As I completed the readings this week, I was struck by all the potential implications that English as a lingua franca (ELF) can have on English language instruction. In “The Cultures of English as a Lingua Franca,” Baker points out that English has moved beyond a single target language and culture to encompass a variety of cultures and communicative skills. In fact, “English-native-speaker pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary choice are inappropriate in lingua franca settings” (568)! Baker also claims that English is no longer strongly connected to the culture of traditional English-speaking countries. For this reason, it’s important for English teachers to recognize that English language learners often use English as a medium of communication with people who are members of multiple cultures and discourse communities. Baker gives the example of Nami, who does not follow native English speaker conventions but instead constructs her own conventions as “those of a ‘new generation’ in Thailand” (579). This example made me think of my Korean friends who have adapted English to allow them to express their culture through what they term “Konglish.” They might directly translate titles of respect, saying “my senior” to refer to an older classmate, or address a teacher as “Teacher” instead of “Ms. So-and-so.” Sometimes they might even create non-standard English vocabulary, such as “skinship” (the act of being “touchy-feely”). I think it’s important for English teachers to recognize these non-standard uses of English as serving specific communicative purposes. We can’t label these uses of English as definitively right or wrong because they depend on cultural communicative practices; however, we can help students critically analyze the language they are using and determine which types of language might be appropriate in various settings.
Marra’s article, “Recording and Analysing Talk Across Cultures,” sheds light on how the teacher as researcher can function in an ELF classroom. Marra’s research methodology reflects the importance of “insider knowledge when interpreting interaction” (316). In addition, Marra recognizes that effective communication depends heavily on the context; therefore, her research has to be conducted in “a way which is culturally framed, and which acknowledges a Maori worldview” (309). Just as an understanding of culture is necessary for Marra to interpret her data, I believe an understanding of students’ cultures and unique uses of English is necessary for teachers to interpret communication with students.
McKay and Bokhorst-Heng address further implications of ELF, stating that grammatical and phonological features of ELF differ from those of traditional standard English (160-162). ELF speakers are beginning to abandon small parts of English grammar that do not affect meaning. For example, they might drop the third person present tense –s, omit articles, overuse common verbs, etc. These grammatical changes don’t usually affect understanding; however, ELF speakers are more likely to have communication breakdowns due to pronunciation differences. For this reason, McKay and Bokhorst-Heng suggest addressing language functions, such as asking for clarification or repetition. I agree that these types of language functions are foundational for English language learners, and I hope to incorporate them into the first few lessons of English courses that I teach—particularly the classes with students who speak a variety of L1s.
Question: Keeping in mind that English is a lingua franca, does anyone have any ideas about how we can practically adapt lessons to meet different language goals of students? (For example, in a single classroom, there could be students who want to learn English for international business with other non-native speakers, students who want to study abroad, students who want to use English to travel internationally, etc.)
No comments:
Post a Comment