The Linguistics Journal September 2009 Special Edition Language

Recommendations

Info

Example 10 The Linguistics Journal – September 2009 46. FR: oh ah just when I was waiting for you right they are like outside there is like 47. this podium and girls dancing singing 48. PL: where outside of MBK it’s a cos play right 49. FR: I don’t think so 50. PL: Japanese cos play 51. FR: I don’t think so 52. PL: oh it’s not (cool) 53. FR: no it isn’t cause my friend my student would be there they’re are crazy about 54. cos play 55. PL: yeah my roommate too . yeah These examples offer an impression of how the research participants characterise cultures and their relationships to English for them. It shows how for many of them cultures are not clearly identifiable and bounded entities, but rather mixed, hybrid and constantly undergoing change. The cultural references, forms and practices expressed through English are not tied to any one culture. Instead the relationships between ELF and its cultural contexts are in-situ, hybrid and liminal, or to paraphrase Nami, ‘open’ and unconstrained. Thus, from these participants we can gain an insight into how Kramsch’s third places manifest themselves for ELF users in Asia. Identity and ELF Notions of identity are clearly closely related to those of culture. Cultural identity is one of many identities which can be drawn on in intercultural communication. Furthermore, the primary role language plays in creating and expressing identity has been well documented (see for example Joseph, 2004). Post-structuralist conceptions of identity and its relationships to cultures and language (Sarup, 1996) remind us that identities are changeable and always in formation rather than inherited and static. Furthermore, we all hold multiple identities which may or may not co-exist comfortably. Thus, contradiction and fracture are also a significant feature of identity. People may chose different group associations in different situations, which it may sometimes be acceptable to hold simultaneously but at other times not. Pavlenko and Lantolf (2000) in examining the writing of immigrants, suggest that in learning a new language in order to become part of a new culture it may be necessary to ‘give up’ or replace aspect of the original cultural identity to be accepted as a ‘native speaker’. This also reminds us that identity depends on two dimensions: an individual identifying with a grouping and being accepted The Linguistics Journal – Special Edition Page 22
The Linguistics Journal – September 2009 by the members of that group as part of the group. However, users of an L2 may also reject the identities or roles allocated them by L1, ‘native speakers’ and create new or alternative identities (Norton, 2000; Duff, 2002). Turning to L2/FL cultures, identities and language, as already suggested, do not exist in a straight forward correlation. In many cases of foreign language learning the users of a language such as English have no desire to give up their original L1 identities and any attempt to question or undermine L1 nationalist identities may be viewed as politically threatening (Byram, 2008a). It is also true that in many contexts of English language learning and use, including Asia, the users have no desire to become ‘native speakers’ of the language. Rather, as definitions of ELF suggest, the aim is to be able to communicate successfully through English with people from many other cultures both regionally and globally. However, this situation results in a number of difficulties or contradictions. Although NES are in the minority in ELF communication in Asia, the ideal of the native speaker model is still heavily promoted in Asia (Adamson, 2006; Baker, 2008a; Jenkins, 2007; Kachru, 2005; Patil, 2006; Toh, 2003; Watson-Todd, 2006). Yet, as has been argued throughout this article, this model is inappropriate to the communicative reality and needs of ELF users. Furthermore, the type of identity changes needed to be accepted as a NES, would be both inappropriate and undesirable for ELF users who have no intention of residing in an English speaking country. Nevertheless, as Jenkins’ (2007) study revealed, attitudes towards NES as the ideal to which all speakers should aim are still mixed. Many participants in her study, which covered a number of Asian countries, still rated NES accents as the most desirable in terms of ‘correctness and intelligibility’. However, Jenkins also proposes that English teachers’ identities in expanding circle settings are often in conflict or contradiction. There is an orientation towards native speaker norms as a desirable goal, particularly from a professional standpoint, while simultaneously many teachers are also proud of L1 identities expressed through English and view themselves as “going in between” (Jenkins, 2007: 230) or having ‘negotiated identities’. Another perceived difficulty with ELF is that if the NES is removed as the model for all language use then no agreement will be possible on shared communication norms. While there is not the space here to deal with all the ramifications of this argument, in relation to identity a number of alternatives can be put forward. If English language learning is no longer to be associated with particular peoples and The Linguistics Journal – Special Edition Page 23
Page 1 and 2: The Linguistics Journal - September
Page 17 and 18: Example 4 The Linguistics Journal -
Page 21: The Linguistics Journal - September
Page 37 and 38: 1. Introduction The Linguistics Jou
Page 73 and 74:
The Linguistics Journal - September
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Procedure The Linguistics Journal -
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Pro bono eorum: The Linguistics Jou
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
show all

The Linguistics Journal September 2009 Special Edition Language

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?