This article was downloaded by: [UOV University of Oviedo]On: 31 October 2014, At: 05:34Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Changing English: Studies in Cultureand EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ccen20

On Responsible Uses of English: Englishfor Emancipation, Correction andAcademic PurposesTahar Labassi aa University of Tunis , TunisiaPublished online: 08 Dec 2008.

To cite this article: Tahar Labassi (2008) On Responsible Uses of English: English for Emancipation,Correction and Academic Purposes, Changing English: Studies in Culture and Education, 15:4,407-414, DOI: 10.1080/13586840802493050

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13586840802493050

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

On Responsible Uses of English: English for Emancipation, Correctionand Academic Purposes

Tahar Labassi*

University of Tunis, Tunisia

The main objective of this paper is to show how some non-Anglophone communities

use English to resist the injustices they endure inside their countries, contribute to

universal knowledge and correct a stereotypical image of their culture in the West.

These ‘responsible’ uses of English depart from the imperialistic, hegemonic view of

English depicted by some Critical Linguists (Canagarajah 1999; Pennycook 1994;

Philipson 1992; Holliday 1994).

This paper defends the position that English has become one of the essential

tools for a better future in some developing countries. After the failed political,

economic and linguistic policies of postcolonial regimes, particularly in some

Francophone regions, English has become an instrument for an unavoidable

confrontation with oppressive rulers. English is the language with which intellectuals

speak to the world to communicate their anger, fears and hopes, as well as their

attempts to participate in current academic, scientific and political debates. Some

intellectuals in non-Anglophone regions of the world, such as North Africa, find it

hard to defend the view that breaking the walls of intolerance has to go through the

medium of English, given that this language is now considered by many, including

some Critical Linguists in the West, an additional threat.

Taking the particular case of Tunisia, an Arab, African and Muslim country, I

shall argue that English serves as an emancipatory tool. In some underprivileged

environments, English may be used to overcome obstacles to emancipation and

handicaps to progress. The national language – Standard Arabic and its vernacular

versions – has been subordinated because political, cultural and even scientific spaces,

where it is used, are occupied by ruling minorities. English has become, de facto, one, if

not the only instrument which may help to break the walls and to foster talk with the

world. Successive politics of Arabisation have created subdued generations; the only

discourse that appeals to most of them is that of fundamentalists whose utter

adversaries are leftists and those who do not consider that the West is evil. Reversing

the trend requires courage, determination and appeal to those who share the hope for

justice and peace. In this respect, English can serve as the vehicle of a healthy

interaction amongst members of the international community. Yet English has been

viewed by poststructuralists, postcolonial writers and leftists in the West as another

imperialistic weapon that serves the interests of the United States of America at the

expense of local identities (Bolton 2005; Pennycook 1994; Philipson 1992). A stance

against the English language often accompanies anti-Americanism.

Observing authentic uses of English, and talking from personal experience, I

argue that English has become life-saving for some activists, who are trapped

*Email: tahar_labassi@yahoo.fr

Changing English

Vol. 15, No. 4, December 2008, 407–414

ISSN 1358-684X print/ISSN 1469-3585 online

# 2008 The editors of Changing English

DOI: 10.1080/13586840802493050

http://www.informaworld.com

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

5:34

31

Oct

ober

201

4

between undemocratic ruling powers and threatening fundamentalists. This paper is

a contribution to a debate on a healthy and positive attitude towards English which

departs from the easy and naıve, though popular, fight against a dominant language.

To some extent, it shares the views of Friedrich (2007) on English as an instrument

for a timely dialogue between nations.

There are no sites in the region which might host this discourse in English. The

rhetoric of resistance to internal injustice in local languages is unheard of, ignored

and sometimes misunderstood. One may go as far as claiming that the use of local

languages might be counterproductive, if not useless. It may only add to isolation,

breed hatred and reproduce the rhetoric of ‘us’ against ‘them’. English has become

the language through which the powerful exert their power, but also the language

that the oppressed use to talk to those who might share their hope for a better future.

Even though one runs the risk of shocking some fellow countrymen and women,

including some academics, using one’s language to address local circles may no

longer be sufficient.

One may remind some opponents that the liberation movements of the early

twentieth century in the region used the language of the coloniser to resist

colonisation. Indeed, L’Action Tunisienne, the mouthpiece of the national party, was

published in French. Depoliticising the issue of language is not realistic. However,

the single-sided opinion that language is ‘good’ or ‘bad’ in itself is unrealistic.

Language is not neutral, and it does not carry one message. English is not the sole

property of imperialists, as anti-imperialists and freedom-fighters are now using

English to strike back, a fact that should be publicised. This paper is a contribution

to the debate on ‘better’, more ‘responsible’ uses of English in the particular

environment of an Arab, African and Muslim country, namely Tunisia.

Tunisia’s national language is Arabic, while French is the second language as the

country was colonised by France from 1881 to 1956. However, in addition to

Standard Arabic, Tunisians speak another variety of the language which results in a

diaglossic situation (Ferguson 1959). French has a firm foothold in the country’s

administrative and educational system as well as in general everyday use among

middle-aged and educated members of the middle class.

With independence, Arabic gained a higher status, particularly in education.

According to Daoud, ‘Arabisation has been considered an essential means to remove

the vestiges of colonialism. In fact a 10-year Arabisation plan was put into place.

Former president Bourguiba declared that ‘‘‘education in the secondary schools will

be oriented towards Arabisation and the use of Arabic, so that it can serve to teach

all subjects’’’ (Daoud 2001, 25).

A closer examination of the situation, however, shows that French is still used as

a medium of instruction, especially for mathematics, sciences and technology

(Battenburgh 1996; Hemissi 1985). The political reforms that took place in 1987

reinforced the Arabisation process, and, as argued by Daoud, ‘the discourse and

policy of the current leadership, which came into power in 1987, indicate further

commitment to Arabisation and a greater sense of independence vis-a-vis the former

colonial power’ (Daoud 2001, 27). The promotion of Arabic was accompanied by a

policy of teaching foreign languages with a special emphasis on English as the

language through which Tunisians interact with the rest of the world (Daoud 2000).

In this sense, French lost some of its presence as the first non-Arab language in the

country. Tossa testifies that: ‘an Anglophone breeze seems to be blowing over the

408 T. Labassi

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

5:34

31

Oct

ober

201

4

Maghreb. One is apt to think that the language of Moliere is losing its place to that

of Shakespeare’ (Tossa 1995, 38). In addition, Arabisation was accompanied by

promoting widespread computer literacy and the teaching of the English language.

Another study has shown that a higher number of potential employers in the private

sectors (business, industry, tourism) seem to require expertise in English as a

condition for recruitment (Labassi 1995).

As a global language English is one of the most remarkable phenomena of the

late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. Several linguists have traced the

evolution of English as a World/International language and provided political and

economic reasons for the worldwide spread of English (Crystal 1997; Kramsch 2000;

Pennycook 1994). The political and military predominance of the USA after World

War II paved the way for a substantial economic and cultural influence that

displaced other languages, including French and German. English has become the

standard for international communication. The collapse of the Soviet Union in the

early 1990s accentuated the trend for a new world order dominated by one

superpower and one super language. No country in the world could afford isolation.

Europe and China, let alone developing countries, are no exception. Linguistic

policies all over the world have had to cope with this linguistic reality, and some

writers claim that what is taking place is linguistic imperialism (Fairclough 2001;

Philipson 1992), while others might call it linguistic realism.

Crystal (1997) asserts that 85% of international organisations in the world make

official use of English, at least 85% of the world’s film market is in English, and some

90% of published scholarly articles in some academic fields, such as linguistics, are

written in English. It is estimated that 75% of all international communication in

writing and 80% of all information in the world’s computers is in English. Crystal

argues that English is spoken as a native language by nearly 400 million people and

has become a lingua franca. If speakers with a lower level of language fluency and

awareness were included, the overall total would be 1,000 million. English is

recognised as undoubtedly the most important language. Graddol (1997) notes that

one in five people now speaks English, with some degree of competence, and that the

number is growing. More recent figures place English second after Chinese in

number of users (Maniere de voir 2008, 64). Second and foreign language speakers

will soon outnumber those who speak English as a first language. English has

become the language to learn for the increasingly mobile international community.

This is a fact that seems to be irreversible. English has become the official language

particularly in the worlds of business and science. That English has acquired such a

status even in Tunisia has been asserted by Battenburgh (1996) and Walters (1996).

Walters, for instance, shows that in Tunisia, ‘English is certainly audible and visible

in a range of situations (the media, the tourist trade, business and advertising)’

(1996, 34).

Friedrich (2007) argues that a lingua franca has always existed, such as Latin or

Arabic. Today the status of English as an international language has reached levels

never attained by Latin or Arabic for reasons that need not be explained here. The

other difference is that English is threatening the very existence of other languages.

The exclusive use of English in some domains has reached some exasperating

dimensions. Burchfield has noted that

English has also become a lingua franca to the point that any literate, educated personon the face of the globe is in a very real sense deprived if he does not know English.

Changing English 409

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

5:34

31

Oct

ober

201

4

Poverty, famine and disease are instantly recognized as the cruelest and least excusableforms of deprivation. Linguistic deprivation is a less easily noticed condition, but onenevertheless of great significance. (Burchfield 1986, cited in Swales 1993, 283–84)

This reality has been criticised without being altered (Pennycook 1994; Philipson

1992). The suggestions made by Critical Linguists (Canagarajah 1996; Pennycook

1994; Philipson 1992) are too distanced from some non-Anglophone environments;

Tunisia, as will be argued later, is a case in point.

This essay goes against the general stream of either condemning English because

of its hegemonic, imperialistic status or depoliticising English and considering that it

is a neutral commodity which might belong to those who use it (Widdowson 1994).

The first attitude towards English is held by leftists in the West and fundamentalists

in the East, one of the amazing encounters that should be noted. It is this unnatural

meeting of people who originally belong to two conflicting ideologies: Marxism and

Islamism. This communion is noticed not only in the attitude towards English, but

also on the occasion of parliamentary elections in some European countries. The

investigation of the underlying reasons for this encounter is beyond the scope of this

paper which focuses on linguistic issues, and particularly the possible ‘wise’ uses of

English in non-Anglophone environments. The following section gives particular

examples of three ‘responsible’ uses of English in the particular case of an Arab/

Muslim country: English for Solidarity Purposes (ESP), English for Correction

Purposes (ECP) and English for Academic Purposes (EAP).

English for Solidarity Purposes

During a very long and unconventional strike carried out by Tunisian university

teachers (May and June 2005), English was used to seek support from other trade

unions around the world. University teachers refused to correct examination papers,

an action that was very daring and considered civil rebellion by the authorities. There

was a great tension and the authorities were afraid of contagion. No local daily

newspaper (in French, Arabic or English) agreed to publish the motions of the trade

union addressed to the public opinion to justify the militant action and seek support.

The same subdued newspapers regularly published the attacks of the authorities; some

went as far as to depict the strikers as traitors and asked the authorities to take severe

measures against them. Walters (1996) rightly noted that: ‘English is used in the

broadcast media, which in Tunisia are state owned and state controlled to a greater

extent than in times past’ (35). In a more recent article, Champagne gives an

informative view of the state of the media in Tunisia and condemns the unethical

attitude of the mercantile West which ‘is willing to overlook repressive regimes as long

as they remain open to US investment’ (Champagne 2007, 205).

Trade unionists were left with one choice: addressing themselves to international

unions to break the walls of isolation. In this way, they discovered the benefits of

using English as it became the only instrument that would help them to talk to

potential supporters capable of exerting some pressure on local authorities. The step

taken by trade unionists was intelligent and efficient as confirmed by the outcome of

the strike. The repressive measures taken by the authorities could have been much

worse. ‘English for Solidarity Purposes’ responded to the needs of an isolated

community of strikers. The ‘language of imperialism’ was used by the small

community of university teachers, who are, to a large extent, anti-imperialists, to win

410 T. Labassi

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

5:34

31

Oct

ober

201

4

the crucial fight for a better life. They were left with no choice but to address

themselves to the larger community of colleagues at the international level through

the medium of English.

English for Correction Purposes

Correcting the image of Arabs is vital, and particularly during these times of fear,

suspicion and mutual misunderstanding. There are interesting studies on Islam

undertaken by leading historians (Abdou 2005; Djaıt 2006), but they are written in

Arabic or French and thus have a limited audience and cannot have the desired

corrective impact. Their translation to English may alleviate some of the stereotypes

and prejudices that Westerners, including intellectuals, might hold. Some Western

academics are unaware of the existence of anti-fundamentalist trends. Writings on

Islam from the perspective of secular academics do not reach a wider audience in the

West, and their production in Arabic or in French is reduced to Arab or

Francophone audiences. Thus, some recent post-9/11 writings do not reach the

desired objective of proposing a less biased image of Arabs and their religion. One

may anticipate the beneficial effects of this, particularly at this moment of declared

and planned wars.

It is frustrating for many secular thinkers in the Arab world to witness, helplessly

and continuously, the usual Arab fundamentalists misrepresent their culture on the

screens of Western televisions. Correcting this vision emerges necessarily through the

production of some more balanced texts in English. The use of English by secular

Arab thinkers has become a necessary step towards the spread of a more objective

image of Arabs and Islam. The spread of anti-fundamentalist writings will reduce the

over-presence of Muslim fundamentalists who are using English to propagate a

hostile vision of the West and its culture. One might go as far as to say that English

may spare us the horrors of future clashes which will be unavoidable if we do not

reverse the trend. It is a mutual effort, but I believe that it is up to Arab/Muslim

intellectuals to do the most. Participating at international conferences and publishing

in high-impact journals based in the West will, one hopes, bridge the gap between

local concerns and academic worldwide current issues. In this context, the use of

English is unavoidable. About 10 years ago, on the occasion of a conference on

‘English in North Africa’ organised by the Tunisian Society for Anglo-Saxon studies

(TSAS), Jabeur (1999, 21) recommended a broader use of English:

English can be used to revamp local cultures and various forms of expression byempowering them to transcend national borders. It can also be used to bring the worldhome, thus creating more ample opportunities for intercultural communication,exchange and interaction.

Almost 10 years later, we are witnessing a move backward. The attitude towards

English has grown more negative as a result of recent events. Reversing the trend is

much more difficult, yet, unavoidable, if we want to live in a less confrontational

world.

English for Academic Purposes

Non-Anglophone academic communities, and particularly Francophone North

Africans, cannot be more visible contributors to knowledge because most of them

Changing English 411

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

5:34

31

Oct

ober

201

4

are poor consumers of knowledge. Lack of mastery of English is a major obstacle

to consumption and production of knowledge (Nash 1990; Ravetz 1971). Most

data banks testify to the poor contribution of countries where English is not

the medium of instruction, even in disciplines which do not require costly

equipment. The best periodicals on Islamology are owned by well-known publishers

in the West (Blackwell, Elsevier, Pergamon and Sage Publications). Serious

writings on contemporary political, theoretical and strategic issues are published

in English. Academics in North African countries share the same criteria for the

classification of top journals in their respective disciplines. Their professional

promotion depends on the number of articles they manage to publish in journals

edited in the West. Local journals do not have the same reputation even among

local communities.

Many scholars in non-Anglophone countries are aware that mastery of English is

a sine qua non condition for any possible cultural renaissance. North Africans and

Arabs do have the economic conditions for economic development, and huge steps

have been achieved in this respect (high literacy rates, longer life expectancy

compared to other African countries), but lack the culture which should precede any

lasting and engrained renaissance. Some scholars belonging to different disciplines in

the hard and human sciences share the belief that English could be one of the

instruments for a long-awaited rebirth in this part of the world.

Additionally, the hegemony of English in the age of electronic communication

has reached incredible levels. Seventy two percent of Internet communication takes

place through the medium of English (Maniere de Voir 2008, 65). Some

communication specialists rightly argue that the advent of electronic access to

information might widen the gap between developing and developed countries. As a

matter of fact, those who investigated the politics of scientific communication

defended two conflicting views. Some believe that the technology of communication

will favour more democratic practices (Hills 1980; Sosteric 1996). Others, however,

argue that these new means will add further obstacles that off-network, disconnected

communities will have to face (Canagarajah 1996; Swales 1993).

The advent of English as an essential tool for academic production, particularly

at the age of computer, leaves no choice to scholars from non-Anglophone

environments. Given the pace at which knowledge is disseminated, there is no time

for a debate on which medium is best. The answer to the question of which language

to use has become obsolete. Indeed, scientists in non-Anglophone environments have

not waited for sociolinguists to advise them on this issue. They are reminded daily

that their survival depends on being operational in English. Reading and writing

English have become unavoidable conditions for joining academic communities in

almost all disciplines.

Recent writings that newly-born Peace Sociolinguistics propose in order to

escape the trap into which leftist/Critical Linguists seem to have led us are

interesting. However, this essay has shown that there are other concerns shared by

scholars surviving with English in hostile environments by detailing other challenges

that academics in non-Anglophone, undemocratic environments face. It has

proposed other more ‘responsible’ ways of dealing with English as a lingua franca.

No one wants Peace Sociolinguistics to be another utopian project. Peace is the

ultimate aim, a universal ambition. Yet, reality reminds us that much work is

required before it prevails, and Peace Sociolinguists do have their share.

412 T. Labassi

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

5:34

31

Oct

ober

201

4

In this respect Friedrich (2007) believes that ‘An emphasis on peace rather

than on linguistic war is a much-needed counterpart to the overheated discussions

around language and dominance’ (73). Indeed, a state of war will not end because

we refuse to see it. A state of linguistic war exists and, denying it will not serve

peace. However, the debate over linguistic wars should shift perspectives. Weshould get rid of the narrow vision of oppressed and oppressors. English is not the

language of the oppressors as the oppressed may use it to defend their rights, or at

least make their case heard. A balanced stand is possible. In this respect, Pratt’s

proposal, although made more than 20 years ago, seems to be timely. Pratt (1987,

61) proposed to stand between

a critical knowledge of the workings of domination and dehumanization on the onehand, and of egalitarian and life-enhancing practices on the other … One would want toavoid, in the case of linguistics of contact, a utopian impulse to joyfully display allhumanity in tolerant and harmonious contact across all lines of difference, or adystopian impulse to bemoan a world homogenised by western media or run only bymisunderstanding or bad intentions.

The way out of the trap is not only condemning the hegemonic nature of English, but

for non-native speakers of English to negotiate a less fragile status and invent more

original and ‘responsible’ uses of English. In other words, we need to get rid of the

rhetoric of victimisation and construct a more aggressive stand.

References

Abdou, F-A. 2005. Reformer l’Islam? Une introduction aux debats contemporain. Paris: La

Decouverte.

Battenburgh, J. 1996. English in the Maghreb. English Today 48: 3–12.

Bolton, K. 2005. Where WE stands: approaches, issues, and debate in World Englishes. World

Englishes 24: 69–83.

Canagarajah, A.S. 1996. Non-discursive requirements in academic publishing, materials,

resources, of periphery scholars, and the politics of knowledge production. Written

Communication 13: 435–472.

Canagarajah, S. 1999. Resisting Linguistic Imperialism in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Champagne, J. 2007. Job seekers and enterprise incubators: educational reform in Tunisia.

Changing English 14, no. 2: 201–215.

Crystal, D. 1997. English as a Global Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Daoud, M. 2000. LSP in North Africa: Status, problems and challenges. Annual Review of

Applied Linguistics 20: 77–96.

———. 2001. The language situation in Tunisia. Current Issues in Language Planning 2: 1–52.

Djaıt, H. 2006. L’historicite de la Mission Muhammadienne a la Mecque. Beirut: Dar Ettalia.

Fairclough, N. 2001. Language and Power. London: Longman.

Ferguson, L. 1959. Diaglossia. Word 14: 47–56.

Friedrich, P. 2007. English for peace: Toward a framework of peace linguistics. World

Englishes 26: 72–83.

Graddol, D. 1997. The Future of English. London: Oxford University Press.

Hemissi, H. 1985. Some Aspects of ESP in Tunisian Higher Education. Unpublished PhD

thesis, University of Tunis.

Hills, P., ed. 1980. The Future of the Printed Word. Milton Keynes: The Open University Press.

Holliday, A. 1994. Appropriate Methodology and Social Context. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Changing English 413

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

5:34

31

Oct

ober

201

4

Jabeur, M. 1999. English, globalisation and Tunisia. Proceedings of the TSAS conference on

‘English in North Africa’. Tunis: TSAS Innovation Series.

Kramsch, C. 2000. Context and Culture in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Labassi, T. 1995. ESP: A market-oriented approach. Paper presented at The Second

ESPMaghreb Conference. Sfax, Tunisia, Faculty of Letters.

Maniere de voir. 2008. Nombre de locuteurs. February, March. Publication du Monde

Diplomatique.

Nash, W., ed. 1990. The Writing Scholar. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Pennycook, A. 1994. The Cultural Politics of English as an International Language. London:

Longman.

Philipson, R. 1992. Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Pratt, L. 1987. Linguistic utopias. In The Linguistics of Writing, ed. N. Fabb, D. Altridge, A.

Durant, and A. MacCabe, 48–66. New York: Metheun.

Ravetz, J. 1971. Scientific Knowledge and its Social Problems. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Sosteric, M. 1996. Electronic journals and scholarly communication: Notes and issues.

Electronic Journal of Sociology. www.sociology.org/vol002.001/Sosteric-Article.htm

(accessed 7 July 1997).

Swales, J. 1993. The English language and its teachers: thoughts past, present, and future. ELT

journal 47: 283–291.

Tossa, M. 1995. Happy few hours. Jeune Afrique 6: 38.

Walters, K. 1996. ‘New year happy’: some sociolinguistic observations on the way to the

‘anglicization’ of Tunisia. Proceedings of the TSAS conference on ‘English in North

Africa’. Tunis, TSAS Innovation Series.

Widdowson, H. 1994. The ownership of English. TESOL quarterly 28: 377–88.

414 T. Labassi

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

5:34

31

Oct

ober

201

4