English: Ethnic or Universal?

<b>Forum for the discussion of Applied Linguistics </b>

Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2

English is:

1. An anglo-saxon language with Anglo-saxon standards.
3
50%
2. A universal language with Anglo-saxon standards.
1
17%
3. A universal language with universal standards.
2
33%
Other.
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 6

JuanTwoThree
Posts: 947
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 11:30 am
Location: Spain

Post by JuanTwoThree » Sat Jun 23, 2007 8:46 am

I'm sorry to say that much of what has been written so far is not my experience (which is a polite way of saying "it's baloney"). I find that if anything it's the NNES in Europe that obsess about Easter Eggs and Beefeaters and Halloween.

Asia may have more NES teachers who think they're cultural ambassadors, perhaps because communicating and socialising with natives is a goal, whereas (we) teachers in Europe know that our students are just as, if not more, likely to be using their English to communicate from one side of the continent to the other. A Spaniard meeting a Finn or a Turk doing business with an Icelander (both not Europe but you see what I mean) don't care two hoots about Pancake Day.

On the other hand, Europe is where the brand "British English" ( without the cultural baggage that is) has more acceptance but that's mostly because teachers from the British Isles are handier ( not to mention "legal").

Even so I think we are increasingly teaching an English that is used on the mainland of Europe : If a German, a Swede, a Greek and a Scot are having a mostly perfectly comprehensible conversation in English but nobody understands the Scot then, I ask, who's got the problem?

Post Reply