Members’ Day 2015

English as a lingua franca;the threat to other languages

Threlford Lecture 2015

Andy Kirkpatrick, Griffith Universitya.kirkpatrick@griffith.edu.au

In this talk, I shall take Asia – in particular Southeast and East Asia – as the context.

I believe, however, that the argument is relevant to other parts of the world – for example Africa, and Latin America, if not Europe.

Background

In the ten nations of ASEAN (Brunei, Burma, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam)there are more than 1000 languages.

Indonesia alone is home to 700+ languages

What’s happening to these languages?

‘Hypothesis’ ‘Idea’

There is a shift taking place in Asia (elsewhere?) which is resulting in more Asians becoming bilingual in their respective national language + English, and with fewer becoming multilingual in Asian languages.

Outline

Background: English as a Lingua Franca in ASEAN and ASEAN + 3 (China/HK, Japan,

Korea)

Language Education Policies and Practices

Predictions / Proposals

This is a ‘macro-perspective’ with occasional ‘micro’ perspectives.

The situation is hugely complex and diverse

There is great diversity not only across the nations of ASEAN but within them

ASEAN Charter(ratified Feb 2009)

‘to promote an ASEAN identity through the fostering of greater awareness of the

diverse culture and heritage of the region’

‘in the spirit of unity in diversity’, BUT

‘the working language of ASEAN shall be English’ (Article 34) (cf. EU)

Extra motivation to learn/teach English stems from:

Aim of ASEAN integration by end 2015

ASEAN Economic Community (+political/security community and socio-cultural community)

‘English is an indispensable tool to bring our Community closer together’ (Sec. Gen. Le)

English is used by more than 800 million multilinguals in Asia alone (Bolton 2008); and we need to know something about how these people use English in lingua franca communication (cf. also the BRICS group).

Generally speaking language education policy in ASEAN and East Asia has English as a compulsory subject in the primary curriculum (note exception of Indonesia) and that English is being introduced earlier and earlier (e.g, Grade 3 across China, Grade 3 planned for Vietnam, currently Grade 6)

Some countries have English as a medium of instruction (Singapore the classic case)

The introduction of English into the primary curriculum is at the expense of another subjects; frequently this is a local language and the language of the region and first language of the children.

Chinese Language Law

Bilingual Education Policy in the Philippines(recent changes)

And some of the wealthy middle class are not even learning their national language.

‘To actually forsake the public school system that teaches in your own language for the private one that teaches in English is an increasingly common phenomenon’ (Wang Gungwu 2007:xiv).

‘A very effective way of killing a language is to deny it any place in the education system’ (Coleman 2010:17)

I have elsewhere argued that the primary school should focus on developing children’s literacy in a local and the national language;

and that the teaching and learning of English can be delayed until children have developed literacy and fluency in local languages (e.g, Kirkpatrick 2010, 2012b, Kirkpatrick and Sussex 2012)

But there have been changes

Malaysia (Gill 2012)

‘The Re-reversal of Language-in-Education Policy’

The Philippines

Very complex both linguistically and politically (especially in terms of language

policies!)(Dekker and Young 2005)

168 languages

90% of the populations speak one of the 8 major languages

1987 Revised BEP basically sees English as MoI for Maths, Science and English; and Filipino (and what’s in a name – Tagalog, Pilipino) for other subjects. English and the national lingua franca were (are?) the primary languages of education.

This means that children who were not Tagalog speaking could go to Primary 1 and find they had to learn in TWO new languages.

‘There have been frequent efforts to incorporate vernacular languages into the primary curriculum (Dekker and Young), but with little lasting effect.

BUT

On 15 May 2013, President BenignoAcquino signed into law the Enhanced Basic Education Act.

In fact, there has been some move to MTB-MLE since a Education Department order in 2009

The new law is extending Basic Education to 13 years

‘For kindergarten and the first three years of elementary education, instruction, teaching materials and assessment shall be in the regional or native language of the learners.’

[Tagalog, Cebuano, Ilocano, Kapampangan, Pangasinense, Bicol, Waray, Tausug, Maguindanaoan, Maranao, Chabacano, Hiligaynon]Recently increased to include more languages

The key criterion appears to be languages with established orthographies.

It takes many resources, much time, and crucially, community involvement, to establish orthographies (e.g, Dekker and Young 2005 on the Lubuagan language, Lilubuagan).

The proponents of MTB-MLE are still arguing for the vernaculars to be used as MoI until at least Grade 6. (The new law calls for transition to Eng. and F as MoI during grades 4-6).

It will probably take about 5 years before the success, or otherwise, of the new law can be evaluated.

It is encouraging, however, given the trends elsewhere in E and SE Asia.

PR ChinaNational Language Law Prescribes Putonghua Mandarin and Modern Standard (Written) Chinese as the sole language of education

Thus, other Chinese languages (e.g, Cantonese- Yue, Shanghainese-Wu, Hokkien-Minnan Hua) cannot be taught in schools). The national lingua franca is completely dominant.

The languages of national minority peoples (of whom there are 55 officially) can be used as languages of education/ MoI in primary schools.

But failure (e.g, Zhuang) vastly outnumbers success (e.g, Korean).

(Adamson and Feng 2015)

English is introduced from Primary 3 in government schools.

English in private kindergartens /tutors for the wealthy.

Those who can afford it send their children to English speaking countries to ‘escape’ the competitive nature of Chinese education.

Simply speaking, however, Chinese children learn Putonghua Mandarin (the national lingua franca) and English.

This combination represents a significant threat, not only to languages of few speakers , but possibly even to languages such as Cantonese (with some 70 million speakers.

Hong Kong alone retains Cantonese as a MoI.

Hong KongAim: Trilingual (Cantonese, Putonghua, English) biliterates (Chinese, English)

In government primary schools, Cantonese remains the MoI;

English is taught as a subject;

Putonghua is taught as a subject – but is being trialled as an MoI for certain subjects, including Chinese itself.

As HK’s universities are English medium (and even the Chinese University of Hong Kong is offering more and more EMI courses), parental demand for English in secondary schools is high (and has recently proved overwhelming);

The new fine-tuning policy of HK’s secondary schools allows more schools to teach more classes in English.

So, there is pressure for primary schools to teach more English and more Putonghua.Our study (Wang and Kirkpatrick 2013)(see also Wang and KP 2015) of trilingual education in HK primary school concluded that:

(i) the three languages should be used as media of instruction, but the ratio of each should alter as children progress through primary, with the emphasis on Cantonese in the first years;

(ii) Cantonese should be the medium for the Chinese subject from P1-P3;(iii) Putonghua can take over as the MoI for Chinese literacy after P3, with Cantonese support classes provided for those whose MT is not Cantonese;(iv) English is the MoI for English and PE from P1;

(v) Cantonese is the MoI for other subjects –with the possibility of General Studies being taught in English in later primary;

(vi) English teachers need to work closely with the other teachers (and vice versa);

(vii) a multilingual pedagogy needs to be adopted whose aim is to enhance students’ functional trilingualism.

But what hope is there really, when the HK universities remain EMI?

HK’s case is comparatively simple with two related languages (Cantonese and Putonghua) and English.

But the added complexities of learning languages from different language families should not be underestimated.

The new 2013 Curriculum for Indonesia

Indonesia is the only ASEAN country that does not make English a compulsory subject in primary school.

Often taught, bizarrely, as a ‘local content subject’ (along with batik, for example) for two periods a week.

Local languages are also taught in this way.

Some schools set aside one day of the week when the regional language is used.

Javanese day, for example, but these are the exception rather than the rule.

International Standard Schools (sekolahbetaraf internasional – SBI) use English as a Medium of Instruction from Grade 4, but many introduce English as an MoI earlier than that.

These SBIs (aka ISS) received much criticism for advantaging the wealthy and elite (they charge fees as well as receiving special funding). People also worry about language issues. Indeed they have recently been ruled unconstitutional.

‘…with the emerging and mushrooming demand for English, schools then drop the local language in order to give more time to the English teaching. As a result, in the long run, children and the younger generation can no longer speak the local language. This is culturally and linguistically pitiful’ (Hadisantosa 2010:31).

Many pesantren (boarding schools attached to mosques) teach English for Islamic Values.

‘Tomorrow, I will come, insya’Allah’

The 7-minute talk is in English in some Jakarta mosques (Fahrudin 2013).

The new 2013 curriculum has no place for English, but has caused / is causing huge controversy for other reasons.

The new curriculum appears designed to create model citizens, with its focus on religion and civics.

Science and maths have been dropped as discrete subjects to be integrated into religion and civics.

It is very likely that with the election of the new President Joko Widowo, the new curriculum will be revisited.

Indeed the new curriculum has recently been abandoned and the previous curriculum re-instated.

What is actually happening in the great majority of cases across E and SE Asia is that:

English is being taught using NS models and targets (Kirkpatrick 2012a);

English is being introduced earlier and earlier into the primary curriculum.

This also means that multilingualism in Asian languages may be being replaced by bilingualism in the respective national language (e.g, BI, Putonghua, Filipino) and English.

Except that almost all education systems consistently bewail the poor English proficiency of their students.

It is perhaps more accurate to suggest, therefore that:

With the exception of the wealthy middle class, Asian schoolchildren are:

learning their national language;failing to learn English;not being given the opportunity to learn local languages.

It is obviously far too early to decide whether this will lead to a significant reduction of Asians who are multilingual in Asian languages, but I suspect the trend will be a ‘Singaporean’ one, with the educated of the region becoming bilingual in their respective national language + English.

The future of smaller Asian languages, despite the new moves in the Philippines, appears bleak.

Generally speaking, in the Asian context, the priorities given to the respective national lingua franca and an international lingua franca (usually English) in language education and language education policy undermines the roles of other languages, not only in language education but across society as a whole.

This leads me to the suggestions that:

(i) Far from being introduced earlier and earlier, English should be delayed until children have fluency/literacy in at least two local languages (home/regional LF/national language);

(ii) English should be taught as a lingua franca; as a multilingual language. That is to say:

The increasing and significant roles of English in non-Anglo-cultural settings needs to be taken on board and curricula designed that reflect this (as a medium of Asian/African cultures etc);

models /targets / linguistic benchmarks should be more functionally oriented towards the ability to use English successfully in multicultural/multilingual settings;

the NS target / model can be challenged for many learning contexts.

This might halt the current trend towards bilingualism in the respective national language (the national lingua franca) + English (the international lingua franca) and encourage a move towards multilingualism, comprising bilingualism in local languages + functional proficiency in English.

Language education policy must be holistic (womb to tomb!)

Implications for translators and interpreters of ‘English’ include the importance of training in the different varieties of English and the use of English as a lingua franca.

There is not much point using NS models when the need is to interpret for ASEAN and Chinese delegates at ASEAN-China forums.

The Asian Corpus of English (ACE)

How is English actually being used? What does this English as a lingua franca look like?

One million (110 hours) of naturally occurring English as a Lingua Franca being used by Asian multilinguals.

Data Collection teams across East and SE Asia.

China (Guangxi University)Hong Kong (Institute of Education)

Griffith University, BrisbaneUniversity of Malaya

NIE SingaporeUniversity of Brunei

Ateneo de Manila UniversityChukyo University, Japan

SEAMEO RETRAC, HCM City, Vietnam

ACE was launched at the English as a Lingua Franca Conference earlier this month September 2014

[http://corpus.ied.edu.hk/ace/]

It will be comparable/complementary to VOICE (Vienna Oxford International Corpus of English – more European focused)

References

Adamson and Feng (eds.) (2015) Trilingualism and Trilingual Education in China. Dordrecht: SpringerBenson, Carol (2008) Summary Overview in Improving the Quality of MT-based Literacy and Learning, Haddad, Caroline (ed.) Bangkok: UNESCO;2-11Bolton, Kingsley (2008) English in Asia, Asian Englishes and the issue of proficiency. English Today 94 (24)(2): 3-13.Coleman, H. (2010) Teaching and Learning in Pakistan. The Role of Language in Education. Islamabad: The British Council.Dekker, D. and Young, C. (2005). Bridging the gap: the development of appropriate educational strategies for minority language communities in the Philippines. Current Issues in Language Planning (6):2: 182-199.Fahrudin, Diding (2013). English language teaching development in pesantren institutions: a transcultural flow experience in Indonesia. Paper given at the 5th COTEFL Conference, Purwokerto, Indonesia May 11-12.

Garcia, Ofelia (2009). Bilingual Education in the 21st Century. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Gill, Saran Kaur (2012). The complexities of re-reversal of language-in-education policy in Malaysia. In Kirkpatrick, Andy and Sussex, Roland (eds). English as an International Language in Asia: Implications for Language Education. Dordrecht: Springer: 45-62.Hadisantosa, N. (2010) Insights from Indonesia. In Johnstone,. R. (ed) Learning through English: Policies, Challenges and Prospects. London: British Council pp 24-46.Kirkpatrick, Andy (2010). English as a Lingua Franca in ASEAN: The Multilingual Model. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University PressKirkpatrick, Andy (2012a) English as an Asian lingua franca: a lingua franca approach and implications for language education policy. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 1(1): 121-140.

Kirkpatrick, Andy (2012b) English in ASEAN: implications for regional multilingualism. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. 33(4): 331-44.Kirkpatrick, Andy and Sussex, Roland (eds.) (2012) English as an International Language in Asia. Dordrecht: Springer.McIlwraith, Hamish (ed.) (2013). Multilingual Education in Africa: Lessons from the Juba Language-in-Education Conference. London: British Council,Nolasco, Ricardo (2008) The Prospects of Multilingual Education and Literacy in the Philippines. Stroupe, R and Kimura K (eds) (2015) ASEAN Integration and the role of ELT. Phnom Penh: IDPWang Gungwu (2007) Keynote address. Lee and Suryadinata (eds) Language, Nation and Development. Singapore: Institute of SE Asian Studies: ix-xvii.Wang Lixun and Kikrpatrick, A. (2015) Trilingual education in Hong Kong’s primary schools: an overview. Journal of Multilingual Education, 5,3 http://www.multilingual-education.com/content/5/1/3Wang Lixun and Kirkpatrick, A (2013). Trilingual education in Hong Kong primary schools: a case study. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 16 (1):100-116.Wang Lixun and Kirkpatrick, A (2013-5). Trilingual education in Hong Kong primary schools: an overview. Journal of Multilingual Education: , 5:3DOI: 10.1186/s13616-015-0023-8.

Members’ Day 2015