Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T08:44:08.700Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Chinese Netizens’ reactions to the use of English as a lingua franca

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 December 2018

Weihong Wang  and
Fan (Gabriel) Fang
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

With the spread of English around the globe, academics increasingly seek to figure out what global English means to the world. Some accept English globalisation as a reality and take it as natural, neutral and beneficial for international and intercultural communication (Crystal, 2003). Some recognise English skills as important linguistic capital and must-have global literacy (Park & Wee, 2012; Tsui & Tollefson, 2007). However, others associate the global expansion of English with linguistic imperialism and the death of indigenous languages (Phillipson, 2009). Some regard globally spread English as native English varieties, particularly American and British English (Modiano, 2001; Trudgill, 1999), others argue for the rise of local varieties of World Englishes (WE) (Bolton, 2005; Kachru, 1986) and the international use of English as a lingua franca (ELF) (Jenkins, 2007; Seidlhofer, 2011). Although these generic interpretations of English have solid arguments from their own perspectives, none is sufficient to elucidate all the ‘complexity of ideological ramifications of the spread of English in [any] particular locality’ (Pan, 2011: 79).

Type
Research Article
Information
English Today , Volume 35 , Issue 4 , December 2019 , pp. 3 - 12
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adamson, B. 2004. China's English: A History of English in Chinese Education. Hong Kong: University Press.Google Scholar
Bolton, K. 2005. ‘Where WE stands: Approaches, issues, and debate in World Englishes.’ World Englishes, 24(1), 69–83.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. 1991. Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. 2003. English as a Global Language (2nd edn.) Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Fang, F. 2017a. ‘An Investigation of attitudes towards English accents – A case study of a university in China.’ In Xu, Z., He, D. & Deterding, D. (eds.), Researching Chinese English: State of the Art. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, pp. 141–156.Google Scholar
Fang, F. 2017b. ‘World Englishes or English as a lingua franca: Where does English in China Stand.’ English Today, 33(1), 19–24.Google Scholar
Fang, F. & Ren, W. 2018. ‘Developing students’ awareness of Global Englishes.’ ELT Journal, 72(4), 384–394.Google Scholar
Gao, X. 2012. ‘The study of English as a patriotic enterprise.’ World Englishes, 31(3), 351–365.Google Scholar
Guo, Y. & Beckett, G. 2012. ‘A critical analysis of English language teaching in today's market economy in China.’ In Sung, K. & Pederson, R. (eds.), Critical ELT Practices in Asia: Key Issues, Practices and Possibilities. Rotterdam: The Netherlands Sense Publishers, pp. 55–70.Google Scholar
He, D. & Li, D. C. S. 2009. ‘Language attitudes and linguistic features in the “China English” debate.’ World Englishes, 28(1), 70–89.Google Scholar
Hu, G. 2005. ‘English language education in China: Policies, progress, and problems.’ Language Policy, 4(1), 5–24.Google Scholar
Hu, G. & Alsagoff, L. 2010. ‘A public policy perspective on English medium instruction in China.’ Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 31(4), 365–382.Google Scholar
Jenkins, J. 2007. English as a Lingua Franca: Attitude and Identity. Oxford: University Press.Google Scholar
Jiang, Y. 2003. ‘English as a Chinese language.’ English Today, 19(2), 3–8.Google Scholar
Kachru, B. B. 1986. The Alchemy of English: The Spread, Functions, and Models of Non-native Englishes. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Kirkpatrick, A. 2007. World Englishes: Implications for International Communication and English Language Teaching. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Kroskrity, P. V. 2004. ‘Language ideologies.’ In Duranti, A. (ed.), A Companion to Linguistic Anthropology. Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 496–517.Google Scholar
Kroskrity, P. V. 2010. ‘Language ideologies–Evolving perspectives.’ In Jaspers, J., Östman, J.-O. & Verschueren, J. (eds.), Society and Language Use. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 192–211.Google Scholar
Liu, J. & Fang, F. 2017. ‘Perceptions, awareness and perceived effects of home culture on intercultural communication: Perspectives of university students in China.’ System, 67, 25–37.Google Scholar
McGroarty, M. 2010. ‘Language and ideologies.’ In Hornberger, N. H. & McKay, S. L. (eds.), Sociolinguistics and Language Education. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters, pp. 3–39.Google Scholar
Modiano, M. 2001. ‘Ideology and the ELT practitioner.’ International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 159–173.Google Scholar
Moody, A. 2013. ‘Language ideology in the discourse of popular culture.’ In Chapelle, C. A. (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. London: Blackwell, pp. 1–3.Google Scholar
Niu, Q. & Wolff, M. 2003. ‘China and Chinese, or Chingland and Chinglish?’ English Today, 19(2), 9–11.Google Scholar
Pan, L. 2011. ‘English language ideologies (ELI) in Olympic Beijing.’ Applied Linguistics Review, 2, 75–97.Google Scholar
Pan, L. & Block, D. 2011. ‘English as a “global language” in China: An investigation into learners’ and teachers’ language beliefs.’ System, 39(3), 391–402.Google Scholar
Park, J. S.-Y. & Wee, L. 2012. Markets of English: Linguistic Capital and Language Policy in a Globalizing World. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Phillipson, R. 2009. Linguistic Imperialism Continued. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Polkinghorne, D. E. 1995. ‘Narrative configuration in qualitative analysis.’ In Hatch, J. A. & Wisniewski, R. (eds.), Life History and Narrative. London: Falmer Press, pp. 5–24.Google Scholar
Seidlhofer, B. 2011. Understanding English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford: University Press.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M. 1979. ‘Language structure and linguistic ideology.’ In Clyne, P. R., Hanks, W. F. & Hofbauer, C. L. (eds.), The Elements: A Parasession on Linguistic Units and Levels. Chicago: Linguistic Society, 193–247.Google Scholar
Trudgill, P. 1999. ‘Standard English: What it isn't.’ In Bex, T. & Watts, R. J. (eds.), Standard English: The Widening Debate. London: Routledge, pp. 117–128.Google Scholar
Tsui, A. B. M. & Tollefson, J. W. 2007. ‘Language policy and the construction of national cultural identity.’ In Tsui, A. B. M. & Tollefson, J. W. (eds.), Language Policy, Culture, and Identity in Asian Contexts. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 1–24.Google Scholar
Wang, W. 2015. ‘Teaching English as an international language in China: Investigating university teachers’ and students’ attitudes towards China English.’ System, 53, 60–72.Google Scholar
Wei, Y. & Fei, J. 2003. ‘Using English in China.’ English Today, 19(4), 42–47.Google Scholar
Wen, Q. F. 2012. ‘Teaching English as an international language in mainland China.’ In Kirkpatrick, A. & Sussex, R. (eds.), English as an International Language in Asia: Implications for Language Education. NY: Springer, pp. 79–124.Google Scholar
Woolard, K. A. & Schieffelin, B. B. 1994. ‘Language ideology.’ Annual Review of Anthropology, 23, 55–82.Google Scholar
Xiong, T. & Qian, Y. 2012. ‘Ideologies of English in a Chinese high school EFL textbook: A critical discourse analysis.’ Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 32(1), 75–92.Google Scholar
Xu, Z. 2010. Chinese English: Features and Implications. Hong Kong: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Yan, X. 2014. ‘A meta-discursive analysis of online comments of Chinese netizens on Huang Xiaoming's appropriation of English.’ Language, Culture and Curriculum, 27(2), 151–162.Google Scholar
Yang, C. & Zhang, L. J. 2015. ‘China English in trouble: Evidence from teacher dyadic talk.’ System, 51, 39–50.Google Scholar