English as a global language

that sees the bilingual as having a single, or unitary, linguistic competence, as opposed to a dual or bifurcated one” (p. x).

To translanguage is to speak naturally and freely, without regard for the restrictions established by the boundaries of named languages, without heed for the constraints that give dual names and borders and limits to the bilingual’s unitary competence. (Otheguy, 2016, p. xi)

These theories have helped draw blueprints for educators to help transcend language policies and practices that make multiple language speakers (or speakers of unofficial language variants) “victims of the symbolic violence (Bourdieu, 1991) that schools have exerted on them, [and] stigmatize their own language practices” (Garcia &

Kleyn, 2016, p. 27).

Inevitably, being stigmatized by one’s ‘own language practices’ has an impact on learner identity, which is one of the main foci of this study. Many of these new directions in language learning have been pithily gathered into the comprehensive work by Norton and Toohey (2004) concerning critical pedagogy and language learning. And while my research does not directly deal with the main themes concerning multilingual learners in the classroom, the fundamental issues of social capital found in the line of work cited above have served as a guide for this researcher’s positioning in the current study at hand. In this sense, I consider how the access to resources for learning, practicing and using English (as a Foreign Language) during life experiences has a lasting effect on individual perceptions of professional opportunities later in life.

1.3 English as a global language

It [English] is everywhere. Some 380 million people speak it as their first language and perhaps two-thirds as many again as their second. A billion are learning it,

14

about a third of the world’s population are in some sense exposed to it and by 2050, it is predicted, half the world will be more or less proficient in it. It is the language of globalization—of international business, politics and diplomacy. It is the language of computers and the Internet. You’ll see it on posters in Cote d’Ivoire;

you’ll hear it in pop songs in Tokyo; you’ll read it in official documents in Phnom Penh. Deutsche Welle broadcasts in it. Bjork, an Icelander, sings in it. French business schools teach in it. It is the medium of expression in cabinet meetings in Bolivia. Truly, the tongue spoken back in the 1300s only by the ‘low people’ of England, as Robert of Gloucester put it at the time, has come a long way. It is now the global language.

“A World Empire by Other Means: The Triumph of English,”

(The Economist, December 20, 2001)

It seems that English is becoming, or has already become, a global language: “the concept of ‘English as a global language’ (EGL) is not recent, describing a phenomenon that developed and drew momentum, particularly in the second half of the twentieth century” (Briguglia, 2005, p.7). There are other terms applied to the growing use of English across the world: “most notably, ‘English as an international language’ (EIL) and English as a lingua franca (ELF)” (Briguglia, 2005, p.7.), the latter in particular has spurred considerable academic and practitioner literature amongst language teachers and researchers. “Over the past 15 years or so there has developed a school of thought within English language education and applied linguistics globally which refers to the phenomenon and use of English as a lingua franca (ELF)” (O’Regan, 2014, p.533). O’Regan goes on to argue the following:

The reader will have noticed that the term ELF is here purposely placed ‘under erasure’ (Spivak, 1976: xvii), with a line drawn through it. This is in order to signal how this term is not just provisional, but inadequate in relation to the sociolinguistic complexity of global and local uses of ‘English’ in the world. As

15

intimated in the last sentence, the same can also be said of the term ‘English’, a term which not only hides a multitude of varieties within it (Blommaert, 1998), but in a world increasingly acknowledged to be populated by ‘Englishes’ (Kachru, 1985), and with an entire ‘World Englishes’ field dedicated to their research, has long been seen as erroneous and problematic. (O’Regan, 2016, p. 205)

And while O’Regan’s position on ELF as an academic field is quite critical, this statement helps highlight the growing sociopolitical interest in promoting English as a lingua franca, as an international or as a global language, amongst policy-makers and educators. Similarly, other theorists working in Applied Linguistics have noted the growing influence of ‘Neoliberalism’ in education, and in particular in English language teaching as a (or perhaps ‘the’) global language. As Block (2017) notes,

“neoliberalism has meant the adoption of the market metaphor as the dominant way to frame all manner of day-to-day activity” (p. 39), including education.

In the broader field of education, the impact of neoliberalism on education has been foregrounded for some time (Hill & Kumar, 2009). The shift from pedagogical to market values has been widely commented on as involving a fundamental shift in educational philosophy: the abandonment of the social and cooperative ethic in favour of individualist and competitive business models.

(Block, Gray & Holborow, 2012, p. 6)

Leaving ‘political economy’ aside (as discussed by Block, et al, 2012), it is still almost indisputable that nowadays the growing number of global interactions has stimulated demands for more efficient communication across linguistic borders. To achieve this, a great number of individuals are learning English, and many of them are hoping their language skills will enhance their paycheck or land them a better job.

And as O’Regan points out, the promotion of English as a ‘neutral’ global language can and should be interrogated.

16

The ELF case proceeds from a liberal-idealist rationalism and acquiescence to the geo-capitalist status quo, which issues from its incapacity to critique, or even name, capitalism as a primary agent in determining the global distribution of economic and linguistic resources, and thus individuals’ life chances as well.

Instead, the world system is taken as given, and economic, gendered, racial, religious and class inequalities within and between the populations of nation states are discounted in favour of a focus on lingua franca forms as ideologically neutral and self-emancipating and, less promisingly, as geo-culturally Eurocentric and the property of cosmopolitan bilingual elites. ELF as a political project thus provides a pillar of support to mobile capital in the reproduction of global class stratifications along linguistic lines. To put this another way, those who have most access to intercultural lingua francas and the most opportunity to use them are those with the highest quotients of economic, social, cultural and linguistic capital (Bourdieu, 1986). (O’Regan, 2016, p. 212)

Two decades ago, Crystal (1997, p. 3) stated, “A language achieves a genuinely global status when it develops a special role that is recognized in every country”, and almost a decade later Krashen (2003, p.100) claimed that the world is suffering from

“English fever,” an overwhelming desire to acquire English as a global language. In East Asian Countries, the English language acts as an influential way of communication in foreign trade, in business, and in politics (Ross, 2008; Sasaki, 2008). Currently, English as a popular communication medium is used in many social fields, such as education, academia, business, technology, sport, as well as popular entertainment. In general, in the globalized economy, learning an internationally dominant language is increasingly viewed as a key to individual and national economic success (Kubota, 2011; Niño-Murcia, 2003; Park, 2011; Yates, 2011). Grin (2001) states that competency in English is regarded as especially important for national economies and it can also provide individuals with income benefits. Another powerful discourse posits that English connects people globally even though more

17

than three quarters of the world population are non-English-speaking. (Graddol, 2006).

The trend towards global English does not appear to be diminishing, despite quite critical voices that have emerged concerning the link between an increasingly globalized consumer society and the expansion of the language (cf. Bamforth, 1993;

Canagarajah, 1999; Block, 2002; Gray, 2010; Block, Gray & Holborow, 2012;

O’Regan, 2014; Block & Gray, 2015). Five decades have passed since Bourdieu (1977) argued that English has become a special kind of cultural capital. Within this perspective, English performs as a kind of commodity that offers its speaker the opportunity to gain access to privileged discourses and resources. Nevertheless, it must be recognized, as indicated above, that the entire trend of global teaching speakers of other languages has lately been criticized for its role in promoting neoliberal values. A newer recognition of the importance of linguistic diversity provides a background for its critique, largely because global English “fits the political and economic context of our current sociohistorical period—in particular, the desire for flexible workers and lifelong learners to perform service-oriented and techno- logical jobs as part of a post-Fordist political economy (Flores, 2013, p. 501;

see also Moore, 2016)

Despite some well-founded criticisms, it can be claimed that English is still widely positioned as a privileged discourse and resource, since people who master English are able to communicate with a large potential pool of other people who have different national and cultural backgrounds as well as allowing them access to multiple perspectives. Such communication may offer huge potential for broadening one’s horizon, resulting in tensions that challenge an individual’s biases and stereotypes.

No matter where one stands in regard to English as a global language, no one

18

denies the dominant position English has achieved worldwide or that its spread seems to be accelerating. However, this development is not hailed universally as a welcome event. And whether we consider it a good thing or otherwise for English to hold this position, we need to keep in mind the cautions of writers such as Phillipson and Skuttnabb-Kangas (1999, p.21), who remind us of the

‘responsibility to examine how a command of English relates to contemporary power structures’. (Briguglia, 2005, p. 10).

In any case, it is quite evident that English has acquired considerable social and cultural capital (in the sense that is it applied by Bourdieu, see chapter 2). Almost paradoxically, given that it is the world’s largest bastion of communism, this is especially apparent in China, as is evidenced by the following statement.

A vast national appetite has elevated English to something more than a language: it is not simply a tool but a defining measure of one’s life potential.

China today is divided by class, opportunity, and power, but one of its few unifying beliefs——something shared by waiters, politicians, intellectuals, tycoons——is the power of English… English has become an ideology, a force strong enough to remake your résumé, attract a spouse, or catapult you out of a village. (Osnos, 2008)

The English language currently holds unprecedented importance in many of China’s major cities, especially in the eastern coastal regions. English is seen as holding a very important potential for cultural, social and economic profit to the people who master it.

For many Chinese, investing time and effort to learn English translates into the opportunity to gain access to well-known colleges and to qualify for well-paid jobs. A number of world enterprises require a certain English level for their employees.

19