THE PLACE OF ENGLISH IN INTERNET COMMUNICATION AND E-DUCATION

My readings for the ICT module have included some think-work based on an article by Mark Warchscauer entitled Wiring English into our Technological World and another by Seth Mydans called Across Cultures, English is the Word. Some thoughts on these…

Warschauer’s central argument is that emerging technologies eliminate three perceived barriers:
1. The distinction between ESL and EFL
2. The digital divide (lack of resources among the world’s poor)
3. The technological divide (the lack of tech skills, even among those who have access to technology.)

Although I can agree with the general argument, as a citizen and lifelong resident of emerging nations, I feel entitled to some criticism of these opinions,

1. ESL/EFL: While English immersion is becoming prevalent in many international workplaces, and fluency increases, inaccuracies may persist, and even be entrenched as a shared interlanguage among L2 speakers. This may be the evolution of the international language, but that does not eliminate prejudice that may exist against L2 speakers. And as a speaker of English as a second language, I am actually allowed to say that!

2. Digital divide: Warschauer's claim that even among the very poor of the world, there is increased accessed to certain shared tech resources is justified. However, many are still left behind, and the divide becomes more and more difficult to cross.
It should also be considered that the vast majority of ICT requires literacy, which cuts out a further segment of the world's population.

Although most languages are represented online, English still rules the waves, and not knowing this world languages sets users at a further disadvantage. In short, Warhschauer has a point, but I can't agree with him completely.

3. Technological divide: The most endangered species here is the technophobic teacher! Even as a one-time internet addict and reincarnated blogger, I often learn shortcuts and new uses for computers and other gadgets from my students. There is a certain threshold of computer skills that will be necessary for teachers to mine the potential of ICT for education. Guiding educators to become e-Ducators will require fundamental attention, particularly in TESOL, where professionalization is not yet prevalent in many contexts worldwide.

Broken English?

Just finished reading David Crystal’s The Stories of English (2004, Penguin) and wound up, as one often does after a good book, with more questions than answers. Crystal’s take on the English language, in this and other publications of note, has been descriptive, rather than prescriptive. In other words, rather than prescribing what the language should look like, as grammarians are often wont to, he describes what it actually does look like. Crystal revels in the possibilities of Modern Standard English, not as the Holy Grail of usage, but as a unifying alternative in a multidialectal and multilingual world. In his English as a Global Language (2003, CUP), the author explored the value of English uniting speakers of other languages, encouraging bilingualism in both a mother tongue and English. Here, the praises of multidialectism are sung: while Modern Standard English ensures that all English speakers can understand each other, the unique flavours of dialect diffuse meaning, atmosphere and linguistic wealth into the language. The thorough and incisive account of the history of English also shows that dialect is nothing new. Truth be told, English itself sprung from that fertile spring of the accursed bastard dialect- a fact readily under rug swept by its purist-prescriptivist proponents. We see that if language is a living entity, it can not be treated like some lifeless object.

I really want to agree with the author. As a native speaker of a minority language who later learned what even the generous David Crystal refers to as a creole of English, I feel he has championed my (not-so-rare) cause. And yet, as a teacher of English, I am not sure what this leaves me to teach. If non-standard usage is not “wrong”, and my students’ usage is common enough to be considered a dialect (though abhorrent to the prescriptive grammarian and even to my dastardly bastardly dialectical sensibilities), does that make it “right”? If dialect is so vibrant and expressive and wrapped up in cultural identity, do I have a right to nip “errors” in the bud? And most of all, if the Modern Standard English-speaking world remains prejudiced- as it does- towards “broken English”, do I have a right not to?

I don’t have a final answer, but my evolving policy at the moment is this. To encourage awareness of non-standard English use- local and others- by contrastive analysis. To conduct error analysis where the local dialect use can cause misunderstanding of offense. And most definitely, to encourage informed and informative use of the local dialect where appropriate, using strategies such as paraphrasing and footnotes for explanation.

(Broken English was the title of a 1979 song by Marianne Faithfull. See the video here.)