of English do not universally offer the same value to areas it has spread to. Its spread in most cases, results in inequality instead of opportunities and the process of learning English has been regarded as a barrier to employment and education rather than opportunity for it. A good example is a research by (Garcia, 1995 as cited in Tollefson, 2000) where the hegemony of English makes it difficult for the Kashmiri language in North India to compete as a language of education. To further contretise this findings, in Papua New Guinea, it is realised that the English policy results in two diverse groups of learners; the majority who become ineffective and irrelevant in the job market and minority who benefits from the system and get employed in the market economy of the country. The same case is true in India where Lin et al. (2002) explain; ‘The amount of resources spent to produce the at least 4%, of English knowing persons in India over the past two hundred years has proved the absurdity of efforts to replace many languages by one.’ (pp. 308-316) Additionally, global spread of English has been seen to be dangerous especially on the minority languages and cultures which may face extinction if English continue to be used among minority group. Lin et al. (2002) explain the phenomenon of language death if English in continually used as global language. He says; ‘...while the loss of minority languages is only casually related to the expansion of English, as assimilation and language loss is nothing new in linguistic history, it is the rate of which indigenous languages are disappearing that is currently alarming.’ (p.189) References Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Howatt, A.P.R. and Widdowson, H.G. (2004). A History of English Language Teaching OUP, Oxford U.K. Lin, A., Wang, W., Akamatsu, N and Riazi, A.M. (2002). Appropriating English, expanding identities, and re-visioning the field: from TESOL to teaching English for glocalized communication (TEGCOM)" Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 295-316. Llurda, E. (Ed) 2006. Non-native language teachers: Perceptions, challenges and contributions to the profession. New York: Springer. Phillipson, R (2008). The linguistic imperialism of neoliberal empire. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies 5(1) 1--‐43. Accessed on 10th April 2013 from http://drr.lib.uts.edu.au/file/20463/013095_phillipsonlinguistic.pdf Phillipson, R. (2006) Language policy and linguistic imperialism. In T Ricento (Ed) An introduction to language policy: Theory and method. Oxford: Blackwell, 346-361. Accessed on 10th April 2013 from http://drr.lib.uts.edu.au/file/14226/013095_phillipsonlanguage.pdf Phillipson, R. and R. Skutnabb-Kangas, 1996, English Only World-wide or Language Ecology?, TESOL Quarterly, Vol.30, Issue 3, pp.429-452. Tollefson, J. (2000). Policy and ideology in the spread of English', in J. K. Hall & W. Eggington, eds, The Sociopolitics of English Language Teaching, Multilingual Matters, Clevedon, Great Britain. Accessed on 10th April 2013 from: http://drr.lib.uts.edu.au/file/5531/015130_tollefsonpolicy.pdf Read More