Evaluating Diglossia

The McKay & Bokhrts-Heng readings from this week elaborate on topics that we have previously discussed in class but also introduce new, interesting ideas.  In one of the most important parts of Chapter 2, the authors describe three different contexts in which English is studied.  These contexts are explained by the Concentric Circle model.  The inner circle describes countries in which English is the native language.  The outer circle refers to countries where English is spoken as an official or second language, but English is not necessarily the primarily language.   The expanding circle is countries where English is widely studied as a foreign language such as China, Germany, and Korea (29).  Although these circles are distinct, globalization is once again diminishing borders (in this case the differences between these contexts).  Many speakers in Outer Circle countries have developed functional nativeness similar to the levels of proficiency found in Inner Circle countries (30).  Nevertheless, each circle does have distinguishing characteristics that make it a unique English learning context.

            An interesting and significant difference exists in the manner that the United Kingdom and the United States (two Inner Circle countries) teach English in their schools.  The policy of Great Britain is to keep English Learners in general education classrooms without any kind of special kind of attention or pull-out group.  The rationale behind this policy is that identifying and separating English Learners would lead to further isolation and discrimination from the rest of society (33).  On the contrary, many educational leaders in the United States believe that it is necessary to pull English Learners out of regular classes in order to properly to support students’ language development.  It is evident that drastic differences exist between the two policies, but it is still unclear which policy is more effective.  Although the United States’ policy could be more beneficial to students’ language needs, isolation of English learning students could lead to more discrimination from other students and members of society.  I agree most with Australia’s National Language Policy detailed on page 35.  The four guiding tenets of this policy are: competence in English, maintenance and development of languages other than English, provision of services in languages other than English, and opportunities for learning second languages.  I would advocate a similar agenda in the United States, but I feel like many people would disagree with me.  Some extremists would push for English to be the only language taught in other schools.  Other educators would argue language policies should be determined by the states, or even the individual schools; they would say that it is not the federal government’s place to create national language or education policies.  Once again, the connections between language, culture, and politics are made evident.

            The most important concept mentioned in chapter 3 is the idea of diglossia.  Diglossia refers to a community that uses two different dialects or languages regularly based on the context or the level of formality.  Often there is a high language (H-language) used in formal situations while other languages (L-languages) are used in informal domains.  In the United States, English is usually the H-language used in public settings while a multitude of different languages are used in respective homes and communities.  Although English is not the official language, its status as the H-language makes learning English much more essential in the United States society than other languages.  I believe that having one common and unifying language is a good thing for society, but other languages should not be oppressed and allowed to be used only in homes.  People should have the freedom to communicate in public however they please.  However, imagine a society without one or two H-languages.  How could a society function unless the majority of people speak the same language or languages?  For this reason, I agree with the dominant use of one language in a society.  However, the learning of other languages should be encouraged, not oppressed. 

The Idea of the Millenium

            The word globalization has been repeated over and over again since the start of the new millennium.  I have read a lot about globalization’s impact on business, information sharing, and popular culture.  I didn’t realize globalization’s impact on language until reading chapter 1 of International English in Its Sociolinguistic Contexts.  However, even before reading this section, I would have been able to determine globalization’s effect on language knowing that it has dramatically affected the culture of the world.  One of the most important things that I have learned in this class is the intertwinement of language and culture, so if globalization is changing the world’s culture it must have an impact on language.

            There are two various positions on globalization in specific relation to the English language; these two views are described in depth on page 3.  The homogeny position views the spread of English as a way of unifying the world’s culture.  Some people see the dominance of one language as a way of spreading culture while others believe that this leads to the loss of other languages and reflects “imperialism and colonization”.  In contrast, the heterogeny position is where individuals describe the features of World Englishes as a sign of the pluricentricism that has been brought about by globalization.  The spread of English has resulted in the creation of different varieties of English around the world.  Ultimately, the effect of globalization on the use of English appears to be a combination of homogenization and heterogenization.  On page 3 it states that the impact of globalization on English use is “a fluid mixture of cultural heritage and popular culture, of change and tradition, of border crossing and ethnic affiliation, of global appropriation and local contextualization.”       

            I enjoyed reading the part about the incentives for learning English.  There are three major incentives for learning English according to the text: economic, educational, and mass media incentives (10).  My previous thinking and learning in this course have led me to examine the connections between these three incentives.  Learning English for educational purposes often leads to monetary rewards.  These monetary rewards can lead to the enjoyment of the world’s most popular music, movies, television, and entertainment; all of these categories are dominated by English.  From another perspective, learning English for economic motives or in the work place could expand one’s knowledge and desire for further education.  English is often a requirement move up a company’s hierarchy; moving up the hierarchy leads to more educational and enrichment opportunities. 

            In my opinion, the most compelling part of the text was an idea contained in the summary on page 25.  The first point of the summary suggests that some people feel that a shared language among all cultures is necessary.  This is a super interesting idea to me, and I agree that a shared language across all cultures would connect the world more than ever before.  Imagine a world in which the majority of humans spoke the same language.  More information can be shared than ever before and problems and concerns can be addressed without the worry of language barriers.  I am not advocating for a dominant world language because I speak English; I do not care where the dominant world language comes from.  I just like the idea of having one language to connect citizens throughout all cultures.  However, this idea seems relatively impossible.  There are so many citizens of the world that only speak indigenous languages that do not have access to the resources to learn English or another heavily spoken language.  In addition, the use of only one language would lead to the loss of culture.  As discussed in this class many times, so much of culture is conveyed through language.  The cease of a language’s use would inevitably lead to lost knowledge or cultural customs, especially amongst indigenous peoples.  So instead of forcing people to learn one language instead of another, why shouldn’t people learn two?

            In my ideal world, all people in the world would maintain their current language (no matter what it is) and then learn an agreed-upon second language.  I am unsure of a politically correct way to determine which language should be used for global purposes; I will leave that to the politicians.  This plan would prevent people from losing previous cultures but also still push for an even further increase in global communication.  Obviously it would take a plethora of resources to facilitate a world language but ultimately the benefits would outweigh the costs. 

Week 10: Is 2 cultures better than 1?

I found the “Becoming Black” article to be the most interesting this week.  This article raised numerous interesting thoughts and questions.  I have always been intrigued by the contrasting views of “black culture” by African Americans.  On one side of the spectrum, some black people are insulted by being labeled as having a separate culture from white people and other ethnic groups.  They do not want to stand out from other groups it appears.  In contrast, it seems to me that there is a large group of black people that love having a distinct and separate “black culture”.  This culture is not violent or rebellious but simply different from the general popular culture (one usually dictated by white people).  However, this distinct culture has also led to further stereotyping from whites and other majority groups.  For example, some white people may assume that all black people follow and belong to this unique “black/hip-hop culture”.  This assumption is part of a social imaginary which is described on page 353 as “a discursive space or a representation in which they are already constructed, imagined, and positioned and thus are treated by the hegemonic discourses and dominant groups, respectively, as Blacks.”  The problem with social imaginary is that it leads to black people once again being treated differently than white people.  History has certainly taught us that this is not a good thing.  Another interesting point was raised on page 366 about the potential use of rap in the classroom.   Hip-hop is an undeniably important part to the “black culture”, so shouldn’t it be included in the culture of the classroom?  Although I personally love the rap/hip-hop genre of music, I feel that many of the popular modern songs are inappropriate for use in a school setting.  Many of the song lyrics focus on drugs, drinking, and the extreme importance of money.  Aren’t these the exact same things that most teachers and administrators spend so much time turning their kids away from?  However, I do agree with the statement on page 367 that teachers should keep up with popular culture.  How can teachers connect on a personal level with their students if they’re living in the past?  

            The other two articles were more similar in nature and dealt with the issue of race in education.   In my eyes, the most important take-away of the Kubota & Lin article was the emphasis that “race” is a social construct and not a scientific identifier.  In raw terms, “race” is just a way of grouping people that look similar together.  For example, the majority of Americans and Western European citizens with lighter skin are often simply referred to as “white”.  People in this group of “whites” come from different origins, speak different languages, and have different cultures.  In many cases the only similarity is the color of their skin, which is essentially a meaningless characteristic.  I loved the quote on page 2 that emphasized that 99.9% of human genes are shared.  This is an awesome fact that I will repeat to my students often and hope that they keep in mind.  However, I am not advocating that teachers and students behave like they are color blind.  On page 16, the authors articulate why not recognizing differences is a bad idea.  Teachers need to be sensitive, not color blind.  Differences should be accepted and respected, but they shouldn’t be used to separate students. 

            The final article dealt with the treatment of Arab exchange students in the United Kingdom.  At the beginning of the article, many of the participants believed that citizens of the United Kingdom viewed them as foreign exchange students or simply as foreign.  At the end of the experience, however, multiple participants gave accounts of how they were seen distinctly as Arab or Middle-Eastern.  This often led to racial discrimination and racial profiling.  Although the previous article proved that “race” has no scientific value, this article demonstrated that concept of “race” is still very important in society and can have serious negative consequences (616).  The fear of Middle Eastern people that has resulted from the aftermath of 9/11 has been labeled as Islamophobia (617).  Although people from the Middle East have always faced discrimination, the harassment and discrimination that they faced surged after the tragedy of September 11^th.  This intense racism has made Muslims much more aware of their own identities (621).  Unfortunately, since 9/11, people from the Middle East have been othered arguably more than any other group. 

Our Representations, Their Futures

            Taylor Mendes’ article was one of my favorite readings of the year thus far.  This information will be extremely important and applicable once I begin teaching.  In addition, Taylor-Mendes caused me to pause and critically think about things that I never considered before.  One of my most important questions involves whether or not textbooks are accurate portrayals of culture.  According to most of the opinions in this article, they are not.  The reading measures the attitudes of teachers and students in Brazil towards their EFL (English as a Foreign Language) textbooks.  The students and teachers were to analyze if some groups are shown in a more positive light than others and if some groups are consistently ignored or fail to be shown in examples or illustrations.  11 students and four teachers are used in this study.  Each participant was given an opportunity to voice their opinion, questions, and concerns during personal interviewers with the researchers. 

            The introductory comments of a student named Fatima on page 64 represents much of the sentiment expressed in this article.  Fatima describes the differences in how black people and white people are represented in textbooks.  She wonders why black people are usually depicted as poor and desperate while white people are portrayed as powerful and happy.  Based on depictions in textbooks, some students may wonder if black people are capable of succeeding and if white people can fail.  Unfortunately, textbooks and other classroom resources, and even teachers, can convey these false stereotypes to even elementary school students (65).  For example, a white elementary student may consistently see white people portrayed as rich and powerful and black people shown as poor and helpless.  This white student may begin to think that all white people are rich and all black people are helpless.  These false beliefs often turn into racist attitudes and even discriminatory actions. 

            On the top of page 67, it is briefly mentioned that some people hold the belief that certain groups or people own English and should be responsible for teaching it.  Once again, this idea can be traced back to the use of textbooks and classroom materials.  How often are non-whites shown teaching English?  Why are all of the students learning English children of color?  No group of people is better English speakers than others.  Teachers—especially at the elementary level--need to be aware that their choice of textbooks and example resources could influence how their students view other social and cultural groups. 

            The study in Brazil concluded that white people dominate the positive images in textbooks while black people are typically represented unfavorably.  As teachers, it is hypocritical for us to preach about equality, fairness, and opportunity but then consistently show images of one group being superior to others.  If the given textbooks consistently demonstrate negative stereotypes, it is our duty as teachers to utilize outside resources that portray all groups in a favorable manner.  This goes beyond hanging up posters of Michael Jordan, Malcolm X, or Martin Luther King.  Minority groups need to be able to see themselves as doctors, lawyers, and teachers them.  These images could have powerful impacts and encourage them to pursue higher educations.  Negative images of certain groups will only lead to racism and negative self-fulfilling prophecies. 

Week 7 Blog: Analyzing Cultural Differences in Writing and Speech

The documentary that we watched in class at the end of last week’s class examined cultural differences in writing and gave tips on how to assess and help the writing of international students.  The video began by once again describing Kaplan’s idea of contrastive rhetoric and how students’ writing in second languages is impacted by their primary languages and cultures.  An example of how contrastive rhetoric can reveal cultural differences was demonstrated by the Japanese female student who lost points for describing “extra information”.  She did not describe what she saw as unnecessary or irrelevant information because in Japanese culture detailed descriptions of events are more common and natural than a brief summary.  For example, a student from the U.S. may write “there was a fight between two guys” while the Japanese student provides a detailed description of the event leading to the fight between the two guys.  This is a cultural difference, not a difference in writing ability.  Another reason for the directness of American prose is because in the United States the author is responsible for conveying a message.  In many other cultures, including Japan, it is the reader’s responsibility to determine the author’s message.  Another writing difference between the United States’ culture and other cultures is the use of citations.  In the U.S. citations are of extreme importance because using information that is not one’s own is considered stealing.  This is largely a reflection of the individualistic style of American culture.  On the contrary, other collectivist cultures place less emphasis on citations because information is shared among the public.  Information is not a private enterprise but a shared commodity.  While the documentary highlighted differences in writing between cultures, the two articles for this week analyzed the impact of culture on speech.

            Marra’s article utilized authentic data to research workplace communication.  A large portion of the article describes how research should be conducted and the importance of considering the culture of one’s participants when designing a study.  In my opinion, Marra’s most insightful point on this topic was his statement that “participants are NOT researched on, but researched with” (305).  Allowing participants to actively participate in the conduction of the research is super important because this research and data often leads to critical self-reflection by the workers.  This reflection will likely cause a change in communication patterns and hopefully lead to a more productive workplace.  Isn’t that one of the primary goals of these research studies?  Hopefully the knowledge we learn from language studies leads to practical improvements and more effective communication.  A major point that I took from the article was that importance of having knowledge of a culture before evaluating the communicative practices of that culture.  Marra’s study examined the workplace communication of two different cultures in New Zealand: the Maori and the Pakeha.  If one does not understand the nature of the Maori culture and hears two workers constantly joking around, one may assume that these workers are lazy or unproductive.  However, the Maori culture could be known for having a light-hearted and fun work environment and these could actually be great workers.  As demonstrated in this class so many times before, one cannot judge others without understanding. 

      Baker’s article focused on English as a Lingua Franca.  According to the text, the term English as a lingua franca is ‘‘a way of referring to communication in English between speakers with different first languages” (569).  For example, a native Spanish speaker and a native French speaker who communicate via English would be using the language as a lingua franca.  English has become a truly global language and its use as a lingua franca has become increasingly more common.  English’s prevalence in a wide variety of different cultures demonstrates a fluid and dynamic relationship between language and cultures.  As articulated by Baker, “English is not property of one culture or community” (568).  Many Americans often think of English as being “our” language, but we need to embrace the philosophy that all people should have the freedom to speak all languages.  In a country founded on freedom, it is ironic and disturbing that some people have tried to restrict others from learning perhaps the world’s most influential language. 

I hope Barbara and David ended up together...

Although it saddens me not knowing if Barbara and David winded up together, I still gained insightful information from all three articles.  From Connor’s article on contrastive rhetoric, I thought critically about the difficulties and challenges of writing in a second language.  Using its most basic definition, contrastive rhetoric is the study of how a person’s first language (and culture) influences his or her writing in a second language.  This concept was created based off research by Robert Kaplan.  One of Kaplan’s primary points was that different cultures have different rhetorical tendencies.  Page 219 offers strategies of how to use the analysis of contrastive rhetoric in the classroom.  The strategy that I liked the most--and plan on using--is simply having students compare the organization structures and features of their L1 and L2.   This is a simple strategy, but it will allow students to make fair comparisons between their two languages without making one language seem inferior to the other.  The article gives examples of comparisons and text analyses using the concept of contrastive rhetoric.  Many of the comparisons are between English and either Finnish or Flemish.  In an analysis of letters (In English) to potential employers, the Flemish applicant is much more direct and brisk than his U.S. counterpart.  One of the central arguments of this article is that this is a reflection of the Flemish culture or writing style as opposed to a reflection of the Flemish’s applicant lack of English or weak writing skills.   Many people assume the briefness or directness of a non-native English speaker’s writing reflects a lack of intelligence because many Americans assume that the “Western” style of writing (organization, complexity, etc.) are superior to the styles of other cultures (as detailed on page 233).     

I am in complete disagreement with Atkinson’s belief that “critical thinking is a social practice unique to western cultural traditions (11).  Dangerous assumptions like this are what often limit ESL students and coerces them into negative self-fulfilling prophecies.  As we have discussed in this class many times, each distinct culture is also completely filled with individual differences and variety.  It is simply wrong to say that an entire culture is incapable of critical thinking.  However, I enjoyed reading Kubota’s narrative about Barbara.   Barbara’s story should inspire those teachers that feel they are not “diverse” or have never had an opportunity to travel outside their own culture.  Without ever leaving the country or learning another language, Barbara transformed from a culturally unaware teacher to a complete advocate of multicultural education.  With the help of her colleague Carol and her love interest David, Barbara changed how she ran her classroom.  For example, she phrased questions and comparisons to avoid making American culture seem more sophisticated or superior to other cultures.  Even something as simple as a teacher’s word choice can change the comfort level of the students in the classroom. 

Kubota’s second article dealt with the constructions and perceptions of the Japanese culture.  The concept of dynamic culture once again occurs on page 11.  Kubota cautions that although certain perceptions, stereotypes, and characteristics can be linked to certain cultures, no culture remains static and completely identifies with all of those assumptions and perceptions.  Once again on page 13, Atkinson makes the case that students from Asian cultures are less capable of critical thinking because of traditional cultural values such as obedience and collectivism.  However, I am in agreement with the points that Kubota makes on the bottom of page 15.  He emphasizes “the similarity between cultures, diversity within a culture, and the idiosyncratic and unpredictable nature of learning processes” (15).  Again these views are more consistent with the newer, more dynamic, view of culture.  A concept that intrigued me throughout the article was Kubota’s use of “the Other”.  I believe the point that Kubota is trying to make is that we associate people different from ourselves as “odd” or “abnormal” so that we do not feel that way about our own selves.  In addition, we often assign the “others” the negative characteristics that we would not assign ourselves.  This phenomenon may be more of an example of a defense mechanism than an example of arrogance. 

Week 5 Blog: The Danger of Stereotypes

         Kumaravadivelu's article on cultural stereotypes is extremely useful to me because it highlights the mistakes that I do not want to commit as an educator.  I think the stereotyping of all diverse groups and cultures that appear similar as “Asian” is a perfect example of an unfair generalization made by schools.  For example, I have seen the term “Asian” as an identifying category on state exams and other demographic surveys.  The three major stereotypes identified on page 710 of Kumaravadivelu’s article are that “Asians”: are obedient to authority, lack critical thinking skills, and do not participate in classroom interaction.  To make these assumptions about any single race or cultural group is inaccurate, but to make these generalizations about dozens of unique cultural groups (that simply appear similar) is ridiculous.  Individual differences are completely ignored according to such logic.  However, unfortunately, many older educators were never trained to teach culturally or to think diversely.  So these stereotypes may not seem incorrect at all in their eyes. 

            Stereotypes can create unwanted self-fulfilling prophecies.  For example, treating all “Asian” students a certain way based on previous perceptions or assumptions could result in similar behavior for all Asian students.  This point is summarized by Kumaravadivelu’s point that, “If Asian students do indeed adopt the passive classroom attitudes that are often claimed, this is more likely to be a consequence of the educational contexts that have been or are now provided for them, than of any inherent dispositions of the students themselves” (712).  This quote demonstrates that the attitudes and performances of teachers are what determine the behavior of students or groups of students more than anything else.  My favorite point addressed in this article is at the bottom of page 715 about how all people are victims and victimizers of stereotypes.  For example, a black student who is the victim of verbal harassment from other white students could then go on to stereotype all white students as being mean and racist.  Stereotypes and perceptions of cultural groups really do affect everyone.