Whose property?

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

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

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

Post by JuanTwoThree » Wed Oct 18, 2006 12:58 pm

Some things occur to me:

We probably all know people whose background is too "exotic" to slot them into the NS/NNS dichotomy.

"Training in" is very overt, "training for" might be a bit subtler.

Some English speakers will never need any such thing, in or for.

Though they might need training in/for communication with ESOL users in their own country. Which is not so "international" unless we label ESOL speakers as foreigners, raising issues of status and nationality.

Isn't English for effective international communication what most learners are getting? Or hoping for?


If tens of thousands of students across Europe use and understand "career" to mean "university studies", does it?

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Wed Oct 18, 2006 3:23 pm

Though they might need training in/for communication with ESOL users in their own country. Which is not so "international" unless we label ESOL speakers as foreigners, raising issues of status and nationality.
The buzz word for that type of communication is intranational, in the study area of World Englishes.

<Isn't English for effective international communication what most learners are getting?>

Some would answer "no" to the first part of your question.

If your students' goal was to communicate internationally in English, which example below would you choose to teach?


1. 'Users pick what they like from a wide variety of fun looks and music styles and Style Finder returns product suggestions based on individual preferences. Which is just the right feature for users who want what works.'


2. 'Users choose what they like from a wide variety of attractive clothing displays and music styles. The Style Finder then returns product suggestions based on their individual preferences. This convenient feature is exactly what online shoppers want.'


<If tens of thousands of students across Europe use and understand "career" to mean "university studies", does it?>

You cite Spanglish use, right?

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

Post by JuanTwoThree » Wed Oct 18, 2006 8:04 pm

As far as I know career is only a false friend in Spanish but that's a lot of Erasmus students using the term across Europe. And more Latins studying in the US. Does a head count of them make it a valid usage? If the usage catches on, bearing in mind that their colleagues from other countries might assume that it's ok, does that stop it being Spanglish?

I've heard English people saying "We went to a camping". Which I think is a bit of Franglais that the Spanish took in good faith and is perhaps now catching on as "proper Engish".

Who said linguistic change couldn't be observed unless with hindsight? David Crystal?

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Thu Oct 19, 2006 8:50 am

And more Latins studying in the US. Does a head count of them make it a valid usage?
When using it to speak among themselves in english, it might be classed a valid usage.
I've heard English people saying "We went to a camping". Which I think is a bit of Franglais that the Spanish took in good faith and is perhaps now catching on as "proper Engish".
¿Kay Sarah, Sarah, no? :)

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

Post by JuanTwoThree » Thu Oct 19, 2006 10:18 am

Hubris, I suppose. Ever since I described myself as being relatively careful with my English I've made a series of mistakes! Typos though, for the most prat.

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Thu Oct 19, 2006 11:03 am

<Typos though, for the most prat.>

:lol:

Most prats of English are native. :wink:

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:49 am

We may, in due course, all need to be in control of two standard Englishes—the one which gives us our national and local identity, and the other which puts us in touch with the rest of the human race. In effect, we may all need to become bilingual in our own language. — David Crystal (1988: p. 265)

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

Post by JuanTwoThree » Mon Oct 23, 2006 11:13 am

"Well, I'm glad you've come," her mother said, as soon as the last note had passed out of her. "I want to go and fetch your father; but what's more'n that, I want to tell 'ee what have happened. Y'll be fess enough, my poppet, when th'st know!" (Mrs Durbeyfield habitually spoke the dialect; her daughter, who had passed the Sixth Standard in the National School under a London-trained mistress, spoke two languages: the dialect at home, more or less; ordinary English abroad and to persons of quality.)

"Tess of the d'Urbervilles", Thomas Hardy.

Dated and a bit snobbish nowadays but not such a different idea.

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Mon Oct 23, 2006 11:47 am

<Dated and a bit snobbish nowadays but not such a different idea.>

Very close indeed.

Stephen Jones
Posts: 1421
Joined: Sun May 18, 2003 5:25 pm

Post by Stephen Jones » Mon Oct 23, 2006 6:24 pm

We may, in due course, all need to be in control of two standard Englishes—the one which gives us our national and local identity, and the other which puts us in touch with the rest of the human race. In effect, we may all need to become bilingual in our own language.
It's called diglossia.

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Tue Oct 24, 2006 4:25 am

It's called diglossia.
Are you sure?

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

Post by JuanTwoThree » Tue Oct 24, 2006 5:00 am

Can one language in two forms be a diglossia? And doesn't one have to have a different status from the other? Which would have the high status, the BrEng, or whichever, for internal use or the IntEng for effective communication? I'd hate to think that one became "better" than the other. That's what we're trying to get away from.

Early start, metal56?

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:10 am

JuanTwoThree wrote:
Early start, metal56?
Baby woke early.

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Thu Oct 26, 2006 11:35 am

"The traditional applied linguistic paradigm divides the non-natives into second and foreign language speakers/learners, with often little distinction between speakers and learners. This paradigm is still the basis on which decades of theory and practice of English language pedagogy and a multi-million dollar English language consumer industry, almost all developed in the two leading English-speaking nations on either side of the Atlantic, are built and made to thrive. In this native-nonnative paradigm, there is no doubt or dispute about who owns English. The native speakers own it, but are willing to transfer controlled possession and award guided right of use to the non-native [-3-] speakers, but may be forever unwilling to cede even a share of the ownership."

http://www.kyoto-su.ac.jp/information/t ... 1/f.1.html

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

Post by JuanTwoThree » Thu Oct 26, 2006 11:49 am

Maybe there's some kind of critical mass reached at which point ownership slips out of the hands of its traditional holders.

It certainly happened to Latin, which outlasted the Roman Empire by more than 1200 years. There was no question of its ownership by the 18th century when it was being used by staunch Protestants as much as by Roman Catholics, who might have been considered its owners by then if anybody could be.

Spanish has no owners as far as I can see. Nor has Arabic.

So it can happen. It might be true to say that these questioning voices are in themselves the first signs of the paradigm falling to bits.

Post Reply