Job Discussion Forums

[johnslat]

Dear spiral78,

"Global English can be defined as that used by non-native speakers with other non-native or native speakers, which is clearly underderstandable in terms of meaning, but does not necessarily strictly follow any established 'British' or 'American' standard of structure or pronunciation."

Hmm, I would think that one possible problem there is that occasionally (at least) not following "standards" of structure/pronunciation can make utterances/writing NOT clearly understandable.

Regards,
John

[rtm]

[Isla Guapa]

[HLJHLJ]

It's not a question of teaching students Global English, it's the anticipated consequence of having huge numbers of speakers using English in countries which were traditionally not English speaking. Any living language will evolve through use, that's how we have ended up with so many variants of English in the first place.

If this hypothetical future does come true, with half the world speaking English, the new speakers won't be learning EFL/ESL from native speaker teachers, they will be raised bilingually. Native speakers will be the minority, and it seems reasonable to me that English will change as a result. It's already happening in countries were many people speak English as a second language (i.e. parts of Europe). It's likely to continue to spread.

Maybe one day native speakers will need to take lessons in Global English.

[Isla Guapa]

Do textbooks exist that purport to teach Global English, or is it just developing naturally among non-native speakers who don't have much contact with native speakers. Maybe it will become a creole language, ultimately incomprehensible to people like me

Europe has been mentioned as a region where Global English is spoken. When Europeans study English in school, what sort of English are they taught? Europeans I have met usually speak something akin to British English.

[spiral78]

Well, it's not like total anarchy, I can assure you, but it's best if you're somewhat tolerant of ambiguity:-)

No, I don't know of any textbooks (yet) purporting to teach Global English. Actually, I think that would be rather defeating the purpose.

Essentially, it's that we teach whatever structures we're familiar with, whether it's British or other, and we are not concerned with whether students actually adopt have/have got or on/at weekends.

Basically, we would correct anything that makes an utterance unclear.

To clarify, I'm speaking of fairly high-level learners, in international contexts. Obviously for lower level students, some structure needs to be taught, and it's necessary to choose a style to accomplish this.

[Isla Guapa]

[HLJHLJ]

I imagine an international context is one in which learners need to communicate with people from various English speaking countries, and potentially also people with other L1s.

Generally, I find that higher level students present with a mix of British, North American, and sometimes Australian grammar and vocab, depending on how and where they learnt. I don't usually correct them for their choice, but often I will make them aware of the difference. For example, on/at the weekend is of little consequence, but 'gotten' sounds terrible to a British ear. So whilst it is grammatically correct, it's best avoided if you are trying to impress a Brit with your English skills.

Equally there are certain items of vocab like pants/trousers, thongs/flip flops, etc that have the potential to cause the speaker embarrassment if they are unaware of them, so I would be sure to teach them the difference if it came up.

I do encourage them to stick with either British or North American spelling. I don't care which one they use, but if they aren't consistent how can I tell if they are using the alternative or have just made a spelling mistake?

If they started with a specific English programme from scratch and worked up to advanced, it wouldn't be an issue. But for many people their learning is a mish mash over time, and they end up with bits from everywhere. The end result is something approaching Global English, or at least, is likely to turn into Global English one day. As long as the meaning is clear and easy to understand, I don't think it is a huge issue.

[spiral78]

[dutchman]

Spiral, you may find this interesting to read:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globish_(Nerriere)

[spiral78]

Yes, thanks - it is interesting. Although I do work in the kinds of situations the author describes, I don't subscribe entirely to the notion of 'globish,' though. For example:

[timothypfox]

I've ignored the discussion on what country is more reputable etc. I met several teachers who found an MA taken at British universities very interesting courses that were helpful in their ESL careers.

I myself took a different route and got an MS in TESOL at City University in New York City through an alternate certification program known as the NYC teaching fellows. The program essentially gives you a nearly free MA after doing a summer boot camp in teaching on the condition that you will teach in a high needs public school while earning your degree for the next 3 years.

The program cut through a lot of red tape in finding work, and I quickly found a job - but ended up as a special needs ESL teacher - something I had not counted on. Academically the program was adequate - but not very academically rigorous. I learned more as a teacher in public schools and that is where I gained real credentials I think to teach abroad. However, having to pay only about $1500 dollars for 2.5 years of university study at the MA level is something I can't complain about. If money is an issue consider my a Teaching Fellows program in the USA if you qualify and you will also get a public school license and work experience.

Having said that, some of the leading educational research is being done in New York City at Columbia University, New York University, and the lesser known but quite prestigious Bank Street College. The downside is that these programs are so outrageously expensive compared with their counterparts in the UK. This is something serious to consider whether paying $20 to $30,000 a year for tuition is something you can fathom.

There are several other schools in NYC that might be worth looking into. I know someone mentioned the MA at New School. I believe it is available online as well. It really does depend on where you are going with this. Many overseas employers want to see you have a public school license and/or experience in a public school to get a job outside of a conversation school. So, for many jobs an MS or MA in Teaching ESL may be better the an MA in Applied Linguistics. If you are PhD or Doctorate bound, then it may not be so important to worry about this distinction.

Many employees may not know the difference between NYU and City University of New York. For good or for bad, the New York name probably sells well to employers. I can't and therefore won't comment on UK university programs, but I am pretty certain the London name after a university credential would sell quite well as well to a perspective employer.

[SahanRiddhi]

[spiral78]

Again, not talking about beginners here.

[SahanRiddhi]

Let's say you were learning, say, Swahili. You worked really hard to master it. You were using it in work situations. You reached that advanced level where you can talk pretty much anything. But sometimes your pronunciation was a little off. Your grammar was suspect sometimes. But your teacher didn't correct you, because you speak "World Swahili." There are various dialects, so your pronunciation and grammar are probably correct somewhere. And therefore you never get past that plateau of "advanced" and move into "near-native" territory, even though you have the potential.