intelligibility in world eglishes

8/9/2019 Intelligibility in World Eglishes

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intelligibility-in-world-eglishes 1/13

World Englishes, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 404–416, 2012. 0883-2919

REVIEWS

Intelligibility in World Englishes: Theory and Application. C.L. Nelson New York and London: Routledge, 2011, xiii + 134pp.

Reviewed by BETH ZIELINSKI∗

English is used in a variety of contexts worldwide. Individuals have different reasons for learning English, and teachers from a range of cultural and linguistic backgrounds find themselves teaching English in increasingly diverse contexts. Regardless of the context,however, the ultimate aim of any interaction in English is successful communication.Teachers of English, in any given context, therefore need an understanding of how to

develop their learners’ ability to communicate successfully with a range of people in avariety of contexts relevant to the learners themselves. This book provides an importantstarting point for this understanding by presenting a theoretical framework for intelligibility,a construct considered by the author to be the “central criterion for effective language use”(p. 46). The author presents this framework – the Smith framework – as a useful way toconceptualize written or spoken intelligibility in the context of world Englishes.

Ch. 1 (pp. 1–27) provides the reader with background information about the complexnature of intelligibility in the context of world Englishes and gives the reader an apprecia-tion of the potential difficulties facing anyone who teaches English in different situationsaround the world. The Smith framework is introduced as a way of studying the compati-

bility of different Englishes and establishing priorities for teaching and learning them indifferent contexts. It is then explained further in ch. 2 (pp. 28–47). The Smith framework conceptualizes language use as involving three levels of increasing complexity: intelligibil-ity, comprehensibility and interpretability. Intelligibility refers to the recognition of wordsand utterances we hear or see; comprehensibility to the understanding of the meaning of those words and utterances; and interpretability to the recognition of their intent or purpose.The combination of these components is seen to result in successful communication. Eachlevel is seen as important in its own right, but failure in one may not necessarily result incommunication breakdown.

Ch. 3 (pp. 48–68) provides the reader with insight into the changing nature and hy-

bridity of world Englishes and the implications for intelligibility, and ch. 4 (pp. 69–80)reviews terms and frameworks used by other researchers in the field and considers howthey compare to the Smith framework terminology. The final two chapters focus on theimplications for teaching (ch. 5, pp. 81–97) and future research (ch. 6, pp. 98–111). Topicsfor discussion and assignments as well as suggestions for further reading are included atthe end of each chapter.

The author indicates that the book is for students (graduate and advanced undergraduate)and investigators of world Englishes, as well as English teachers and teacher educators. Itcertainly does provide this audience with important information about the complex nature

∗

Department of Linguistics, 5th

Floor, Building C5A Room 508, Macquarie University, NSW 2109, Australia. E-mail: [email protected]

C 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd



Reviews 405

of English use, learning and teaching in the context of world Englishes, and also explores auseful framework in which to consider the different components of effective language use,whatever the circumstances might be. The author also provides examples to demonstratethe usefulness of a framework in categorizing different aspects of language use, whether we are considering a pedagogical issue or sociolinguistic profiling of interactions between

particular individuals or groups.The importance of such a framework is particularly evident when reading and interpret-

ing research related to intelligibility. As pointed out by the author in ch. 4, intelligibilityhas been defined in a range of different ways in the literature, and different terms such asintelligibility, comprehensibility, and understanding , have been used interchangeably byresearchers in the field. From a personal point of view, an earlier version of this framework (see Smith and Nelson 1985) was instrumental in facilitating my understanding of researchin the area by enabling me to understand what different researchers were investigating and measuring regardless of the terms they used. It also provided me with an understanding of what it was that I wanted to investigate and how I might go about doing so. Interestingly,

however, despite his criticism of other researchers’ use of terms in ch. 4, the author of the present book uses the term intelligibility in two different ways throughout the book.Although he discusses the difference between intelligibility-in-general and intelligibilityas a component of intelligibility-in-general , he uses the same term for both, and I found myself confused at times as to which he was referring to.

This book also provides a starting point for the enormous amount of research that isneeded to understand the complexity of intelligibility in the context of world Englishes.Although the author demonstrates the usefulness of the Smith framework at a theoreticallevel, the practical implications in many situations are yet to be determined. For example,

because of the highly interdependent nature of the different components of the Smith

framework, what might seem like a straightforward distinction in theory may be difficultto measure in practice. Thus, researchers might find it difficult to measure intelligibilityas separate from comprehensibility because listeners will use what is a natural processof listening and refer to the meaning and context of an utterance to identify difficultwords within it. There is also a need for further research on how this theoretical framework relates to practical guidelines as to how teachers in different contexts might work with their learners to improve their intelligibility in ways that are relevant to their situation. Ch. 5,which is described by the author in the preface as having a “focus on guiding learners inachieving intelligibility across varieties” covers the area in very general terms only, and tends to focus on what not to do as a teacher, rather than on practical advice on what might

be advantageous to their particular learners. Thus, the teacher in the Nigerian school givenas an example in ch. 5 (p. 83) might understand that British English is not an appropriatemodel to teach his students because not only is it irrelevant for them in their particular context, but it is a model that he himself does not use freely outside of the classroom.However, there is as yet little research to guide him as to what is appropriate to teach inthis situation.

Another area of research that warrants investigation is how the Smith framework con-tributes to our understanding of the dimension of comprehensibility used by Derwingand Munro (see Derwing and Munro, 2009 for an overview). Derwing and Munro definecomprehensibility as the listener’s perception of how easy or difficult a speaker is to un-derstand, which potentially involves components similar to those involved in the conceptof intelligibility-in-general discussed by the present author.




406 Reviews

Some readers may object to the dogmatic manner in which the author expresses hisviews at times, and consequently he may not effectively reach the very audience he istrying to influence. However, the book raises important issues related to intelligibility inthe context of world Englishes and provides an excellent knowledge base and starting pointfor important research to enhance our understanding of this complex topic.

REFERENCES

Derwing, Tracy M., and Munro, Murray, J. (2009) Putting accent in its place: Rethinking obstacles to communication. Language Teaching 42, 476–90.

Smith, Larry E., and Nelson, Cecil, L. (1985) International intelligibility of English: Directions and resources. World Englishes 4, 333–42.

(Received 30 February 2012)

Young Learner English Language Policy and Implementation: International Perspectives.Edited by Janet Enever, Jayne Moon and Uma Raman. Reading: Garnet Publishing Ltd.,2009, i + 248 pp.

Reviewed by SHIH-YU CHANG∗

The fact that English learning has penetrated deeply into primary school education isneither surprising nor new. The myth “the earlier the better”, and some peculiar phenomenagenerated from it, such as teaching English in primary schools in spite of the absence of trained English teachers or adequate resources, are addressed in this book. The introductionof English education early in the curriculum has become a trend if not a competition

between countries where English is not spoken as a first language.Young Learner English Language Policy and Implementation: International Perspec-

tives is a selection of conference papers presented in Bangalore, India in January 2008.The conference was organized by the International Association of Teachers of Englishas a Foreign Language (IATEFL) Young Learners Special Interest Group and the BritishCouncil, and had as its theme “The way forward: Learning from international experience of TEYL (Teaching English to Young Learners)”. As stated in the introduction by the editors(p. 3), the purpose of this book is to provide guidance to decision-makers at governmentalministry levels who plan to implement an early start in teaching English to young learners.

This book is organized into three main parts: “Keynote talks”, “National case studies”,and “Innovations, experiments, projects”. The foreword (p. 1), written by Barbara Hewittof the British Council, identifies the purpose of the book as to serve as an essential

reading for those who want to introduce early foreign language teaching effectively. In theintroduction the three co-editors of the book present a general overview of the conference,its aim of “providing a forum for discussion and debate on the process of policy designand implementation” (p. 3), its organization, and the two main foci of national casestudies and innovational projects. In ch. 1 two of the editors, Janet Enever and JayneMoon, discuss the challenges and changes experienced in the context of English teachingcurricula in primary schools around the world. The issues, such as challenges of policyimplementation, curriculum design and assessment, and language choices in multilingualsocieties, are addressed in the following papers that constitute the proceedings.

∗Department of English, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA. E-mail: [email protected]




Reviews 407

In the “Keynote talks” section (chs. 2–4), first Yoko Goto Butler (ch. 2) uses Englishlanguage teaching practices in primary schools of Korea, Taiwan and Japan as examplesto address several issues, including children’s equal access to English education, English-speaking teachers versus local teachers, and the adaptation of popular English LanguageTeaching (ELT) methods (e.g. communicative language teaching) to local contexts. Richard

Johnstone’s chapter (ch. 3) discusses the key “conditions” for achieving “generalized success” of implementing English Language Learning (ELL) in primary schools. N. S.Prabhu (ch. 4) then briefly summarizes the role English plays when it is taught to younglearners.

In the section “National case studies” (chs. 5–16), the situations of TEYL in differentnations are presented, as it is important for researchers and educators to review the currentstate of TEYL. Chs. 9 and 11 provide a general overview of English teaching at the primarylevel in India and Korea. Likewise, researchers based in Europe (ch. 16) investigate earlylanguage learning in Croatia, England, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, and Sweden.The chapter on Turkey (ch. 8) addresses how teaching English is concerned in education

reforms. On the other hand, ch. 10 argues that early bilingual education in Cameroon has been developed more from an educational point of view than as a social-political choice.When discussing the topic of TEYL, how early young learners should begin learning

English is always a controversial issue and probably the first matter of discussion for policy makers. In 2000, Maharashra, India (ch. 5) introduced a new educational policy of teaching English beginning in Grade 1, whereas Londrina, Brazil (ch. 6) integrates Englishlearning starting from Grade 4. It is certain that different starting ages have created differentchallenges for educators. However, does starting early really have a beneficial effect onlearning English? Hungary (ch.14), based on its own experiences with TEYL, suggeststhat an early start may not be effective if certain conditions are not met.

The Hungarian experiences remind us that it is essential to evaluate the effectivenessof teaching English to primary school students. Chs. 12 and 15 include comprehensiveevaluations of ELT in primary school in Iceland and China. In Ch. 13, two Indian states,Orissa and Delhi, are specifically profiled to illustrate how the goals of TEYL are achieved and whether school children have equal access to English learning in India. The case of Bangladesh (ch. 7) provides suggestions for improvements needed in the future based onthe achievements of students.

In contrast to Section B and its view of TEYL more from a global perspective, Sec-tion C, “Innovations, experiments, projects” (chs. 17–28), examines local issues, such asinnovative curricula, teaching techniques, teachers’ professional development, as well asthe use of technology. In Oman (ch. 17), the Integrated Curriculum project aims to de-velop both children’s Arabic and English literacy skills. An innovative project of BuenosAires, Argentina (ch. 19) provides equal access to underprivileged children, whereas inKarnataka, India (ch. 20) the issue of community aspirations is taken into account. Sim-ilarly, Israel (ch. 24) has implemented a project to reach out to the local community and

build communication between Arabs and Jews. Ch. 27 goes further to investigate the ef-ficiency and efficacy of a nationwide curriculum innovation in China. Besides curricular innovations, teaching techniques cannot be omitted. Multiple intelligences (MI), a widelyused theory in education, is applied to teaching L2. With the focus on listening to musicand storytelling, both chs. 21 and 26 demonstrate the integration of MI into ELT in Spainand India.




408 Reviews

Teacher training is another crucial subject to be considered, as most primary schoolteachers may not have the ability to teach English. Both Taiwan (ch. 18) and Nigeria(ch. 23) have created a project to help teachers’ professional development. Ch. 22 in-vestigates Turkish English teachers’ instructional practices and perceptions of the imple-mentation of the “communicative-oriented curriculum”. Lastly, the use of technology is

addressed. Ch. 28 investigates the uses of CD-ROMs in teaching English in MalaysianPrimary schools.

As illustrated above, not only does this book cover a wide range of issues related toTEYL, but it also examines these issues from a global perspective, including Englishteaching in twenty-three countries located in Asia, Europe, South America, Africa and theMiddle East. The chapters included in the book provide an insiders’ point of view on thecurrent state of TEYL in different countries. The book in general meets its goal in thatit is an essential reading for decision-makers at governmental ministry level who plan toimplement an early start in teaching English to young learners. However, the volume doesface the challenge that conference proceedings often face. It aims to cover a wide range of

issues and a number of countries, but at some point, some of the chapters do not provideenough depth to offer a clear picture of what is being described.In relation to world Englishes research and scholars, this book can be an interesting

read in several ways. For one, it is a good source for researchers who are concerned withthe sociolinguistic profiles of different countries. The chapters serve as a starting pointfor reviewing the role of English teaching and learning in primary education settings.Second, as there is not much discussion in the field of world Englishes about TEYL, this

book may attract world Englishes researchers and student scholars who are intrigued byEnglish teaching and learning in primary schools and at the same time are ponderingthe role of world Englishes in primary education. In addition, this book can be used as

a supplement for teacher training programmes preparing teachers who are interested inteaching English overseas and to help these teachers understand the policies of Englishteaching and learning in a country. Lastly, the volume is a window into deliberating theissues that world Englishes may face in the future, for a large number of people who learnEnglish from a very young age are about to become or will soon be a world Englishes user and partake in the evolution of Englishes.

All in all, Young Learner English Language Policy and Implementation: International Perspectives can be stimulating to World Englishes researchers and students who areinterested in policy making and curriculum and instruction in primary schools.


English as a Lingua Franca in ASEAN: A Multilingual Model . Andy Kirkpatrick. AsianEnglishes Today. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2010, xiv + 222 pp.

Reviewed by AZIRAH HASHIM∗

While there have been many important publications on English in Asia (e.g. Bolton 2003;Kachru 2004; Kachru and Nelson 2005; Deterding and Kirkpatrick 2006; Prescott 2007),there has not been a book that provides a comprehensive coverage of the topic English as

∗

Humanities & Ethics Research Cluster, IPS Complex, University of Malaya 50603, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. E-mail:[email protected]




Reviews 409

a Lingua Franca in ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations, which comprises 10countries) and addresses language education issues as well. Andy Kirkpatrick goes beyond the mere coverage of all ASEAN countries and develops a multilingual model which isworth discussing in the context of education. The book is divided into three main partsand eight chapters. The preface outlines the structure of the book and raises issues such as

balancing need for English with need to promote national languages and preserving locallanguages.

Part 1 with its three chapters profiles the origins of ASEAN, the role and development of English, and the national languages in each of the ten member countries. Ch. 1 (pp. 3–18)“The origins of ASEAN and the role of English” provides a summary of the formationof ASEAN and useful background information, especially on the role of English. TheEuropean Union with its 23 official languages is referred to to show the contrast between theofficial EU and ASEAN policies. The relationship between English and other languages,including Putonghua, is also discussed, giving an overview of the language attitudes in theregion.

Ch. 2 (pp. 19–42) provides a historical description of the four countries in ASEANthat were colonies of English speaking powers – Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Singapore – and draws useful comparisons on the different roles of English in thesecountries. The author raises concerns about how, with the current government of eachcountry adopting policies that would ensure their citizens become proficient in English, anequitable balance would be struck between English and other languages. Malaysia’s shiftinglanguage education policy as well as the major milestones in that policy development arediscussed and contrasted with Singapore’s. Brunei’s language policies are briefly discussed;they appear to be less controversial than those in Malaysia and Singapore. This is followed

by a more detailed review of language education policies in the Philippines, including the

choice of Tagalog as the national language and the debate surrounding this.Ch. 3 (pp. 43–64) treats those countries in ASEAN that did not have a British colonial past – Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam – and focuses on the very differenttypes of English language education in these countries. In Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam,especially, developments in the education system privilege the position of English.

The survey of ASEAN is well written and informative. The author’s comments aboutEnglish teaching in these countries, especially Burma, Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam, arehighly realistic.

Part II (chs. 4–5) of the book is devoted to linguistic features of English as a LinguaFranca (ELF) in ASEAN. The author begins with a useful introduction which gives some

background on ELF and examples of previous work. He inserts two caveats: first, theinformants are of different English proficiency and those speakers that are “too proficient”were not excluded because these are speakers in ASEAN who have English as their

primary language; second, the relative frequency of the features used in the context of ELFthroughout ASEAN is not known, and the data used in the book comes mainly from highly

proficient users of English. This appears to be a limitation in the analysis. However, it isstated that a team comprising the author and researchers from ASEAN are collecting dataon varieties of English, from the informal and colloquial basilectal to the formal acrolectal.

Ch. 4 (pp. 73–93) provides a selection of the phonological and lexical features of ASEANspeakers of English. The study shows that there are only a few occasions when the use of distinctive phonological features led to a breakdown in communication. It is interestingto note that the author found that distinctive lexis often used in individual varieties of




410 Reviews

English is absent from the ELF data. This shows an obvious difference between ELF and the various varieties of English in the region.

Ch. 5 (pp. 95–122) discusses grammar, discourse and pragmatics of ELF. It beginswith evidence of grammatical variation in dialects of British English, indicating thatgrammatical variation is common even in a traditional variety of English. Variation in ELF

data is explained as natural language development. The second half of the chapter goes onto describe non-standard features of ASEAN ELF. The author illustrates from his exampleshow difficult it is to make reliable judgements about the linguistic causes of non-standard forms and that speakers who may use non-standard forms in one context may use standard forms in another. A section on discourse and pragmatic norms is also offered.

From features, the book moves on to examining communicative strategies of ASEANELF. Strategies that are unique to ASEAN ELF are listed in a table with strategy types for listeners and for speakers.

The third part of the book, “Implications for policy and pedagogy”, consists of twochapters, one on implications for language education policy and another on the peda-

gogical implications and recommendations for language education policy and practice inASEAN. It begins with an insightful discussion of the highly debated topic in the regionof when English should be introduced into the school curriculum and used as a medium of instruction (MOI). The author very clearly argues his position on this long running debate

by highlighting the shortage of teachers proficient in English, the linguistic demands onthe child and the privileging of English at the expense of local languages.

On whether English should be introduced as a subject or as a MOI, the author usesearlier studies and findings to support his view that children need to attain a certain levelof proficiency before they can use the language as a MOI. He brings up three myths of language education and dispels each of them convincingly. He shows that cognitivist second

language acquisition (SLA) research remains the mainstream perspective often adopted by ministries of education in ASEAN. Kirkpatrick, in contrast, urges a shift towards socialSLA whereby context within ASEAN is crucial. Finally, he gives an overview of thelanguage education policy model in Hong Kong which involves similar issues to those inASEAN countries and exemplifies a clear bilingual method.

The last chapter, ch. 8 (pp. 169–89) “Pedagogical implications: The multilingual modeland the lingua franca approach”, addresses the question of what English should be taught,who should teach it and what should be taught through English using what materials. He isagainst the privileging of English at the expense of local languages and national languagesand the teaching of Maths and Science in English as is practised in some ASEAN countries.He illustrates through past studies that the choices made with regard to language education

policy have produced negative results in many instances, such as increasing failure and drop-out rates, increasing inequality and increasing dominance of English. He highlightsthe needs of the ASEAN learners, who are to use English as a medium of communicationwith other multilinguals for whom English is the second or foreign language and as a soleworking and official language of ASEAN.

Adopting the perspective of a social SLA would help in syllabus design and adopting amultilingual model would involve making the linguistic benchmarks that of the speech of ASEAN multilinguals who are able to use English successfully in ELF situations. This istimely with the debate about diversity of the English language and which model teachersshould use. The author’s analyses and discussions as well as his suggestions for policy and

pedagogy provide an excellent depiction of the practices and needs of the ASEAN region.




Reviews 411

As a reference book for students and researchers interested in sociolinguistics, applied linguistics, ELF, world Englishes and English as an International Language, this volume isa valuable resource which sheds much needed light upon the role, functions and featuresof English in ASEAN. It is useful for education policy planners in the ASEAN region and complements the works that have been produced by scholars in Europe on ELF in that

region.

REFERENCES

Bolton, Kingsley (2003) Chinese Englishes: A Sociolinguistic History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Deterding, David, and Kirkpatrick, Andy (2006) Emerging South-east Asian Englishes and intelligibility. World Englishes

25, pp. 391–410.Kachru, Braj B. (2005) Asian Englishes: Beyond the Canon. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Kachru, Yamuna, and Nelson, Cecil (2006) World Englishes in Asian Contexts. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Prescott, David (ed.) (2007) English in Southeast Asia, Literacies and Literature. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars

Publishing.(Received 27 February 2012)

Dreams and Realities: Developing Countries and the English Language. Edited by HywelColeman. London: The British Council, 2011, 386 pp.

Reviewed by CHRISTIANE MEIERKORD∗

Approximately 5.5 billion people of the world’s population live in what are called de-veloping countries, and 1.4 billion (data for 2005) of these people live in conditions of extreme poverty, defined by the World Bank as having an income below $ 1.25 per day(The World Bank 2011). While research in many disciplines, particularly developmentstudies, is making good progress to explain how these conditions may be alleviated, one

of the factors which is far from being understood is the link between development and the mastery of (international) languages. Dreams and Realities, being a volume published

by the British Council, addresses old but still timely questions: Is English of benefit todeveloping countries? Does it help countries develop, and, if so, how?

In his foreword (pp. 7–8), editor and British Council’s Head of English LanguageInnovation Michael Carrier finds that “[g]overnments recognise the importance of Englishto their economies and societies and to the fulfilment of the personal aspirations of their citizens, understanding its capacity to empower and support development” (p. 7), thussetting the scene for a volume that overwhelmingly emphasizes the positive effects of teaching and using English in developing contexts. As such, the volume stands in stark

contrast to Skutnabb-Kangas and Phillipson (1994) with its focus on linguistic imperialismand the hegemony of English. Following Coleman’s introductory chapter, the book isorganized into five sections and an appendix, which consists of a list of countries with lowand medium development as well as a list of key development indicators.

In the first section, “Policy planning and implementation”, four papers discuss the problems governments face when introducing appropriate language policies and puttingthese into practice. For Kennedy (ch. 2, pp. 27–40), language policy should developcommunicative competence for “an equitable sharing of resources and a distribution of socio-political and economic power and influence” (p. 28), for which it is first necessary

∗Department of English, Ruhr-University Bochum, Universitatsstr. 150, 44801 Bochum, Germany. E-mail: [email protected]




412 Reviews

to identify peoples’ needs and wants before examining the role that language(s) should play to meet those needs. The following three papers reveal how difficult this is. Williams(ch. 3, pp. 41–57) discusses the practice of using a foreign language as medium of in-struction (MOI), which for her contributes to the lack of development in many countries.As even the link between education and development is doubtful (e.g. does not positively

correlate with child survival), she finds that English risks becoming a factor of nationaldivision rather than unity, as it may create “a division between, on the one hand, those whohave good access to it, typically members of the reasonably well off urban groups, and,on the other hand, those who do not, typically the members of poor urban and especiallyrural groups” (p. 46). However, Meganathan’s (ch. 4, pp. 59–87) careful analyses of dataobtained from all Indian states reveal that India’s citizens’ belief in a positively transfor-mative power of English hinders the implementation of a promising three language policyadvocating the teaching of a local language, Hindi, and English in India’s education sector.English is the most widely offered language despite the low quality of English languageeducation, particularly in rural contexts, where teachers lack the necessary qualifications

and materials. The limitations of such practices are also visible from Coleman’s discus-sion (ch. 5, pp. 89–113) of Indonesia’s introduction of “International Standard Schools”in 2006. Invoking globalization as a rationale, these schools teach in English and cater for a demand in the upper middle class, while normal schools teach in Bahasa Indonesia.Thus, Indonesia’s migrant workers, who require language teaching to succeed in their jobsas domestic servants abroad and who contribute to Indonesia’s welfare through remittinglarge amounts of money, are largely neglected in the government’s language planning.

In the second part, three papers indicate how divergent “Perceptions of English” are inAfrica. Tembe and Norton (ch. 6, pp. 117–39) discuss Uganda’s language policy, whichadvocates the use of local languages as MOI to increase literacy rates. However, research

carried out in rural Butaleja and urban Torore shows that parents and stakeholders prefer Luganda as a language of reading and writing in the rural district and English in Torore.English is regarded as facilitating international workers’ mobility and access to professionalemployment in Uganda. Apparently, more substantive efforts are necessary to disseminateresearch results as regards the benefits of first language education. In Cameroon, on theother hand, francophone students in rural areas mostly lack an extrinsic motivation tolearn English, often giving preference to Spanish or German instead. The 70 Francophonescience-oriented students Focho (ch. 7, pp. 141–63) studied were not convinced that Englishwould be useful to find a job, with many of them not aiming at the international job market.In contrast, Negash (ch. 8, pp. 165–87) explains that, in Ethiopia, English language skillsare mandatory for African farmers to negotiate with Western and Asian markets. Theyare also important for those skilled and qualified Ethiopians who live in the diaspora and send remittances home. However, to successfully serve as a lingua franca joining Africansand Asians, English needs to be more appropriately taught, based on solid research “onAfricans’ perceptions of the value of English, so that the debate on language planning canmove beyond the whim of the elites” (p. 183).

The next section discusses the role of English in “Social and geographic mobility”.Lamb (ch. 9, pp. 191–211) warns, based on the Indonesian context, that middle classadvantages as regards school experiences may lead to a widening divide between them and children from more modest backgrounds. Capstick’s ethnographic study (ch. 10, pp. 213– 34) of four English students in Mirpur, Pakistan, who are all preparing for immigrationto the UK, reveals that remittance money is again a major motivation for this type of




414 Reviews

Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove, and Phillipson, Robert (1994). Linguistic Human Rights: Overcoming Linguistic Discrimination,Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

The World Bank (2011). World Development Indicators. Washington, DC: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development-indicators


The Relocation of English: Shifting Paradigms in a Global Era. Mario Saraceni.Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010, xiv + 156 pp.

Reviewed by K INGSLEY BOLTON∗

This is an innovative and thought-provoking monograph from an author who has beenactive in the fields of sociolinguistics and world Englishes (WE) in Asia as well as theUK for a number of years. The volume makes an interesting and timely contribution tothe theory of WE, and is recommended to everyone interested in the development of WEas a subfield of English studies and linguistics. This book comprises seven chapters, six

of which are concerned with theoretical aspects of WE. The seventh (ch. 6) is essentiallya case-study analysis of Malaysia, which serves to illustrate the theoretical perspectivesrehearsed in the other chapters of the book.

In ch. 1 (“English in the world”), Saraceni notes that the WE paradigm shift has largelytaken place within certain fields of academia, but that the move to decentralize the “Englishlanguage” has achieved only limited success elsewhere (pp. 6–7). Throughout this chapter,Saraceni argues for a reconceptualization of WE in terms of “English in the World” (EIW).Ch. 2 (“Language and nation building”) focuses on the historical dimension, and exploresthe roles of language and nationalism in the modern nation-state, and the way in whichlanguage codification has formed part of the national project in so many societies over

the last 200 years. Ch. 3 (“World Englishes”) then evaluates the WE paradigm from botha sympathetic and critical perspective, and reviews such key issues as the Kachru-Quirk debates from 1985 to 1991, as well as the influence of postcolonial theory on the WE

paradigm. Finally, in this chapter, Saraceni (p. 53) comments that:

WE discourse developed as a response to purist stances about varieties of English and, at the same time,

drew part of its ideological position from postcolonial literary discourse. In turn, purist positions were

expressed in a rhetoric which contained echoes of the imperialist narrative on language and culture,

while the postcolonial language debate was centred upon clear anti-imperialist concerns in the uneasy

decision to adopt and alter the English language.

He then claims that “the collocation of the WE paradigm with postcolonial literarydiscourse presents a conceptual conundrum”, and that “the anti-imperialist drive founded on the idea of a plurality of Englishes is inherently contradictory as it is based on afundamentally Eurocentric view of the world” (p. 53).

In ch. 4 (“The contradiction of plurality”), Saraceni expands on this last point, through acatenated discussion of the semiotics of WE, verbal signs, visual signs, and nomenclature,suggesting that a features-based approach to varieties of English often undermines a num-

ber of the key aspirations of the WE approach, and may even facilitate the stigmatizationof localized varieties of English:

∗

Department of English, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong. E-mail: [email protected]




Reviews 415

WE scholars regard variation as an integral part of the continuous evolution of language in different

societies and posit that ‘new’ varieties of English should be treated as valid as the ‘old’ ones [ . . .]

The traditional practice mentioned [. . .] of defining ‘new’ varieties of English in terms of the degree

to which they deviate from ‘old’ ones is not challenged or abandoned but embraced in WE discourse.

Indeed, the very idea of distinct Englishes entails the presence of a reference point acting as a benchmark,

against which certain features are foregrounded and identified as distinctive. In this way, world Englishes

are inescapably located in a subaltern position with respect to Anglo-American English, a position of

constant comparison with the norm-providing Inner Circle [. . .] Within this model, ‘non-native’ varieties

of English need ‘native’ varieties in order to characterise their distinctiveness and, hence, their very

existence. Non-Inner-Circle varieties of English are described according to parameters that have been

set in the Inner Circle, for the Inner Circle and by the Inner Circle (p. 77).

In ch. 5 (“English as a lingua franca”), Saraceni presents a review of ELF literature thatidentifies a number of inconsistencies, where “widely different” definitions of the subjecthave been put forward, although he also notes that both English as a Lingua Franca and WE“can be seen as two terms denoting our laborious attempts to understand the unprecedented

phenomenon of English in the world” (p. 99).In ch. 6 (“The location of English in Malaysia”), he explores the sociolinguistics of

English in this setting, through an ethnographic study utilizing surveys of students, in-terviews, and the analysis of newspaper discourse. Cumulatively, Saraceni describes aconflicting and paradoxical situation, where, despite a long history in the community,few Malaysians feel able to claim a genuine ownership of English, and the association of English with Inner Circle institutions is as strong as ever. Despite the best efforts of WEadvocates, Saraceni suggests, the “location” of English in the minds of Malaysians remainsinextricably tied to Inner Circle countries, and, not least, to the myth of a “pure English”spoken by “native speakers”, unsullied by features of bahasa rojak or “Manglish”.

In the final chapter (ch. 7, “The relocation of English”), Saraceni underscores the centralarguments of the book, highlighting the contradiction between the “academic discoursenarrative” that typically valorizes WE and the “public discourse narrative”, which istypically critical of local varieties of English. In this context, he argues, an approach tovarieties based on linguistic features may have an unexpected consequence, as “emphasison the linguistic aspects of EIW can not only restrict but also invalidate the whole notionof relocation”, contending that “the notion of relocation cannot be cultivated on the terrainof language form” (p. 133).

Saraceni then argues for a reconceptualization of “world Englishes” as “English in theWorld”, a view theoretically grounded in the WE tradition but recast in terms of a revised

perspective, where the ownership of English is relocated in concrete and real fashion:The relocation of English begins with the loosening of the knot that ties the English language to [ . . .]

BANA (Britain, Australasia and North America). First of all, the physical spread of English in the world

causes the re-rooting of the language. In turn, this gives rise to a phenomenon whereby, in the first

instance, various local cultures find new forms of expression through English and, subsequently, the

scope of this phenomenon broadens beyond the confines of local settings and offers alternative views of

the world to those emanating from the Anglophone West [. . .] The relocation culminates when English

ceases to be somebody else’s language, or the language of the Other, and can truly and comfortably

become one of the Self’s languages (p. 143).

Whether or not Saraceni’s paradigm rethink will help to realize that ambition remainsto be seen. But there is no doubt that, in terms of WE theory, his monograph makes an




416 Reviews

important and valuable contribution to research in the field. There is little doubt too thatmany of the paradoxes and problems he identifies do represent key theoretical issues in WEtoday. For example, the discussion of the disconnect between academic and lay discourse onlocalized varieties of English is directly relevant to a number of Asian societies, includingIndia and Hong Kong. Similarly, his contention that a narrow features-based approach to

WE fails to capture the complex realities of English in Outer Circle and other societiesis also well founded, although, conversely, I am not persuaded linguistically-oriented approaches have only a marginal role to play. Elsewhere, I have argued that one of themajor strengths of the WE approach to English worldwide is that it includes a diversityof perspectives, ranging from the overtly socio-political to the traditionally linguistic (asillustrated by the wide range of topics of this very journal). While Saraceni’s monographis positioned towards the socio-political/socio-cultural end of the spectrum, I would alsoargue for the value of other approaches (including those primarily concerned with linguisticsystems) as well.

Nevertheless, this volume is important because it encourages us to grapple with a

number of difficult theoretical questions that influence our assumptions in formulating and conducting our research, as well as our teaching. The issue of “location” here, moreover, hasa potentially wide application at a number of levels, not only in relating to the “ownership”of English in particular societies, but also in reminding us that our research and teaching inWE are always located in particular sociolinguistic contexts, and determined or influenced

by the particular realities of such settings. Saraceni’s book is thoughtful, well-written, and full of insights, drawn from the author’s research as well as his personal experience. It isstrongly recommended to all those interested in the development of world Englishes as afield of research and pedagogy.

(Received 6 March 2012)


intelligibility in world eglishes

Documents