![]() Trade In this Item for up to £14.25
Get an extra £5 when you trade in books worth £10 or more until June 30, 2012. Trade in Linguistic Imperialism (Oxford Applied Linguistics) for an Amazon.co.uk gift card of up to £14.25, which you can then spend on millions of items across the site. Trade-in values may vary (terms apply). Find more products eligible for trade-in.
|
Product details
|
Tag this product(What's this?)Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organise and find favourite items. |
Phillipson argues that the center (that is the English speaking countries of the West) have used English to supress the people of the former colonies. This phenomenon he refers to as "linguistic imperialism". He deals with 5 tenets,or rather fallacies, which have been used for such imperialistic purposes; the most important of these fallacies are that English is best taught monolingually (without using other languages) and that it is best taught by a native speaker.
While Phillipson raises many interesting points (the fallacies of ELT among them) his overall thesis has to be rejected on the following grounds (to name but a few):
on its in-built power asymmetry, that is that the devloping countries are seen as being incapable of independent decisions.
that fact that linguistic imperialism is not falsifiable: there is no scenario where Phillipson would admit that English DOES fulfill a useful role in a third world country.
Phillipson's left-wing terminology and tone: imperialism itself is a left-wing term.
a country's linguistic ecology is to complex to fit into Phillipson's neat "black and white" scenario.
Phillipon's book can thus be only a start for a discussion on global English. For further reading I recommend Kachru's "The Alchemy of English", Crystals "English as an International Language" (critical reading necessary) and Pennycook's "The Cultural Politics of English as an International Language."
The author has no need for preposterous "linguistic theories" of the kind that crop up in Pennycook's work, for example. We don't have to worry about the possibility that colonialism has somehow attached itself to the English language, for example. Nothing in Phillipson's book rules out straightforward reform of language policy.
Indeed, the strength of this book is the fact that it does not distract from the fact that the responsibility for reform lies with the policy-makers in the countries where these neo-colonialist relationships exist. Indeed, by pointing out the problem in unpretentious terms, the author is arguing that reform of language policy is the key to breaking the relationships which lie at the heart of the problem.
This is far superior to Pennycook's work, which focuses on the responsibility of the western teacher (who is expected to shoulder the white man's burden by being self-critical, while ignoring the malpractice going on around him).
Phillipson loses a star for not making it clear why theoretical linguists don't police the field better. We can guess that they have little to gain, and a lot to lose, by doing so, but this is left to the imagination.
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
|