The Multiculturalism of English as an Asian Language

Asian varieties of English are diverse, however, with different social roles attached to the adopted language. Each country has used the language in its traditional cultural and linguistic contexts, thereby producing a distinct variety characterized by unique structural and functional features.

Proficiency levels also differ with "English as a second language" (ESL) countries producing more skillful speakers than "English as an international language" (EIL) counterparts.

As most Asian countries recognize English as a useful language for intranational or international communication, they are increasingly committed to strengthening and improving English language teaching. Most prominently, they start teaching English at the elementary school level. While primary school English is common in ESL countries, many EIL countries are now following suit, including Japan, China, and Korea. In parts of Asia where English serves as an official language, and where ELT expands and succeeds, people start speaking English among themselves.

Wherever this happens, a set of indigenous patterns develop, the kind of patterns people find easier to handle. As languages come into contact, they get mingled in many interesting ways. The notion of one language as an independent system is only an imaginary creation. This has become increasingly obvious in Asian English studies, where cross-linguistic analysis is a key to a better understanding of a wide range of new patterns.

As a matter of fact, the forms and uses of English in Asia are enormously influenced by other Asian languages. While the influence often gets blurred in syntactic superposition, it is visible in lexical and idiomatic borrowing. Let me give you some examples of "face" from Singapore and Malaysian English, where Chinese phraseologies apparently are reflected. "Face" is extremely important in Asian societies. In the oriental value system, "face" refers to an individual's pride, dignity, honor, and even identity.

In this connection, it has to be stressed that although these phrases are not part of British English or American English, they are not to be denigrated or stigmatized. If they are useful for certain purposes in Singapore and Malaysian societies, they tend to get deeply rooted there. Just because nonnative speakers do not use English the way native speakers do, does not mean they are wrong or using the language incorrectly.

It is also important to note that teachers do not teach local varieties of English in the school. They teach "Standard British English" in the classroom in Singapore and Malaysia. But if people are compelled or expected to speak English, it is natural that they should do so only in the way best fit for them. The same phenomenon can spring up in countries where English is taught as an international language if we encourage our students to speak English, as we must for various good reasons.

Similarly, Japanese very often use Japanese expressions in English. Japanese speakers of English tend to say "We went to Kyoto by car yesterday" instead of "We drove to Kyoto yesterday," an expression preferred by Americans. If a friend failed to turn up at a designated place and time for a date or an appointment, a Japanese would say, "I went there. Why didn't you come?," while an American would say, "I was there. Where were you?" Japanese often greet their international acquaintances with, "Oh, I haven't seen you for a long time. Are you OK? You haven't changed. I wanted to see you," instead of a simple "Hi, how are you?" Furthermore, if they were thrown into an English-speaking situation and were not equipped with right phrases, Japanese speakers might begin to say:

? He has a wide face (is well known).

? He has a black belly (is roguish).

? He has a tall nose (is boastful).

It would be illogical to turn down these expressions as incorrect because these are non-native. Above all things, most Japanese learners are non-native speakers, encouraged to speak English by taking fall advantage of the repertory they have acquired, however limited it might be. It would also be hard to accept the presupposition that sentences above are incorrect while sentences below are correct simply because they are native-based.

? He has a bitter tongue (is critical).

? He has a sweet tooth (is fond of sweets).

? He has green fingers (is fond of gardening).

1. The English language in the ?Asian century?

Asia is seen as the future for the internationalisation of higher education, and the globalisation of English is enabling this future. Countries in Asia have therefore started to align their internationalisation strategies towards this Asia focus.
For example, Singapore?s Minister of Education Heng Swee Keat concluded in his talk at the Singapore Management University on 16 February: ?Asia is going to be a critical part of our future. The more we understand what is going on in Asia, the better our future will be. We must position ourselves as a global Asian hub that connects Asia with the world.?
The internationalisation of higher education and the English language play a key role in Singapore?s endeavour to become a ?global Asian hub? and to identify and create ?advantages that others find relevant.

However, it seems that the internationalisation policies of countries and universities in Asia seldom question the global dominance of English and what consequences it may have for knowledge and scholarship building and the general well-being of Asian societies in the long run.
Let me now turn to a few interrelated issues to elaborate this problem further.
Scholars continue to raise questions related to the overemphasis on the English-only curriculum and the English-only mentality when it comes to what counts as valid knowledge and as legitimate intellectual sources in knowledge exchanges and knowledge production.

More and more (academic) knowledge is produced in English, while less and less is produced in local (Asian) languages, partly because publications in English are valued and seen as a desirable sign of intellectual integration.
Many scholars, including Asians, also admit that they have not tried to publish in Asian languages. Many others do not see the need to learn Asian languages for their academic work because they have many Asian students eagerly wanting to ?teach? them about Asia through the medium of English. Their engagement with Asia tends to stop at the surface, and I believe this can be improved.

In a forthcoming article on the internationalisation of higher education, the role of English and national cultural identity issues in Asia, I analyse in particular Japan?s Action Plan 2003 to ?Cultivate Japanese with English Abilities? and the ?Global 30? Project 2008.
The former endorses the critical role of English for Japan?s advancement and integration, and notes the essential requirement for global communication through English language skills in the 21st century.
The latter aims to introduce English-medium programmes in Japan?s top 30 universities to partly promote Japanese higher education internationally, to provide access to English to Japanese students and to attract more international students to Japan. One argument put forward in this article is that ?the Japanese government?s policies to strengthen Japanese culture and identity through its English language education and the internationalisation of higher education are causing more concern regarding the government?s perceived identity crisis and a decreasing interest in Japanese universities from both Japanese and international students?.
What is more, while Japan has for a long time been paying more attention to minimising the potential of ?losing? the uniqueness of its national cultural identity through contact with English and the West under the pressure of globalisation, Japanese scholars have now warned the government and Japanese universities about something bigger and more fundamental.
Precisely, they point to over-reliance on English and the potential loss of knowledge production in Japanese and other Asian languages, should these languages not receive serious consideration at a national level.

With the expansion of English-language programmes, courses, schools and universities across Asia as a part of the drive to become international hubs of education, innovation and scholarship, the over-reliance on English is becoming even more alarming.
In certain settings, students start learning in English at a very young age. It is more common, however, that students stop learning and being taught in their local languages once they enter university.
Many students and academics do not know how to present a topic in their local language because they do not know the norms, genres, styles, concepts, theories and vocabularies needed to perform such tasks. They become ?illiterate? and thus much less sophisticated in their own tongues.
One may also say that for many people in Asia, English is their native language and thus other local Asian languages are not necessarily their mother tongues and-or native languages; yet this group is still a tiny minority in the vast context of Asia.

This phenomenon has the potential to (re)produce an unequal and somewhat superficial engagement with scholarship under the banner of internationalisation that is largely driven by commercialisation, the overindulgence of English in government policies as well as a nation-building agenda that tends to take many shortcuts to English while undermining local languages.
After all, the international role of English does not have to result in the impoverishment of knowledge and scholarship in other languages, and this needs to be realised in policy and practice of the internationalisation of education and language policies across the Asian region.
Likewise, English is never going to entirely replace local languages. However, it will create a divide in local societies between those who use English and those who do not.
At the moment, the knowledge that circulates in the world of international education does so largely through the medium of the English language. It only indirectly touches those beyond the English-language world.
Part of the rationale for the internationalisation and globalisation of education is to make the world more equitable ? that is, to allow people everywhere to have access to the same body of knowledge.

Conclusion

The concept of English as a multicultural language is based on the fact that English is here to stay as an indispensable language for intranational and/or international communication in Asia and other parts of the world. In this paper, I have discussed a number of issues involved in recognizing and promoting English as an Asian language and teaching, learning, plus using English as such. As a diversity management approach, matters of intercultural literacy and language awareness have also been explored.

References

1.http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20130605121840593

2. http://www.theguardian.com/education/2000/nov/23/tefl.guardianweekly

3. English as a Multicultural Language in Asia and Intercultural Literacy [ 74 ?. ]

4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Asia

5. Hawkins, Erich. (1984) Awareness of Language: An Introduction.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

6. Honna, Nobuyuki. (2003) "English as a Multicultural Language and Intercultural Literacy." Southern Review No. 18.

Date: 2016-06-12; view: 72