Pub Date : 2021-10-06DOI: 10.1080/14664208.2021.1986299
C. Sung
ABSTRACT This paper investigates the language ideologies held by a group of international students in an English medium instruction (EMI) university in multilingual Hong Kong. The findings indicate that the participants’ beliefs about English extend beyond its role as an instructional medium and encompass its use as a lingua franca and as a means of social inclusion. It is also found that the participants hold complex yet sometimes contradictory ideologies about the kinds of English to be used and/or accepted and about the monolingual and multilingual uses of English in the EMI university context. Taken together, the study suggests that the participants’ ideologies with respect to the roles of English and the norms of English use in the EMI university context are much more complex than what language policy from above suggests. The findings also reveal the ideological tensions over the norms of English use in the EMI university context and the closely intertwined relationship between the participants’ language ideologies and the maintenance of their interests, especially in relation to access to learning opportunities in the classroom. The study calls for attention to broader issues pertaining to social inclusion/exclusion, linguistic advantage/disadvantage and educational equality/inequality in the multilingual EMI university context.
{"title":"English only or more?: Language ideologies of international students in an EMI university in multilingual Hong Kong","authors":"C. Sung","doi":"10.1080/14664208.2021.1986299","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2021.1986299","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper investigates the language ideologies held by a group of international students in an English medium instruction (EMI) university in multilingual Hong Kong. The findings indicate that the participants’ beliefs about English extend beyond its role as an instructional medium and encompass its use as a lingua franca and as a means of social inclusion. It is also found that the participants hold complex yet sometimes contradictory ideologies about the kinds of English to be used and/or accepted and about the monolingual and multilingual uses of English in the EMI university context. Taken together, the study suggests that the participants’ ideologies with respect to the roles of English and the norms of English use in the EMI university context are much more complex than what language policy from above suggests. The findings also reveal the ideological tensions over the norms of English use in the EMI university context and the closely intertwined relationship between the participants’ language ideologies and the maintenance of their interests, especially in relation to access to learning opportunities in the classroom. The study calls for attention to broader issues pertaining to social inclusion/exclusion, linguistic advantage/disadvantage and educational equality/inequality in the multilingual EMI university context.","PeriodicalId":51704,"journal":{"name":"Current Issues in Language Planning","volume":"23 1","pages":"275 - 295"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59954239","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-29DOI: 10.1080/14664208.2021.1984674
Gwan-Hyeok Im, Dongil Shin, S. Park
ABSTRACT This study suggests a conceptual framework for policy-driven test development and validation, using the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) as an example context. By linking the literature on policy analysis and argument structure in the validation of testing, the strong relationships between policy and testing are illustrated. This rationalizes why policy-driven test development and implementation require the analysis of multiple stakeholders, content, context, and processes. The suggested framework will enable test providers to investigate the legitimacy of test development and use at the initial stages. The TOPIK was often intended for socio-political purposes, and was utilized for admissions and employment purposes. Today, its use has extended for the purposes of visa issuance, permanent residence, and naturalization. Thus, it is posited that the legitimacy of any policy-driven testing should be evaluated in terms of context, consequence, and feasibility.
{"title":"Suggesting a policy-driven approach to validation in the context of the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK)","authors":"Gwan-Hyeok Im, Dongil Shin, S. Park","doi":"10.1080/14664208.2021.1984674","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2021.1984674","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study suggests a conceptual framework for policy-driven test development and validation, using the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) as an example context. By linking the literature on policy analysis and argument structure in the validation of testing, the strong relationships between policy and testing are illustrated. This rationalizes why policy-driven test development and implementation require the analysis of multiple stakeholders, content, context, and processes. The suggested framework will enable test providers to investigate the legitimacy of test development and use at the initial stages. The TOPIK was often intended for socio-political purposes, and was utilized for admissions and employment purposes. Today, its use has extended for the purposes of visa issuance, permanent residence, and naturalization. Thus, it is posited that the legitimacy of any policy-driven testing should be evaluated in terms of context, consequence, and feasibility.","PeriodicalId":51704,"journal":{"name":"Current Issues in Language Planning","volume":"23 1","pages":"214 - 232"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48351859","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-11DOI: 10.1080/14664208.2021.1965741
Maria Bylin, Sofia Tingsell
ABSTRACT The study compares the uses of the native-speaker concept as a legitimizing resource in language-standard ideologies and normative discourse in five languages of European origin. Much research and international discussion has focused on the native speaker of English, a symbolically international language. We aim to show how the native-speaker concept may function differently in national-standard ideologies. The study entails a concise comparison of five European standardization ideologies, a closer look at three such ideologies, and a case study of the native speakers’ function in the normative discourse on a syntactic construction of a national language, namely Swedish. Much language planning and standardizing relies on academic linguistics for legitimacy, and native speakers’ judgments are an irrefutable data source in theoretical linguistics. However, the concept of the native speaker as a judge of linguistic material is recontextualized in normative discourse. Drawing on analyses of national-standard ideologies and standardizing discourse, results indicate that the native speaker may have different repercussions depending on the heterogeneity of the speech community and the standard ideology. We argue that the native speaker may function as a border marker of the standard language, but in national languages also of what is considered intralingual variation, and thus in symbolic terms the nation.
{"title":"The native speaker: a border marker of the standard, the nation, and variation","authors":"Maria Bylin, Sofia Tingsell","doi":"10.1080/14664208.2021.1965741","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2021.1965741","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The study compares the uses of the native-speaker concept as a legitimizing resource in language-standard ideologies and normative discourse in five languages of European origin. Much research and international discussion has focused on the native speaker of English, a symbolically international language. We aim to show how the native-speaker concept may function differently in national-standard ideologies. The study entails a concise comparison of five European standardization ideologies, a closer look at three such ideologies, and a case study of the native speakers’ function in the normative discourse on a syntactic construction of a national language, namely Swedish. Much language planning and standardizing relies on academic linguistics for legitimacy, and native speakers’ judgments are an irrefutable data source in theoretical linguistics. However, the concept of the native speaker as a judge of linguistic material is recontextualized in normative discourse. Drawing on analyses of national-standard ideologies and standardizing discourse, results indicate that the native speaker may have different repercussions depending on the heterogeneity of the speech community and the standard ideology. We argue that the native speaker may function as a border marker of the standard language, but in national languages also of what is considered intralingual variation, and thus in symbolic terms the nation.","PeriodicalId":51704,"journal":{"name":"Current Issues in Language Planning","volume":"23 1","pages":"254 - 274"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44199567","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-11DOI: 10.1080/14664208.2021.1965740
Kerttu Rozenvalde
ABSTRACT This paper investigates the positions of state policymakers in Latvia on Latvian, English, and Russian in higher education. By using argumentation analysis, the study explores policymakers’ statements in two public debates: on the use of Russian as a medium of instruction (May 2018–June 2020) and on the use of English as a language of doctoral theses (November–December 2019). The paper shows that the main difference of opinion among policymakers is about the role of the state in university language policies. Through a focus on the discursive elements in policymaking, four responses to language use in academia are outlined: firstly, the dominant nationalising discourse, which is reinforced to insist on the need for the state to continue with its nationalising language policies; secondly, the globalising discourse, which is manifested in the statements of the same policymakers to justify the state’s support to English, but not Russian; the final two discourses emphasise that universities should be autonomous to implement their own language policies, yet one of these is solely used to argue for institutional autonomy, whereas the other links autonomy with arguments that suggest construing Russian in academia as a right and a resource, not as a problem.
{"title":"State policymakers on Latvian, English, and Russian in higher education in Latvia: language ideological debates through the lens of argumentation analysis","authors":"Kerttu Rozenvalde","doi":"10.1080/14664208.2021.1965740","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2021.1965740","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper investigates the positions of state policymakers in Latvia on Latvian, English, and Russian in higher education. By using argumentation analysis, the study explores policymakers’ statements in two public debates: on the use of Russian as a medium of instruction (May 2018–June 2020) and on the use of English as a language of doctoral theses (November–December 2019). The paper shows that the main difference of opinion among policymakers is about the role of the state in university language policies. Through a focus on the discursive elements in policymaking, four responses to language use in academia are outlined: firstly, the dominant nationalising discourse, which is reinforced to insist on the need for the state to continue with its nationalising language policies; secondly, the globalising discourse, which is manifested in the statements of the same policymakers to justify the state’s support to English, but not Russian; the final two discourses emphasise that universities should be autonomous to implement their own language policies, yet one of these is solely used to argue for institutional autonomy, whereas the other links autonomy with arguments that suggest construing Russian in academia as a right and a resource, not as a problem.","PeriodicalId":51704,"journal":{"name":"Current Issues in Language Planning","volume":"23 1","pages":"176 - 194"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49444623","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-11DOI: 10.1080/14664208.2021.1965739
Kamaludin Yusra, Y. Lestari, M. Hamid
ABSTRACT Tourism is a service industry that demands well-trained professionals with internationally accredited skills including English language proficiency. Meeting such demands has been one of the foremost concerns of the ASEAN ministries of tourism and education. In collaboration with ASEAN member countries and the Australian government, Indonesian Ministry of Education and Ministry of Tourism piloted the integration of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), ASEAN Common Competency Standards for Tourism Professionals (ACCSTP), Common ASEAN Tourism Curriculum (CATC), Regional Qualifications Framework and Skills Recognition System (RQFSRS), and Indonesian Qualification Framework (IQF) into the National Curriculum (K-13) for hospitality and tourism education. Successfully trying out at hospitality and tourism colleges, the project was subsequently extended to vocational high schools. The study reported in this article investigated how the various policies were integrated by English teachers for their implementation in vocational high schools in a local Indonesian context and what outcomes and experiences resulted from this process. The article illustrates micro-level teacher agency in meeting regional, national and local policy mandates for preparing tourism and hospitality professionals for the common ASEAN job market.
{"title":"Teacher agency and the implementation of CEFR-like policies for English for tourism and hospitality: insights from local vocational high schools in Indonesia","authors":"Kamaludin Yusra, Y. Lestari, M. Hamid","doi":"10.1080/14664208.2021.1965739","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2021.1965739","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Tourism is a service industry that demands well-trained professionals with internationally accredited skills including English language proficiency. Meeting such demands has been one of the foremost concerns of the ASEAN ministries of tourism and education. In collaboration with ASEAN member countries and the Australian government, Indonesian Ministry of Education and Ministry of Tourism piloted the integration of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), ASEAN Common Competency Standards for Tourism Professionals (ACCSTP), Common ASEAN Tourism Curriculum (CATC), Regional Qualifications Framework and Skills Recognition System (RQFSRS), and Indonesian Qualification Framework (IQF) into the National Curriculum (K-13) for hospitality and tourism education. Successfully trying out at hospitality and tourism colleges, the project was subsequently extended to vocational high schools. The study reported in this article investigated how the various policies were integrated by English teachers for their implementation in vocational high schools in a local Indonesian context and what outcomes and experiences resulted from this process. The article illustrates micro-level teacher agency in meeting regional, national and local policy mandates for preparing tourism and hospitality professionals for the common ASEAN job market.","PeriodicalId":51704,"journal":{"name":"Current Issues in Language Planning","volume":"23 1","pages":"233 - 253"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45877425","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-11DOI: 10.1080/14664208.2021.1965742
H. Y. Lee, M. Hamid, I. Hardy
ABSTRACT Although most international organisations are, in principle, multilingual, the ten-member Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) has adopted a radical approach by operating monolingually, ostensibly for convenience and pragmatism. In order to provide an evaluation of the ASEAN policy context, this paper compares and contrasts ASEAN to two other more familiar international organisations, namely the United Nations (UN) and European Union (EU). The paper attempts to rationalise language policy and planning (LPP) in these organisations, grounded in principles such as equality, inclusivity, practicality, instrumentality, economic viability and even arguably, ‘neutrality’ in the context of ASEAN. These principles are discussed in relation to two underlying models of language ideology, i.e. linguistic pluralism and internationalisation, which characterise ASEAN, EU and UN LPP. The article presents the argument that ASEAN has embraced English-only monolingualism, rooted in internationalisation, while both UN and EU strive to achieve plurilingualism, albeit through divergent multilingual operational models. The analysis, however, shows that the ideology of linguistic pluralism characterising UN and EU is at best symbolic, as this ideology has practically maintained the hegemony of English and, to some extent, the other languages of power. This suggests that ASEAN may not have much to learn from EU or UN for an alternative to its English-only policy.
{"title":"Characterising language policy and planning in international organisations: ASEAN insights","authors":"H. Y. Lee, M. Hamid, I. Hardy","doi":"10.1080/14664208.2021.1965742","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2021.1965742","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Although most international organisations are, in principle, multilingual, the ten-member Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) has adopted a radical approach by operating monolingually, ostensibly for convenience and pragmatism. In order to provide an evaluation of the ASEAN policy context, this paper compares and contrasts ASEAN to two other more familiar international organisations, namely the United Nations (UN) and European Union (EU). The paper attempts to rationalise language policy and planning (LPP) in these organisations, grounded in principles such as equality, inclusivity, practicality, instrumentality, economic viability and even arguably, ‘neutrality’ in the context of ASEAN. These principles are discussed in relation to two underlying models of language ideology, i.e. linguistic pluralism and internationalisation, which characterise ASEAN, EU and UN LPP. The article presents the argument that ASEAN has embraced English-only monolingualism, rooted in internationalisation, while both UN and EU strive to achieve plurilingualism, albeit through divergent multilingual operational models. The analysis, however, shows that the ideology of linguistic pluralism characterising UN and EU is at best symbolic, as this ideology has practically maintained the hegemony of English and, to some extent, the other languages of power. This suggests that ASEAN may not have much to learn from EU or UN for an alternative to its English-only policy.","PeriodicalId":51704,"journal":{"name":"Current Issues in Language Planning","volume":"23 1","pages":"195 - 213"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45916204","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-13DOI: 10.1080/14664208.2021.1939988
Darlene Keydeniers, S. Aalberse, Sible Andringa, F. Kuiken
ABSTRACT This paper analyses the motivations behind the implementation of bilingual education in the Dutch preschool system and relates this to the status of Dutch in the Dutch educational system. Based on the analysis of policy documents and questionnaires filled in by parents and teachers, this study reveals two different underlying ideologies that the government, daycares and parents have adopted. The ideology of the Dutch government and daycare organizations visited by a Dutch-speaking audience is centered around Dutch-speaking children acquiring English as a foreign language. On the other hand, non-Dutch speaking parents and daycare organizations visited by an international audience rather want to expose non-Dutch speaking children to Dutch, to facilitate better integration into the Dutch community. The data thus suggest that not only English but also Dutch is important for many parents. Still, the introduction of bilingual daycares is part of an ongoing ‘Englishization’ of the Dutch educational system that has been taking place for decades. Future research should determine what a larger scale introduction means for the status of the Dutch language in the Dutch preschool system in the long run.
{"title":"Bilingual daycares in the Netherlands: an analysis of the implementation of bilingual input and underlying ideologies","authors":"Darlene Keydeniers, S. Aalberse, Sible Andringa, F. Kuiken","doi":"10.1080/14664208.2021.1939988","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2021.1939988","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper analyses the motivations behind the implementation of bilingual education in the Dutch preschool system and relates this to the status of Dutch in the Dutch educational system. Based on the analysis of policy documents and questionnaires filled in by parents and teachers, this study reveals two different underlying ideologies that the government, daycares and parents have adopted. The ideology of the Dutch government and daycare organizations visited by a Dutch-speaking audience is centered around Dutch-speaking children acquiring English as a foreign language. On the other hand, non-Dutch speaking parents and daycare organizations visited by an international audience rather want to expose non-Dutch speaking children to Dutch, to facilitate better integration into the Dutch community. The data thus suggest that not only English but also Dutch is important for many parents. Still, the introduction of bilingual daycares is part of an ongoing ‘Englishization’ of the Dutch educational system that has been taking place for decades. Future research should determine what a larger scale introduction means for the status of the Dutch language in the Dutch preschool system in the long run.","PeriodicalId":51704,"journal":{"name":"Current Issues in Language Planning","volume":"23 1","pages":"157 - 175"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14664208.2021.1939988","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42836573","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-09DOI: 10.1080/14664208.2021.1939976
F. Copland, Joanna McPake
ABSTRACT In 2003, Mary Louise Pratt published a hugely influential paper in Profession where she took to task misconceptions about multilingualism and language learning apparent in the USA in the wake of 9/11 and consequent counter-terrorism measures. She argued that a new public idea about language was necessary in order to ensure unity and security. This article argues that in the aftermath of Brexit, the UK also needs to develop a new public idea about language to ensure a future that is prosperous, socially, culturally and economically. To do so, it first challenges a number of prevalent myths about language learning and multilingualism in the UK through a review of scholarship, media articles and reports which focus on languages and multilingualism since 2013. It then suggests that interest in the Anglosphere has meant that the value of English is now artificially inflated and that the value of other languages is underplayed. We argue that this turn to the Anglosphere and to (English) monolingualism should be challenged through proposing a new public idea about language for post-Brexit UK.
{"title":"‘Building a new public idea about language’?: Multilingualism and language learning in the post-Brexit UK","authors":"F. Copland, Joanna McPake","doi":"10.1080/14664208.2021.1939976","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2021.1939976","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In 2003, Mary Louise Pratt published a hugely influential paper in Profession where she took to task misconceptions about multilingualism and language learning apparent in the USA in the wake of 9/11 and consequent counter-terrorism measures. She argued that a new public idea about language was necessary in order to ensure unity and security. This article argues that in the aftermath of Brexit, the UK also needs to develop a new public idea about language to ensure a future that is prosperous, socially, culturally and economically. To do so, it first challenges a number of prevalent myths about language learning and multilingualism in the UK through a review of scholarship, media articles and reports which focus on languages and multilingualism since 2013. It then suggests that interest in the Anglosphere has meant that the value of English is now artificially inflated and that the value of other languages is underplayed. We argue that this turn to the Anglosphere and to (English) monolingualism should be challenged through proposing a new public idea about language for post-Brexit UK.","PeriodicalId":51704,"journal":{"name":"Current Issues in Language Planning","volume":"23 1","pages":"117 - 136"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14664208.2021.1939976","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47437981","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-08DOI: 10.1080/14664208.2021.1939977
Lee Mackenzie
ABSTRACT This article critically analyses the extent to which research in the field of English and development in the global South supports the claim that English can contribute to development. Particular reference is made to the Colombian context, which, along with several other countries in Latin America, has prioritised English language teaching in recent years through a series of initiatives. In doing so this paper highlights domains where English skills may be more or less useful in developing contexts in general and in Colombia more specifically and identifies factors which may influence the role of English in development. To aid in this analysis, this article draws on Phillipson’s (Linguistic imperialism. Oxford University Press, 1992) theory of linguistic imperialism and relevant literature which looks at the role of English and development in the global South. The paper argues that although English may foster development in domains such as employment, trade, migration, and education, this is contingent upon a range of personal and contextual factors including level of Englishand socioeconomic status. It is also argued that, regardless of the contribution that English can make to development, interests in the global North are benefitting from the proliferation of this language in developing contexts.
{"title":"Linguistic imperialism, English, and development: implications for Colombia","authors":"Lee Mackenzie","doi":"10.1080/14664208.2021.1939977","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2021.1939977","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article critically analyses the extent to which research in the field of English and development in the global South supports the claim that English can contribute to development. Particular reference is made to the Colombian context, which, along with several other countries in Latin America, has prioritised English language teaching in recent years through a series of initiatives. In doing so this paper highlights domains where English skills may be more or less useful in developing contexts in general and in Colombia more specifically and identifies factors which may influence the role of English in development. To aid in this analysis, this article draws on Phillipson’s (Linguistic imperialism. Oxford University Press, 1992) theory of linguistic imperialism and relevant literature which looks at the role of English and development in the global South. The paper argues that although English may foster development in domains such as employment, trade, migration, and education, this is contingent upon a range of personal and contextual factors including level of Englishand socioeconomic status. It is also argued that, regardless of the contribution that English can make to development, interests in the global North are benefitting from the proliferation of this language in developing contexts.","PeriodicalId":51704,"journal":{"name":"Current Issues in Language Planning","volume":"23 1","pages":"137 - 156"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14664208.2021.1939977","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46097241","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-07DOI: 10.1080/14664208.2021.1936397
F. M. Phaka, Dax Ovid
ABSTRACT The discussion of African languages as languages of learning and teaching can be traced back to the 1980s. To date, this discussion still continues and efforts to intellectualise African languages have been lax. Here, we present practical South African examples of higher education achievements in African languages that demonstrate the challenges and opportunities of African language planning and corpus development. We particularly focus on the development of a peer-reviewed bilingual (IsiZulu and English) book on the frogs of Zululand, South Africa. The publication under consideration falls within the life sciences, and it is the first comprehensive book on South African frogs to be written in an African language. Developing life sciences reading material in vernacular is a time-consuming process that requires a multidisciplinary team which understands both life and social sciences. Furthermore, when vocabulary relating to a focal species is undocumented, field research is necessary to identify the nuances of a specific language or culture. This language planning effort under discussion demonstrates the IsiZulu language’s ability to communicate life sciences and how language planning efforts can be made integrative and inclusive of previously marginalised languages.
{"title":"Life sciences reading material in vernacular: lessons from developing a bilingual (IsiZulu and English) book on South African frogs","authors":"F. M. Phaka, Dax Ovid","doi":"10.1080/14664208.2021.1936397","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2021.1936397","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The discussion of African languages as languages of learning and teaching can be traced back to the 1980s. To date, this discussion still continues and efforts to intellectualise African languages have been lax. Here, we present practical South African examples of higher education achievements in African languages that demonstrate the challenges and opportunities of African language planning and corpus development. We particularly focus on the development of a peer-reviewed bilingual (IsiZulu and English) book on the frogs of Zululand, South Africa. The publication under consideration falls within the life sciences, and it is the first comprehensive book on South African frogs to be written in an African language. Developing life sciences reading material in vernacular is a time-consuming process that requires a multidisciplinary team which understands both life and social sciences. Furthermore, when vocabulary relating to a focal species is undocumented, field research is necessary to identify the nuances of a specific language or culture. This language planning effort under discussion demonstrates the IsiZulu language’s ability to communicate life sciences and how language planning efforts can be made integrative and inclusive of previously marginalised languages.","PeriodicalId":51704,"journal":{"name":"Current Issues in Language Planning","volume":"23 1","pages":"96 - 111"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2021-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14664208.2021.1936397","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48866420","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：