English for Globalisation or for the World's People?

Author(s): Robert Phillipson

Source: International Review of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift fr
Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale de l'Education, Vol. 47, No. 3/4,
Globalisation, Language and Education (Jul., 2001), pp. 185-200
Published by: Springer
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3445340
Accessed: 17-04-2017 15:56 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International Review of
Education / Internationale Zeitschrift fr Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue
Internationale de l'Education

This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:56:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ENGLISH FOR GLOBALISATION OR FOR THE WORLD'S
PEOPLE?

ROBERT PHTl TI,PSON

Abstract - The article explores the role of English in ongoing processes of globali-
sation, the reasons for its dominance, and the need for conceptual clarification in
analysing English worldwide. Examples from the post-colonial and post-communist
worlds and the European Union reveal increasing corporate involvement in education,
and World Bank policies that favour European languages. Studies of global English
range from those that uncritically endorse global English to those which see it as
reflecting a post-imperial but essentially capitalist agenda. Many of the contem-
porary trends are captured in two competing language policy paradigms that situate
English in broader economic, political and cultural facets of globalisation, the
Diffusion of English paradigm, and the Ecology of Languages paradigm. A number
of studies of various dimensions of linguistic and professional imperialism in the
teaching of English to Asians reveal the persistence of western agendas in education.
There is also increasing documentation of resistance to this, both at the level of
awareness of the need to anchor English more firmly in local cultural systems, and
at classroom level. Language pedagogy needs to ensure that English is not learned
subtractively. Only in this way can globalisation be made more accountable and locally
relevant.

Zusammenfassung - Der Autor dieses Artikels untersucht die Rolle der englischen
Sprache im fortlaufenden Prozess der Globalisierung, die Griinde fur ihre Dominanz
und den Bedarf an begrifflicher Aufkldrung in der Analyse des Englischen weltweit.
Beispiele von post-kolonialen und post-kommunistischen Welten und der europai-
schen Union zeigen ein wachsendes Engagement von Firmen in der Bildung sowie
politische europaische Sprachen favorisierende Massnahmen der Weltbank. Studien
iiber globales Englisch reichen von denen, die globales Englisch unkritisch favorisieren
bis zu solchen, die Englisch als Ausdruck post-imperialer jedoch hauptsichlich kap-
italistischer Tendenzen sehen. Viele der zeitgemassen Trends sind in zwei miteinander
kon-kurrierenden Sprachpolitikparadigmen gefangen, die Englisch in umfassendere
wirtschaftliche, politische und kulturelle Facetten der Globalisierung setzen: die
Verbreitung des Englischparadigmas und die Okologie des Sprachparadigmata. Eine
Reihe von Studien iiber unterschiedliche Dimensionen linguistischen und beruflichen
Imperialismus im Englischunterricht fur Asiaten zeigt die Fortdauer westlicher
Tagesesordnungen der Bildung. Es gibt jedoch eine wachsende Dokumentation iiber
den Widerstand gegen diese Fakten, sowohl auf der Ebene des Bewusstseins iiber die
Notwendigkeit, Englisch fester in lokalen Kultursystemen zu veranker als auch auf
Klassenraumebene. Sprachpadagogik muss sicherstellen, dass Englisch nicht subtraktiv
gelert wird. Nur so kann Globalisierung effektiver gestaltet und lokal relevant werden.

Resume - L'auteur de cet article etudie le r61e de l'anglais dans les processus actuels
de mondialisation, les raisons de sa pr6ponderance et le besoin de clarification
conceptuelle dans l'examen de la langue anglaise en diff6rents points du globe. Des
exemples tires du monde post-colonial et post-communiste ainsi que de l'Union
europeenne montrent l'engagement croissant des entreprises dans l'education, ainsi

LA International Review of Education - Internationale Zeitschrift fur Erziehungswissenschaft

V - Revue Internationale de l'Education 47(3-4): 185-200, 2001.
? 2001 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:56:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
186

que les politiques de la Banque mondiale qui favorisent les langues europeennes. Les
etudes menees sur l'anglais d'usage mondial s'etendent de celle approuvant sans
reserve l'anglais universel ' celle le considerant comme le reflet d'une conception
post-imp6rialiste et essentiellement capitaliste. De nombreuses tendances actuelles
s'expriment A travers deux modeles concurrents de politique linguistique, qui placent
1'anglais dans le complexe economique, politique et culturel plus vaste de la
mondialisation : le modele du "rayonnement de l'anglais", et celui de "l'ecologie
linguistique". Plusieurs e'udes menees sur les diff6rents aspects de l'imp6rialisme
linguistique et professionnel dans le cadre de l'enseignement de l'anglais aux
Asiatiques r6velent la persistance d'un influence occidentale dans le domaine 6ducatif.
Il existe 6galement une documentation croissante sur la resistance ' cet 6tat de fait,
tant au niveau de la prise de conscience quant ' la n6cessite d'ancrer davantage
l'anglais dans les syst6mes culturels locaux, qu'au niveau de la classe. La p6dagogie
linguistique doit garantir que I'apprentissage de l'anglais ne se fasse pas au
d6triment de la langue maternelle. Cette voie est la seule qui puisse rendre le
phenom6ne de mondialisation plus responsable et plus pertinent au niveau local.

Resumen - Este articulo explora el papel que desempefia el idioma ingl6s en los
procesos de globalizaci6n actuales, las razones de su dominio y la necesidad de aclarar
conceptos en el anilisis del ingles mundial. Hay ejemplos provenientes de los mundos
postcolonial y postcomunista y de la Union Europea que revelan una creciente
participaci6n corporativa en la educaci6n y politicas del Banco Mundial que favorecen
las lenguas europeas. Los estudios sobre el ingles global abarcan una amplia gama,
desde los que aprueban sin reparos el ingles global hasta aquellos que lo consideran
reflejo de un programa postimperialista, pero esencialmente capitalista. Muchas de las
tendencias contempora'neas estan representadas por dos paradigmas contrapuestos de
polftica lingiiistica que sitd'an idioma ingles dentro de facetas econ6mica, politica y
cultural mas amplias de la globalizaci6n: el paradigma de la difusi6n del ingles y el
paradigma de la ecologia de las lenguas. Una serie de estudios realizados sobre
diferentes dimensiones del imperialismo lingii'stico y profesional en la ensefianza del
ingles a educandos asiiticos revela la persistencia de los programas occidentales en
la educaci6n. Pero tambien se estd documentando de forma creciente la resistencia
contra estas tendencias; tanto a nivel de la conciencia en cuanto a la necesidad de
afianzar el ingles en sistemas culturales locales como tambien a nivel de las aulas.
La pedagogfa lingiiistica debe asegurar que el ingles no sea aprendido de forma
substractiva, para que la globalizaci6n se pueda desarrollar con mayor responsabil-
idad y relevancia a nivel local.

Pe3IoMe - B aaHHoHN cmraTbe HccneayeTcft POJb aH-JIHHicKoro %13bIKa BO

BceM MHpe B npouecce ro6aoIH3ai3Hw , npH'4HHbi ee AOMHHHpOBaHAR H
Heo6to?aHM oCTb B ee KOHuLenTyan bHOM pa3-b.cHeHHi. npHMepbl, B3SlTbie H13
nOcT-KO3 OHHa.1bHorO H nOCT-KoMMYHHCTHFieCKoro MHPOB H EBpone'icKoro
Co0o3a. yKa3IbIBaIoT Ha Bo0pacTaioUiee Bceo6uwee y'4aCTHe B o6pa3oBaHmN
nofl01THKK BceMHpHoro BaHKa TalOKe noJLaep)CIHBaeT eBponeAicKHe SI3bIKH.
PccaeaoBaH,41 o rro6aMbHoM aHrJ1-HCKOM M3bIKwe HMeoT WHPOKHH-
,Amana3OH - OT HeKPHTHL1HO nOJJeeP)KHBaiouHx rJOi6abHbIH- aHmrJ1Hc KHHi
,ao paccmaTpHBatoLw ero KaK oTpawueHHe nocT-HMnepKoH, B CYLLWOCTH
KanMTaJICTH4'eCKOI nporpamMbl. MHorHe H3 coBpeMeHHbIX TeHaeHLAHA
onpeaenmIO TCR a 1BYMR KOHKYPHPYIO0LUHMH napaAHrMaMH R3bIKOBONA
noJ1HTHKH. KOTOpbIe paccmaTpHBaioT aHrJ1HiiCKHiH SI3bIK B 6ojnee WUHPOKOM

This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:56:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 187

3KOHOMHqecKOM. nOJnHTH4eCKOM H KynJbTypHOM acneKTax rno6anJH3auHH:

napaaMHria PacnpocTpaHeHsl aHrniicKoro l3bIKa H napaHmrMa 3KoJorHH
513blKOB. HeCKOJIbKO HCCJiejOBaHHHA pa3JH4HbIX H3MepeHHH
JIHHrBHCTH4eCKOrO H nlpojeCCcHOHanbHOro HMnepHanH3Ma B npenoaaBaHHH
aHrjIHCKoro S3blKa a3HaTaM o6HapymHBaiOT AOMHHHpOBaHHe 3anaIHbIX
nporpaMM B o6pa3oBaHHH. TaioKe yeeiqnHHBaeTc 0aoKyMeHTauSl o
npOTHBOCTOaHHH 3TOMy KaK Ha ypOBHe OC03HaHHl Heo6xoaHMOCTH
3aKpenJlaTb aHrnHHCKHUH 3bIK 6onee rjiy6oKo B MeCTHblX KyJIbTypHblX
cHCTeMax. TaK H Ha ypOBHe KJaaccHoH KOMHaTbl. A3blKOBaSI neaarorHKa
Ajon~)Ha o6ecneqMBaTb, qTo6bi aHrniHCKHi aR3biK He H3yqancs
o6oco6JneHHO. TonbKO TaKHM cnoco6oM rno6anH3aLuHi MOKeT CTaTb 6onee
OTBeTCTBeHHOM H inOKanbHO npHeMneMoR.

English in globalisation

English is integral to the globalisation processes that characterise the con-

temporary post-cold-war phase of aggressive casino capitalism, economic
restructuring, McDonaldisation and militarisation on all continents. English
is dominant in international politics and commerce, its privileged role being
strengthened through such bodies as the United Nations, the World Trade
Organisation, and regional groupings such as the North American Free Trade
Agreement and the European Union. The dominance of English is also being
consolidated in other dimensions of globalisation such as military links
(NATO, UN peace-keeping operations, the arms trade), and culture
(Hollywood products, BBC World, CNN, MTV).
There is a considerable literature on globalisation, but language policy is
accorded little attention in the work of economists and political scientists.
Even 'development' researchers, including those specialising in education,
seldom focus on language issues. By contrast, the substantial literature on
language policy and language in education shows that an increasing number
of sociolinguists and applied linguists are approaching language in more
multi-disciplinary ways. However, there is still a striking absence of litera-
ture that brings the study of globalisation and English together.
The huge literature on English includes excellent portrayals of the history
of how and why the language expanded (Bailey 1991; Miihlhausler 1996), and
many descriptions of its diversity in different parts of the world. There are
studies of how the role of English in post-colonial societies has served to
maintain western interests, and how the education systems of independent
states have continued the language policies of colonial times virtually
unchanged (Phillipson 1992; Pennycook 1994). Many scholars from the South
are challenging the professional orthodoxies of language scholars from the
North: Kachru (1997) has been concerned to extract the study of post-colonial
Englishes from the stranglehold of western approaches and eurocentricity;

This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:56:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
188

Dasgupta (1993) convincingly demonstrates that English is not in an organic

relationship with Indian languages or the mass of Indian people; Parakrama
(1995) explores the distinctiveness of Sri Lankan English and its distance from
an Anglo norm; for Ngugi wa Thiong'o, the Kenyan novelist, language issues
have always been at the heart of the continuing exploitation of the South by
the North (1993, 2000), hence the need to strengthen creativity in African
languages and to radically change contemporary language policies.
These cris de cceur from globally peripheral cultures have affinities to
critiques of linguistics for failing to address the role of language in societal
reproduction. Bourdieu (1991) shows how linguists working in a Saussurean
tradition cut themselves off from social reality when focussing on a standard
language but simultaneously ignoring the processes of state formation that
have led to 'a unified linguistic market, dominated by the official language'
(ibid.: 45). This process has been the dominant pattern at the level of the
state over the past two centuries. It is now being created at the global level.
English is the dominant language of the global economy, markets are being
unified, and language policy interlocks with all the other domains of social
interaction and hierarchisation. As yet, there is little analysis of global English
in this sense.1
There is a major need for conceptual clarification in this area. Such terms
as 'global English', 'anglophone Africa', and English being referred to as a
'universal' lingua franca conceal the fact that the use of English serves the
interests of some much better than others. The concepts include some and
exclude others. Many write loosely that English is the world language, but to
describe English in such terms ignores the fact that a majority of the world's
citizens do not speak English, whether as a mother tongue or as a second or
foreign language. Critical scholarship ought to analyse the strong forces that
are at pains to create the impression that English serves all the world's citizens
equally well, or those who uncritically assume this is so, when this is
manifestly not the case.
Mufwene, a linguist from the Congo now based in the US, demonstrates
(1997) that the concepts and terminology used in relation to English outside
the neo-Europes,2 'new Englishes', and creoles, involve biased processes of
hierarchisation of the 'legitimate and illegitimate offspring of English', and
are fundamentally flawed and ethnocentric.
Symptomatic of the wishful thinking of global English is the publicity used
by The International Herald Tribune (earlier New York Herald Tribune). It
describes itself as 'The world's daily newspaper. Since 1887.... The global
village has a hometown newspaper ... It's the newspaper the whole world
reads'. Evidently the global village, another metaphor much used by the cheer-
leaders of globalisation, is monolingual. There are in fact still some
6,000-7,000 spoken languages in the world, and perhaps equally many sign
languages, and hundreds of languages are used across national borders. The
continuing existence of most languages is, however, threatened by market
forces and the ideology and practice of monolingual nation-states (Skutnabb-

This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:56:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 189

Kangas 2000a). The continued use of many languages used in international

fora is threatened by globalisation and those forces that strengthen English at
the expense of other languages.
Many decisions that affect the entire world's population are taken in
English. Reference to English as a 'global' language has therefore much less
to do with demography or geography than with decision-making in the con-
temporary global political and economic system. The world system itself is
fragile, turbulent and unsustainable. English is currently pre-eminent but may
be challenged by Chinese, Arabic and other languages. In our contemporary
world, 10-20% of the population are getting obscenely richer, the English-
speaking haves who consume 80% of the available resources, whereas the
remainder are being systematically impoverished, the non-English-speaking
have-nots.
When analysing English worldwide the bottom line is whose interests
English serves. Also of crucial importance, not least in the academic and
educational worlds, is whose interests scholarship on English serves. Ngugi
wa Thiong'o encapsulates the issues vividly:

A new world order that is no more than a global dominance of neo-colonial

relations policed by a handful of Western nations ... is a disaster for the peoples
of the world and their cultures ... The languages of Europe were taught as if they
were our own languages, as if Africa had no tongues except those brought there
by imperialism, bearing the label MADE IN EUROPE. (Ngugi 1993: xvi, 35)

The agony of language loss has been expressed vividly by a delegate from
Mali to UNESCO, when pleading for funds to record the oral memories of
old people, because Mali's history itself was still almost entirely oral and
would die with his generation:

When an old man dies in one of our villages, a shelf-full of books is lost. (quoted
in Hoggart 1992)

Contrast this with the words of Lord Macaulay, whose educational minute
in India in 1835 set the tone for language policy throughout the British empire.
When referring to British Orientalists, i.e. westerners who learned oriental
languages, he wrote:

I have never found one amongst them who could deny that a single shelf of a
good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia.
(quoted in Kachru 1986: 7)

The colonial exercise was not merely about conquering territory and
economies, but also about conquering minds. For Macaulay and generations
of colonialists the purpose of British education for Indian leaders was to
produce:

A class of persons, Indians in blood and colour, English in taste, in opinion, in

morals and in intellect. (ibid.: 5)

This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:56:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
190

Throughout the entire post-colonial world, English has been marketed as

the language of 'international communication and understanding', economic
'development', 'national unity' and similar positive ascriptions, but these
soft-sell terms obscure the reality of North-South links and globalisation,
which is that the majority of the world's population is being impoverished,
that natural resources are being plundered in unsustainable ways, and that
speakers of most languages do not have their linguistic human rights respected
(Skutnabb-Kangas and Phillipson 1994; Kontra et al. 1999).
Globalisation policies serve to ensure that the role of English is maintained
and perpetuated. The key player in educational policy is the World Bank
(Brock-Utne 2000). Its policies are cast in Macaulay's mould:

The World Bank's real position ... encourages the consolidation of the imperial
languages in Africa ... the World Bank does not seem to regard the linguistic
Africanisation of the whole of primary education and beyond as an effort that is
worth its consideration. Its publication on strategies for stabilising and revital-
ising universities, for example makes absolutely no mention of the place of
language at this tertiary level of African education. (Mazrui 1997: 39)

The policies of key international organisations dovetail with those of

transnational corporations, which are increasingly active in determining the
content of education worldwide (Spring 1998).

Corporations are also the main providers of educational materials for US schools
... and in Canada and other countries, too ... Oil and chemical companies have
been particularly generous in providing materials to explain nature to young people
... a generation of American youngsters is trained to regard nature in a way that
coincides with corporate objectives (Mander 1996: 311-312).

This development reflects the predominant interest of corporations in

producing consumers rather than critical citizens. Corporations have long
dominated advertising and the media. As education is a key site of cultural
reproduction, it is logical that the World Bank and the transnational corpora-
tions are expanding their influence in education.
This pattern is now also visible in Europe, where hitherto corporate
influence on national education systems has been discreet and more indirect.
In the post-communist world, English was one of several panaceas that were
explicitly and fraudulently marketed as the solution to the problems of the
economy and civil society (explicitly by two British foreign ministers, Douglas
Hurd and Malcolm Rifkind). There is a major support scheme for English
teaching in post-communist European countries.3 The British Petroleum
corporation (now merged as BP Amoco) is funding a 'Science across Europe'
scheme which is being marketed in tandem with the British Council in post-
communist European education systems. The SHELL corporation is funding
a project to upgrade 'English language education specialists' in Bulgaria,
which is doubtless good for both the oil company and for the British textbook
business. So just as 'the business of America is business' (Fishman 1996: 4),

This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:56:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 191

manifestly English for business is business for English. The English teaching
industry was reported as being worth ?6 billion to the British economy in the
1980s, and has expanded significantly since. This industry involves language
schools, publishing, university degrees connected to English teaching, and a
host of ancillary services. A recent example of cultural globalisation aimed
at strengthening English and British interests is the 'Blair Initiative',
announced on 18 June 1999, which aims at increasing Britain's share of the
global market in foreign students. This 'Initiative' is somewhat intriguing
when, according to the British government's own figures, one third of all
children in Britain are growing up in poverty and derive little benefit from
the education system.
A recent development, in parallel with this industry, is the globalisation of
distance education, which is big business for American, Australian and British
universities. School-level exams in the full range of subjects are also business
that consolidates the dominance of English. The University of Cambridge
Local Examinations Syndicate is the second largest examination organisation
in the world, after Educational Testing Services of Princeton, New Jersey. It
organised exams in 1996 in 154 countries (Rosenthal 1997).
The British minister for education and employment, David Blunkett, echoes
official statements of the last fifty years when stating in November 2000
that... 'It makes good economic sense to use English fluency as a platform
to underpin our economic competitiveness and to promote our culture
overseas'.4
The use of English is expanding in European Union (EU) member states
and institutions. Links between the education systems of the countries of the
European Union have intensified in recent years, although education policy
is, along with language and culture, in principle a matter for each member
state rather than supra-national bodies (the European Parliament, the
Commission, the Council of Ministers). The EU does however involve an
immense amount of contact in all spheres of life (politics, commerce, tourism,
scientific research, higher education, . . .), such exchange being far from
symmetrical in the use made of languages. The expansion of English is partly
a result of Americanisation in the media, commerce, youth culture et al, and
is assisted by its status as the dominant foreign language in continental
European education systems. While there is no simple correlation between the
use of English and either British culture or US corporate interests, these
developments embody and entail hegemonising processes that tend to render
the use of English 'natural' and 'normal', and to marginalise other languages.
The EU is in fact a test case for policies that effectively implement language
rights and linguistic equality, which in theory the EU is committed to main-
taining. Until recently the dominant language of each EU member state has
generally not been under threat internally from other languages for the past
two centuries, and in this respect there are major differences between what
is happening now in Europe and the experience of the Soviet empire and the
colonial and post-colonial worlds. The meshing of English with each local

This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:56:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
192

linguistic ecology thus differs substantially. But at root what is at stake is

comparable: is English being strengthened at the expense of local languages
and cultures, or is there a healthy balance between the uses to which English
is put and democratic language policies that accord linguistic human rights
to speakers of all local languages? These are complex, multi-faceted ques-
tions to which there are no straightforward answers, even if there are clear
tendencies. What can be attempted in the present context is to exemplify how
some of the issues can be addressed.

'Global' English

The globe of global English is a crystal ball. Global English represents special
interests. In political and scholarly discourse it is often a subtle form of special
pleading, the advocacy of the privileged in an unjust world: see, for instance,
Crystal's book (1997) English as a Global Language, which is, in my view,
eurocentric, and fails to see how the 'triumph' of English affects other lan-
guages and is connected to political and economic dominance.5
The overall position of English in many countries has been explored in a
large volume entitled Post-Imperial English: Status Change in Former British
and American Colonies, 1940-1990 (Fishman, Conrad and Rubal-Lopez, eds.,
1996).6 The volume begins and ends with Fishman's attempt to bring work
on the relationship between language(s) and economic, social and political
indicators up to date in the light of a statistically-based study of a wealth of
such data by one of his collaborators, Rubal-Lopez, and input from the 29
scholars from British and American 'spheres of influence' (including many
from Africa and Asia) who contribute to this volume. Fishman speculates on
English being 'reconceptualized, from being an imperialist tool to being a
multinational tool . . . English may need to be re-examined precisely from
the point of view of being post-imperial (as the title of our book implies, that
is in the sense of not directly serving purely Anglo-American territorial,
economic, or cultural expansion) without being post-capitalist in any way'
(ibid.: 8). He also stresses the limitations of our instruments and concepts, but
boldly tabulates the degree of 'anglification' in each state. His assessment that
the 'socio-economic factors that are behind the spread of English are now
indigenous in most countries of the world' and that the continued spread of
English in former colonies is 'related more to their engagement in the moder
world economy than to any efforts derived from their colonial masters' (ibid.:
639) seems to ignore the fact that 'engagement in the moder world' means
a western-dominated globalisation agenda set by the transnational corpora-
tions and the IMF, and the US military intervening, with or without a mandate
from the United Nations, whenever 'vital interests' are at risk.
Many of the dimensions in the contemporary tension between a globally
expansionist language and alternatives to it are illuminatingly brought together
in two paradigms that were initially proposed by Yukio Tsuda (1994), and

This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:56:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 193

The Diffusion of English and Ecology of Languages paradigms

The diffusion of English paradigm Ecology of languages paradigm

1. monolingualism and linguistic 1. multilingualism, and linguistic

genocide
2. promotion of subtractive learning of
dominant languages
3. linguistic, cultural and media imperialism
4. Americanisation and homogenisation of
world culture
5. ideological globalisation and
internationalisation
6. capitalism, hierarchisation
7. rationalisation based on science
and technology
8. modernisation and economic
efficiency; quantitative growth
9. transnationalisation
10. growing polarisation and gaps
between haves and never-to-haves
diversity
2. promotion of additive foreign/
second language learning
3. equality in communication
4. maintenance and exchange of
cultures
5. ideological localisation and
exchange
6. economic democratisation
7. human rights perspective, holistic
integrative values
8. sustainability through promotion
of diversity; qualitative growth
9. protection of local production and
national sovereignties
10. redistribution of the world's
material resources

which have been further elaborated in a more differentiated analysis by Tove

Skutnabb-Kangas (2000a: 657), from which the table on page 193 comes.
Skutnabb-Kangas's book is a comprehensive survey of the entire field of
language dominance, language rights, and language ecology that synthesises
work in many disciplines. It can serve as a springboard for action to promote
more democratic language policies. The Diffusion of English paradigm entails
the promotion of one language (English) and one culture (the USA's) at the
expense of others, by means of the interlocking of linguistic imperialism with
a system of production and ideologies that attempt to justify an economically
expansionist and exploitative world order. The Ecology of Languages
paradigm, by contrast, builds on our linguistic and cultural diversity, attempts
to ensure equality for speakers of all languages, and uses the human rights
system as a counterweight to the 'free' market. To advance the cause of the
Ecology of Languages requires efforts at all levels from the local to the global.
This means putting language policy higher up on political agendas.

Global English teaching professionalism?

English plays a dominant role in many post-colonial contexts. In Pakistan,

English acts 'by distancing people from most indigenous cultural norms'
(Rahman 1999: 293). In India, according to a large survey of the status, role
and functions of English entitled 'Problematizing English in India', there is
'an increasing mystification and deification of English socially and peda-

This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:56:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
194

gogically - it is essentially meant for a special group of people; it is taught

(effectively) in prestigious public schools and other Indian languages are
ignored and marginalized' (Agnihotri and Khanna 1997: 19). The study con-
cludes with the words: 'What we need is a more radical paradigm shift in
language planning in which English sustains rather than destroys the multi-
lingual ethos of India' (ibid.: 144). The survey was funded by the British
Council, reminding us that even if the British presence in English studies in
India is small, it can none the less have a significant impact.
A survey of how English has been 'brokered' in India, concludes that when
there is collaboration between British and Indian experts, 'the leadership,
and the greater initiative and influence, come from the British "expert"' (Rajan
1992b: 140): 'The connection between higher education in India and the
western academy undeniably exists - it is not only historical and paradigmatic
but is also a continuing relation of dependence and support in matters of
scholarship and expertise, material aid, the training of personnel, the framing
of syllabi, and pedagogical methods.' (ibid.: 141). This fits the pattern of
professional imperialism that Ivan Illich warned against thirty years ago:

Professional imperialism triumphs even where political and economic domination

has been broken . . . The knowledge-capitalism of professional imperialism
subjugates people more imperceptibly than and as effectively as international
finance and weaponry ... The possibility of a convivial society depends therefore
on a new consensus about the destructiveness of imperialism at three levels: the
pernicious spread of one nation beyond its boundaries; the omnipresent influence
of multinational corporations; and the mushrooming of professional monopolies
over production. Politics for convivial reconstruction of society must especially
face imperialism on this third level, where it takes the form of professionalism.
(Illich 1973: 56-57)

Illich's 'convivial society' has strong affinities with the Ecology of Languages
paradigm. The professionalism he warns against permeates much English
teaching, which has its origins in the Diffusion of English paradigm (Phillipson
1992) and for the most part still sees itself this way, with the native speaker
American or Brit as the target of language learning, and in many parts of the
world as the ideal teacher of English too. The native speaker ideal is imple-
mented in teaching materials that serve to flesh out native speaker norms in
texts that project a culture-specific worldview.
An increasing number of studies is challenging the legitimacy of the
linguistic and cultural universe of 'English' in post-colonial schools. Glenn
Toh's PhD study (Toh 1999) scrutinises cultural bias, cultural and linguistic
hierarchisation in three generations of English teaching textbooks in
Singapore, and shows the inappropriacy of relying on native speaker models
when Singaporean identity is to be strengthened. Through meticulous critical
discourse analysis he shows that the language pedagogy of the textbooks has
its origins in a western vision of the world and is irredeemably eurocentric,
hence incompatible with the contemporary social realities of Singapore and
the wider world. His study confirms the analysis in a recent survey article of

This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:56:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 195

English in Singapore: the language in education policy ensures that the

language of school and government displaces the language of home and
neighbourhood (Tickoo 1996: 444), official policy resulting in 'a debilitating
dependence on native speaker models, a product of not just what Phillipson
sees as the five fallacies in ELT,7 but of what Skutnabb-Kangas calls
"colonized consciousness"' (ibid.: 449).8 He adds that this may have seriously
harmful consequences for national identity, with excessive dependence on
exonormative English possibly leading to constraints on the development of
innovation and creativity.
Martin Baik's PhD study analysed the cultural content of textbooks for
English in the two Koreas (summarized in Baik and Shim 1995). It shows that
in the case of South Korea, the textbooks are based on stereotyping: 'embell-
ishment' and 'glamorisation' project western life-styles as 'objects of
admiration and envy', all of which serves to 'dissimulate the cultural domi-
nance of foreign nations, especially the United States and Britain', and to
belittle other cultures. The conclusion is that 'In an age where foreign language
learning has become a survival skill, it becomes virtually everybody's business
to review the cultural message of language textbooks with a more critical eye'
(ibid.).
Masaki Oda has reported on the traumatic experience of a university student
from Japan attending a language course in London (Oda 2000). When the
Japanese student did not conform to the stereotype of how 'the Japanese' were
supposed to behave, and questioned it, she was victimised by the school and
subjected to humiliating treatment. The institution insisted on control over
all aspects of the educational discourse, which was structurally biased against
the Japanese learner and her culture, disempowered her and invalidated her
norms. Oda regards this as confirming a picture of mainstream TESOL
'imposing an ethnocentric ideology and inadvertently supporting the essen-
tializing discourse that represents cultural groups as stable or homogeneous
entities' (Spack 1997: 773). This 'can be explained in terms of the colonial
construction of the Other.... Culture has become a category of fixity rather
than an engagement with difference' (Pennycook 1998: 188-189). For Oda,
this was a clear case of linguicism in an educational institution, discrimina-
tion on the basis of language and culture, and native/non-native hierarchisa-
tion.
Thiru Kandiah sees countries in the postcolonial world as trapped in a major
contradiction. On the one hand, they need the 'indispensable global medium'
for pragmatic purposes, even for survival in the global economy. On the other
there is the fact that the medium is not culturally or ideologically neutral, far
from it, so that its users run the 'apparently unavoidable risk of co-option, of
acquiescing in the negation of their own understandings of reality and in the
accompanying denial or even subversion of their own interests' (2001: 112).
These two elements form a dialectic, the one inevitably entailing the other.
What is therefore needed in relation to English is 'interrogating its formula-
tions of reality, intervening in its modes of understanding, holding off its

This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:56:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
196

normalising tendencies, challenging its hegemonic designs and divesting it

of the co-optive power which would render it a reproducing discourse' (ibid.).
Kandiah advocates authentic local projections of reality, and emancipatory
action.
Canagarajah's 1999 book on resisting linguistic imperialism in Sri Lanka9
is a path-breaking documentation of how English learning can function
productively in ways that meet local needs. He anchors a detailed empirical
study in a highly articulate theoretical perspective. The rich bottom-up
language learning description and analysis shows how the classroom can serve
genuinely emancipatory purposes. He explores student resistance in a mar-
ginalised community, and elaborates critical pedagogy strategies that can
productively build on Kandiah's dialectic, the tension between accommoda-
tion and resistance, as a way of contributing to a social struggle for empow-
erment.10

Appropriating English while maintaining their vernaculars makes periphery subjects

linguistically competent for the culturally hybrid modern world they confront. The
maintenance of polyvocality with a clear awareness of their own socio-ideological
location empowers them to withstand the totalitarian tendencies - of local nation-
alist regimes and Western multinational agencies - enforced through uniformity
of thought and communication. The simplest gestures of code-switching and
linguistic appropriation in the pedagogical safe houses suggest the strategic ways
by which discourses may be negotiated, intimating the resilient ability of human
subjects to creatively fashion a voice for themselves from amidst the deafening
channels of domination. (Canagarajah 1999: 197)

This is a far cry from the universe of mainstream 'development aid' in

education. People working on educational language projects in Asia in the
early 1990s have pooled their experience in an admirable collection of papers
Language and development. Teachers in a changing world (Kenny and Savage
1997). It contains a fund of reflective analysis of the factors contributing to
the triumphs and, more frequently, the failures of development aid projects.
But it is striking that the title of the book itself seems to assume that English
is a panacea. 'Language' in fact refers exclusively to English. All 'teachers'
in our changing world are apparently teachers of English. This invisibilisa-
tion of the rest of the relevant languages is a re-run of much colonial and
post-colonial language-in-education policy, which, as is well known, has
served European languages well and other languages-much less well. It reflects
investment being put into English, an infrastructure and ideology that dis-
cursively construct English as the handmaiden of globalisation, the universal
medium.
It is significant that an increasing number of scholars and teacher trainers
are seeking to redefine the content of English teaching in Asia so as to make
a break with the cultural and linguistic norms of the Anglo-American world.
Several papers given at the Fifth English in Southeast Asia Conference, held
at Curtin University of Technology in Perth, Western Australia, 5-8 December
2000, represent attempts to re-shape the English language of classrooms so

This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:56:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 197

that English here genuinely reflects Asian values and goals, and so as to
contribute to educational language policies that can appropriate English in
ways that involve strengthening the local language ecology and the additive
learning of English."
The forces behind globalisation and the Diffusion of English have massive
resources to promote their cause, and have been successful in projecting a
favourable image of themselves. Those who believe that all languages have
value, and that use of one's mother tongue is a human right, need to be much
more active in counteracting linguistic and professional imperialism, and
creating favourable conditions for a viable, just Ecology of Languages. Both
paradigms need further elaboration so as to clarify for language pedagogy pre-
cisely what the subtractive spread of English12 entails, and how it can be
counteracted in all parts of the world. Learners need to develop receptive
competence in many Englishes, beginning, of course, with local variants.
Foreign experts are non-natives whose professionalism must build on deep
knowledge of the culture in which they have chosen to work, which, among
many other things, requires learning local languages. There are many indi-
viduals, globally and locally, who are working to make English serve more
equitable purposes, which means that we have cause for feeling confident in
addressing the major challenges that we face professionally. Only by doing
so can we hope that globalisation can be made more accountable and more
sensitive to the real needs of the entire world's citizens.

Notes

1. On shortcomings of this kind in Crystal 1997, see Phillipson 1999b. Graddol 1997
brings many fields together, but is also not firmly anchored in social theory. See
also Phillipson and Skutnabb-Kangas 1999.
2. This term relates to parts of the world occupied by Europeans, the Americas,
Australasia, and South Africa.
3. Reported on the British Council's ELTECS electronic list and annual reports.
4. Quoted in the Guardian Weekly, 16-22 November.
5. The final paragraphs of Crystal 1997 (139-140) speculate on whether English will
eliminate all other languages, which he considers would be an intellectual disaster,
whereas his alternative scenario, the global triumph of English, is: 'In 500 years'
time, will it be the case that everyone will automatically be introduced to English
as soon as they are born ... . .It may be that English, in some shape or form,
will find itself in the service of the world community for ever.' See my review
article, Phillipson 1999b, and Phillipson 2000b.
6. I have reviewed the book in the journal Language, Phillipson 1999a.
7. English Language Teaching, also widely known as TESOL, the Teaching of
English to Speakers of Other Languages, and ESL, English as a Second Language.
8. The term derives from Franz Fanon's pioneer analysis of post-colonial societies.
9. See also Lakshman Punchi's article in this issue.
10. For several examples of this in bilingual education in a wide range of contexts,
see the contributions to Phillipson 2000a, in particular those by Cummins, Peura,
Taylor, and Wink & Wink.
11. On related issues, see, for South Africa, Alexander 2000, Desai 2000, and Heugh

This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:56:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
198

2000; and for more general issues, the contributions to Phillipson (ed.) 2000,
and Ricento (ed.) 2000.
12. Tove Skutnabb-Kangas was the first to propose the re-naming of the Diffusion
of English paradigm as the Subtractive Spread of English paradigm. She
has specific recommendations for teachers of English in Skutnabb-Kangas
2000b.

References

Agnihotri, Rama Kant and Khanna, Amrit Lal. 1997. Problematizing English in India.
Delhi: Sage.
Alexander, Neville. 2000. Language Policy and Planning in South Africa: Some
Insights. In Phillipson (ed.). 2000a, pp. 170-173.
Baik, Martin and Shim, Rosa. 1995. Language, Culture, and Ideology in the Textbooks
of Two Koreas. In: Tickoo, Mackan L., ed., Language and Culture in Multilingual
Societies: Issues and Attitudes. Singapore: Regional Language Center.
Bailey, Richard W. 1992. Images of English. A Cultural History of the Language.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1991. Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity Press.
(Translation of Ce que parler veut dire: I'economie des echanges linguistiques. Paris:
Fayard, 1982).
Braine, George (ed.). 1999. Non-Native Educators in English Language Teaching.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Brock-Utne, Birgit. 2000. Whose Education for All? The Recolonization of the African
Mind. New York: Falmer Press.

Canagarajah, Suresh A. 1999. Resisting Linguistic Imperialism in English Teaching.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Crystal, David. 1997. English as a Global Language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Dasgupta, Probal. 1993. The Otherness of English: India's Auntie Tongue Syndrome.
Delhi: Sage.
Desai, Zubeida. 2000. Mother Tongue Education: The Key to African Language
Development? A Conversation with an Imagined South African Audience. In:
Phillipson (ed.). 2000a, pp. 174-178.
Fishman, Joshua A., Conrad Andrew W. and Rubal-Lopez, Alma (eds.) 1996. Post-
Imperial English. Status Change in Former British and American Colonies,
1940-1990. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Graddol, David. 1997. The Future of English? London: The British Council.
Heugh, Kathleen. 2000. Giving Good Weight to Multilingualism in South Africa. In:
Phillipson (ed.). 2000a, pp. 234-238.
Hoggart, Richard. 1992. An Imagined Life. Life and Times 1959-91. London: Chatto
& Windus.

Illich, Ivan. 1973. Tools for Conviviality. London: Fontana.

This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:56:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 199

Kachru, Braj B. 1986. The Alchemy of English. The Spread, Functions and Models
of Non-Native Englishes. Oxford: Pergamon.
Kachru, Braj B. 1997. World Englishes and English-Using Communities. Annual
Review of Applied Linguistics 17: 67-87.
Kandiah, Thiru. 2001. Whose Meanings? Probing the Dialectics of English as a Global
Language. In: Goh, Robbie et al., eds., Ariels - Departures and Returns: A Festschrift
for Edwin Thumboo. Singapore: Oxford University Press, pp. 98-117.
Kenny, Brian and Savage, William (eds.). 1997. Language and Development. Teachers
in a Changing World. Harlow and New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
Mazrui, Alamin. 1997. The World Bank, the Language Question and the Future of
African Education. Race and Class 38(3): 35-48.
Mikl6s Kontra, Phillipson, Robert, Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove and Varady, Tibor (eds.).
1999. Language: A Right and a Resource. Approaching Linguistic Human Rights.
Budapest: Central European University Press
Mufwene, Salikoko S. 1997. The Legitimate and Illegitimate Offspring of English. In:
Smith and Forman (eds.). 1997, pp. 182-203.
Miihlhausler, Peter. 1996. Linguistic Ecology. Language Change and Linguistic
Imperialism in the Pacific Region. London: Routledge.
Ngugi wa Thiong'o. 1993. Moving the Centre. The Struggle for Cultural Freedoms.
London: James Currey; Nairobi: EAEP, Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Oda, Masaki. 2000. Linguicism in Action: Language and Power in Academic
Institutions. In: Phillipson (ed.). 2000a, pp. 117-121.
Parakrama, Arjuna. 1995. De-hegemonizing Language Standards. Learning from
(Post)Colonial Englishes about 'English'. Basingstoke and New York: Macmillan.
Pennycook, Alastair. 1994. The Cultural Politics of English as an International
Language. Harlow: Longman.
Pennycook, Alastair. 1998. English and the Discourses of Colonialism. London and
New York: Routledge.
Phillipson, Robert. 1992. Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Phillipson, Robert. 1999a. Review of Fishman, Conrad and Rubal-Lopez (eds.). 1996.
Language, 75/2, 165-168.
Phillipson, Robert. 1999b. Voice in Global English: Unheard Chords in Crystal Loud
and Clear. Review Article on Crystal 1997. Applied Linguistics 20(2): 265-276.
Phillipson, Robert (ed.). 2000a. Rights to Language. Equity, Power, and Education.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Phillipson, Robert. 2000b. English in the New World Order: Variations on a Theme
of Linguistic Imperialism and 'World' English. In: Ricento (ed.). 2000, pp. 87-106.
Phillipson, Robert and Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove. 1999. Englishisation: One Dimension
of Globalisation. In: Graddol, David and Meinhoff, Ulrike, eds., English in a Changing
World, AILA Review vol. 13, pp. 17-36.
Smith, Larry E. and Forman, Michael L. (eds.). 1997. World Englishes 2000. Honolulu:
University of Hawai'i Press.

This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:56:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
200

Spring, Joel. 1998. Education and the Rise of the Global Economy. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.

Rahman, Tariq. 1999. Language, Education and Culture. Karachi: Oxford University
Press.

Rajan, Rajeswari Sunder (ed.). 1992a. The Lie of the Land. English Literary Studies
in India. Delhi. Oxford University Press.
Rajan, Rajeswari Sunder. 1992b. Brokering English Studies: The British Council in
India. In Rajan (ed.). 1992a, pp. 130-155.
Ricento, Thomas (ed.). 2000. Ideology, Politics and Language Policies: Focus on
English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Rosenthal, Daniel. 1997. Exams Abroad, CAM, Easter 1997, 31-32.
Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove. 2000a. Linguistic Genocide in Education - or Worldwide
Diversity and Human Eights? Mahwah, New Jersey & London: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.

Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove. 2000b. Linguistic Human Rights and Teachers of English.

In: Hall, Joan Kelly & Eggington, William G. (eds.), The Sociopolitics of English
Language Teaching. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, pp. 22-44.
Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove and Phillipson, Robert (eds.). 1994. Linguistic Human Rights:
Overcoming Linguistic Discrimination. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Spack, Ruth. 1997. The Rhetorical Constructions of Multilingual Students. TESOL
Quarterly 31(4): 765-774.
Tickoo, Makhan. 1996. Fifty Years of English in Singapore: All gains, (a) Few Losses?
In: Fishman, Conrad & Rubal-Lopez (eds.). 1996, pp. 431-455.
Toh, Glenn Koon Peng. 1999. Primary School English Textbooks in Singapore: An
Examination of Cultural and Ideological Content. PhD thesis, School of Education,
Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia.
Tsuda, Yukio. 1994. The Diffusion of English: Its Impact on Culture and
Communication. Keio Communication Review 16: 49-61.

The author

Robert Phillipson is British, with degrees from the Universities of Cambridge and
Leeds, and a doctorate from the University of Amsterdam. He worked for the British
Council in four countries, and has lived in Denmark since 1973. He is currently a
Research Professor at the Department of English of Copenhagen Business School.
He has written widely on language learning, language policy and language rights: for
details see the bibliography of his article. A full list is available on his homepage
http://babel.ruc.dk/-robert. His Linguistic Imperialism builds on an analysis of why
English has remained so powerful in postcolonial countries, and the role of language
pedagogy as an instrument of western policy. His current research is mainly concerned
with globalisation and English, and language policy in the European Union.
Contact address: Dr Robert Phillipson, Department of English, Copenhagen
Business School, Dalgas Have 15, DK - 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark. E-mail:
rp.eng@cbs.dk.

This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Mon, 17 Apr 2017 15:56:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms