English, gatekeeping, and Mandarin: the future of language learning in South Korea

Many supporters and critics of a ‘global English’ assume that English is (initially) ‘outside’ of cultures in what Braj Kachru calls the ‘Expanding Circle’. But this ignores the ways English has been culturally and historically constituted in countries where it is still a ‘foreign’ language. In South Korea, English education—as an institution—has been part of Korean life since the 1880s. During that time, English has acquired a variety of contradictory cultural meanings related to the colonial and postcolonial experiences of South Korean people. For example, although introduced as part of the late‐nineteenth century ‘enlightenment’ of Korean society, English became associated during the Korean War with conservatism and the US military government. More recent beliefs surrounding English suggest a combination of liberatory possibility and imperialism. Through an examination of historical sources, literature and ethnographic interviews undertaken from 1999 to 2001, I describe some of these shifting meanings as relevant not only for our understanding of English in South Korea but for world Englishes as a whole. ‘Global English’, I suggest, must be understood as both global and local.

This study investigates Korean parents’ perceptions of and attitudes toward issues related to the study of English, such as the social phenomena that arise from excessive emphasis on learning English and so-called “English fever”; as well as ideas about Standard English, American English, Korean English and other varieties of English (World Englishes). This investigation was conducted using a survey that targeted Korean parents, who are the primary decision-makers when it comes to their children’s English education. The survey was comprised of two sections with similarly-themed questions: one part asked respondents’ opinions based on their own experiences learning English, and the second part asked about their philosophy when it came to their children’s English education. In this way, the study explored whether or not respondents held contradictory attitudes between their beliefs as learners and their beliefs as parents. The results of the survey confirm that respondents view English as essential for success in South Korea, but it was also clear that they are tired of the excessive pressure placed on learning English and social problems caused by it. Additionally, they believe there is a standard English, but do not consider it to be limited to specific dialects, such as American or British English and while they perceive the existence of other varieties of English, they are less interested in learning them. Regarding their children’s English education, their responses were not fully contradictory, but they did show some degree of inconsistency. For example, they preferred their children have Native English teachers and were less accepting of them being taught other varieties of English, including Korean English. Significantly, the results of this study not only challenge, but stand in contrast to results from previous studies and to prevailing social prejudices, which often portray Korean parents as English-obsessed and willing to go to any lengths to ensure the highest-quality English education for their children.

In largely monolingual South Korea, English has become so important that it is promoted and regarded as a major criterion in education, employment and job-performance evaluation. Recently, South Koreans have also gone so far as to debate whether to adopt English as an official language of South Korea. This article examines the status and role of English in South Korea, particularly in the context of the Official English debate. In so doing, the article critically discusses previous ideologically-based accounts of English in South Korea. By demonstrating that these accounts do not go ideologically deep enough, the article argues that education, under cover of the ideology of merit, serves as a primary mechanism of elimination that conserves the hierarchy of power relations already established in South Korean society. English has been recruited, in the guise of globalization, to exploit the meretricious ideology of merit to the advantage of the privileged classes and to the disadvantage of the other classes of the society. English in South Korea cannot be understood fully unless it is recognized that its importance has not been as much engendered by globalization as it has been resorted to as a subterfuge to conceal where the responsibility for inequality in education lies within the society.

The current paper examines how English has evolved to become valued language capital in South Korea (henceforth ‘Korea’). Since the late 20th century, Korea has experienced the phenomenon of ‘English fever’, which refers to the frenetic and at times over-zealous pursuit of English-language proficiency across Korean society (J. S. Y. Park, 2009). Researchers have examined ‘English fever’ through various prisms, including education (Park & Abelmann, 2004; J. K. Park, 2009), neoliberalism (Piller & Cho, 2013; Cho, 2015; Lee, 2016), and local socio-politics (Shim & Park, 2008). Rarely has the phenomenon been approached from a historical point of view. Considering the fact that a historical examination of language can provide critical insights into the local processes through which distinctive ideologies of language have been shaped and popularized (Cho, 2017), this paper traces the historical evolution of English in Korean society by focusing on three key periods, i.e. Japanese colonization (1910–1945); the post-independence period and modernization (1945–1980); and military dictatorship and globalization (1980-present). Drawing on the theoretical framework of global centre-periphery divisions embedded in Orientalism (Said, 1979), the analysis focuses specifically on the influence of the United States on the rise of English in Korea. In doing so, I show that ‘English fever’ is not a recent phenomenon but has its roots in historicity through which the seeds for the ongoing phenomenon of ‘English fever’ were planted in Korean society.

Just what is it like to teach English to Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) in South Korea? Through this journal, the author provides a frank and candid account of the various events, commitments, tasks, relationships (at both work and play). The text is changed very little from the actual handwritten journal kept for the fifty weeks Wellens spent teaching ESOL at Chungnam Institute of Foreign Language Education (CIFLE), a state-of-the-art facility in Gongju, South Korea. Hundreds of thousands of university degree holders and of native English speakers from the USA, New Zealand, the UK, Canada, Australia and South Africa teach English in South Korea every year as help to provide the government-mandated English language requirement in the schools. Anyone considering teaching English in South Korea (or anywhere in the world) will benefit from the reading of this book as preparation for a transformative experience.

This entry provides an overview of English in South Korea by contextualizing the various roles of English against the background of Korea's historical contact with English. Korea's national English education program, the main channel of contact with English for the majority of Koreans, is critically reviewed together with the status of English in the tertiary sector. This entry reviews the importance Koreans place on private education in English language learning and the influence of English in various sociolinguistic domains. Englishized Korean and Korean English are also discussed together with examples of the most common features shared by both varieties. The final section includes discussion of the most popular ideologies held about English in South Korea.

This essay is an investigation of global and local functions of English in South Korea. Although English was traditionally studied as a ‘global language’ for international purposes, it has also become part of the local South Korean context through the incorporation of English loanwords; commonly referred to as Konglish. By looking at the attitudes towards this language phenomenon, as well as the manifestation of Konglish in the media and popular culture I would like to argue that Konglish is an important cultural phenomenon. Creating awareness of Konglish will enable English language learners to differentiate between local and global varieties successfully.

World EnglishesVolume 28, Issue 4 p. 558-560 The Local Construction of a Global Language: Ideologies of English in South Korea by Joseph Sung-Yul Park Jamie Shinhee Lee, Jamie Shinhee LeeSearch for more papers by this author Jamie Shinhee Lee, Jamie Shinhee LeeSearch for more papers by this author First published: 06 November 2009 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2009.01614.xRead the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Volume28, Issue4December 2009Pages 558-560 RelatedInformation

Using Marxist notions of value, this study examines how the commodification of language instruction skews understandings of who is deemed a legitimate teacher of English in South Korea. The study argues that neoliberalism incentivizes the Korean ELT market to create value in race and racialized images. For example, the analysis explores how skin color, nationality, ethnicity, and facial morphology are used to sell an “authentic” and “Western” learning experience, thus creating exchange value in characteristics and features that are not traditionally associated with good language teaching, such as the ability to communicate information effectively. Analyzing interviews, job advertisements, and immigration documents from a critical discourse analytic perspective, the analysis uncovers how a market-driven ELT profession contributes to, and represents, a nexus of racially-motivated ideologies that circulates the discourse that English in South Korea is an indispensable form of upward mobility. The paper ends by contending that scholars and practitioners must do more to understand how constructs central to markets, such as value and commodity, shed light on pressing critical ELT issues.

English in South Korea, where the language is highly emphasized as a necessary language for the age of globalization, continues to have limited use within the country’s dominant Korean language monolingualism, despite the fact that localized forms of linguistic resources originating from English permeate everyday communication. This sociolinguistic characteristic has led to problems for concepts that aim to provide a typology of new Englishes by identifying them in terms of distinct varieties – including the notions of English as second language/English as foreign language, inner/outer/expanding circles, and English as lingua franca. In this paper, I argue that a proper understanding of English in South Korea requires that we move away from such variety-based approaches, instead viewing language as practice embedded in speakers’ communicative activity in social context. For this purpose, I discuss the case of Konglish, a term that pejoratively refers to English as used by Koreans. While previous studies have rightly argued that expressions condemned as Konglish should be seen as legitimate localized uses of English, here I focus on how Konglish does not represent a variety but a cultural practice, in which Koreans draw upon whatever resource available to them in making communicative action, and through which Koreans conceptualize their position in the global world. Based on this discussion, I argue that research on English as a global language should move beyond the varieties-based approach that focuses on typologies of Englishes to ask more fundamental questions about the nature of language itself.

This paper examines the status and identity of teachers of English as a foreign language in South Korea. In many parts of the world, English is taught as a second, foreign, or additional language. The status of native and non-native English-speaking teachers is debated often. However, the dichotomy is not as straightforward as it might appear because the difference between native and non-native speakers does not sufficiently describe the identities, linguistic abilities, and teaching skills that those teachers possess. Cho (2012) described two critical considerations for male Korean-American teachers of English in South Korea: (1) linguistic capital and the ideal of native English speakers in Asian countries and (2) the social status and identity of Asian-Americans as members of minority groups in the United States. In order to transcend the idealisation of the West and to support learners and teachers in South Korea, this paper discusses issues of whiteness and native-speakerness in relation to the two issues that Cho described by examining the backgrounds and characteristics of Korean Americans as well as English-as-a-foreign-language education in South Korea. In addition, the paper discusses the teaching experience and the abilities of English teachers. The analysis identifies the benefits and risks of commodifying linguistic capital. The findings contribute to the developments of English-language education not only in East Asian countries but also in the rapidly globalising world of the modern age, in which English competence is more valuable than ever.

From an alienated to an active English learner: The case of a North Korean refugee in South Korea

In South Korea English as an International Language (EIL) is neither neutral, imperialistic nor democratic but rather functional and pragmatic and inherently linked to the country's development. It is not a language being used internally for communicative purposes. Rather, it is an additional linguistic skill being learnt for the purposes of international business communication and academic advancement both contributing to South Korea's rising presence in the international arena. This paper examines the role of English as an International Language in South Korea and the roles played by language in society and culture. It looks at the implications that this has for teaching English in South Korea and the need to focus on interpretability to expose students to as many varieties of English as possible to prepare for the linguistic diversity that they are likely to encounter in their own locale.

English in South Korea: Two Sides of the Same Coin

Techno-Modeling CareRacial Branding, Dis/embodied Labor, and “Cybraceros” in South Korea Anna Romina Guevarra (bio) “It may be better to have a telepresence robot from a highly skilled teacher than to have just an average teacher in the classroom,” Balch added. —Susannah Palk, “Robot Teachers Invade South Korean Classrooms” The cyborg is a condensed image of both imagination and material reality, the two joined centers structuring any possibility of historical transformation. —Donna J. Haraway, “A Manifesto for Cyborgs” The wellspring of technological innovation is the exercise of the technological imagination. —Anne Balsamo, Designing Culture In 2010 the Korea Institute of Science and Technology announced its latest innovation: her name is Engkey (a contraction for “English jockey”)—the “English teaching robot teacher.” “She” has already been selected as one of the “50 best inventions of 2010” by Time magazine and has been heralded as the “job terminator” that will eventually replace some thirty thousand foreign nationals who teach English in South Korea. Engkey is an avatar tele-education robot that is premised on the concept of “distant-teaching” or “e-learning” and is representative of the South Korean state’s commitment to improve the English-language proficiency of its citizens. It is a device that was invented by the Center for Intelligent Robotics at the Korea Institute of Science and Technology (kist) in 2010 to provide educational assistance in elementary schools. Engkey is a robot effectively designed to be operated by a call-center worker overseas. At a height of 3.3 feet, Engkey stands as a white penguin-shaped robot, with a tv display screen as a [End Page 139] head that projects an image of a young white girl with long blonde hair (see fig. 1). She can wheel around the room to speak, sing, sense, and actively respond to children, as well as provide an emotional response by modulating her facial expressions and moving her head and arms. Engkey’s “functionality” derives from the fact that she is controlled by a remote teacher who, during the pilot tests, was located in the Philippines. Filipina teachers, working in the Philippines, circulate as disembodied yet gendered and racialized robots with avatar white faces, and interact with South Korean students using a microphone device attached to the video camera to telecast lessons and communicate in real time. Engkey was piloted between 2010 and 2011 in twenty-nine schools in South Korea and is now undergoing further technical reconfiguration and testing to improve her functionality and decrease her retail price.1 Click for larger view View full resolution Fig. 1. Engkey. Courtesy of the Korea Institute of Science and Technology. Through Engkey, this paper examines the complex relationships between neoliberal formations, the gendered geopolitics of care work, and contemporary forms of disembodied labor. It brings into conversation the literatures [End Page 140] on migration, labor studies, and feminist science and technology studies by exploring two analytics. First, it seeks to examine Engkey’s subjectivity as a visible, “live” presence in the classroom but one simultaneously rendered invisible, articulated solely as a technological innovation. Second, it explores the implications of Engkey’s dis/embodiment for “authenticity work” and what I call racial branding—the neoliberal discursive and political economic strategy for positioning Filipinos as the ideal global labor rendered operable through the dynamics of race and gender.2 Engkey as a “branded” and gendered laboring figure is also instrumental in sustaining the so-called global care chains that link the global North and South through paid and unpaid forms of care work.3 Appearing as a female avatar with a young and whitened face reifies and perpetuates the gendering of this form of care work, in this case, teaching. Engkey embodies the gendered subject presumed to be the ideal laboring subject for performing these tasks. However, in this latest configuration of commoditized labor, Engkey serves as an innovation of such care work, disrupting the ways in which this new form of care work operates through disembodiment and deracination, even as she calls into question the inherent classbased and gendered hierarchies that the global care chain presumes. That is, the “good enough” laborer in the global South, dis/embodied by...