Transcript A pedagogical framework for teaching English as an international

A pedagogical framework for
teaching English as an international
language(EIL)
WEN Qiufang
National Research Center for
Foreign Language Education, BFSU
EIL, ELF and EFL
EIL: English as an international language
 ELF: English as a lingua franca
 EIL=ELF
 EFL: English as a foreign language
 ELF≠ EFL

ELF and EFL
Teaching objective
Teaching focus
EFL
Native-like speakers
Imitation, adoption
ELF
Effective
communicators
Adaptation,
Accommodation
The focus of my talk
A
framework for teaching English
as a lingua franca or an
international language
 From the teacher’s perspective
Topics to be addressed
 Motivation
 Two
proposed solutions and their
problems
 A pedagogical framework
 Advantages of the proposed
framework
1. Motivation
Who owns English?
Non-native speakers outnumber
English native speakers
The total number of native speakers ?
The total number of non-native
speakers?
380 million
300 million
1 billion
Kachru’ three circles of English
Graddol (1997)
–The center of authority
regarding the language would
shift from native speakers to
nonnative speakers.
“English as a world language
does not ‘ belong’ to mother
tongue speakers of English alone,
but to all those who can make
effective use of it.” (Lee, 1981:
1)
Conceptual and practical

Quite a number of scholars have
made a strong argument against
taking the native-speaker’s English
as a norm for non-native speakers.
In their view, we should teach
English as a lingua franca rather than
as a foreign language. We shoud
promote ELF-oriented pedagogy.
Conceptual and practical

Conceptual
– Many people think this kind of
revolutionary idea cannot be refuted
easily.

Practical
– What to be taught in classroom?
– How to evaluate our students’
performance?
Topics to be addressed
 Motivation
 Two
proposed solutions and their
problems
 A pedagogical framework
 Its advantages
Proposal 1
 L2
user model（Cook，1999）
Vivian Cook (1999)
 The language used by successful L2
users can be a model for L2 learners.
 Treat L2 users in their own right but not
imitation of native speakers, deficient
native speakers, failed natives.
 Comparing the characteristics of native
speakers and of L2 users is like
comparing tomatoes and apples, useful
only at a gross level.
Tough questions
Howe to differentiate successful L2 users from
unsuccessful ones? What are the criteria?
 How can we describe and define “successful”?

– Success in using English can be found in various fields,
such as business, diplomacy, journalism, and education.

Apart from the difficulty of identifying a viable nonnative model, there is a strong doubt about the
existence of essential differences between the
English system used by successful L2 users and
that used by native speakers (Gao 2008; Wen and
Yu 2003; Yu 2006).
Divided views about the use of
English in China

China English as an independent variety
– Supporters, e.g. Jiang & Du, 2003；Li，1993）
– Opponents, e.g. Gao，2008；Yu，2006；
Wen & Yu，2003）

No empirical evidence
Empirical studies: Examples
 A small-scale study of nativized
features in China’s English
newspapers (Wen & Yu, 2001)
 The use of evaluative adjectives in
China’s English newspapers (Yu,
2006)
 The use of creation-andtransformation verbs in China’s
English newspapers (Gao, 2007)
Empirical studies: Examples
Instead of identifying individual
successful users for description,
study the collective product, i.e.
English used in the official media
such as The 21st Century, China Daily,
TV script
– To what extent English has been
nativized in Mainland China?
Develop，grow，make,
change, produce,
transform, create, build
Research questions

What are the linguistic features (semantic,
lexical and grammatical features) of the
top eight creation-and-transformation
verbs (TECVs) in China’s English
newspapers?

To what extent are the nativized features
of TECVs intelligible and acceptable to
native and non-native speakers of English?
Data-collection
 An established corpus of China’s
English newspapers (CCEN),
composed of 1860 articles from three
English newspapers (China Daily,
Shanghai Star and Beijing Review
 Published in 2002, with 1,058,961
tokens and 20,338 types.
 Only comprises articles about
domestic events from first-hand
sources.
Questionnaire

Intelligibility and acceptability
– Five-point scale on intelligibility
– Ask them to write down what they have
understood
– Five-point scale on acceptability
Major findings
The distribution of senses of some of
the TECVs varied in CCEN and NBNC.
Semantic broadening and subtle
semantic variations are found
In regards to semantic prosody,
positive senses of the TECVs more
frequently used in CCEN
Major findings
Some collocations more frequent and
a few unique
Grammatical features: intransitive
use of TECVs more frequently, Verb +
Noun + Preposition more frequently
Major findings
Most of nativized English in China’s
context can be understood and
accepted by both native and nonnative speakers of English.
Native and non-native English
speakers’ interpretations of the verb
collocations varied.
Major findings
Native speakers tend to show higher
degree of acceptability than nonnative speakers.
The nativized features tend to be
more intelligible to female
respondents than to male
respondents.
General conclusions
 More
quantitative differences
than qualitative ones
 Almost
all the qualitative
differences being lexical rather
than grammatical
Proposal 2
….the result of the description of how
English is being used in the international
context could be potentially used as a
model for L2 learners（Seidlhoufer,2001)
 the assumption underlying this proposal
has been challenged by several scholars
(Alptekin 2010; Canagarajah 2007;
Ferguson 2009).

Misconceptions

Function ≠ Product
“LFE is intersubjectively constructed in
each specific context of interaction. The
form of this English is negotiated by
each set of speakers for their purposes.”
(Canagarajah, 2007: 925)
“ ELF is an international medium of
communication. It has no native
speakers and no proper culture of its
own to speak of .” (Alptekin, 2010: 101)
Misconceptions
Impossible
and
unnecessary to codify an
ELF but possible and
necessary to research the
use of ELF
Misconceptions
 What
to be learned ≠what to be
achieved
Native
variety
Non-native
variety
Non-native
variety
?
Conceptual issues
There is a danger that the overemphasis
on the nativized variety will move nonnative variety further and further apart
until a stage is reached where English can
no longer be served as lingua franca
Many layers of English

At the center

The common core shared by all
speakers of English

On the periphery
 the
nativized features from a variety of
cultures which shadow on the first
layer
Topics to be addressed
 Motivation
 Two
proposed solutions and their
problems
 A pedagogical framework
 Its advantages
3. A pedagogical framework
Three types of linguistic variety taught
in relation to the learner’s proficiency
Common core and
Native
peripheral features of English
variety
Common core
Peripheral features
Non-native varieties
including the
interlocutor’s own
variety
Requirements on L2 learners’
Output

Linguistically
 On
the phonological level: allow to have a
foreign accent while emphasizing mutual
intelligibility
 On the morphological level: more tolerant
of morphological errors but do not
encourage
 On the syntactic level: correct sentence
structures (SVO)
Requirements on L2 learners’
Output
 On
the lexical level: more tolerant of
mixed use of British and American
words: expect to learn nativized lexical
words and phrases
3. A pedagogical framework
Cultural component
Multicultures of
others
Target
language
culture
Chinese
cultures
• Introduce the world
to China
• Introduce China to
the world
Intercultural
communicative
competence
Intercultural
competence
Communicative
competence
Linguistic
Pragmatic
Strategic
Wen, 2004: 175
Sensitivity
tolerance
flexibity
Intercultural
competence
Speaking ability
Flexibility
Clarifying/Negotiating
Willing to comprise
Tolerance
Empathy
Egalitarian attitude
Listening ability
Sensitivity

Multi-perspective
Knowledge of dif. cultures

A model of cross-cultural communicative
competence (Wen, 1999)
In a book entitled “Spoken English
Testing and teaching” in Chinese

Present a paper entitled “Globalization
and intercultural competence” at a
conference “English and globalization:
Perspectives from Hong Kong and
Mainland China by the Chinese University
of HK in 2002

Paper published in English in 2004
3. A pedagogical framework
Pragmatic
 Universal
rules
 Target language rules
 Rules of other non-natives
Pragmatic
China
Japan
China
China
India
Sweden
What kind of English will be
used here? What kind of
pragmatic rules will be used?
Setting for ELF
Philippine
Thailand
Ange la
Singapore
Russia
US
China
canada
Swe de n
India
M alaysia
Japan
Italy
Ge rmany
Pragmatic
CS
JS
CS
IS
CS
SS
Open, dynamic, on-line generated
Pragmatic objective

Abilities to generate appropriate
communicative rules and strategies
Topics to be addressed
 Motivation
 Two
proposed solutions and their
problems
 A pedagogical framework
 Advantages of the proposed
framework
Advantages

Balancing globalization and localization
– Unlike the traditional view that the native variety is
the only norm
– unlike the radical view that the model is that created
by successful non-native speakers or the codified ELF

Making a clear distinction between what is to be
taught and what is to be achieved
– Specifying the three components of teaching:
linguistic, cultural and pragmatic
– All the objectives having the same focus, the
successful accomplishment of communication in
English
Thank you！