English in the age of globalization: Changing ELT models, restructuring relationships

Abstract

I. IntroductionTowards end of 20th century English became a truly global language and since then it has kept its privileged position among other languages. It is estimated that English is spoken by about 1.5 billion people all over (Crystal 1997:5). The term 'global English' reflects various functions English serves on all continents. In Inner Circle countries, to use Kachru's terminology (Kachru & Nelson 2001), it is first and majority group language. In Outer Circle countries, for example India, Pakistan, Singapore and Nigeria, English is used as a second language together with other languages as a means of intranational communication and in Expanding Circle, which covers an unspecified number of countries, English is largely taught as a foreign language in schools.Beyond shadow of a doubt has English become major lingua franca and has achieved a high level of international significance. None of previously established lingua francas, whether it was Latin in times of flourishing Roman Empire, French in 18th and 19th centuries, Russian imposed as common foreign language in Eastern Europe after Second World War or artificially created Esperanto, influenced international communication on such a large scale as English has done in past few decades. In general, two opposing perspectives can be traced in discourse on global use of English. Crystal (1997) and Wardhaugh (1987), for example, perceive dominant role of English in communication as a natural outcome of collaboration of several historical and cultural factors which have helped language to achieve its special position. As Wardhaugh comments: What is remarkable about English and what makes it unique is extent to which it has spread throughout world. No other language has ever had influence in affairs that English has today (Wardhaugh 1987: 131).These ideas are opposed by a wave of critical voices who emphasize interdependence between worldwide use of English and ideological, political, and commercial interests of core Inner Circle countries, mainly UK and USA. In this field seminal work of Robert Phillipson (1992) on linguistic imperialism has probably been most influential in inspiring further research into politics of English and English language teaching (ELT) (Pennycook 1994, 1998), (Singh, Kell & Pandian 2002). These authors argue that universal presence of English is a result of pursuing political and economic interests and of effort of British and Americans to maintain control over English language, often with support of national organizations and ELT industry. In other words, they link global English closely with linguistic and cultural imperialism of English speaking countries. An obvious question arises here: was rise of English as language just a natural outcome of English language being 'in right place at right time' or is it more a result of power struggles and deliberate policies?In this article we intend to examine connections between spread of English, ELT business, and distribution of power between native and nonnative English speaking communities. Secondly, we will discuss implications of global use of English for ELT profession and describe potential of ELT pedagogy for restructuring existing power relationships. As for terminology, we will make use of Phillipson's notions of Centre and Periphery. The first term refers to core English speaking countries, while latter involves regions in which English is used as a second language (mainly former British colonies) or taught as a foreign language. Here Eastern Europe, which at beginning of 1990s emerged as the new postcolonial world (Wallace 2002: 108), occupies an important place. The divisive line between Centre and Periphery is drawn along linguistic differences between native and non-native English speaking communities as well as along differences in their economic and technological development. …