THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 1 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
AbstractThe present paper argues that today’s global role for English is endangered as
long as the language is equated with the political, economic and cultural power of its major western speakers, the US and Britain. To remain a global language in the future, then, English must “deculturize” away from being the language of country X or country Y, and subsequently “multiculturalize” in order to be able to express a variety of cultural concepts around the world. These goals have already been accomplished to a certain extent through the growing recognition of Indian, Singaporean, Nigerian and other newer Englishes within linguistic circles.
However, the common conceptualization of English as a single language connected with certain cultures persists in education and in general society, and this must change if English is to survive a world power shift. Specifically, English should be taught along with tolerance and intracultural sensitivity, not only in EFL and ESL classrooms, but in ENL ones as well.
本 論 で は 、 世 界 の 政 治 経 済 力 や 文 化 力 を 占 めて い る 英 国 お よ び 米 国 に 結 び つ い て い る か ぎ り 、今 日 の 英 語 の グ ロ ー バ ル 役 割 は 将 来 危 険 で あ る こと を 議 論 す る 。 国 際 語 の ま ま に 残 る た め 、 英 語 はま ず 国 Xま た は 国 Yの 母 国 語 で あ る こ と よ り も 「 非文 化 的 」 に な ら ざ る を え な い 。 ま た 、 世 界 中 の さま ざ ま な 文 化 的 概 念 を 表 現 で き る よ う に 「 多 文 化的 」 に な る 必 要 性 も あ る 。 こ の 二 つ の 目 的 は 、 言語 学 者 の あ い だ で は イ ン ド 、 シ ン ガ ポ ー ル 、 ナ イジ ェ リ ア な ど の 新 Englishesの 認 識 に よ っ て す で に ある 程 度 進 ん で い る 。
し か し な が ら 、 英 語 は 単 一 言 語 で あ る 特 定 の文 化 に か か わ っ て い る と い う 一 般 概 念 は 未 だ に 教育 や 一 般 社 会 に 続 い て い る 。 世 界 の も っ と も 有 力な 国 々 が 変 わ っ て も 、 英 語 が 世 界 語 と し て 生 き 残る た め 、 こ の 実 態 は 変 わ ら ざ る を え な い 。 特 に 、英 語 が 外 国 語 や 第 二 言 語 と し て 教 え て い る 教 室 だ
1/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 2 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
け で は な く 、 母 国 語 と し て 扱 う 教 室 の 中 で も 、 寛容 や 多 言 語 ・ 文 化 へ の 配 慮 も 含 む べ き で あ る 。
1. Introduction—language and culture2. The future of English – language and power3. The role of Englishes4. Deculturalization or multiculturalization?5. Tolerance and linguacultural sensitivity6. ConclusionsWORD COUNT: 5 3 6 7
1. Introduction
As the new millennium rushes in, with English unquestionably being the language
of global educational, political and economic leadership around the world, the question is
being asked by more and more scholars around the world -- for how long? The crystal
ball gazers vary in their predictions: Some say 50 years anyway, others 100, still others
cannot imagine any change in the present situation at all.
Why such a discrepancy between the visions of the realists vs. the optimists?
White cites 8 reasons (AILA Aug. 5, 1999) that the proponents of English longevity use to
support their claims:
1) It is the most frequently used language by national leaders around the world.
2) It is used in the most countries around the world. (?)
3) Most educated non-natives speak English fluently.
4) 10% of world leaders are native English speakers. (?)
5) English is the language of air traffic control and computer technology.
2/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 3 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
6) English is an official or semi-official language in 50 countries, and also an
official language of ASEAN.
7) Around the world, most students study English.
8) English is the language of young pop culture.
While these reasons are undoubtedly valid, they have also been true to varying
degrees of other international languages in the past, in history. In addition, all of these
facts are still based on the crucial relationship between the language and cultural,
economic and educational power. This is evident when we listen to reasons people
around the world view English as important and necessary all around the world today.
"We need English to get a job." "We need it to study higher education." "We need it to
do business with people around the world." "We need it to use computers and
technology." "We need it to understand popular music and movies." "We need it to be
cool."1 Such needs are based on a world in which English, in short, is the rage; a world
led by the media and what has been aptly dubbed the ELT empire.
2. How long will English last?
In the past, other languages have enjoyed a dominant position on the international
scene due to their inherent connection with a certain culture. Naturally, the power
associated with the culture was the major cause of the language's increase in popularity.
Such power may have been economic, political or military (or some combination of the
three); in any case, it was the power of an empire. We may think of several instances --
3/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 4 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
Latin, during the Roman Empire. Arabic, during the Ottoman Empire. Until recently,
French in Europe and North Africa. Japanese in Asia before and during WWII.
The prestigious position of all of these languages died, naturally, with the collapse
of their respective Empires. Not even the valiant struggles of the Alliance Francaise to
save the purity, respectability and power of its language were able to deter its downfall in
Europe. Paraphrasing the famous quote "a language is a dialect with an army and a
navy" we may well assert that "an international language is a language with an empire,
either economic or political, or both." For English today, the power is in the hands of the
ELT empire.
And unless the lessons of history are carefully studied and not repeated, a fall of
the power of this new Empire will invariably dictate the fall of English as well. From
history, we have seen that there is nothing inherent in any language that makes it fit to be
used internationally. Beauty and purity did not help French. Linguistic sensibility and
simplicity did not help Esperanto. Attachment to power--economic, cultural, educational
and military--is the one necessary and sufficient criterion for an international language but
unfortunately those who are in power -- the gatekeepers -- tend to become blind to this
fact. Those who are not in power know it only too well, and resent it, watching and waiting
patiently for their turn to become gatekeepers. The cycle is endless.
Graddol (1997:58 ) predicts that there will be a plurality of world languages in the
future. English will be spoken by more people than today, but so will Chinese, Arabic,
Spanish, Hindi/Urdu, Malay and Russian. The important question here is, by whom, and
4/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 5 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
to whom? Which of these languages will be used the most in cross-cultural contexts?
Which of these languages will be the most common second language of native speakers
of other first languages? Barring a change of massive proportions in the world order due
to wars, natural disasters, widespread disease, or alternatively to discovery of some
power-bearing superior technology, it will probably still be English. Sheer numbers of
people, unless they have the power to change the world order and the will to do so, will
not jar English from its position. On the other hand, the possibility of a shift in world order
is a real one, and judging from history, is bound to come eventually.
Thus the question "How long will English last?" becomes an easy one to answer,
in terms of history if not in terms of years. It will last exactly until the next world power
displaces the northwest part of the globe from the position it enjoys today -- that is, unless
that world power is English speaking.
2. A Truly Global Language? English vs. Esperanto
What, however, if a language born of power such as English could disentangle
itself enough from its creator nation(s) to become acceptable to the cultures of the future
gatekeepers, whoever they may be? What if a language were to shed its skin of cultural
and economic success, and make itself humbly available to any culture who would wish to
use it in their own manner? The guiding light of the Esperanto dream, now in its second
hundredth year, has been to become just this -- a language available for international use,
ready to take on any cultural skin it may need.2
5/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 6 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
Many people do not realize it, but Esperanto has come quite a long way in the
realization of its goal. There are now an estimated 2 million speakers of the language
worldwide (Urban, on web), including some native speakers. There is a full body of
literature in Esperanto. It is evolving with the times, and the number of words in the
dictionaries has risen from a vocabulary of 800 roots in 1887 to one of 9000 official roots
and at least 9000 unofficial ones (size of Zhang Honfan's Esperanto-Chinese Dictionary)
today. (internet Esperanto page) 3 The quiet followers of the language lack only one
thing to propel it into the international arena on a big time basis -- power.
English can learn a lesson from Esperanto. Now, English is the language of the
culture(s) in power, but in order to stay that way, it needs as much as possible to detach
itself from the Euroamerican culture(s) which have propelled it to such heights.
Otherwise, these same culture(s) will surely become an anchor to drag it to the depths in
11 Taken from textbook interviews in Yoneoka & Arimoto, “Englishes of the World”,Tokyo: Sanshusha,2000.22 To talk of cultural skins means of course that we need to assume that culture and language may be disassociated at least to some extent. I believe that the two are closely interconnected, but that “culture” has both surface and deeper manifestatations, roughly equivalent to the oft-used distinction between Culture with a capital C (i.e. art and literature) and culture with a small c, or the organization of family, life styles, customs, relationships, etc. within a society. Capitalized Culture, then, may or may not be associated with a certain group—and may vary when a language is used in different cultural contexts. Lower case culture, on the other hand, deals with universal human attributes that may involve differing values but cannot themselves be disassociated from the human condition.
Thus Pennycook’s (1994, cover) assertion that “English can never be removed from the historical, social, cultural, economic or political contexts in which it is used” is only half correct. It cannot be removed from such contexts, indeed; but the contexts may change in and of themselves. 33 Admittedly this still does not compare with the 8 million words estimated to be available in English (Graddol 1997), but it does show that the language is generative, productive and alive. Adding vocabulary is not a large problem. Also, roots may be inflected in several ways, making a much larger actual word count.
6/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 7 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
the future. English must become indigenous to all cultures, not because it is cool, not
because it is CocaCola, not because it is a window to business and educational
opportunities, not because it is necessary in the international world; but because it is
multicultural in and of itself. It must be available for world cultures to claim as their own, to
cloak in the robes of their own personal identities.
How can such a feat be possible? In some places, it has already happened.
English in many post-colonial countries, especially those where there is a lack of a clear-
cut competitor for a national language, has been accepted to provide linguistic stability
within national borders as well as beyond them. Prime examples of such countries are
Singapore and India, although there are many others. Both of these countries have taken
on English as their own. It differs from the English used in the ELT Empire not only in
terms of accent, but also in grammar, vocabulary, literature and culture. Naturally
Singaporean and Indian English differ from each other as well, so much that they might
even be considered different languages if they had different names4 . At any rate, they are
two Englishes, each with their own spheres of power, culture and raisons d’etre.
The existence of different culture-based varieties of English means that it may be
preferable to regard “English” not merely as a language, but rather as a multicultural
44Widdowson (Aila 1999, Tokyo) has suggested that Englishes that have taken on cultures of their own be renamed to shed the cloak of culture associated with the term "English." Such names do exist already, such as Taglish and Singlish, but these have been brought to life under derogatory conditions. Viewed as bastards and half-breeds, such terminology is sometimes considered discriminatory. The real solution here is not simply to rename, but to first empower these languages from within, giving them pride and acceptance among their own people and thus willingness to share them with the rest of the world. The question of naming will then resolve itself naturally--either the present name will rise in status, or will be rejected for some higher status-bearing term.
7/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 8 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
language system. There are precedents for such a system, although they have never
been explicitly recognized as such. French in North Africa still retains much of its power,
sharing it with Arabic (yet another multicultural language system). Spanish has been the
accepted national language for most countries in South America since the time of the
conquistadors. These countries, then, already have an international language for use
within most of their continent. It serves their needs, and it is difficult to imagine these
countries suddenly switching over to English.
In fact, we may now speak of "concentric" languages of power--one powerful intra-
or international or regional language, and another powerful global language--i.e. English. It
is no longer a matter of choice of which foreign language to study, but of what language
serves the needs of which speakers. We may even hear a distinction made in such
places between "international" and "very international" languages. Peruvians and
Bolivians, for example, have no need of English to speak to each other, but only to go
onto an even wider global level. Chinese is a unifying power around the Chinese-
speaking world--an international language. For Chinese speakers, English is not needed
on an international level, but on a global one. Many Europeans, too, tend to distinguish
between an "international" European language (which may be German in some areas,
French in others, Russian or Spanish in still others) and "very international" English.
Such concentric multilingualism should not be discouraged, but encouraged. Just
as a father can have the same amount of love and respect for each of four children as he
would have for just one, so should gatekeepers of the global language respect and
8/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 9 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
promote the development of other languages. And just as speakers of national languages
in “enlightened” countries around the world are (for the most part) tolerant of their regional
dialects and linguistic minorities, so should English speakers be supportive of
multilingualism. This is the best way, perhaps the only way, to promote a true respect and
love for a truly global language.
3. Englishes and the cultural connection
Support of multilingualism does not apply only to foreign languages, but also to
other Englishes. Once, several years ago, a British professor was asked what kind of
English was best for Japanese students to study. His semi-joking response was "British,
of course", but he added a tongue-in-cheek caveat that one could also study Singaporean
English, Indian English, Australian English, and (even) American.
Today, however, that list of English varieties could be lengthened interminably, to
the point that it does not provide any reasonable answer to the question at all. Still, the
question remains, and continues to be posed and answered in various ways. What
English to study, to teach? Standard English? Basic English? The most popular English
at the time? The one the teacher knows? The one the students need? The one that is
most easily understandable for the rest of the world? The one easiest for the students to
acquire? The one required by the administration, or whoever pays the bills? The one that
matches whatever teaching materials are available? Even, it has been suggested, the
one that matches best the horrendously fossilized spelling system?. (cf. Brown 1989).
9/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 10 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
Sensible responses, all, but each raises questions of its own. What if the English
variety of the teacher is not the one needed by the students? What if the students do not
know what they need? What if several varieties are needed? What if the most popular
variety (=the prevailing standard) is one that is highly difficult to emulate in terms of
pronunciation and/or grammar? What if it includes culture-based vocabulary that the
students will never need to use in their daily lives? And what constitutes "standard"
anyway?
The question is further complicated when we consider the symbiotic relation
between language and culture. A certain variety of English, or any language for that
matter, is necessarily connected with a certain culture. What culture(s), then, should be
taught along with English? If English is a "world standard language", then is there also a
world standard culture? Obviously not, but without culture language feels incomplete, like
a hollow shell with no meat inside. No single language then can be a true world standard
as long as the world is multicultural. And if a language is passed off as global by being
taught aculturally, then language students stand to be deprived of the enjoyment of
learning about new cultures, undeniably one of the most attractive elements of learning a
foreign language.
What harm is done if English is taught in the context of a dominant or mainstream
culture? A look at the Japanese context provides us with an answer. The Japanese
Ministry of Education has always had guidelines regarding the teaching of culture
associated with language. In recent years, however, these guidelines have subtly shifted
10/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 11 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
from teaching a specific target culture through language (effectively, through English) to
teaching both native and non-native English cultures (including the Japanese culture) and
cross-cultural education in general (see Yoneoka 1998). This has had a globalizing effect
on textbooks, where only 1/3 of the contents deal with Inner Circle countries (=”native”
English countries with Western cultural backgrounds), whereas the other 2/3 are
concerned with Outer Circle (=ESL) and Expanding Circle (=EFL) countries, including
Japan itself (Hanaoka, 1997).
On the other hand, the teachers who are working with these textbooks are still
overwhelmingly monocultural – the vast majority are Japanese, and over 90% of the JET
program assistant language teachers working with them are from the US, UK, or Canada
(Yoneoka, 1999). In addition, the English used in the texts and the accompanying tapes,
and required on tests, is generally US. Thus monocultural teachers teach about various
cultures through a single variety, and students learn about the “outside world” in terms of,
or "flavored by" US (or occasionally UK) English. Fair-skinned JETS reinforce the
stereotyped image that the whole world eats McDonalds all-beef hamburgers, carries
guns, chews gum and celebrates Christmas (none of which are necessarily true even of
Americans!).
What does this type of education serve students who may find themselves later on
in Hinduist India where cows are sacred and beef anathema? Or in Singapore where
even bringing a pack of gum through customs constitutes a crime? Now, English is used
all over the world, and teaching "English culture" means that a multiplicity of cultures must
11/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 12 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
be taught along with it. For Japan to achieve a true multicultural English education, then,
there must be wider access for non-Japanese instructors of all ethnicities, not only in
assistant teaching positions but also in full ones.
This example clearly demonstrates how English as a single language is invariably
linked, however subtly, with a single culture. Then, if a single language cannot truly be
global in the context of a multicultural world, there are only two possibilities. Either
monoculturalize the world, or multiculturalize the language.
4. Deculturizing or Multi-culturizing?
Traditionally, the ELT world has gone about the task of making English applicable to
“non-native” cultures in one of two ways—by either deculturalizing the language or
multiculturalizing it. In the former, English is defined in its narrowest sense: a
lexicosyntactic body of decontextualized words and phrases, minus accent, minus culture,
minus orthographic idiosyncracies. Examples of the former are Basic English (Ogden
1930s ) and core English (Nayar 1994).
We are apt to view such conceptualizations with suspicion – can Basic English
indeed be considered a language at all? At best it is lifeless, as any attempt to quantify
the number of lexical entries and syntactic rules immediately precludes linguistic
productivity. Nevertheless, it serves sound, even necessary pedagogical purposes such
as creation of first-year vocabulary lists. Moreover, the barebones language that such
conceptualizations try to capture is close to universal human cognition and may represent
a working skeleton on which a cultural skin may hang.
12/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 13 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
At the other extreme, we have ELT experts (Longman, Cambridge, Oxford, to name
a few) creating multicultural English dictionaries, claiming their superiorities in sheer
volume of vocabulary entries. As English is now estimated to contain around 8 billion
words (Graddol 1997:51) such dictionary creation is no easy matter, and relies
increasingly on technology such as corpus data. These dictionaries share a common flaw
of ethnocentrism, however; one that is impossible to avoid. For any term, the definition
will be in terms of the English variety of the dictionary producers (for the most part,
British). In addition, there is the problem of cross-reference—the users of such a
multilingual dictionary will be able to look up a term such as “push-bike” and find that it
means “bicycle” or “bike” in British and US English, but how will they realize that the same
vehicle may be called “cycle“ in Indian English or that the same term “bike” means
“motorcycle” in Japanese English?
Both deculturalization and multiculturalization have their linguistic and
pedagogical applications, but neither can escape the centralization of the linguistic core
associated with the present world order. A more egalitarian track is provided by leaders of
the World Englishes movement, who insist that a language that wears a sociocultural
cloak of identity is intrinsically different from the same language wearing a cloak of
another color. Thus Nigerian English is one English; Japanese English is another. Since
speakers of one variety can and do learn to speak another variety without reference to a
single standard, such a conceptualization of English is highly suitable to a pluricentric
approach to ELT such as that suggested by Kachru (AILA 1999).
13/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 14 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
Even this movement, however, has roots in centralization: Kachru’s (1986)
Concentric Circles, which have been its guiding light, are inherently ethnocentric in their
conceptualization. The guru himself expressed dissatisfaction with the paradigm, as
languages shift and borders between the circles become muddy and unclear, but also due
to its basic centralized position of native Englishes. Variations in which the circles are
drawn side by side (e.g. Graddol 1997:10, fig. 4) do little to help: even here, the native
circle is still FIRST.
Yoneoka (2000a) proposes a system of Englishes based on an abstract (i.e.
deculturalized) English core which both feeds on and supports all varieties of English
clustered around it, much like a mushroom stem or an umbrella handle. Each variety has
its own sociolinguistic identity, but is intertwined and networked with other varieties. In this
paradigm, all varieties, whether native or not, share equality as well as real-world
importance: the rain falls and the sun shines on them all. On the other hand, the core
“English” serves as a sort of CPU to handle incoming and outgoing information flow, but
derives its life, soul and very nature of its existence from the varieties themselves.
Naturally the CPU may be bypassed as well, as varieties which find themselves closer to
each other will find it much more efficient to exchange information directly.
5. Interlinguistic and intercultural sensitivity in the English curriculum
Whatever paradigm is used, the main issue remains one of acceptance and
tolerance of all varieties and the cultures they represent. Especially in times of change,
14/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 15 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
the flexibility to be able to recognize and understand the cloaks worn by speakers of other
Englishes becomes increasingly important.
Whatever else may be said about the ELT Empire, its track record in interlingual
and intercultural sensitivity has been pitiful. Second language English users cannot
escape the label “learner” (as if native speakers are not learning their language every time
they meet a neologism!). They have “accents” (native speakers don’t?!) that need
“correction”; they can only be considered “good” English users if they produce “proper”
grammar.
ELT Empire efforts to define, direct and dominate the world of English, however
well-meaning, have come under fire because they have not been attuned to language
situations other than those in their own countries. With respect to language policy,
Phillipson (1999:271) points out that “the assumption that experts from countries such as
the UK or the US, deeply monolingual and with a very patchy record of foreign language
learning, can contribute to policy on education and language matters in multilingual
societies is completely counter-intuitive.” In pedagogy, Pakir (1999:112) states that “the
theory and the applications of the theory that emanate from Inner Circle speakers of
English may not be the best basis for teaching the speakers of English in the Outer Circle
and the Expanding Circle in the coming millennium.” These and other criticisms of the
theories and policies of British and North American language experts are not directed
towards the soundness of the work itself. Rather, they question its applicability to
societies that need to pay more attention to the mutual intelligibility and successful
15/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 16 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
intercultural communication of their peoples than to the acquisition of “native” English as
judged by outsiders.
Thus, native speaker ELT policies (whether they mean to be so or not) are being
regarded as linguistically imperialistic and culturally insensitive, a potentially dangerous
situation for the future of English. History has shown that linguistic domination by force or
policy has painful and disastrous consequences, both with respect to human psychology
and sociolinguistic genocide. Older Koreans still haven’t forgiven their Japanese
conquerors for forcing them to speak Japanese only during the occupation (although
some have no doubt profited from their linguistic expertise). The Hawaiian language and
culture have been all but lost due to nearly a century of English only policies. Now, with
much of the world rapidly transforming into a giant McDonalds (Japan, for example, has
the second highest number of outlets in the world, after the US), the prospect that the
world may continue this trend becomes frightening in terms of what is being lost.
Graddoll’s (1997) startling prediction that of the some 7000-8000 languages spoken today,
only 1000 or so will remain in 50 years demonstrates just a portion of this loss. It is time
to take stock of and reevaluate our world’s multiculturalism, and to actively protect what is
left.
Pakir’s (1999:109ff) model of “English-knowing bilingualism”5 as the norm of the
21st century is a fresh alternative to the monocultural approaches of ELT. Indeed, her
home country Singapore may be taken as a model of such a future, where peoples of
16/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 17 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
different ethnicities proudly maintain their own cultural identities while communicating with
each other using not ELT English, but the English that is best suited for them.6
Clearly the growing acceptance of multicultural Englishes around the world
implies that English classes themselves will need to become more multicultural: i.e. to pay
more attention to cross-cultural education and communication in general, as well as to
global affairs. In English classes of the future, students should find themselves learning
less about Christmas and Cambridge and more about refugeeism and Ramadan.
Not only cross-cultural sensitivity but also cross-linguistic sensitivity should be part
of the future English course. At present less than 6% of the world population can be
classified as native English speakers, and birth rate statistics of this population indicate
that the proportion will only decrease in the future. A comparison of the number of
bilingual English knowers vs. native English speakers (now 4:1 by some estimates and
clearly growing) shows that communication between bilingual speakers of different
varieties of English is becoming the norm. Thus, all English users should be aware that
Indian and Malay speakers, for example, may say /dat/ or /det/ for what Japanese
speakers tend to pronounce /zat/ and Koreans /zet/, namely, what most monolingual
speakers pronounce /thaet /.
55 I would add “and biculturalism” to “English knowing bilingualism”.6Singaporeans can and do speak Singlish, a variety of English entirely appropriate socially and culturally appropriate. However, the Singapore government (supported by the British Council) has instigated a campaign against Singlish since 1999, calling it “broken, ungrammatical English” and “a handicap we must not wish on Singaporeans” (cf. Yoneoka 2000 for references). The name itself of this “Speak Good English” campaign demonstrates the value judgment handed down by the government on the variety of English of the majority of its people.
17/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 18 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
Needless to say, such intercultural and interlinguistic sensitivity should be part of the
monolingual English speaker’s curriculum as well as the bilingual one. For native English
speakers, this is not simply a question of “what’s good for the goose is good for the
gander”, but rather a lesson in mutual respect and understanding that cannot be achieved
heuristically in monocultural societies, or even in monocultural neighborhoods in
multicultural cities. Here it must be realized that multicultural neighborhoods have a
natural advantage— if everyday interaction between ethnicities is not based on mutual
sensitivity and respect, people learn the hard way that disaster is bound to result.
Although it is true that subjects such as cross-cultural communication and applied
comparative linguistics are indeed receiving more attention than before in native English
speaking countries, many monolinguals still have a long way to go before they can truly
live together harmoniously in a multicultural society.
6. Conclusions
The multicultural language system known collectively as “English” has earned a
place in the mouths of millions through a number of factors, ranging from hard work and
innovation to brute force and oppression. It is a position of considerable envy for other
languages, and yet one that anyone who has taken the time and trouble to learn English,
or had the luck to be born into it, would not want to see disappear. In many countries it is
an elected language, selected because of its power both in the world and at home. As
people vote for presidents or prime ministers, so they voted for English. Thus the position
18/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 19 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
is also one of responsibility to these people—to respect their human rights and be
sensitive to their causes.
There are at least two specific causes that may be addressed. One of these is the
right to speak one’s own variety of English. Too often, well-meaning but insensitive native
speakers (of any language) will voluntarily “correct” an accent rather than listen to it.7
This may be perfectly appropriate in a situation where the L2 speaker is a self-declared
“learner” and wishes to be corrected, but it may be out of place when a speaker is trying to
express an opinion or elicit information. In such a situation it is more likely to produce
resentment than gratitude, and it is thus imperative to understand the attitude “my accent
represents who I am, meddle with my pronunciation and you meddle with my identity.”
(Pakir 1999: 110)8
Alternatively, some native speakers may sometimes even try to opt out of a
conversation rather than try to decode a differing accentual system (see Varonis and
Gass, 1982). The prospect of having to repeat “Pardon?” many times may be scary
and/or annoying to some native speakers, but it should be realized that this is a natural
part of conversation between people of different varieties. L2 speakers (of any language)
know this, and understand it in others—monolingual speakers (of any language) tend to
have more difficulties learning this lesson. Running away from intervarietal
77 I have even heard stories of NNS speakers of US English being corrected by British English speakers, and vice versa.8Pakir (1999:110) puts it this way: “The term accent reduction comes from a particular paradigm in which ESL teachers feel responsible for changing the speech habits of learners of English. Why not consider another term that could possibly come from the perspective of those who teach and do research in the ESL world: accent addition?”
19/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 20 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
communication situations, however, does not solve problems, and may even be
misinterpreted as discrimination.
Championing the cause of respect for the non-native accent could mean, more than
anything, reeducating the native speaker. Ngugi (1993: 114-115) suggests “Couldn’t
decolonizing the mind be a task as much for Europeans as Africans?” Indeed, perhaps
even more so.
The second cause is the right to cultural identity and multilinguism. Advocates of
English Only in the United States argue that the best way to govern a country is
monolingually. Whether this is true or not for the United States, it is certainly not the way
for every country in the world (again Singapore provides an excellent counterexample)
and extending this theory to a global level would result in a tragic loss of other languages.
Indeed, it already has had devastating effects on thousands of minority languages in the
US and elsewhere. Rather than condone such losses, or even stand to one side and
mourn them, it is the responsibility of those in power to actively support plurality of
language, culture and identity.
The language planners of the world, when promoting the English system, must do
so with a spirit of acceptance and a healthy respect for those cultures who buy into it. If
so, English had a good chance of maintaining influence in spite of power shifts, because
of the lack of a better multicultural alternative. If not, the 21st century will go down in
history as the one in which the ELT empire died, and English along with it.
Bibliography
20/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 21 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
Abbott, G. (1991) "English across cultures: the Kachru catch". English Today 7,4:55-57.
Brown, A. (1989) "Models, standards, targets/goals and norms in pronunciation teaching", World Englishes, 8:2, p. 193-200.
Crystal, D. (1985) "How many millions? The statistics of English today” English Today 1:1.
Crystal, D. (1997) English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dutcher, N. (with the collaboration of G. Richard Tucker (1997-undated).) The Use of First and Second Languages in Education: A Review of International Experience. Pacific Islands Discussion Paper Series, 1. East Asia and Pacific Region, Country Department III. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Graddol, D. (1997). The future of English? London: British Council.Kachru, B. (1986) The alchemy of English: The spread, functions and models of
non-native Englishes. Oxford: Pergammon Press.Kachru, B. (1996). World Englishes: Agony and ecstacy. Journal of Aestetic
Education 30, 135-155.Kachru, B. (1997). World Englishes and English-using communities. Annual review
of applied Linguistics. 17: 66-87. Kachru, B. (1992) "Models for Non-Native Englishes" in Kachru, B. The Other
Tongue: English across Cultures, 2nd Ed. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, p. 48-74..
Kachru, B. (1994) "Englishization and contact linguistics", World Englishes 3:2, p. 135-154.
Kachru, B. and C. Nelson (1996) "World Englishes" in McKay, S. L. and N. H. Hornberger, Sociolinguistics and Language Teaching, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 71-102.
Kaplan, Robert B. (1987) "English in the language policy of the Pacific Rim", World Englishes 6:2, p. 137-148.
Lowenberg, Peter H. (1992) "Testing English as a World Language: Issues in Assessing Non-Native Proficiency" in Kachru, B. (1992), The Other Tongue: English across Cultures, 2nd Ed. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, p. 108-121.
21/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 22 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
Nayar, P.B. (1994) Whose English is It? Tesl-EJ 1:1 available www.kyoto-su.ac.jp/information/tesl-ej/ej01/f.1.html
Ngugi(tildes over u and I) wa, T. (1993). Moving the Centre. The Struggle for Cultural Freedoms. London: James Currey, Nairobi: EAEP, Porsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Pakir, A. (1999). Connecting with English in the Context of Internationalization, TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 33, No. 1, p. 103-114.
Pennycook, A. (1994) The cultural politics of English as an international language. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
Philipson, R.. and Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (1996) English only worldwide or language ecology? TESOL Quarterly 30/3: 429-52.
Phillipson, R. (1999) Voice in Global English: Unheard Chords in Crystal Loud and Clear, Applied Linguistics 20/2: 265-276.
Smith, Larry E. and Khalilullah Rafiqzad (1979) "English for Cross-Cultural Communication: the Question of Intelligibility", in Tesol Quarterly, 13:3, p. 371-380.
Smith, Larry E. (1992) "Spread of English and Issues of Intelligibility" in Kachru, B. (ed.), The Other Tongue: English across Cultures, 2nd Ed. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Sridhar, Kamil K. (1985) Review of " Readings in English as an International Language", Smith, Larry (ed.) in RELC Journal 16:1 p. 101-106.
Strevens, P. (1992) "English as an International Language", in Kachru, B. (ed.), The Other Tongue: English across Cultures, 2nd Ed. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Taylor, David S. (1991) "Who speaks English to Whom? The Question of Teaching English Pronunciation for Global Communication", System 19:4, pp. 425-435.
Trudgill, Peter and Jean Hannah (1994) International English: A Guide to the Varieties of Standard English, 3rd ed., New York: Routledge, Chapman and Hall.
Tsuda, Y. (1994) “The diffusion of English: Its impact on culture and communication. Keio Communication Review 16: 49-61.
Urban, M. Esperanto: Frequently Asked Questions, available http://www.esperanto.net/veb/faq-5.html, 2000.
Varonis, E. and S. Gass (1982) "The Comprehensibility of Non-Native Speech", Studies in Second Language Acquisition 4:2 pp 114-136.
22/2305/07/23
THE NECESSITY OF ENGLISHES FOR THE FUTURE OF ENGLISH
Page 23 05/07/23 Judy Yoneoka
Yoneoka, J. (1999) Towards the 21st century: Goals and Obstacles in English Education in Japan, Kumamoto Gakuen Daigaku Sogo Kagaku 5 ー 2 .
Yoneoka, J. (1998) Non-Standard English Teachers in ESL Education: In Defense of the "Different" English Accent, Kumamoto Gakuen Daigaku Sogo Kagaku
23/2305/07/23