The language political aspect of ELF

39

suit the purposes of the speakers. This involves processes in which ELF speakers cooperate to understand each other in an ongoing interaction by means of negotiation of meaning and accommodation, using all the linguistic resources at their disposal to achieve their communicative goals.

The pragmatic view of ELF is relevant for investigating English speech varieties since it illustrates how functions of language use may affect language forms. Although in speech varieties, a number of language forms may have no pragmatic functions, for example, variants in pronunciation resulting from L1 transfer in the case of EFL speakers, the use of variables by speakers can be influenced consciously or unconsciously by the context of language use, namely the audience, the formality of the situation of the topic. Pronunciation can also be used for accommodation for the sake of intelligibility, compensating for differences in schematic knowledge by finding a linguistic common ground, or to signal personal relationships with other speakers.

40

and to show how ELF can be conceived as a language political paradigm which offers a new approach to English in terms of the status of its speakers, the norms of its use and the practices of teaching it. This is to provide further theoretical context for investigating Hungarian EFL learners‟ attitudes towards English speech varieties.

Phillipson (1994) argues that the transfer of English as a dominant language can be seen as linguistic imperialism, which means demonstrating social, political and cultural power through English, which is promoted by governments and organisations such as the British Council. It is argued that the status of English as the socially dominant language in post-colonial settings creates a linguistic and cultural hegemony of English and its native speakers. This is achieved by emphasising the richness and the superior linguistic qualities of English, for example, by asserting that English is the language with the largest vocabulary, a claim which is not justifiable linguistically, while implying that other languages lack such positive qualities.

Besides, asserting the pervasive role of English and its importance of international communication makes other languages appear to be marginal and of limited importance.

Linguistic imperialism also involves the idea that through the dominance of the English language, the cultures, values, practices or political systems of native-English Anglo-Saxon societies are presented as superior to those of non-Anglo-Saxon people.

The idea of linguistic imperialism implies that there are many inequalities in international contexts where English is used as the dominant language of communication. Professionals such as business people, scientists or academics who wish to engage in their professions in international contexts are forced to use English as a medium of communication, which means that they need to master a new linguistic code and they also have to conform to ENL speakers‟

norms of language use if they seek acceptance in these discourse communities (Canagarajah,

41

2005). For example, a scientist who intends to share their discovery in an international journal or present it at an international conference will have to adhere to the strict norms of ENL discourse communities. Not only will they have to use English to communicate their ideas, they will have to do so in a manner that native speakers of English do it, structuring and presenting ideas and arguments by following the conventions of ENL, with the idiomaticity and possibly the pronunciation of native speakers in the case of spoken discourses. By contrast, since international contexts are dominated by English and Anglo-American norms, ENL speakers enjoy the advantages of home turf in the international arena due to their familiarity with English and the norms of its use regardless of whether they are professionally superior to non-native speakers of English or not.

Phillipson (1992) argues that there are a number of manifestations of linguistic imperialism in language education as well. The main purpose of native speakerism in ELT is not to contribute positively to the teaching of English but to maintain the hegemony of ENL and the dominance of native speakers in the profession. The most prominent aspect of linguistic imperialism in ELT is the promotion of monolingualism which involves several fallacies. It asserts that English is best taught by native speakers who represent authentic English and are therefore the ideal models for learners. In addition, they also have first-hand knowledge of the cultural context of English and they are thus more suitable to teach the language than non-native teachers. Monolingualism also entails that English ought to be the only language which features in teaching materials and which is used during lessons. Learners‟ mother tongues are regarded as potentially harmful influences which should be banished from ELT altogether. The main rationale behind excluding learners‟ L1 from ELT is that it might result in language transfer, that is, transferring features of the learners‟ mother tongue to their English, which would

42

“contaminate” their English by making it incorrect or simply not authentic as it would mean deviations from ENL. This can be regarded as the main rationale for using prestige varieties of English speech such as RP in ELT and stigmatising L1 accent features of learners.

The inequalities between ENL versus ESL and EFL speakers are also discussed by Pennycook (1994) building on the theory of Center versus Periphery by Galtung (1971) whereby the native speakers of dominant English-speaking countries exert cultural and political influence on ESL and EFL speakers through English, especially in the context of language education. Due to the global dominance of English in the media and in popular culture, political views, values and ideologies are handed down from countries of the Center to countries of the Periphery through the media and through language education. For example, English-language news is produced in countries of the Center and is consumed as international news in the Periphery, while they represent mainly the point of view and interpretations of the Center. Similarly, the values and narratives of internationally popular Hollywood movies represent the narratives, values and worldviews of the Center, which are received in the Periphery as desirable alternatives to their values which are not represented in English-language popular culture.

Equating English with ENL and the superiority of the Center can constitute the basis of the prestige value of English speech varieties of the Center due to the associations speakers of English make between pronunciation and symbolic meanings, discussed further in Section (2.4.2).

43