Attitudes to World Englishes

Implications for teaching English in South Korea

Hyejeong Ahn

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781315394282
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Languages & Linguistics
• Subtopic: Linguistics
• Index: Languages & Linguistics

This book critically examines South Korean English teachers' awareness of and attitude towards eight varieties of English and how they respond to the proposal of a World Englishes approach in their teaching practice. It showcases the deeply rooted favouritism towards American English and illustrates how relevant challenges arising from this attitude can be addressed to meet the changing needs of future participants in international contexts. This book argues that disclosing and questioning the hidden discursive practices embedded in the English education policy in South Korea may be the first step in raising awareness of and in changing negative attitudes towards embracing diversified Englishes. The findings are systemically discussed in relation to the implications that researching awareness and attitude has for pedagogical considerations and for teacher training. This book aims to contribute to the field of WE, where studies relating to the South Korean context are largely limited.

1
World Englishes

Changes in language occur over time, resulting in modifications of phonological, lexical, syntactic, semantic, pragmatic and other diachronic shifts. At any given moment a language, and English is no exception, also has variation within itself amongst different communities of its speakers, and this variety is known as synchronic variation (Saussure, 1966). Kachru (1988) argues that there are two kinds of language contact situations involving English. The first is where there are changes to the local language due to the influence of English, which is termed ‘Englishisation’. The second is the nativisation of English, which occurs when the English language undergoes linguistic assimilation with features of the local language. He introduces the field of World Englishes and provides arguably one of the most critical and influential models describing the diversified spread of the English language globally. The first edition of The Other Tongue by Kachru (1982) outlines aspects of variations in English languages and their demographic spread. Since the publication of the book, studies of World Englishes have been undertaken extensively, discovering that the English language has been proven to be one of the most hybrid and rapidly changing languages in the world (Bolton, 2003; Graddol, 2000, 2006; Jenkins, 2009b, 2015; Kirkpatrick, 2007b, 2010b; Kirkpatrick & Sussex, 2012; Mufwene, 1996; Schneider, 2003, 2014b; Xu, 2010b).

1.1 Three Concentric Circles

The pioneer scholar of World Englishes, Kachru (1982), challenges the traditional view of English as a language of a particular country. Instead he advocates a pluri-centric conception of English and so developed the controversial ‘Concentric Circles’ model, marking pluralisation of English to describe the social reality of diversified users and varieties of English. His model comprises three circles: Inner Circle, Outer Circle and Expanding Circles (Kachru, 1992b). The three circles ‘represent the types of spread, the patterns of acquisition, and the functional allocation of English in a diverse cultural context’ (Kachru, 1992b, p. 356). The Inner Circle consists of countries such as the United Kingdom (UK), the United States of America (USA) and Australia, where English is used as the primary language and the mother tongue. A major characteristic of the varieties spoken in these countries is largely that they are ‘endonormative’ (Banjo, 1993, p. 261) in that they find within themselves the norms of correctness and appropriateness to be propagated through their own language. In the Outer Circle countries, English has been institutionalised as an additional language. This circle includes countries such as India, Singapore and the Philippines. Typically, these countries came under British or American colonial administration before acceding to independence. English in these countries continues to be used for intra-ethnic communication in various social, educational and administrative domains. Finally, the Expanding Circle includes the rest of the world, including France, South Korea, Russia and Brazil, where English is mainly used as a foreign language. Generally, English in the Expanding Circle is not widely spoken for communicative purposes but extensively taught within the education system. Educators and policy makers in the Expanding Circle countries have traditionally preferred AmE or BrE as target models of English education (Bruthiaux, 2003; Kirkpatrick, 2007a; Matsuda, 2003a, 2003b; McKay, 2002).

Within the Concentric Circles model, Kachru broadly categorises diversified English varieties into three types: ‘norm providing’, ‘norm developing’ and ‘norm dependent’ (Kachru, 1992b, p. 5). Firstly, the norm-providing varieties, so-called native varieties (Kirkpatrick, 2007a, p. 6), are found in the Inner Circle countries. Amongst these native varieties, AmE and BrE are considered most appropriate and are attitudinally preferred varieties (Kachru, 1992b; Kirkpatrick, 2007a). Kachru (1982) argues that there have been attitudes of unquestioning support for AmE and BrE varieties of English, believed to be the only varieties of English to be taught and promoted. Consequently, this notion inevitably marginalised ‘other’ Englishes and treated them as ‘somewhat undesirable’ to be used. Secondly, the norm-developing varieties, also called nativised varieties, are found in the Outer Circle. Kachru (1992a) notes that, amongst the users of these varieties, ‘there is confusion between linguistic norm and linguistic performance’ (p. 5). Despite the fact that the linguistic performance of an Indian English speaker from an Outer Circle community allows for successful communication, it is not considered as the ‘norm’. Therefore, the speaker’s linguistic behaviour is not considered appropriate. Kachru (1992a) argues that there are widespread perceptions amongst the users of Outer Circle varieties that ‘native varieties’ are superior to their own, which therefore, should not be promoted. The norm-developing varieties are low on attitudinal scale, although they may be widely used in various functions. A number of studies, however, have suggested that there is a gradual shift amongst the speakers of Outer Circle Englishes from exonormative to endonormative (linguistically self-reliance) attitudes, and the realisation of linguistic independence of nativised varieties has been occurring (Bruthiaux, 2003; Jenkins, 2006a, 2009a, 2009b). The third category of English that Kachru presents is the norm-dependent varieties that are found in the Expanding Circle countries. It is often believed that the norms of these Englishes come from external sources, often being either AmE or BrE varieties (Bruthiaux, 2003; Matsuda, 2003a, 2009).

1.2 Identification of the paradigm of marginality

Kachru’s three circles model identifies not only the diversified Englishes and their multiple users by referring to the Inner Circle, Outer Circle and Expanding Circle but also the ideological issues concerning attitudes and biased perceptions towards varieties of the English language. It has been argued that these biased perceptions largely come from the concept of ideal speaker-hearers in a linguistically homogenous society (Chomsky, 1965) and that linguistic competence, when it deviates from ideal competence, is considered as erroneous (James, 1998) or as interlanguage (Selinker, 1992).

World Englishes scholars claim that this notion is based only on a short-sighted view of the English-speaking community, seeing itself as completely homogenous. Thus it is no longer valid or applicable in the dynamic and multilingual reality (Jenkins, 2009a; Kachru, 1982; Kirkpatrick, 2007a, 2007b, 2008). Kachru (1996) calls this the ideology of ‘paradigms of marginality’ (p. 243), explaining that it severely neglects the inclusion of the complexities of multilingual language behaviour. Kachru expands the ‘paradigm of marginality’ into three phenomena that explain the critical issues related to these complexities: ‘paradigm myopia’, ‘paradigm lag’ and ‘paradigm misconnection’ (Kachru, 1996, p. 243).

The term ‘paradigm myopia’ represents the traditional assumption that English-speaking communities are monolingual societies. Kachru (1996) claims that this traditional assumption is based on the notion of an English-speaking community as a completely homogenous one. He proposes that such a notion is a ‘short-sighted view of the fast-increasing English speech community in the new contexts of diasporas’ (p. 242) and that it is no longer valid and applicable in a dynamic and multilingual reality.

The second notion, ‘paradigm lag’, indicates attitudes towards and resistance to the linguistic and sociolinguistic context of multilingualism. Kachru asserts that these attitudinally loaded symptoms are particularly evident in English language teaching practices, which view linguistic creativities as ‘error’, ‘fossilisation’ and ‘interference’ (Kachru, 1996, p. 244). The use of the first language (L1) (including Outer Circle Englishes) in second language (L2) teaching is seen as essentially hazardous for English acquisition and thus needs to be restricted. Kirkpatrick (2007a) also accurately contends that the choice of the English language teaching industry has long been based on the belief that Inner Circle varieties of English are somehow superior to Outer Circle Englishes and are regarded as the authoritative standard. Therefore, the speakers of these varieties are considered to be the most desirable teachers. With this paradigm lag, a great majority of students are inevitably disadvantaged as their choice of target model is unattainable, thus a lack of native speaker proficiency has been seen as a sign of poor competence (Takeshita, 2000). It has been reported, for example, that Japanese students’ passive attitudes in using English for international communication is associated with their feeling of shame at not being able to speak English to what is believed to be the level of target model speakers (Kubota, 1999). In addition, governments, ministries and employers, particularly those in the Outer and Expanding Circle countries, need to recognise not only the counter productiveness of the paradigm lag but also the advantages associated with multilingual local teachers who are expert users of English. Instead of classifying these multilingual local English teachers as somehow inferior to Inner Circle English speaking teachers, these teachers should be held up as strong linguistic role models for their students. The policy of employing an untrained and monolingual Inner Circle variety of English speaker as English language teachers should be systematically discouraged by the profession, and Kirkpatrick argues that well-trained, multilingual, culturally sensitive and sophisticated teachers are the best choice for teaching today’s learners of English (2007a, 2007b, 2008, 2009).

The implications of the counter productiveness of the paradigm lag are particularly serious because they condition attitudes towards speakers of other Englishes. This leads to the third phenomenon, known as ‘paradigm misconnection.’ Paradigm misconnection represents the gap between a hypothesis, the sociolinguistic context and the historical realities of language use. In other words, there is a clear gap between the common assumptions and the realities of the sociolinguistic aspects of the English language. Kachru (1991) notes that such concerns, expressed by McArthur (1987) and Quirk (1990a, 1990b) on the issues of the world’s need for a ‘standard variation’ of English in Quirk’s notion of English as a second language (ESL) and English as a foreign language (EFL) countries, are a clear indication of the paradigm gap. Quirk (1990a) upholds standards in the use of English and argues that the tolerance for variation in language use is an educationally damaging practice. Therefore, he believes that a standard should be warranted in all contexts of English use. Kachru, on the other hand, argues that the international spread of English use has led to changes in the reality of English use and has given birth to diversified Englishes around the world, thus leading to a need to re-examine traditional notions of standardisation. Kachru (1996, p. 30) argues that an understanding of the paradigm of marginalities with recognition of its three unfortunate products, paradigm myopia, paradigm lag and paradigm misconnection, is essential. He also stresses the need for pedagogical research into linguistic creativities in multilingual situations across cultures and for a new paradigm that accepts the multicultural and multilingual communities of English-speaking contexts.

1.3 The implications of the Concentric Circle model

Kachru’s three Concentric Circles model has made a significant contribution to the research of English language in a number of ways (Kachru, 1982). Firstly, it has promoted an awareness of varieties of English and engendered a large number of critical debates about the traditional view of English language as the language of particular countries. It has also significantly helped shift negative perceptions of varieties of English which are other than the Inner Circle varieties. In addition, the model has critically represented the realities of English language communication situations, advocating the recognition that differing varieties of English would not lead to a lack of intelligibility and, therefore, should not be treated as deficient. This notion is also supported by Kirkpatrick’s argument that ‘all Englishes are precisely different from each other and they are all nativised in the sense that they reflect their own culture’ (Kirkpatrick, 2007b, p. 7). As English has become widely used as a global language, it is expected that through English, speakers will signal their nationality and other aspects of their identity. Therefore, there is little justification for assuming that the native varieties are somehow better and purer than the nativised varieties.

Further, the model has critical implications for the widely cited theory of Linguistic Imperialism by Phillipson (1992). Phillipson contributes to the discussion of the deleterious effects of English on the development of other languages. In the Linguistic Imperialism theory, the widespread use of English would systematically and gradually threaten languages, starting from languages used by relatively few people with their associated cultures and ways of thinking to the languages of larger populations. English, in Phillipson’s theory, is accused of being a killer language which works as a messenger bringing Anglo cultural norms to other cultures. Phillipson’s theory won many followers as it did, at that time, accurately account for the widespread use of English. However, with the understanding of how new Englishes in norm-providing and norm-dependent contexts had accommodated local cultures, the accusation of English being a killer language in Phillipson’s (1992) theory may now be no longer applicable. Pennycook (2006, 2007) further elaborates that English as a means of global communication, across space, borders, communities and nations, has become so rapidly localised, indigenised and recreated in the local that it is far less clear than it might appear what it means to say something in English. Brutt-Griffler (2002) argues that English has become a world language with a multicultural identity created largely by speakers belonging to non-mother tongue English speech communities. The speakers in these communities are no longer passive recipients of a language policy. Instead, they claim to have linguistic control of the English language. For example, African speakers can express their African experience in English. New Englishes can allow them to express their own messages best without altering the weight of their African experience. Modiano (2001) also contends that cultural imposition as a result of English language learning is likely to occur, a view that has been supported by Pennycook (1989), who argues that the continuation of the cultural discourse of colonialism through English language use may no longer be justifiable. The notion of the ‘worldliness of English’, proposed by Pennycook (1994), argues that English enables its users from many cultures to express and negotiate their voices and disperse their knowledge in far broader communities as well as gaining the possibility of achieving international reach.

1.4 Limitations of the three Concentric Circles model

There is little doubt that Kachru’s three Concentric Circles model has been highly influential and contributed greatly to our understanding of the sociolinguistic realities of the spread of English. However, despite its influence on many scholars, the validity of the model has been questioned, particularly in relation to the way countries are categorised. In this section, three fundamental limitations are discussed.

1.4.1 Conceptual inconsistency

Conceptual inconsistency is found in the manner in which the circles are divided. Kachru (1982) himself notes that grouping nations in the model based on the countries’ shared colonial history may have overlooked important sociolinguistic aspects of each country listed in the circle. Although the nations grouped in the same circle may share a similar colonial history, the ways English is used and the roles of Englishes in these countries are vastly different from each other (Bruthiaux, 2003; Rajadurai, 2005). For example, in Outer Circle countries like Nigeria and Singapore, English is widely used in a variety of official and unofficial roles not only for education and administration but also for internal communication across ethnic groups. In contrast, Hong Kong, also listed in the Outer Circle, has little need for English as a tool for internal communication and tends to limit its use to administrative and educational functions. In addition, a number of countries not formally recorded as having a colonial history are strategically omitted in the circles and leave some grey areas that are not mutually exclusive (Rajadurai, 2005, p. 113). Thus, the positioning of some countries that are not strictly comparable, like South Africa and many other countries in the region of South Africa, is difficult. It is argued that the model’s establishment on political and colonial history as opposed to sociolinguistic considerations is inconsistent, and thus it fails to account for the complex use of English worldwide (Bruthiaux, 2003).

1.4.2 Classification difficulties

Due to the rapidly changing nature of English-speaking contexts in the globalised world, the boundaries separating these circles have become less distinct, making it more difficult to find countries that can be accurately classified as Expanding Circle, Outer Circle or Inner Circle (Ahn, 2013; McKay & Bokhorst-Heng, 2008; Sharifian & Clyne, 2008). According to Crystal (1997), the majority of English speakers today are derived from the Outer Circle and Expanding Circles, with greater than 80% of communication in English presently occurring in the absence of Inner Circle speakers. Current English-speaking contexts where there are a large number of interactions between speakers from each circle are drastically different from what Kachru predicted. A great number of speakers from Outer Circle and Expanding Circle countries now live in Inner Circle countries, such as the USA and Australia, and many speakers from the Inner Circle live in the Outer Circle and the Expanding Circle countries.

In addition, the categorisation of ESL speakers as being from the Outer Circle and EFL speakers as being placed in the Expanding Circle is now not as clear-cut as it formerly had seemed to be. Several countries in the Expanding Circle are increasingly moving away from dependency on traditionally viewed varieties of English. For example, English-speaking contexts in European countries, traditionally seen as Expanding Circle countries, are becoming more like Outer Circle countries where English is widely used in daily interaction (Graddol, 2006). In addition, city dwellers in Expanding Circle countries have more need and opportunities to use English compared to their rural counterparts in the Outer Circle. Furthermore, multilingual cities are developing new linguistic landsca...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• 1 World Englishes
• 2 Overview of eight varieties of English
• 3 Language and attitude
• 4 English education in South Korea
• 5 Measuring attitudes to varieties of English
• 6 Englishes? Awareness of varieties of English
• 7 Attitudes towards Inner Circle Englishes
• 8 Attitudes towards Asian Englishes
• 9 Attitudes towards Korean English
• 10 Preferred teaching models and pedagogical implications
• 11 Pedagogical implications
• 12 Further suggestions
• References
• Appendices
• Index