Variant issue 22    back to issue list

Biting your tongue: Globalised power and the international language
Eilish Gaffey

The notion that an international lingua franca is necessary to allow worldwide communication has emerged in correspondence with the ongoing process of globalisation.1 Although the spread of the English language is often portrayed as an inevitable consequence of global forces, it can also be conceived as a subtle and insidious form of western imperialism. The proliferation of English Language Teaching (ELT) programmes can be viewed as an instrumental part of this. The inequality produced from the global spread of English, through the threat it poses to indigenous languages and cultures, raises questions about the common representation of ELT as universally beneficial.
Merely focusing on the function of language as a means of generating mutual intelligibility trivialises its importance in individual identity and group culture. According to the Whorfian hypothesis, the structure of a language directly influences how speakers will understand and organise the social and natural world around them.2 In opposition to this, sociolinguists have tended to view language as a reflection of the social structure.3 Similarly, the structural-functionalist approach to language identifies its functional role in the maintenance of social structure.4 All of these positions, however, point to the integral role of language in the formation of personal and distinctive cultural meanings and identity. Language can thus be seen as a repository of a unique world view, so that the disappearance of a particular language will have major social consequences.
Language also cannot be removed from its economic and political context. According to Antonio Gramsci, language is a field of force where different ideologies, interests and styles can compete.5 Likewise, the post-structuralist position moves beyond the conception of language as merely a functional linguistic system, pointing to the existence of 'discourses', the articulations of ideology and power relations in language. The promotion of and resistance to the global spread of English, therefore, cannot be separated from broader economic, social and political contexts.6

The global spread of English
Braj Kachru's 'circles' model outlines the different roles English plays in different countries, and how this relates to its powerful global position. At the centre, including the economically-powerful countries of Britain, Australia and the USA, English is the core language of all public discourse. Exemplified in India and South Africa, the outer circle is composed of countries where English has had a long history of institutionalised functions and is particularly important in the areas of education and political administration. Finally, within the expanding circle, English is utilised for specific purposes such as for scientific knowledge (as seen in China and Japan).7 Chinese is the world's most commonly-spoken language but is subordinate to English in terms of economic significance; English has gained supremacy because it has become the "main language of books, newspapers, airport and air-traffic control, international business and academic conferences, science, technology, medicine, diplomacy, sports, international competitions, pop music, and advertising".8
The spread of English can be seen as the consequence of its penetration into economic and political institutions worldwide, which in turn arose from the growth in the global economic market controlled by the English-speaking countries.9 Language planning has been used for centuries in the engineering of social change; it can be argued that the increase in English language usage is the result of a directly orchestrated systematic strategy, particularly through education policies, to facilitate the development of Anglo-American political and economic power. Robert Phillipson suggests that "the very concept of an international, or world, language was an invention of Western imperialism".10
The process of globalisation, facilitated by rapid advancements in information and communications technology and marked by increased mass communication and movement of people, can be viewed as imperialist in spirit. Changes in structural relations have helped maintain global inequalities, which in turn serve the interests of capitalism in English-speaking countries. Thus, English has become the language of capitalism. As well as functioning as the medium of globalisation, English also works as a tool for its extension, the gatekeeper of access to international trade and information.11
The attempt to create a dominant global position for English can be traced back to the nineteenth century, when British colonialism reached every continent and language teaching came to be used for the active development of political unity. English successfully acquired an official status in many countries because it was promoted as a neutral solution to competition between indigenous languages; many African countries have retained it as a lingua franca for communication at a national level. Because Britain was one of the earliest countries to develop industrially, English developed a monopoly of certain technical terminology. By the end of the century, the USA became a major influence in the global spread of English, its economy surpassing that of Britain. "The fact that the North Americans speak English" was Bismarck's response in 1898 when asked what he believed was the most important feature in the determining of modern history.12 Linguistic imperialism was then used in conjunction with military colonisation, with language central to the conduct of trade and the communication of information and cultural norms. Western planning policies, and in particular the introduction of British and American teaching programmes, were instrumental in this process.13
Language planning was chiefly justified through the application of the core ideas of Modernisation Theory which argued that countries could be successfully modernised in a similar manner to the rebuilding of Europe. This ethnocentric interventionist approach, which included the Enlightenment ideal of creating human progress through educational investment, produced the perception of a dichotomy between so-called developed and developing countries, whereby the latter needed to be liberated from traditional institutional structures which inhibited economic growth.14 Furthermore, it was asserted that improvements could be achieved through an imitation of the institutions and cultures of industrialised countries. Recent approaches, such as Dependency Theory and World Systems Theory, have questioned the notion of a linear development towards modernity and point to the role of aid in disguising business investments. Modernised western countries are considered responsible for creating and maintaining the barriers to economic prosperity and international equality.15
The use of English in maintaining and extending western power has also depended on an imperialist discourse whereby the creation of a hegemonic position for English has been sought. This has involved the presentation of English language learning as commonsensical; an idea to be internalised even though it may not be in the interests of non-native speakers to do so.16 English can then be viewed as the 'Trojan horse' of western imperialism.17 The implied superiority of English can be linked to its promotion as a language which is intrinsically varied, interesting and capable of adapting to societal changes although it is, in fact, an extremely difficult language to learn, particularly because of its unusual vowel sounds and highly idiomatic nature.18 The endeavour to create an ideology whereby acquiring a knowledge of English is necessary to overcome disadvantage is also enhanced through extrinsic factors, with huge levels of resources being allocated towards the training of teachers and the publication of textbooks and dictionaries. Perhaps the most significant aspect relating to the status of English is the emphasis placed on its functional qualities in offering potential access to information, prestige and economic prosperity.19

The ideology of English
The idea that language assists in achieving a better quality of life is the core dogma of language planning, and the supposed functional benefits of English mean that acquiring knowledge of it is deemed a practical solution to economic disadvantage. This notion is particularly supported by a frequent exaggeration of the benefits of monolingual communication. A study conducted by Fishman in 1968 suggested that a correlation exists between financial success and communication, and that this is facilitated by linguistic homogeneity. His findings have been unquestioningly accepted although those states which displayed economic prosperity were also educationally and politically stable. English is usually presented as the most feasible lingua franca, especially in African countries.20 The glorification of English extends also to its ideological connection to social organisation and democracy, with an implication that it can serve as the voice of freedom and be used as a symbol of unity.21
While the development of hegemony relies on a promotion of the perceived benefits of one language, there will also be a corresponding inferred threat that negative consequences will result from a failure to convert to the dominant ideology. The attribution of undesirable connotations, such as poverty and conflict, to minority languages, which are then seen as handicaps to accessing resources, is intended to increase the desire to acquire knowledge of English.22 A disciplining of those who do not comply can also occur, exemplified in the denial of political rights to non-English speakers in Britain and the USA.23
However, the very spread of English has meant that the UK and the USA no longer have sole possession of English: its fragmentation into international varieties is thus possible. The success of linguistic imperialism then depends on the dominant countries retaining authority, through a lack of reciprocity, exemplified in the standardisation of English through dictionaries and texts which are controlled by the educational and media institutions of western industrialised countries.24 The flow of knowledge through English is largely unidirectional as seen in the almost monopolistic control by the USA over the software industry, at a time when the Internet is becoming increasingly important in international communication.25 The greatest possible threat to the use of English as a global language "it has been said with more than a little irony, would have taken place a generation ago - if Bill Gates had grown up speaking Chinese Language".26 However, despite efforts to hinder the legitimacy of alternative varieties of English, the development of telecommunications technology can provide an opening for the organisation of resistance to a dominant capitalist ideology.
The aim to foster an asymmetrical relationship in the flow of information can be extended to the dissemination of western culture, so that linguistic and cultural imperialism are clearly intertwined. The USA spends a larger proportion of its gross national product on mass advertising than any other country and the enormous circulation of its newspapers is unequalled.27 There has been growing interest in art forms from developing countries but the USA still retains a strong position in the international music and film markets so that "it is extremely difficult for a society to practice the free flow of media and enjoy a national culture at the same time - unless it happens to be the United States of America".28 In the Arab world, globalisation and the international spread of English are often viewed as synonymous with Americanisation; American culture is present in a variety of forms, including fashion, entertainment, food and business transactions. Similarly, the cultural and ideological consequences of the ideological elevation of English can be seen in East and South East Asia where the language is presented as a 'magic wand' for gaining access to the perceived advantages of an American lifestyle.29

ELT and globalised culture
The international spread of English has primarily occurred through the medium of education, which has always been a major part of language planning. English is the main medium of teaching in higher education in many nations, including countries where it has not achieved official status. ELT is one of the world's largest expanding industries; it is estimated that 1,000 million people may currently be learning English.30 ELT is presented as a service industry, a response to the increasing global demand for English, but it can be argued that this demand has been manufactured by those countries that are responsible for the provision of foreign teaching programmes. The retention of control over the teaching of English facilitates its use as a form of linguistic imperialism.31
The frequent perception of ELT as an area distinct from broader political policy is misleading, as seen in the authority of the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office to determine which countries will be targeted for the introduction of teaching programmes (currently the focus is on Africa and the Middle East, areas that are of great strategic importance for Anglo-American political and commercial connections). Winston Churchill clearly recognised the economic and political advantages of a spread in English abroad: "I am very much interested in the question of basic English. The widespread use of this would be a gain for us far more durable and fruitful than the annexation of great provinces".32 The original objective of the British Council, alongside the promotion of British culture, was the spread of the English language.33
The British Council, in its early stages, explicitly referred to its role in the active establishment of English as a universal language and in the 1950s it began a collaboration with the USA, which involved the joint teaching of courses. At this point, both countries adopted a policy of promoting the use of English as an international second language in order to develop and maintain western economic interests.34
ELT providers have focused almost exclusively on professionalism in teaching, which facilitates a perceived separation of ELT from its political, economic and cultural context and means that the introduction of an explicit imperialist agenda can now be avoided. The British Council set up the School of Applied Linguistics in 1957 to give its teaching programmes a theoretical basis but the studies conducted therein remained firmly within the field of functional linguistics, excluding areas such as psychology, sociology and anthropology. Its research policy continues to avoid any analysis of broader issues and focuses mainly on language, literature and teaching practices. Funds are not allocated directly towards research, which generally involves an evaluation of small projects. The disconnection of pedagogy from its relationship with political and economic concerns serves to absolve ELT experts from questions of cultural and linguistic imperialism and allows for the assumption by teachers that their services are undeniably beneficial in the counteracting of underdevelopment and promoting democracy.35
The preoccupation with teaching practices draws attention away from the ideological implications of ELT, with the result that teachers may remain unaware of the political contexts of education. Power relations in classrooms reflect authority-relations Kachru's 'centre'. Traditionally, classes have been organised in a hierarchical fashion where the teacher often directs choral responses from students. More recently, methods have been adopted which appear to give more control to students but this frequently places them in a situation whereby they are forced to lead discussions at the command of a teacher who continues to follow a curriculum and encourages students to give correct answers, rather than allowing debates over rationality or meaning.36 Even when teachers recognise the imperialist agenda of ELT, they are generally employed as short-term employees and trained to use an uncritical pedagogy so that it is extremely difficult for them to apply a more flexible approach to the teaching of English.
Similarly, teachers may also remain largely unconscious of their implicit role in the dissemination of western culture. This ethnocentric approach, where teachers will always work according to their own world view, means that learners are often stigmatised as deficient and so need to be educated and re-socialised. The notion that ELT programmes can be applied uniformly irrespective of context ultimately leads to a devaluing of other cultures and education systems. Efforts are not made to integrate teachers into communities and the blurring of lines between different types of ELT, such as English as a Foreign Language (EFL) or English as a Second Language (ESL), conveys that little differentiation is made between the needs of various groups. Course content frequently contradicts the norms and values of other societies and even when a more cosmopolitan approach is attempted in the preparation of textbooks and curricula, this has tended to deal with the area of travel, even though notions of holiday romances and the casual spending of money are inappropriate to many cultural groups.37
Outlined at the Makeree conference in 1961, the tenets of ELT reflect its eurocentric approach and lend support to the inequality produced from the global spread of English. For example, the principle that monolingual instruction will foster efficiency facilitates a legitimation of a patronising view of native languages and cultures and has allowed bilingualism to be associated with poverty and conflict. In the USA, ELT has been used to aid the assimilation of foreign languages into English. Resistance has occurred here, however, where groups have attempted a revival of minority languages, as in the introduction of bilingual signage in areas of New York to facilitate the large Puerto Rican community.38 The perceived threat to the dominance of English can be seen in the foundation of the English Only Movement in the USA, which can be seen as a form of racism.39 The advocation of monolingualism has often led to the suppression of minority languages and cultures.40 Even when the existence of indigenous languages has not been directly threatened, ELT programmes have allowed for the adoption of English loan words so that some languages have undergone major structural changes through linguistic borrowing.
The ELT tenet that the ideal teacher will be a native speaker who can serve as a model for students to aspire towards, ensures that teachers retain their authoritative status and a monopoly over the meaning of words.41 This also facilitates a possible stratification within the English language, with so-called Standard English holding the highest position, followed by American English. A study conducted by L. E. Smith suggests that native speakers are among the least intelligible when providing instruction. He also argues that where teachers have English as their mother tongue, students tend to be held responsible when problems with understanding arise.42 The placing of responsibility on students rather than teachers in the occurrence of language learning difficulties reflects a neo-classical approach which concentrates on individuals and allows the motives and consequences of ELT to remain unquestioned. This focus on individualism, an important feature of capitalist ideology, can be linked to language planning as part of promoting the global spread of English.
Unequal access to ELT programmes also play a major part in the reproduction of existing social structures and facilitates the maintenance of inequalities. An exploration of the broader issues surrounding ELT, through the adoption of a historical-structural approach, shows that education allows for the institutionalisation and rationalisation of inequality. Many countries on the 'periphery' are characterised by a dual system where English can be used as a barrier to entry to academic and political institutions. The confining of English to certain domains can further threaten local languages through linguistic curtailment, where it retains a monopoly over words used in particular fields.43
If ELT can be conceived as an integral element of contemporary linguistic imperialism, questions can be raised about its potential introduction into Iraq. If military occupation becomes illegal, it can be argued that the teaching of English will be used as an instrument for the retention of US dominance where "EFL administrators and teacher trainers in the British Council and United States Information Agency are likely poised to hitch a ride into Basra and Baghdad on the back of the tanks, laying the groundwork for the Operation Iraqi English Literacy to follow" [Editor's Note: Perhaps 'Operation Iraqi Literacy' would have a more apt acronym?].44 As an ELT teacher, Julian Edge raises concerns about the role of his colleagues in the creation of a hegemonic position for English in Iraq which would serve to reinforce current power structures: "I believe that it is now possible to see us, EFL teachers, as a second wave of imperial troopers. Before the armoured divisions have withdrawn from the city limits, while the soldiers are still patrolling the streets, English teachers will be facilitating the policies that the tanks were sent to impose".45

Resisting the linguistic imperative
Viewing the global spread of English, and the instrumental role of ELT therein, as a subtle form of imperialism can lead to a pessimistic outlook for the future of other languages and cultures. However, resistance to the threats it imposes can be attempted in various ways, such as through separatist movements, a greater awareness of the broader contexts of ELT, a challenge to the perceived need for an international language or the strict application of international laws on linguistic human rights.
The development of counter-hegemonies is possible if the international spread of English is dependent on its hegemonic position, in which the learning of the language is seen as a rational response to an inescapable process of globalisation. Because hegemony is never static and requires acceptance of the dominant ideology by its recipients, the formation and legitimation of challenges could potentially influence changes to existing power structures.
Resistance has occurred in many areas. Swahili has replaced English as the official language of Kenya.46 Following the employment of ELT experts in China in the 1970s so that English could be utilised to facilitate access to technological and scientific information and to attract multinational corporations, increases in structural inequality and fears regarding the endangerment of Chinese traditions has led to a growing hostility towards language teaching programmes. However, despite the restrictions that have been placed on these programmes, a dependence on foreign investors means that a demand for English teachers remains.47
It may therefore be possible that English has already reached a position whereby a failure to incorporate it into educational institutions means that countries will no longer be capable of communicating beyond their borders, and find themselves in a position of economic, technological and academic disadvantage. The potential for resistance could then lie in the attainment of English and in using it as a tool for expressing unique cultural identities. A tolerance of diverse forms could then mean that people would not be confined to communicating with native speakers of English.48
In agreement with Mikhail Bakhtin's idea of using the novel as an instrument for the development and articulation of counter-hegemony, resistance has frequently occurred through the arts.49 If translation can be used as a power resource, the practice of 'writing back' could possibly be used to decolonise the ethnocentric assumptions of imperialists. Language itself can be a site as well as a means of conflict, involving struggles over meaning and syntax. A rejection of western standards for the so-called correct usages and meaning of words, along with an appropriation of English to reflect a particular cultural context can counteract the unidirectional flow of information and culture. Paradoxically, the development of a post-colonial nationalist discourse in Africa was largely created through writings in English. In using the arts as resistance, however, there is always a danger that works will be stereotyped into a type of folkorism and English speakers will have been influenced by western culture in their education.50 Also, artistic products can have the long-term effect of revitalising the English language.51 The development of new forms of English and the potential for it to be influenced by other languages has already raised concerns about the lowering of standards, leading to a hierarchy of Englishes and the possible future emergence of a 'World Standard Spoken English'.52
An awareness of a broader structural context among ELT experts and teachers along with recognition of the significance of materials, methods and classroom practices in the formation of identity could be highly influential in the transformation of power relations.53 Greater self-reflexivity through the introduction of a critical pedagogy could be used as a discursive intervention in order to reduce inequality. Teachers could be trained to be conscious that they are entering a different society and adapt their curricula accordingly, so that indigenous cultures can be consolidated rather than threatened. Likewise, students should be informed that both a language and a culture are being taught and that neither is superior to their own. The potential existence of varieties in rationality which apparently contradict western reason must also be accepted. Debates over meaning should be permitted to convey that English can express a variety of cultures. An awareness that education is always a political arena on which classroom authority-relations can have an impact must be acknowledged. The instruction of 'situational survival' English, which is condescending, could be replaced by the teaching of skills in the understanding and discussion of topics which would allow students to use their own political voice through English.54 Also, the accreditation of non-native speakers as teachers could help to de-centralise ELT and remove the Centre's monopoly over teaching methods, textbook production and standards of English.55 However, if ELT is understood as an instrument of imperialism, an alternative pedagogy is unlikely to be introduced.
A rejection of the ELT principle of monolingualism could also offer a potential alleviation to the dangers imposed on indigenous languages and cultures. The perceived requirement of English for business transactions does not allow for the necessity of native languages in local trade and it is possible that different languages could be used in specific spheres.56 In Australia, the protection of minority languages is viewed as essential to its economic prosperity.57 The teaching of bilingualism, however, is extremely time-consuming and costly to finance. Because it is most effective in young children, the learning of a second language at this stage would have a major impact on a person's socialisation and early development.
A need for different languages could remain feasible, however, through a reduction in the teaching of English and a questioning of the requirement of a global language. The growing sophistication in communications technology could make translation more efficient and less expensive. Currently, 90% of Internet hosts are in English but HTML standards can support multilingual browsing, so an increased availability of teaching materials in other languages is possible. The proliferation of communication and movement of people could lead to a rise in trade between continents outside the 'centre'. Also, increased economic exchanges between Asian countries could lead to use of Mandarin as their lingua franca.58
The recent accommodation of a variety of cultures in Eastern European countries conveys the possibility of a tolerance of heterogeneity in languages.59 Under international law, people have the linguistic human right to the protection of their mother tongue, which includes the provision of basic education and political representation in their native language. Because of a lack of clarity in the application of rights and also because complaint procedures must be individual rather than collective, minority languages and cultures continue to be threatened by the spread of English. A clarification of laws, increased access to courts and the introduction of measures to ensure the implementation of rights could limit the rapid spread of English and the inequality that this produces. Also, teachers should be made fully aware of the multiple dimensions of linguistic human rights.60
So far, however, there has been little concerted action to control the worldwide spread of English. Although it can no longer be tied to a specific country, the future of English may be connected to the future of the USA, particularly because the weakening of national governments through globalisation has greatly increased the reach of American media and culture.61 The development of political alliances among non-English speaking countries or changes in demographic patterns may challenge English's dominant international position. There are many possibilities for a limiting of the dangers that English poses to other languages and cultures. However, because the growth of English as an international language can be conceived as linguistic imperialism and is linked to the current global supremacy of capitalism, it is difficult to envisage any serious threat to the global dominance of English without a shift in the balance of world power.

1 P. Trudgill (1974) Sociolinguistics: An Introduction (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books).
2 Benjamin Lee Whorf argues that the linguistic system itself "shapes ideas, the program and guide for the individual's mental activity, for his analysis of impressions, for his synthesis of his mental stock in trade". Language itself determines how speakers perceive and organise the natural and social world around them. See Whorf in Wardhaugh, R. (1986) An Introduction to Sociolinguistics (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
3 This explains why anthropologists are frequently concerned with vocabulary in their analyses of social groups. In different parts of the world, taboo words can vary significantly according to the values of a particular society. The numerous taboo words relating to sex can be viewed as an expression of the sexual morality in western culture. In other societies, there are inhibitions concerning words for game animals or one's left hand. See Trudgill.
4 G. Williams (1992) Sociolinguistics: A Sociological Critique (London & New York: Routledge).
5 C. Brandist (1996) 'Gramsci, Bakhtin and the Semiotics of Hegemony', New Left Review 216.
6 A. Pennycook (1994) The Cultural Politics of English as an International Language (London: Longman Group Limited).
7 B. Kachru and C. Nelson (2001) 'World Englishes', in A. Burns and C. Coffin, eds., Analysing English in a Global Context (London & New York: Routledge).
8 D. Crystal (2003) English as a Global Language (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), p.358.
9 J. W. Tollefson (1991) Planning Language: Planning Inequality (London: Longman Group Limited).
10 R. Phillipson (1992) Linguistic Imperialism (Oxford: Oxford University Press), p.1.
11 M. R. Zughoul (2003) 'Globalisation and EFL/ESL Pedagogy in the Arab World' in Journal of Language and Learning, vol. 2, no.1.
12 Quoted in Crystal, p.77.
13 Crystal.
14 Tollefson.
15 Pennycook.
16 Phillipson.
17 Pennycook.
18 R. McCrum, W. Cran and R. MacNeil (1986) The Story of English (London: Faber and Faber Limited).
19 Phillipson.
20 Attempts have been made to use the language of Esperanto because it is not linked to a particular country but these have been largely unsuccessful. Also, the presentation of Esperanto as a neutral language can be criticised because of its European-style grammar. See Trudgill.
21 When the USA colonised the Philippines at the beginning of the twentieth century, English was given official status with the idea that it would build national solidarity. It was used to foster loyalty to the new administration. Furthermore, the teaching of English was unevenly distributed, with the sons of indigenous leaders exclusively targeted. The unification of tribes through English maintained the existing power relations and meant that it became possible for the USA to employ a policy of indirect rule. Despite its representation as sign of integration, the introduction of language teaching resulted in the reproduction of inequality. See J. Brutt-Griffler (2002) World English: A Study of its Development. (Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Limited).
22 T. Skutnabb-Kangas and R. Phillipson (1995) 'Linguistic human rights, past and present' in T. Skutnabb-Kangas and R. Phillipson, eds., Linguistic Human Rights: Overcoming Linguistic Discrimination (Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter).
23 Crystal.
24 Williams.
25 Also, because access to technological information relates to national structures, many countries have undeveloped computer networks. Governments become forced to expose their institutions to the direct control and influence by countries of the 'centre' in order to gain assistance. See Tollefson.
26 Crystal, p.122.
27 Crystal, p.122.
28 Smith in Pennycook, p.38.
29 Zughoul.
30 Crystal.
31 Phillipson.
32 Quoted in Pennycook, A., p.107
33 This is conveyed in the outlining of its goals by the Prince of Wales: "The basis of our work must be the English language. Our object is to assist the largest number possible to appreciate fully the glories of our literature, our contribution to the arts and sciences, and our pre-eminent contribution to the political sciences. This can be best achieved by promoting the study of our language abroad". Quoted in Pennycook.
34 In 1981, the UN Institute for Namibia conducted a study in order to develop a national education policy. Afrikaans was the dominant language but it was decided to replace it with English although less than 1% of the population had it as a mother tongue. The choice was based on criteria that were mainly functional and ignored other areas such as culture and identity. It is then possible to argue that these criteria were selected to ensure that English emerged as the chosen language. See Phillipson.
35 Phillipson.
36 Tollefson.
37 Phillipson.
38 Trudgill.
39 Skutnabb-Kangas and Phillipson.
40 Trudgill.
41 Trudgill.
42 This is exemplified in a study on ELT in China where teachers perceived differences as flaws in students that needed to be corrected. See Kachru and Nelson.
43 Kachru and Nelson.
44 B. Templer (2004) 'Teaching the Language of the Conqueror',
45 J. Edge (2004) 'TEFL and International Politics: A Personal Narrative',
46 Crystal.
47 Tollefson.
48 Crystal.
49 Brandist.
50 Pennycook.
51 This is clearly seen in the Irish context through the proliferation of Anglo-Irish literature in the Celtic Renaissance.
52 Crystal.
53 B. Morgan (2002) 'Review of 'The Sociopolitics of English Language Teaching, J. K. Hall and W. G. Eggington, eds.',
54 Pennycook.
55 D. Graddol (2001) 'English in the future' in A. Burns and C. Coffin, eds., Analysing English in a Global Context. (London & New York: Routledge)
56 J. J. Smolicz (1995) 'Australia's language policies and minority rights: a core value perspective' in Skutnabb-Kangas and Phillipson.
57 This is illustrated in the introduction of a successful bilingual teaching programme for Lebanese children, where their first language was considered a valuable asset for the learning of English. Languages were always kept separate which meant that each was afforded equal respect. See J. Gibbons, W White and P. Gibbons (1995) 'Combating educational disadvantage among Lebanese Australian children' in Skutnabb-Kangas and Phillipson.
58 Graddol.
59 F. Grin (1995) 'Combining immigrant and autochthonous language rights: a territorial approach to multilingualism' in Skutnabb-Kangas and Phillipson.
60 T. Skutnabb-Kangas and R. Phillipson, eds. (1995) Linguistic Human Rights: Overcoming Linguistic Discrimination. (Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter).
61 G. Melchers and P. Shaw (2003) World Englishes (London: Arnold).