linguistlist.org>
Editor for this issue: Martin Jacobsen <martylinguistlist.org>
ARTS-01.NOVELL.LEEDS.AC.UK>Su Xiaojun wrote: about an argument --"why shouldn't we have our own Chinese English?" >will fostering Chinese English hinder international communication & >what will happen if there is no norm to refer to in EFL teaching & >what should be the norm if there should be one? Most of the Englishes that are (more or less) accepted as alternative standards of English are from places where English has a widespread internal currency. English is one of the locally used languages of India, Singapore and Nigeria, for example. This is Kachru's 'Outer Circle'. In the case of places where English is little used by people of the country within the country (France, Japan) -- Kachru's 'Expanding Circle' -- the idea of them having a local standard is more controversial. China of course has recently been enlarged by the addition of an 'Outer Circle' area, Hong Kong, which means that it already contains one of these local norms. It's important to look at what learners and users of a language are doing with it. The old idea that you learn English to speak to British and American people, and that you learn the culture of the language along with the language is very limiting and rather unrealistic. If you are learning English in China you are likely to be using it with people from all over the world, many of whom are coming from Outer Circle or Expanding Circle countries. It's important for learners to understand that there is not ONE (not even TWO) 'right' way of using English, but many, which they will have to cope with, like all English users. Given the tremendous diversity in English, and given the fact that comprehension is negotiated between speakers in a situation of real need, I don't think there is much point worrying about international communication. In drawing up syllabuses it's important to be both realistic in terms of the needs of the learners, and also in terms of the model being within the general framework of Standard English. The Standard Englishes of the world share a common spelling system (with very minor variations), a common (almost entirely) grammatical system, with, for example, particular patterns of concord and tense. They differ in a few lexical items, some of them needed to express local culture. Pronunciation varies dramatically within Standard English. Syllabuses should therefore pay attention to maintaining those features which keep the learner within the Standard Englishes. Anthea * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Anthea Fraser GUPTA : http://www.leeds.ac.uk/english/$staff/afg School of English University of Leeds LEEDS LS2 9JT UK * * * * * * * * * * * *Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
dmacc.cc.ia.us>On 19 Mar 98 at 10:09, The LINGUIST List wrote: > LINGUIST List: Vol-9-405. Hi! Xiaojun, Your question really intrigued me even though this is not my research field. The reason is that I'm a Chinese, and I've been here for eight years, first studying English and later teaching it in the U.S. I still remember a professor in Peensylvania suggested to me that there is such English as Chinese English, an English similar to Sigaporean English. But I can't hardly agree with him. Unlike other Englishes, such as Indian English and Nigerian English, English language has NEVER been an official language in China, a language used by the majority Chinese in their daily communications. And probably English will NEVER be an Official language in China. This means that the English used by the educated Chinese in the mainland of China has not formed its independent variety of English grammar and even phonology. English, to a great extent, is an idiomatic language rather than sentences formed simply according to grammatical rules. If you read essays written by the Chinese student or even sthe articles in China Daily, you can see that the biggest problems with these essays/articles are lack of idioms in them. It seems that oftentimes their sentences are grammartical but not idiomatic. On the other hand, a language has to reflect the social, cultual and political reality/change of a society. That's why we have "the iron rice bow." For a native speaker of English to understand what we are talking about in English, he or she needs to know our culture. Therefore, standard English (American/British) plus the words/phrases which reflect the Chinese culture should be the basis of "Chinese English," if anybody prefers to call it. Finally, I want to emphasize that it's not helpful for our students to believe that there is an independent variety of English, Chinese English. English is a language we non-native speakers would probably have to spend our whole life to learn. I really don't want to see we Chinese speak an "English" which native speakers of English have absolutely no idea of what we're talking about, if the difficulty is not caused by their lack of knowledge about China. Regards, Weishan Zhang, Ph.D.Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue