essay about english as a lingua franca

English as a Lingua Franca

Introduction.

In the contemporary interpretation used in scholarly literature and teaching practice, the concept of English as a lingua franca (ELF) is conventionally utilized to denote a special sociolinguistic category. Thus, ELF should be viewed as a functional type of language that is used as a medium of communication and interaction between speakers of different languages in certain spheres of interaction (Jenkins and Leung 2). Relying on the process of globalization, the world community began to experience the need for a sole communication tool to be used by people from different countries and regions.

In the modern world, English takes the position of a leading language used for global communication. The adoption of English as a lingua franca significantly influenced educators’ approaches to teaching this language and their own education. The debate of EFL “has led to some reconfigurations in teaching English as a lingua franca and critical teacher education models relevant to the current position of English language” (Deniz et al. 145).

However, regardless of the existing research on the effect produced by the status of English as a global communication language, the changes it inflicted on the education for English teachers remain under-researched. The purpose of this chapter is to provide a historical perspective on the establishment of English as a lingua franca and discuss the state of affairs today. It is aimed at examining the impact of the current status of English on teacher education, the way English is taught these days, and its use as an instrument for intercultural communication.

English as a Lingua Franca: A Historical Perspective

Initially, a lingua franca implied a specific language form based on the vocabulary of French, Provencal, and Italian languages. These languages originated in the Middle Ages for the negotiations of Arab and Turkish merchants with Europeans and existed in the form of “Sabir” until the 19th century (Wansborough 42).

Later, English began to develop as a lingua franca due to a number of factors (trade and cultural relations, for example) that eventually led to its further transformation and popularization. The worldwide geographical distribution of English and the strong and influential position of the nations that used it as their native language made it reach every continent (Abdullah and Chaudhary 129-131). It became convenient for speakers of different languages to embrace English as a means of global communication.

The establishment of English as a lingua franca was observed during several centuries. The colonization practices of the British Empire and the United States and the amplification of their power after World War II contributed to adopting English for discussing political and social issues (Abdullah and Chaudhary 130-133). The final significant step towards settling English as a lingua franca was made at the onset of the information technology era (Sultana 216). Thus, the first and most popular computer programs were written with reference to English, and the spread of the Internet also added to the popularity of this language.

English as a lingua franca was called differently, depending on time and individuals’ use of it. It was known as the “new English” (pidgin), newspeak, and English as a means of teaching and learning (Mallette 89). Therefore, different versions of the English language (World Englishes) became actively used for performing various functions in worldwide communication (Björkman 25). As a result, the earlier perception of English as the language spoken primarily in the United Kingdom and the United States has eventually changed.

The versatility of the English language that occurred due to its wide use for numerous purposes and by representatives of various cultures has been the focus of scholarly research since the 1980s (Schneider 59). The reason is that English became employed for various types of casual, professional, and official communication all around the world.

Still, the acceptance of English as the language of communication in such fields as business, commerce, medicine, and science in the twentieth century was associated with certain barriers. First of all, English was unevenly spread and taught in different parts of the world. Moreover, the use of this language was commonly associated with poor performance and command due to the interference with speakers’ native languages (Baker, “English as a Lingua Franca in Thailand” 8).

Furthermore, the quality of education in certain regions was inappropriate because of the lack of native speakers and resources (Jenkins, English as a Lingua Franca in the International University 78). Still, the norms and specifics of the language became adapted to guarantee that English develops into a flexible and universal language for science and commerce.

The fact that the key educational systems of the world (the UK, the US, Australia, and others) were based on the use of English also contributed to the further expansion of the language. The education of foreign citizens in schools and universities of these countries is supported by national trends and the active use of English as a means of instruction (Danielson 69). It is also important to note that English is also used for instruction in some other countries even though it does not have an official status there (House 60). For instance, in some Scandinavian countries, Master’s programs are proposed in English. Due to such a phenomenon, English is also known to function as an intermediary language between speakers within one nation in situations where none of these participants are native speakers.

ELF versus ENL and EFL

The current state of the process of globalization is reflected in a new paradigm of the forms and functions of the English language in contexts that go beyond its original national identity. The mentioned new English paradigm was proposed by Kachru, who distinguishes between the three circles of the utilization of English in the modern world, including inner, outer, and expanding ones (Kalocsai 19). The inner circle is limited by borders of the so-called native context of using English in countries that are historically considered to be English-speaking. They are, for instance, Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand, the USA, Canada, and South Africa, among others (Gu et al. 138). The above circle focuses on English as a Native Language (ENL).

In its turn, the outer circle is formed by national variants of the English language, World Englishes, which are still spoken in the countries of the post-colonial world (India, Malaysia, Singapore, and Kenya, for instance). Finally, the third circle of expanding English refers to the context of using it as a Foreign Language (EFL). In this case, it is not the second state language and does not play any role in the performance of the core state functions in political or social spheres (Saito 1071). Thus, English is considered a way of integration into a global economic, political, and educational space in the countries of Europe, Asia, Latin America, and Africa.

Kachru’s Three Circles Model has certain weaknesses associated with approaches to its interpretation, but it can be used to analyze the evolutionary development of English as a lingua franca. The ELF concept has developed as being juxtaposed to the Three Circles Model and addressing its key drawbacks to explain the phenomenon of using English for worldwide communication (Deterding 58). The ELF category is less focused on the geographical location of World Englishes, and it provides a more general and flexible perspective on the phenomenon of a global expansion of this language.

It is possible to note that, regardless of its applicability to specific situations of using languages, Kachru’s classification is less relevant than the ELF perspective (Berthoud et al. 56-58; Deterding 58). The reason is in the contemporary use of English as a universal tool for communication between representatives of different cultural speaking various native languages.

Specific features of ELF as a language variety have been studied by the Vienna-based group organized and led by Barbara Seidlhofer. The researcher established the Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English (VOICE). According to the VOICE’s statute, ELF is defined as “any use of English among speakers of different first languages for whom English is the communicative medium of choice, and often the only option” (Seidlhofer 7). Focusing on spoken data, VOICE studies indicate that ELF is a category that is significantly separated from ENL because language contacts contributed to changing specifics of using English.

The hybrid nature, receptivity, and flexibility in relation to external influences are the defining features that allow English to develop. They also add to transforming the language and cultural identity of people speaking it (Cavalheiro 21-27). The reason is that international speakers of English as a lingua franca tend to transform the used language continuously by means of bringing new notions, adding concepts, and sharing knowledge (Cavalheiro 11).

These people choose to use English in more situations every day, and they add English words and notions when speaking other languages. In that way, speakers’ cultural identities begin to be shared and interact by expanding one another’s cultural identities. As a result, today, ELF is utilized all over the globe to embrace personal, professional, and cultural spheres of communication.

Features of ELF

The major characteristic of a global language is its wide use in various settings by speakers of different first languages, and speakers’ pronunciation can be heavily affected by external and internal factors. As a lingua franca, English has some core and non-core features that are required for its broad use and comprehension by non-native speakers. The core features in pronunciation are important for the maintenance of the language intelligibility between non-native speakers in international settings (Deterding and Mohamad 10-11). These features include the following ones:

all consonant sounds apart from [θ], [ð] and [ɫ];
initial clusters of consonants;
nuclear stress;
mid-central NURSE vowel [ɜː];
distinctions between lengths of vowels (Deterding and Mohamad 11).

When it comes to the non-core features, they do not play an essential role in the maintenance of a communicational success between international speakers of a lingua franca. The non-core features of English as a lingua franca include the following ones:

final clusters of consonants;
consonant sounds [θ], [ð] and [ɫ];
reduced and weak forms of vowels;
intonational tones;
lexical stress;
stress-based rhythm;
the individual vowel quality (Deterding and Mohamad 11).

The non-core features of the language are discussed as not obligatory to be included as part of a language teaching program. Referring to this controversial idea, some teachers disagree and believe that the lexical stress and vowel quality, for example, should be taught as essential features of the English language (Deterding and Mohamad 11). In addition, many experts argue about grammatical variations in different forms of English as a lingua franca (Sung 44-45).

The problem is that, due to alterations in the perception of language features that are more or less essential, the entire approach to teaching English will be affected in a school curriculum. Therefore, further research is required on whether distinguishing core and non-core features of English as a lingua franca is suitable for informal oral communication (Alsagoff et al. 33; Schmitz 277). The representatives of different regions of the world tend to disregard some non-core features and follow the others. Due to various vocal specificities of the world’s languages, the ways of the pronunciation of sounds in the English language may vary (Deterding and Mohamad 11-12). It is important to study whether these aspects can influence language intelligibility.

English Language Teaching and ELF

The most common peculiarities that occur in the course of ELF teaching are described in existing scholarly research. Among typical “errors,” one may note the loss of inflection -s/-es of modern verbs in the form of the third person and the use of relative pronouns “who” and “which” as interchangeable. Additional errors also include the use of redundant prepositions (of phrases) and wordiness (Cogo and Dewey 62; Jenkins, English as a Lingua Franca in the International University 78). In this respect, a number of questions arise: should English teachers develop skills of using such forms? Should they show tolerance when students use them inappropriately? Should they pay attention to them and correct them as mistakes?

There are two opposite views on the approach to teaching English as a lingua franca. Some researchers support the idea that a simplified form of English can be taught to avoid discussing the abovementioned non-core elements of the language (Sowden 90-92). Other researchers state that avoidance of teaching all the language aspects is irresponsible, and even with the focus on ELF, students need to know all the norms and rules of English (Deniz et al. 142).

Furthermore, in countries of the expanding circle, the goal of education should be to choose a variant of English that has a lot in common with the inner circle English. However, students should be prepared for communication with users of different versions of English with their specific features, not just British or American English (Murray 322). Thus, the receptive acquaintance with the peculiarities of ELF expands students’ linguistic consciousness and implies the formation of productive skills of reproducing learning options.

In order to introduce students to different versions of the English language, the inclusion of samples of World Englishes in teaching activities can transform the course of learning. Among the participants of learning, there are representatives of countries of the inner circle and those belonging to outer and expanding circles (Jenkins, “English as a Lingua Franca from the Classroom to the Classroom” 489). This approach forms the students’ understanding that English is an intermediary in communication between citizens of the whole world and prepares them for communication with potential interlocutors.

The local English-language press seems to be a rather beneficial source of information regarding local versions of English of a particular region. The examples include The Times of India (India), The South China Morning Post (Hong Kong), and The Straits Times (Singapore) (Ke and Cahyani 31; Kirkpatrick 136). Furthermore, it is possible to ask students to compare the websites of English-language newspapers of two different countries for lexical and grammatical differences. From this perspective, teaching English as a lingua franca involves learning the correct pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary, as well as the formation of intercultural literacy (Paltridge and Starfield 19).

To cope with such a task, non-native speakers of the language are to make every effort to become rather successful bilinguals who have intercultural views, skills, and knowledge (Hynninen 302; MacKenzie 33). At the same time, it is evident that the methodological aspects of ELF teaching require a deeper study in order to present the efficiency of communication to a multicultural community (O’Regan 548). Thus, additional research is needed and important in this field.

English as a Lingua Franca and Culture

Non-native speakers use ELF in accordance with various cultural references. The international and intercultural nature of a lingua franca influences the approach of how this language needs to be taught, taking its unique paradigm into consideration. The reason is that ELF should be viewed as the mixture of projections of various identities that it contains due to its continuous transformation. Being a lingua franca, the English language is used by representatives of different cultures as a link maintaining their connection with each other (Deniz et al. 142-143). English becomes affected by the versatility of cultures in the context of which it is used, and this aspect influences the teaching approach because the vision of the standard paradigm of English needs to be transformed.

Not many investigations raise the question of culture-related teaching in the ELF paradigm. One of the new studies of intercultural communication among seven users of English in Thailand by Baker demonstrated the use of different “cultural frames of reference” while speaking English (“The Cultures of English” 567).

That aspect allowed speakers to move “between global, national, local, and individual orientations” while using English in the context of their specific culture but for the purpose of global communication (Baker, “The Cultures of English” 567). To be more specific, cultural perceptions of speakers created the context for using the English language. Thus, it needs to be taught, taking into account cultural sensitivity principles because the perception of culture can change according to the needs of interlocutors in the ELF context.

The use of English as a lingua franca in intercultural communication changes the correlations between the language, culture, and nation. The representatives of various nations speak English using the word order, structures, and phrases other than native speakers while following the rules embedded in their culture and languages. Thus, “the underlying motives of intercultural interactions are mutual understanding and negotiating meaning, rather than projecting native-like command of the language” (Dombi 186).

Due to the fact that interlocutors in an ELF context possess different cultural frames than native speakers, the focus should be on teaching them to use English to guarantee mutual understanding and effective communication.

During intercultural communication in ELF contexts, the perception of cultures is constantly changing in response to the needs of interlocutors. Cultural frames of reference switch from the global to local levels at every moment when a person needs to use a new strategy in his or her speech (Meierkord 57). The changing nature of references in an ELF context attests to the absence of any particular culture in such intercultural communication. Nevertheless, a language cannot exist without any culture. All interlocutors contribute their cultural references creating a common medium for communication with predefined anticipations and beliefs (Dombi 186; MacKenzie 33).

According to Deniz et al., this specific cultural aspect needs to be taken into account when focusing on ELF because it determines how speakers will use English for their interactions (142). Furthermore, representatives of various cultures will refer to ELF in a different manner depending on dissimilarities in their backgrounds and native languages.

At the same time, the participants of intercultural communication in an ELF context develop a new perception of their society. Thus, they can use various cultural frames of reference suitable for particular situations and their application of English changes (Deniz et al. 144; Dombi 186). Therefore, the use of English as a lingua franca is crucial for the development of cultural frames of references and abilities to communicate effectively across cultures. Still, the theoretical knowledge about the correlations between the language and national culture is important, but it does not give an intuitive understanding of different references on the global, cultural, and individual levels.

Using English as a lingua franca, non-native speakers include not only their cultural references in the communication but also their limited understanding of either British or American English. They create unique rules of communication based on their basic understanding of several languages and intuition. Therefore, people speaking English as a lingua franca develop their own cultural references with characteristics that can differ from the sum of all cultural references typical of their native language (Illes 4). Two distinct approaches to using a lingua franca exist depending on the type of communication (Baker, “Culture and Language” 71).

According to Baker, ELF “studies, intercultural communication research and English language teaching (ELT) have all been concerned with ideas of ‘successful’ communication and the competencies needed to achieve this” (“Culture and Language” 70). Thus, some non-native speakers use the English language chiefly for business and professional cooperation and learning purposes. Other non-native speakers use English in their daily life, and approaches to teaching it should be different.

The idea of using ELF also depends on the concept of turn in the communication of non-native speakers. All people taking part in the discourse follow the unspoken rule of turn-taking. Thus, interlocutors have to speak fluently one after another to be understood, and, in a lingua franca communication, this rule should be discussed in detail.

The reason is that the parties often do not understand the English language to the extent needed for fast switching between interlocutors. Baker claims “that overlapping speech is regarded as being erroneous and a violation of some rule” in cases when non-native interlocutors do not speak English fluently (“Culture and Language” 75). People get used to the smooth change between speakers, and abrupt interjections are considered to be rude, even though they might sound neutral in native-speaker communication.

In lingua franca interactions, in most cases, interlocutors are able to predict the words and phrases of others for a quicker exchange of thoughts and ideas. However, it is important to note that the overlapping speech creates hindrances for this course of action (Crystal 34-39; Deniz et al. 149-150). Therefore, the culture of lingua franca communication contains some unique rules that must be obeyed by all interlocutors for the effective exchange of ideas.

English as a lingua franca creates a new communication culture based on different functions of words and structures that are traditionally used in the English language. According to House, “speakers of English as a lingua franca in academic consultation hours tend to strategically re-interpret certain discourse markers” (57). The purpose of such use of discourse markers (for example, “yes” or “yeah”) is “to help themselves improve their pragmatic competence and thus function smoothly in the flow of talk” (House 57). The speakers of English as a lingua franca use these makers chiefly to connect their thoughts and produce an easily understandable text or speech.

Still, non-native interlocutors experience difficulties in finding appropriate linking structures in English. The discourse makers help them to continue speaking even if they lose the main thread of their speech. The words “yes” or “okay” are often used to express the agreement with some facts, but in this case, they mark the end of each individual thought expressed by a speaker (Dombi 184). Therefore, English as a lingua franca possesses its unique communication culture based on specific rules of pragmatic use.

English as a Lingua Franca in Intercultural Communication

In order to guarantee successful communication between representatives of different cultures and nations, it is necessary to use one common language as a lingua franca. Today, this role is performed by English, and researchers pay much attention to investigating its importance for intercultural communication (Deniz et al. 149-150; MacKenzie 22). Communication between representatives of different cultures can involve both non-native speakers of English or interlocutors for whom English is a native tongue and speakers who use another language. In these situations, English is used in a different manner, affecting the quality of interaction and understanding because of depending on interlocutors’ knowledge of this language and their fluency in using it.

In the context of intercultural communication, researchers are inclined to oppose the use of Standard English as a specific monolithic form of English and ELF. The reason is that non-native speakers and participators of cross-cultural communication usually have no enough knowledge and skills to use Standard English norms in spite of the fact that they are usually educated to apply the British English or American English norms in their speech. The problem is that the use of ELF is associated with the impact of other different languages on non-native speakers’ application of the English language rules. Still, researchers also pay attention to the tendency of referring to the US English as Standard English that can also be used as ELF in most cases because of its spread around the globe (Dombi 185; Kirkpatrick 122).

However, despite the fact that researchers and practitioners have no single idea regarding the most effective approach to teaching and using ELF, it is almost impossible to ignore the global community’s focus on applying English in all spheres and businesses as an appropriate means of intercultural communication.

Issues in ELF and Teacher Education

In regard to teaching English as a lingua franca, culture teaching is focused on presenting the language as an effective means for intercultural communication. In particular, the flexibility of ELF teaching can be guaranteed only with reference to the absence of a single target culture as the carrier of specific language norms to follow (Bowles 197; Grazzi 57-58). In other words, the development of cultural awareness and sensitivity is to be the major focus of the new teaching paradigm in the context of viewing English as a lingua franca.

Specifics of teaching English as a lingua franca are also influenced by the fact that this language is used by a great number of speakers who affect it with reference to their cultures. Thus, the number of speakers of English for whom this language is not native outnumber native speakers of English (Dombi 184).

As a result, the English language becomes heavily impacted by the contexts in which it is used, and this aspect further affects approaches to teaching and learning it. Additionally, from the ELF perspective, English should be no longer viewed as used or shared only by one or several native-speaking cultures. Therefore, the way this language is taught will change both by means of dropping the image of a single carrier culture and by focusing on the role of this language as an intercultural communication tool. In turn, the change in the context of discussing English and how it is taught and presented to learners requires alterations in the way English language teachers are trained for practice all around the world.

New teacher education programs are needed because many professionals working for decades in their sphere hesitate to change their views on the approaches to teaching the English language. According to Cavalheiro, “teacher education programs are therefore the ideal way to introduce new approaches to ELT, as both theory and practice play a crucial role in the training and development of trainees” (3).

This idea could be applied to all types of teaching, but it is crucial in the ELF context. According to Sifakis, “there is evidence to suggest the existence of a mismatch between what ESOL teachers seem to believe about the English that they teach to their non-native learners and the competencies and abilities that they believe these learners need when communicating” (346). For example, educators can avoid paying attention to the peculiarities in the use of ELF in specific cultural contexts believing in the effectiveness of their traditional teaching methods. As a result, the quality of ELF teacher education can decrease in this situation.

New educational courses can help to develop teachers’ perception of ELF as a means of intercultural communication. In all countries around the globe, language teachers know about the international position of English, but they generally do little to enhance or adapt their methods. For example, educators can be oriented to teaching only the norms of Standard English that can be inappropriate while discussing the issue of ELF (Sifakis 348). Teachers should realize the position and the use of ELF in intercultural communication to accept the need for change in their methods.

Active exchange of experience among language professionals will lead to the development of their view on English as a lingua franca. Unfortunately, previous practice in language teaching can hinder the enhancement of new approaches because people tend to support their attitudes to new methods and techniques with their prior positive or negative experiences (Cavalheiro 17). As a result, young teachers are usually more willing to broaden their views on ELF than their senior colleagues are. The problem is that experienced and novice teachers have different approaches regarding individuals’ motives to learn English, and their methods and strategies differ significantly.

The development of English as a lingua franca calls for the appearance of innovative teacher education programs. On the one hand, the focus on teaching the standardized model of English as the core for most ELT programs can be viewed as appropriate because the effectiveness of these programs is supported by researchers. They state that English learners need to understand and use the rules of Standard English to succeed in communication not only with other learners of the language but also with native speakers (Sifakis 317).

On the other hand, the other group of investigators accentuates the idea that a non-standardized variant of English is more typical of participants on intercultural communication, and more advanced approaches to teaching English are required. From this perspective, the existing teaching models and strategies are viewed as ineffective to address the needs of English learners and users today (Deniz et al. 149-150; Kirkpatrick 123). Thus, the reference to outdated teaching models is viewed as unrealistic and ineffective because it does not address the expectations and needs of the modern global community.

In the literature, researchers discuss the idea that teaching English with the focus on achieving native speakership is not a suitable decision for all cases. In spite of the fact that teachers are oriented toward teaching students using this approach, they often cannot achieve significant results because non-native speakers cannot demonstrate the required level of language competency in most cases.

Thus, researchers view this approach that is typical in the sphere of teacher education as a linguistic myth that needs to be overcome (Deniz et al. 150). The reason is that such a one-sided approach tends to limit English learners in their intention to actively use the language while speaking with representatives of different cultures (MacKenzie 35). Moreover, the promotion of this traditional concept in teacher education does not correspond with applying English as a lingua franca.

A modern approach to preparing the English language teachers is proposed to be based on the idea that the content and principles of teaching should not be limited by specifics of the culture of English-speaking nations. On the contrary, more attention should be paid to developing the idea of ELF in the context of concentrating on developing both teachers’ and students’ intercultural knowledge. From this perspective, teaching English as a lingua franca should be perceived as realized in multicultural environments (Dombi 185; MacKenzie 12). As a result, in learning English, individuals receive opportunities to refer to their diverse multicultural and linguistic backgrounds, and teachers are expected to apply an innovative approach to explaining the rules of English to learners.

Referring to the results of studies on English as a lingua franca and the issue of teacher education in this context, it is important to state that today researchers propose reconsidering the traditional teaching approach. They explain this suggestion while stating that the English language teachers should adapt to changes in the global use of ELF, and the focus only on native-speaker norms can be inappropriate in the future (Deterding and Mohamad 8).

Supporting the status of English as a language for international communication, it is important to emphasize the needs of non-native speakers who learn and use it (Crystal 52; Seidlhofer 44). This aspect influences the development of a unique multicultural community in which English is used from the perspective of the sociolinguistic reality, but not according to specific norms and standards. When referring to standardization and various native norms, it is not always possible to achieve expected results in learners’ level of language acquisition and use.

The problem is that different rules should be used when teaching non-native speakers with a focus on the concept of ELF, and teachers need to become aware of these particular features. They include the focus on pronunciation, grammar rules, and punctuation, among other language aspects that are studied by native speakers and non-native speakers in a different manner (Crystal 34; Dombi 185). Therefore, new paradigms are expected to be used by the English language teachers in their work with diverse students who plan to use this language while communicating in different cross-cultural situations.

It took a long time for the English language to grow into one of the most commonly used languages all around the globe. As a result, it is eventually transformed into the universal means of communication between representatives of different cultures. Thus, over the last century, English has cemented its position as a lingua franca – the language that speakers of various mother tongues use in order to understand one another. English is also the language that dominates such essential fields as science, education, business, and commerce. In the contemporary world, researchers and language professionals agree that English as a lingua franca represents a unique category as it serves as a functional means of intercultural and international communication.

The success of English is being used all around the globe depends on the fact that his language possesses a set of characteristics and features that have made it easy to learn and understand. The establishment of English as a lingua franca has been a prolonged but productive historical and social process that was prompted by many significant global events, including colonization, wars, and the rapid development of technology.

Due to all these events, the English language had an opportunity to find its way to be spread on all continents and in most countries of the world. At first, this language was seen mostly as inseparable from its major native cultures and countries, such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada, among others. However, over time it grew into a lingua franca – the language that seems to belong to the entire world. As a result, it needs to be transformed and taught in accordance with the diversity of nations that actively use it for intercultural communication.

The role and existence of ELF in the global community can be described from two perspectives, which functional and descriptive ones. For the correct analysis of English as a lingua franca, it is necessary to define who, under which circumstances, and for what purposes realize this function. Taking a descriptive approach, it is crucial to underline that communication arising from the implementation of ELF does not always contain the structures and word order of Standard English, and this aspect influences the teaching approach.

Many researchers studied the relations between teaching the English language and applying the ELF concept, stressing the need for reformations in ELT for more effective implementation of ELF. Thus, the methodological aspects of ELF require deeper study and subsequent reform and changes in order to enhance the efficiency of communication in a multicultural community. The role and implementation of ELF in intercultural communication were described in the existing literature with special attention to cultural references implied by all interlocutors.

As a result, new teacher education programs can be viewed as needed to enhance the views of professors on ELF and improve teaching processes. The reason is that the influence of various cultures on teaching English as a lingua franca in diverse settings requires further adaptation of educational programs and improvement of educators’ skills to the needs of learners.

Works Cited

Abdullah, Sayeh S. and Mohammad Latif Chaudhary. “English as a Global Lingua Franca.” International Conference on Education, Applied Sciences and Management (ICEASM’2012) Held 26-27 December 2012 in Dubai (UAE) , 2012, pp. 128-134.

Alsagoff, Lubna, et al., eds. Principles and Practices for Teaching English as an International Language . Routledge, 2012.

Baker, Will. “Culture and Language in Intercultural Communication, English as a Lingua Franca and English Language Teaching: Points of Convergence and Conflict.” The Cultural and Intercultural Dimensions of English as a Lingua Franca , edited by Prue Holmes and Fred Dervin, Multilingual Matters, 2016, pp. 70-92.

—. “English as a Lingua Franca in Thailand: Characterisations and Implications.” Englishes in Practice , vol. 1, no. 1, 2012, pp. 1-10.

—. “The Cultures of English as a Lingua Franca.” Tesol Quarterly , vol. 43, no. 4, 2009, pp. 567-592.

Berthoud, Anne-Claude, et al. Exploring the Dynamics of Multilingualism: The Dylan Project . John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2013.

Björkman, Beyza. English as an Academic Lingua Franca: An Investigation of Form and Communicative Effectiveness . Walter de Gruyter, 2013.

Bowles, Hugo. “ELF-Oriented Pedagogy: Conclusions.” International Perspectives on English Language Teaching , edited by Sue Garton and Keith Richards, Palgrave Macmillan, 2015, pp. 194-208.

Cavalheiro, Lili Lopes. English as a Lingua Franca: Bridging the Gap between Theory and Practice in English Language Teaching . Universidade de Lisboa, 2015.

Cogo, Alessia, and Martin Dewey. Analysing English as a Lingua Franca: A Corpus-Driven Investigation . Bloomsbury Publishing, 2012.

Crystal, David. English as a Global Language . Cambridge University Press, 2012.

Danielson, Charlotte. The Framework for Teaching: Evaluation Instrument . Danielson Group, 2013.

Deniz, Esma Biricik, et al. “English as a Lingua Franca: Reflections on ELF-Related Issues by PreService English Language Teachers in Turkey.” The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal , vol. 16, no. 2, 2016, pp. 141-161.

Deterding, David. Misunderstandings in English as a Lingua Franca: An Analysis of ELF Interactions in South-East Asia . Walter de Gruyter, 2013.

Deterding, David, and Nur Raihan Mohamad. “The Lingua Franca Core and Englishes in East and Southeast Asia.” Asiatic , vol. 10, no. 2, 2016, pp. 7-24.

Dombi, Judit. “English as a Lingua Franca in Intercultural Communication.” Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Brasov , vol. 4, no. 53, 2011, pp. 183-187.

Grazzi, Enrico. “Linking ELF and ELT in Secondary School through Web-Mediation: The Case of Fanfiction.” International Perspectives on English Language Teaching , edited by Sue Garton and Keith Richards, Palgrave Macmillan, 2015, pp. 55-71.

Gu, Mingyue Michelle, et al. “The Dynamic Identity Construction in English as Lingua Franca Intercultural Communication: A Positioning Perspective.” System, vol. 46, no. 1, 2014, pp. 131-142.

House, Juliane. “Developing Pragmatic Competence in English as a Lingua Franca: Using Discourse Markers to Express (Inter) Subjectivity and Connectivity.” Journal of Pragmatics, vol. 59, no. 2, 2013, pp. 57-67.

Hynninen, Niina. “The Common European Framework of Reference from the Perspective of English as a Lingua Franca: What We Can Learn from a Focus on Language Regulation.” Journal of English as a Lingua Franca , vol. 3, no. 2, 2014, pp. 293-316.

Illes, Eva. “Communicative Language Teaching and English as a Lingua Franca.” Vienna English Working Papers , vol. 20, no. 1, 2011, 3-16.

Jenkins, Jennifer. “English as a Lingua Franca from the Classroom to the Classroom.” ELT Journal , vol. 66, no. 4, 2012, pp. 486-494.

—. English as a Lingua Franca in the International University: The Politics of Academic English Language Policy . Routledge, 2013.

Jenkins, Jennifer, and Constant Leung. “English as a Lingua Franca.” The Companion to Language Assessment , edited by Antony John Kunnan, John Wiley & Sons, 2014, pp. 1-10.

Kalocsai, Karolina. Communities of Practice and English as a Lingua Franca: A Study of Students in a Central European Context . Walter de Gruyter, 2014.

Ke, I-Chung, and Hilda Cahyani. “Learning to Become Users of English as a Lingua Franca (Elf): How Elf Online Communication Affects Taiwanese Learners’ Beliefs of English.” System, vol. 46, no. 2, 2014, pp. 28-38.

Kirkpatrick, Andy. “English as an Asian Lingua Franca: The ‘Lingua Franca Approach and Implications for Language Education Policy.” ELT Journal , vol. 2, no. 1, 2012, pp. 121-139.

MacKenzie, Ian. English as a Lingua Franca: Theorizing and Teaching English . Routledge, 2014.

Mallette, Karla. A Companion to Mediterranean History . John Wiley & Sons, 2014.

Meierkord, Christiane. “Interpreting Successful Lingua-Franca Interaction. An Analysis of Non-native-/Non-native Small Talk Conversation in English.” Linguistik Online , vol. 5, no. 1, 2013, pp. 57-69.

Murray, Neil. “English as a Lingua Franca and the Development of Pragmatic Competence.” ELT Journal , vol. 66, no. 3, 2012, pp. 318-326.

O’Regan, John P. “English as a Lingua Franca: An Imminent Critique.” Applied Linguistics , vol. 35, no. 5, 2014, pp. 533-552.

Paltridge, Brian, and Sue Starfield, editors. The Handbook of English for Specific Purposes . John Wiley & Sons, 2012.

Saito, Akihiro. “Is English Our Lingua Franca or the Native Speaker‘s Property? The Native Speaker Orientation Among Middle School Students in Japan.” Journal of Language Teaching and Research , vol. 3, no. 6, 2012, pp. 1071-1081.

Schmitz, John Robert. “To ELF or not to ELF?”(English as a Lingua Franca): That’s the Question for Applied Linguistics in a Globalized World.” Revista Brasileira De Linguística Aplicada , vol. 12, no. 2, 2012, pp. 249-284.

Schneider, Edgar W. “Exploring the Interface Between World Englishes and Second Language Acquisition–and Implications for English as a Lingua Franca.” Journal of English as a Lingua Franca , vol. 1, no. 1, 2012, pp. 57-91.

Seidlhofer, Barbara. Understanding English as a Lingua Franca . Oxford University Press, 2011.

Sifakis, Nicos C. “ELF Awareness as an Opportunity for Change: A Transformative Perspective for ESOL Teacher Education.” Journal of English as a Lingua Franca , vol. 3, no. 2, 2014, pp. 317-353.

Sowden, Colin. “ELF on a Mushroom: The Overnight Growth in English as a Lingua Franca.” ELT Journal, vol. 66, no. 1, 2012, pp. 89-96.

Sultana, Shaila. “Language and Identity in Virtual Space.” Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, vol. 26, no. 2, 2016, pp. 216-237.

Sung, Chit Cheung Matthew. “Global, Local or Glocal? Identities of l2 Learners in English as a Lingua Franca Communication.” Language, Culture and Curriculum, vol. 27, no. 1, 2014, pp. 43-57.

Wansborough, John E. Lingua Franca in the Mediterranean . Routledge, 2013.

Chicago (N-B)
Chicago (A-D)

StudyKraken. (2021, September 19). English as a Lingua Franca. https://studykraken.com/english-as-a-lingua-franca/

"English as a Lingua Franca." StudyKraken , 19 Sept. 2021, studykraken.com/english-as-a-lingua-franca/.

1. StudyKraken . "English as a Lingua Franca." September 19, 2021. https://studykraken.com/english-as-a-lingua-franca/.

Bibliography

StudyKraken . "English as a Lingua Franca." September 19, 2021. https://studykraken.com/english-as-a-lingua-franca/.

StudyKraken . 2021. "English as a Lingua Franca." September 19, 2021. https://studykraken.com/english-as-a-lingua-franca/.

StudyKraken . (2021) 'English as a Lingua Franca'. 19 September.

This paper was written and submitted to our database by a student to assist your with your own studies. You are free to use it to write your own assignment, however you must reference it properly.

If you are the original creator of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyKraken, request the removal .

Share full article

Supported by

How the English Language Conquered the World

By Amy Chua

Jan. 18, 2022

THE RISE OF ENGLISH Global Politics and the Power of Language By Rosemary Salomone

“Every time the question of language surfaces,” the Italian Marxist philosopher Antonio Gramsci wrote, “in one way or another a series of other problems are coming to the fore,” like “the enlargement of the governing class,” the “relationships between the governing groups and the national–popular mass” and the fight over “cultural hegemony.” Vindicating Gramsci, Rosemary Salomone’s “The Rise of English” explores the language wars being fought all over the world, revealing the political, economic and cultural stakes behind these wars, and showing that so far English is winning. It is a panoramic, endlessly fascinating and eye-opening book, with an arresting fact on nearly every page.

English is the world’s most widely spoken language, with some 1.5 billion speakers even though it’s native for fewer than 400 million. English accounts for 60 percent of world internet content and is the lingua franca of pop culture and the global economy. All 100 of the world’s most influential science journals publish in English. “Across Europe, close to 100 percent of students study English at some point in their education.”

Even in France, where countering the hegemony of English is an official obsession, English is winning. French bureaucrats constantly try to ban Anglicisms “such as gamer , dark web and fake news ,” Salomone writes, but their edicts are “quietly ignored.” Although a French statute called the Toubon Law “requires radio stations to play 35 percent French songs,” “the remaining 65 percent is flooded with American music.” Many young French artists sing in English. By law, French schoolchildren must study a foreign language, and while eight languages are available, 90 percent choose English.

Salomone, the Kenneth Wang professor of law at St. John’s University School of Law, tends to glide over why English won, simply stating that English is the language of neoliberalism and globalization, which seems to beg the question. But she is meticulous and nuanced in chronicling the battles being fought over language policy in countries ranging from Italy to Congo, and analyzing the unexpected winners and losers.

Exactly whom English benefits is complicated. Obviously it benefits native Anglophones. Americans, with what Salomone calls their “smug monolingualism,” are often blissfully unaware of the advantage they have because of the worldwide dominance of their native tongue. English also benefits globally connected market-dominant minorities in non-Western countries, like English-speaking whites in South Africa or the Anglophone Tutsi elite in Rwanda. In former French colonies like Algeria and Morocco, shifting from French to English is seen not just as the key to modernization, but as a form of resistance against their colonial past.

In India, the role of English is spectacularly complex. The ruling Hindu nationalist Indian People’s Party prefers to depict English as the colonizers’ language, impeding the vision of an India unified by Hindu culture and Hindi. By contrast, for speakers of non-Hindi languages and members of lower castes, English is often seen as a shield against majority domination. Some reformers see English as an “egalitarian language” in contrast to Indian languages, which carry “the legacy of caste.” English is also a symbol of social status. As a character in a recent Bollywood hit says: “English isn’t just a language in this country. It’s a class.” Meanwhile, Indian tiger parents, “from the wealthiest to the poorest,” press for their children to be taught in English, seeing it as the ticket to upward mobility.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber? Log in .

Want all of The Times? Subscribe .

Students, Staff and Alumni
Search Students, Staff and Alumni
Course finder
International

What is English as a Lingua Franca? An introduction to the field

Alessia cogo goldsmiths, university of london.

‘English’, as a language, has for some time been seen as a global phenomenon and, therefore, as no longer defined by fixed territorial, cultural and social functions. At the same time, people using English around the world have been shaping it and adapting it to their contexts of use and have made it relevant to their socio-cultural settings. English as a Lingua Franca, or ELF for short, is a field of research interest that was born out of this tension between the global and the local, and it originally began as a ramification of the World Englishes framework in order to address the international, or, rather, transnational perspective on English in the world. The field of ELF very quickly took on a nature of its own in its attempt to address the communication, attitudes, ideologies in transnational contexts, which go beyond the national categorisations of World Englishes (such as descriptions of Nigerian English, Malaysian English and other national varieties). ELF research, therefore, has built on World Englishes research by focusing on the diversity of English, albeit from more transnational, intercultural and multilingual perspectives, to which I will return later.

In this introduction to ELF, a definition right at the outset should be helpful. ELF is an intercultural medium of communication used among people from different socio-cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and usually among people from different first languages. Although it is possible that many people who use ELF have learnt it formally as a foreign language, at school or in an educational institution, the emphasis is on using rather than on learning. And this is a fundamental difference between ELF and English as a Foreign Language, or EFL, whereby people learn English to assimilate to or emulate native speakers. In ELF, instead, speakers are considered language users in their own right, and not failed native speakers or deficient learners of English. Some examples of typical ELF contexts may include communication among a group of neuroscientists, from, say, Belgium, Brazil and Russia, at an international conference on neuroscience, discussing their work in English, or an international call concerning a business project between Chinese and German business experts, or a group of migrants from Syria, Ethiopia and Iraq discussing their migration documents and requirements in English. The use of English will of course depend on the linguistic profile of the participants in these contexts, and they may have another common language at their disposal (other than English), but today ELF is the most common medium of intercultural communication (Crystal 2003; Graddol 2006), especially in transnational contexts.

So, research in ELF pertains to roughly the same area of research as English as a contact language and English sociolinguistics. However, the initial impetus to conducting research in ELF originated from a pedagogical rationale – it seemed irrelevant and unrealistic to expect learners of English around the world to conform to native norms, British or American, or even to new English national varieties, which would be only suitable to certain socio-cultural and geographical locations. So, people from Brazil, France, Russia, Mozambique, or others around the world, would not need to acquire the norms originated and relevant to British or American English speakers, but could orientate themselves towards more appropriate and relevant ways of using English, or ELF. Researchers called for “closing a conceptual gap” (Seidlhofer 2001; Jenkins 2000) between descriptions of native English varieties and new empirical and analytical approaches to English in the world. With the compilation of a number of corpora (the Asian Corpus of English, ACE, the corpus of English as a Lingua Franca in Academic Settings, ELFA, and the Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English, VOICE) ELF empirical research started to explore how English is developing, emerging and changing in its international uses around the world. Since the empirical corpus work started, research has expanded beyond the pedagogical aim, to include explorations of communication in different domains of expertise (professional, academic, etc.) and in relation to other concepts and research, such as culture, ideology and identity.

The initial empirical focus was on describing what ELF looked like, or, more linguistically, on identifying salient linguistic features in ELF use. However, close analysis of corpora showed that ELF is highly variable and context dependent, and therefore features are relevant as symptoms of “the underlying processes that give rise to the emerging forms” (Cogo and Dewey 2012: 3). The current interest of ELF research, therefore, has shifted to looking into the processes that facilitate communication in these international contexts, such as negotiation and accommodation. In the rest of this introductory essay, I will start by surveying some of the processes that underlie and support ELF communication, before moving on to research on attitudes, identity and multilingual issues. Ultimately, I will point out how dealing with ELF requires a reconceptualization of the notion of ‘language’. One caveat, before I delve deeper into these aspects of ELF – this paper is written with the idea of introducing the phenomenon of English as a Lingua Franca through my own work, rather than via an overview of all the work carried out in this area, so it is inevitably skewed towards my own view and approach to the field and my own preferences and interests. Most of the work currently being carried out in ELF is surveyed in other publications (among others, Cogo 2016b; Jenkins, Cogo and Dewey 2011).

Accommodation and negotiation of meaning

Research on ELF has come to focus on the processes of regularization, of redundancy reduction and the tendency to increase explicitness in the aim of enhancing clarity. These processes, underlying and motivating ELF communication, have been shown to constitute examples of linguistic creativity. In this sense, rather than describing the resulting unconventional forms as deficient and foreign because of their non-conformity to ENL, these examples of creative use and construction of ELF are effective and appropriate in the contexts where they are used.

A key aspect of ELF communication is negotiation of meaning – the conversational work carried out by participants for making meaning and achieving understanding. The analysis of negotiation moments has pointed to the use of various strategies which can be classified into ‘pre-empting strategies’ and ‘solving strategies’ (see Cogo and Dewey 2012). The former are used to prevent a possible misunderstanding in the conversation, when something may be ambiguous and the speaker may carry out some active work in order to clarify what is being said, even if no conversational problem is identified. The second kind of strategies are the solving ones, the conversational moves that speakers make when there may be a non-understanding and they signal it and try to solve it by negotiating meaning.

The following short transcript of a conversation between work colleagues is an example of negotiation work. The participants involved in the conversation are from different sociolinguistic backgrounds and have different repertoires of linguistic resources that are available to them in the conversation and that can become relevant in the exchange. Anna’s main first language is Italian, but she also speaks English at work and knows French; Jean’s main language is French, but he also speaks English for work purposes, and a bit of German; Karen is German, but speaks English and French fluently. They are discussing a collection of holiday pictures, which are described by Jean as “cheesy”. It is the adjective “cheesy” that starts a negotiation of meaning.

Example 1: Fleur bleu

1 ANNA: =too much eh?

2 JEAN: =cheesy

3 KAREN: [YE::AH

4 ANNA: [YE::AH

5 KAREN: yeah a bit too much I think

6 JEAN: so … blue flower we say … fleur bleu

7 ANNA: why? … to say that it’s cheesy

8 JEAN: yeah … fleur bleu means … you know when you have these pictures with 9 little angels of

10 KAREN: ah [yeah

11 ANNA: [yeah

12 JEAN: fleur bleu

13 KAREN: kitsch- [kitschig

14 JEAN: [kitschig yeah @@@

After Jean’s description of the pictures as “cheesy” the other participants agree with him (in lines 3 and 4), but Jean still carries on with an exploration of a French expression which partly corresponds to “cheesy” while also expanding its meaning. The expression “fleur bleu” refers to the old-fashioned pictures of angels carrying blue flowers, as in the picture above, and is something Jean uses to enlarge the concept of “cheesy” and include sweet, almost saccharose. But it is the way he explains the French expression and the ensuing negotiation of meaning that is interesting for us. Jean does not immediately introduce the words in French, if he did that the other participants may or may not be able to understand what he is saying. Instead, he translates the expression first (“blue flower” in line 6) and then signals that French people say that (“we say”) but that this may not be a common expression anywhere else. He uses a contextualization cue, “we say”, which signals to the other participants that he is translating. Only then, when he has already expressed the meaning in English, does he translate the expression back to hisoriginal. In line 7, Anna moves in to question whether the meaning of “fleur bleu” corresponds to “cheesy”, and while Jean confirms it in the following turn, he carries on to explain where the idiom comes from, i.e. from the pictures with little angels (line 8 and 9). Anna and Karen confirm that they have understood the expression, and then Karen provides again another corresponding expression in German “kitschig”, which Jean finally confirms.

This conversation is a successful example of negotiation involving different kinds of strategies. The first, pre-empting strategies, concern monitoring speakers’ contributions to the conversation, paying attention to unusual moves or implicit signals of problems and taking steps to disambiguate potential unclear aspects. For instance, if interlocutors may seem to hesitate the speaker can adopt pre-empting strategies such as repetition, paraphrasing, code-switching and use of multilingual resources in order to clarify their intended meaning (see Cogo 2009; 2010; Cogo and Pitzl 2016). In the extract, Jean takes great care in explaining the French idiom before any possible non-understanding can create problems in the conversation. Other strategies may include explicit reflections on language, such as metadiscourse, or explicit lexical suggestions. Pre-empting strategies are particularly important in ELF talk as they ensure the monitoring of understanding and the prevention of communication problems, and, therefore, also show how mutual understanding is not taken for granted. In the blue flower example the negotiation is not only a way of monitoring understanding but also enhances the meaning and expands the semantic area covered by “cheesy” – in other words, using “cheesy” would not be enough for Jean, so the three participants use their multilingual repertoire to add and enhance its meaning.

The second kind of strategies, the ones concerned with solving non-understanding, deal with explicit signals of problems in communication and focus on resolving them. A range of signals is used by speakers to indicate a possible non-understanding, such as non-response, prolonged silence, explicit requests for clarifications, comprehension questions or different kinds of repetition. All these are used to indicate that something happened in conversation that may affect understanding and meaning. For instance, in the first example Anna performs a comprehension check in line 7 to make sure she has understood and Karen suggests her own version of “cheesy” in line 13.

Empirical research on natural communication portrays a picture of ELF as a dynamic and complex medium of communication, which emerges out of the local and situational encounter among the participants, but also relies on the shared resources in their specific practice (educational, professional or other). For example, in another project carried out among business people in their workplace, the findings showed that participants co-constructed the socio-linguistic resources necessary to carry out their work and, in doing that, prioritized content over ‘accuracy’ according to a native speaker model (Cogo 2016a; 2012a). The study also revealed the importance of intercultural accommodation skills and multilingual sensitivities for carrying out successful communication in ELF contexts.

Attitudes and orientations

More recent sociolinguistic research in ELF has also emphasised that investigations of language use should not be kept separate from in-depth explorations of practices, including attitudes, ideologies and power, at the local level. These explorations focus on the orientation of the speakers towards the resources that emerge, are shared or co-constructed in the community, but can also branch out in investigations of language ideology and identity.

For instance, the following example is an extract from a conversation which I recorded a few years ago and was part of an investigation into ELF strategic use and perceptions (Cogo 2010). The specific moment in the conversation transcribed below happens towards the end of a meeting among colleagues discussing some important work issues. One of the colleagues felt the meeting went relatively well and starts saying what she feels is the reason why relations among co-workers are fine.

Example 2: On the same boat

1 NANA: yeah I think we are all on the same ... on in ... ah: what is it

2 ... on the same boat

3 ISABEL: yeah?

4 NANA: yeah? ... how do you say? on the same boat?

5 ISABEL: I don’t know yeah ... on the same boat I think ... on the bus on the train

6 ANNA: anyway we understand you

7 ISABEL: yeah ... we are all foreigners

8 NANA: all foreigners (laughing)

According to Nana, colleagues’ relations are positive and colleagues generally get on because they are all “on the same boat”. Nana, Isabel and Anna (all pseudonyms) are here involved in discussing this idea, and while they agree with each other overall they seem to negotiate on a linguistic level. Initially, Nana wants to know what preposition, either ‘on’ or ‘in’, would be correct to use with the idiomatic expression so she explicitly asks for corrective feedback with “what is it” (line 1). When Isabel does not take up the request Nana asks again with a different formulation “how do you say?” (line 4). Isabel first admits that she does not know the ‘correct’ idiomatic expression, and then she starts playing not with the prepositions but with the lexical items, instead. Isabel’s play with different means of transport, “boat” “bus” and “train”, has the double function of livening up the discussion and refusing to be seen as the authority in terms of grammatical correctness. So as Isabel put it, “we are all foreigners” and foreignness is something they have in common, but not something to be seen in a negative way. Isabel, by this means, seems to endorse Nana’s original proposition about how well they all relate as colleagues. Foreignness is like a resource that alerts them to possible different ways of saying things, possible different interpretations.

The example also shows how speakers from different lingua-cultural backgrounds orient to English and their attitudes to their English practices. As highlighted at the beginning, the focus is on how language is used , co-constructed and shaped to adapt to the communicative context, the situation and the interlocutors, rather than learned . However, in a current study on refugees and asylum seekers’ advice consultations (Cogo, in preparation) I found that negotiations in such contexts are very sensitive: the advisors’ orientation towards the advisees’ displayed knowledge of English, and their understanding and orientations towards ELF use rather than native norms, are key to successful advice consultations, especially in sensitive situations of power imbalance. ELF therefore is not seen as a simplified version of English, but as complex, creative, and as co-constructed by participants moulding and shaping their linguistic (multilingual) resources. ELF co-construction, however, is not a neutral endeavour, but subject to people’s agency, orientation towards it and access (sometimes unequal) to resources, including linguistic ones.

Reconceptualizing “language” in ELF research

The traditional view and early conceptualizations of the nature of a lingua franca conceived the phenomenon as language simplification, but current corpus work has demonstrated the complex and fluid nature of ELF, rather than its simplification. This is especially evident on the level of pragmatics, where empirical data collected in different studies showed occurrence of new, adapted or translated idiomatic expressions, which are used effectively in different ELF contexts or communities. For instance, in my work on pragmatic strategies I collected naturally-occurring spoken data among colleagues from different linguistic backgrounds chatting together during their coffee breaks. The findings showed how local expressions were altered, adapted or translated to be made comprehensible and relevant in their talk, through skillful and sophisticated negotiations of meaning and use of multilingual resources (Cogo 2010; Cogo and Dewey 2012). Similarly, the negotiation of the idiomatic expression “in the same boat” demonstrates how creatively changing an idiom “serves to establish a sense of playfulness and in-group belonging” (Cogo 2010: 304), and how idiomatic construction is also possible depending on and in relation to speakers’ orientations and ideologies.

Ultimately, research in ELF is no longer simply a matter of investigating how English is changing and adapting to different contexts and speakers, but rather involves and requires a re-conceptualization of ‘language’ and a rethinking of the traditional tenets in linguistics and applied linguistics more generally. The challenge relating to the concept of language is posed by the dynamic nature of ELF communication, which requires changes and adaptations to different contexts and users, and by its situational nature, in that it emerges from the different constellations of speakers, communities and contexts. ELF is not a self-contained, bounded system but a practice, which is inherently variable, adaptable and heterogeneous and cannot therefore be considered a ‘variety’, at least not in the traditional sense of the term. So, instead of thinking of ELF in terms of a separate and bounded system, we need to think in terms of shared repertoire/s of resources that people co-construct and draw from in order to carry out certain activities in specific contexts. This also implies going beyond static descriptions of linguistic features to highlight the processes that facilitate and ensure effective communication. A re-directed focus on repertoires also allows us to consider English not in isolation but in relation and contact with other languages and resources that may be part of the speakers’ repertoire. This has also shifted the attention to analyzing “languaging” or “translanguaging” as inevitable and indeed important/essential aspects of ELF, the creative exploitation of multilingual resources according to users’ needs and circumstances (Cogo 2012a).

Identity – shifting between user and learner

It is commonly assumed that learning a language and using a language are two different processes and would normally occur separately and in a specific order – first you learn a language and then you use it. However, latest developments in language learning research have shown that learning a language involves using it, and, therefore, that learners and users are simultaneous and shifting roles and identities. These, in practice, are also influenced by the sociocultural context, the language attitudes and ideologies. For instance, in my work with business people in different companies (Cogo 2012a; 2016a), I interviewed participants about their relation to English, including reflections on their roles of learners or users, how satisfied they felt about their English in business contexts, etc. The findings were more complex than just the dichotomy of user and learner would represent, with fluctuating identities in between the two. Some participants were rather happy with their English, and some commented on how they mixed English with other linguistic resources (French and Italian, for instance) to enhance and expand on their meaning but also to signal their different identities. Others were less positive about their English and felt they still needed to attend English lessons and still saw themselves more as learners than as users. Still others fluctuated in their attitudes to English and their learner versus user roles, sometimes even seeing themselves as shuttling between one and the other within the same conversation. Some were proud of being international individuals, open to different intercultural experiences and portraying themselves as expert in negotiating an identity in English alongside their identity in their first language. For instance, one Italian businessman reiterated that his “italianitá” was an important aspect of his English professional identity. He did not need to focus on “bending over backwards” to sound English and felt that his linguistic proficiency allowed him to function effectively in the international business communities he worked in, but also allowed him to move comfortably between Italian and English social worlds, forming relationships in both his first language and English. Other participants felt they were good at English but still needed to develop their proficiency and positioned themselves as occasional English speakers, sometimes in a learner mode, and with few opportunities to develop an identity through English in the context where they worked (see Cogo 2012a and 2016a). Unequal access to English seemed to limit their imagined identities as English users in their current and future practices.

The concept of identity, then, emerges as multifaceted, dynamic and fluid, developing from the social relations and interactions with others, society and culture, and shaped by personal experience. Identities, however, do not merely emerge in interaction but are also constrained by the specific socio-cultural environment and institutional conditions in specific contexts, as well as by what people bring to the interaction, their attitudes and ideologies. Identity for all the participants seems to be culturally embedded with the work they do and the linguistic resources they use for their professional practices. It is also embedded in the institutional environment where they operate. The essentialist notions of the language learner, and the dichotomy of learner versus user, are limiting and untenable, and it is only by acknowledging the complex relation between language and identity and the complexity of identity itself that we start understanding and untangling the diverse experiences of ELF speakers.

[Editor's Note: Since the Modern Humanities Research Association referencing style, which is the 'house style' of GLITS-e, is atypical in the field of linguistics, we have made an exception for Alessia's article.]

Cogo, A. (in preparation) Giving advice in sensitive contexts: a sociolinguistic exploration of advice and advocacy sessions for refugees and asylum seekers.

Cogo, A. (2016a). “They all take the risk and make the effort”: Intercultural accommodation and multilingualism in a BELF community of practice. In L. Lopriore and E. Grazzi (eds.) Intercultural Communication: New Perspectives from ELF . Rome, Italy: Roma Tre Press.

Cogo, A. (2016b). English as a Lingua Franca in Europe . In A. Linn et al. English in Europe . Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

Cogo, A. 2009. ‘Accommodating difference in ELF conversations: A study of pragmatic strategies’. In Mauranen A. and E. Ranta (eds.) English as a Lingua Franca. Studies and Findings . Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 254–273.

Cogo, A. 2010. ‘Strategic use and perceptions of English as a Lingua Franca.’ Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 46(3), 295-312.

Cogo, A. 2012a. ELF and Super-diversity: a Case Study of ELF Multilingual Practices from a Business Context. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 1(2), 287-313.

Cogo, A. 2012b. ‘French is French, English is English’: standard language ideology in ELF debates. In P. Studer & I. Werlen (eds.) Linguistic Diversity in Europe , 233-256. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

Cogo, A. 2015. Complexity, negotiability and ideologies: a response to Zhu, Pitzl, and Kankaanranta et al. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca , 4(1), 149-155.

Cogo, A. and M. Dewey. 2012. Analyzing English as a lingua franca: A corpus-driven investigation . London: Continuum.

Cogo, A. and M-L. Pitzl. 2016. Pre-empting and signalling non-understanding in ELF. English Language Teaching journal , 70(3).

Crystal, D. 2003. English as a Global Language . (2 nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Graddol, D. 2006. English Next. Why global English may mean the end of ‘English as a Foreign Language’ . British Council. Free download at http://englishagenda.britishcouncil.org/sites/ec/files/books-english-next.pdf

Jenkins, J. 2000. The Phonology of English as an International Language . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jenkins, J. Cogo, A. and Dewey, M. 2011. Review of developments in research into English as a lingua franca. Language Teaching 44(3), 281-315.

Seidlhofer, B. 2001. Closing a conceptual gap: the case for a description of English as a lingua franca. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 11, 133–58.

ACE – Asian Corpus of English, http://corpus.ied.edu.hk/ace/

ELFA – English as a Lingua Franca in Academic settings, http://www.helsinki.fi/englanti/elfa/

VOICE – Vienna Oxford International Corpus of English, https://www.univie.ac.at/voice/

Subject List
Take a Tour
For Authors
Subscriber Services
Publications
African American Studies
African Studies
American Literature
Anthropology
Architecture Planning and Preservation
Art History
Atlantic History
Biblical Studies
British and Irish Literature
Childhood Studies
Chinese Studies
Cinema and Media Studies
Communication
Criminology
Environmental Science
Evolutionary Biology
International Law
International Relations
Islamic Studies
Jewish Studies
Latin American Studies
Latino Studies

Linguistics

Literary and Critical Theory
Medieval Studies
Military History
Political Science
Public Health
Renaissance and Reformation
Social Work
Urban Studies
Victorian Literature
Browse All Subjects

How to Subscribe

Free Trials

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section English as a Lingua Franca

Introduction, elf handbooks, book series, and journal.

Conceptualizing ELF: Past to Present
Higher Education
Business Settings
ELF and Intercultural Communication
Other Domains and Functions
ELF and Pedagogy
ELF Linguistic Characteristics and Processes

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming articles expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section.

Edward Sapir
Sentence Comprehension
Text Comprehension
Find more forthcoming articles...
Export Citations
Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

English as a Lingua Franca by Jennifer Jenkins , Will Baker LAST REVIEWED: 07 August 2023 LAST MODIFIED: 22 April 2020 DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199772810-0262

The phenomenon of English as a lingua franca (ELF), in other words English used among speakers who have different first language backgrounds, has existed since the British began to colonize parts of Asia and Africa in the late 16th century. However, it is only during the past thirty years that ELF has spread to the rest of the world, seen a dramatic rise in its number of users, and attained its current global status. Unsurprisingly, then, research publications on the ELF phenomenon are also relatively recent. Like the phenomenon that it explores, research into ELF has also grown, particularly since the start of the current millennium, in terms of the amount being published as well as an expansion in the areas of interest being reported. Thus, whereas the original research into ELF focused entirely on linguistic forms, particularly phonological and lexico-grammatical, current ELF research explores a host of domains from tourism, to business, to higher education among many others, as well as a wider range of linguistic areas including ELF pragmatics, metaphorical language, and morpho-syntactics, along with various other English language-related topics such as intercultural communication, ELF in social contexts, humor in ELF interactions, assessment of ELF, and implications for teacher education. In addition, the first corpora of ELF use began to be collected, most notably Mauranen’s Corpus of English as a Lingua Franca in Academic Settings (ELFA) and Seidlhofer’s Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English (VOICE), with Kirkpatrick’s Asian Corpus of English (ACE) following a few years later. Meanwhile the ELF phenomenon has been reconceptualized in line with the findings of its growing body of research. Nevertheless, ELF research is still in its infancy by comparison with most other areas of academic inquiry, and to date there is therefore only one overview publication, one journal, and no reference works, bibliographies, textbooks or the like. This bibliography is therefore divided according to the key areas in which publications on ELF have focused up to now.

As the Introduction makes clear, the field of English as a lingua franca (ELF) is in its infancy, with most work on the subject having taken place over the past twenty years. This being so, there are relatively few resources currently available: just one journal, one book series, and two handbooks. The Journal of English as a Lingua Franca publishes research articles, commentaries, and book reviews related to all aspects of ELF research. Similarly the book series Developments in English as a Lingua Franca[DELF] publishes both monographs and edited collections related to ELF research and its implications. Jenkins, et al. 2018 provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of ELF research with forty-seven chapters from leading scholars in the field. Walker 2010 offers a practically focused handbook that addresses pronunciation issues for teachers of English from an ELF perspective.

Jenkins, Jennifer and Will Baker. 2013–. Developments in English as a Lingua Franca [DELF]. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

This book series, published by De Gruyter Mouton, began publication in 2013, and has already included a dozen titles, with several more in progress. Again, many of the major book-length publications on ELF are found here.

Jenkins, Jennifer, Will Baker, and Martin Dewey, eds. 2018. The Routledge handbook of English as a lingua franca . London and New York: Routledge.

This book covers all key areas of ELF research to date. The first section explores a range of approaches to conceptualizing and positioning ELF. The second focuses on the regional spread of ELF, while the third turns to ELF characteristics and the fourth to contemporary domains and functions of ELF. Section 5 considers ELF in academic settings, Section 6 investigates ELF policy and pedagogy, and the final section looks ahead, exploring topics such as migration, attitudes, ELF and other global languages, and the future of ELF.

Journal of English as a Lingua Franca . 2012–.

This began publication by De Gruyter Mouton in 2012 and has been published twice yearly since then. Many of the key article-length publications in the field of ELF are to be found in this journal.

Walker, Robin, ed. 2010. Teaching the pronunciation of English as a lingua franca . Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.

This handbook for pronunciation teachers is divided into six sections. The first three theoretical sections consider the changing English-speaking world, implications for an ELF-oriented approach to pronunciation teaching, and issues involved in adopting such an approach. The remaining two-thirds of the book covers techniques for teaching ELF pronunciation, planning and assessment, and individual chapters by authors from ten wide-ranging countries/first languages explaining in each case how ELF pronunciation teaching could be adapted to that specific first language.

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login .

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here .

About Linguistics »
Meet the Editorial Board »
Acceptability Judgments
Accessibility Theory in Linguistics
Acquisition, Second Language, and Bilingualism, Psycholin...
Adpositions
African Linguistics
Afroasiatic Languages
Algonquian Linguistics
Altaic Languages
Ambiguity, Lexical
Analogy in Language and Linguistics
Animal Communication
Applicatives
Applied Linguistics, Critical
Arawak Languages
Argument Structure
Artificial Languages
Australian Languages
Austronesian Linguistics
Auxiliaries
Balkans, The Languages of the
Baudouin de Courtenay, Jan
Berber Languages and Linguistics
Biology of Language
Borrowing, Structural
Caddoan Languages
Caucasian Languages
Celtic Languages
Celtic Mutations
Chomsky, Noam
Chumashan Languages
Classifiers
Clauses, Relative
Clinical Linguistics
Cognitive Linguistics
Colonial Place Names
Comparative Reconstruction in Linguistics
Comparative-Historical Linguistics
Complementation
Complexity, Linguistic
Compositionality
Compounding
Computational Linguistics
Conditionals
Conjunctions
Connectionism
Consonant Epenthesis
Constructions, Verb-Particle
Conversation Analysis
Conversation, Maxims of
Conversational Implicature
Cooperative Principle
Coordination
Creoles, Grammatical Categories in
Critical Periods
Cyberpragmatics
Default Semantics
Definiteness
Dementia and Language
Dene (Athabaskan) Languages
Dené-Yeniseian Hypothesis, The
Dependencies
Dependencies, Long Distance
Derivational Morphology
Determiners
Dialectology
Distinctive Features
Dravidian Languages
Endangered Languages
English as a Lingua Franca
English, Early Modern
English, Old
Eskimo-Aleut
Euphemisms and Dysphemisms
Evidentials
Exemplar-Based Models in Linguistics
Existential
Existential Wh-Constructions
Experimental Linguistics
Fieldwork, Sociolinguistic
Finite State Languages
First Language Attrition
Formulaic Language
Francoprovençal
French Grammars
Gabelentz, Georg von der
Genealogical Classification
Generative Syntax
Genetics and Language
Grammar, Categorial
Grammar, Cognitive
Grammar, Construction
Grammar, Descriptive
Grammar, Functional Discourse
Grammars, Phrase Structure
Grammaticalization
Harris, Zellig
Heritage Languages
History of Linguistics
History of the English Language
Hmong-Mien Languages
Hokan Languages
Humor in Language
Hungarian Vowel Harmony
Idiom and Phraseology
Imperatives
Indefiniteness
Indo-European Etymology
Inflected Infinitives
Information Structure
Interface Between Phonology and Phonetics
Interjections
Iroquoian Languages
Isolates, Language
Jakobson, Roman
Japanese Word Accent
Jones, Daniel
Juncture and Boundary
Khoisan Languages
Kiowa-Tanoan Languages
Kra-Dai Languages
Labov, William
Language Acquisition
Language and Law
Language Contact
Language Documentation
Language, Embodiment and
Language for Specific Purposes/Specialized Communication
Language, Gender, and Sexuality
Language Geography
Language in Autism Spectrum Disorders
Language Nests
Language Revitalization
Language Shift
Language, Synesthesia and
Languages of Africa
Languages of the Americas, Indigenous
Languages of the World
Learnability
Lexical Access, Cognitive Mechanisms for
Lexical Semantics
Lexical-Functional Grammar
Lexicography
Lexicography, Bilingual
Linguistic Accommodation
Linguistic Anthropology
Linguistic Areas
Linguistic Landscapes
Linguistic Relativity
Linguistics, Educational
Listening, Second Language
Literature and Linguistics
Machine Translation
Maintenance, Language
Mande Languages
Mass-Count Distinction
Mathematical Linguistics
Mayan Languages
Mental Health Disorders, Language in
Mental Lexicon, The
Mesoamerican Languages
Minority Languages
Mixed Languages
Mixe-Zoquean Languages
Modification
Mon-Khmer Languages
Morphological Change
Morphology, Blending in
Morphology, Subtractive
Munda Languages
Muskogean Languages
Nasals and Nasalization
Niger-Congo Languages
Non-Pama-Nyungan Languages
Northeast Caucasian Languages
Oceanic Languages
Papuan Languages
Penutian Languages
Philosophy of Language
Phonetics, Acoustic
Phonetics, Articulatory
Phonological Research, Psycholinguistic Methodology in
Phonology, Computational
Phonology, Early Child
Policy and Planning, Language
Possessives, Acquisition of
Pragmatics, Acquisition of
Pragmatics, Cognitive
Pragmatics, Computational
Pragmatics, Cross-Cultural
Pragmatics, Developmental
Pragmatics, Experimental
Pragmatics, Game Theory in
Pragmatics, Historical
Pragmatics, Institutional
Pragmatics, Second Language
Pragmatics, Teaching
Prague Linguistic Circle, The
Presupposition
Psycholinguistics
Quechuan and Aymaran Languages
Reading, Second-Language
Reciprocals
Reduplication
Reflexives and Reflexivity
Relevance Theory
Representation and Processing of Multi-Word Expressions in...
Salish Languages
Sapir, Edward
Saussure, Ferdinand de
Second Language Acquisition, Anaphora Resolution in
Semantic Maps
Semantic Roles
Semantic-Pragmatic Change
Semantics, Cognitive
Sentence Processing in Monolingual and Bilingual Speakers
Sign Language Linguistics
Sociolinguistics
Sociolinguistics, Variationist
Sociopragmatics
Sound Change
South American Indian Languages
Specific Language Impairment
Speech, Deceptive
Speech Perception
Speech Production
Speech Synthesis
Switch-Reference
Syntactic Change
Syntactic Knowledge, Children’s Acquisition of
Tense, Aspect, and Mood
Text Mining
Tone Sandhi
Transcription
Transitivity and Voice
Translanguaging
Translation
Trubetzkoy, Nikolai
Tucanoan Languages
Tupian Languages
Uto-Aztecan Languages
Valency Theory
Verbs, Serial
Vocabulary, Second Language
Voice and Voice Quality
Vowel Harmony
Whitney, William Dwight
Word Classes
Word Formation in Japanese
Word Recognition, Spoken
Word Recognition, Visual
Word Stress
Writing, Second Language
Writing Systems
Zapotecan Languages
Privacy Policy
Cookie Policy
Legal Notice
Accessibility

[81.177.182.159]
81.177.182.159

Search Menu

Sign in through your institution

Advance articles
Editor's Choice
Key Concepts
The View From Here
Author Guidelines
Submission Site
Open Access
Why Publish?
About ELT Journal
Editorial Board
Advertising and Corporate Services
Journals Career Network
Self-Archiving Policy
Dispatch Dates
Terms and Conditions
Journals on Oxford Academic
Books on Oxford Academic
< Previous

English as a Lingua Franca: concepts, use, and implications

Article contents
Figures & tables
Supplementary Data

Alessia Cogo, English as a Lingua Franca: concepts, use, and implications, ELT Journal , Volume 66, Issue 1, January 2012, Pages 97–105, https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccr069

Permissions Icon Permissions

Sowden’s article raises a number of questions concerning English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) and criticizes it as a simplified and culturally neutral means of communication. In this response, I address the issues concerning the conceptualization and use of ELF as well as the implications for ELT. I provide up-to-date evidence of ELF research and show the variability, richness, and creativity of ELF communication.

Personal account

Sign in with email/username & password
Get email alerts
Save searches
Purchase content
Activate your purchase/trial code
Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with username/password
Recommend to your librarian
Institutional account management
Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institutionâ€™s website and Oxford Academic.

Click Sign in through your institution.
Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institutionâ€™s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see â€˜Sign in through society siteâ€™ in the sign in pane within a journal:

Click Sign in through society site.
When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Short-term Access

To purchase short-term access, please sign in to your personal account above.

Don't already have a personal account? Register

Month:	Total Views:
November 2016	15
December 2016	37
January 2017	110
February 2017	141
March 2017	106
April 2017	107
May 2017	204
June 2017	96
July 2017	66
August 2017	134
September 2017	176
October 2017	106
November 2017	159
December 2017	107
January 2018	117
February 2018	114
March 2018	78
April 2018	103
May 2018	131
June 2018	55
July 2018	64
August 2018	195
September 2018	97
October 2018	143
November 2018	219
December 2018	193
January 2019	259
February 2019	181
March 2019	89
April 2019	119
May 2019	154
June 2019	88
July 2019	47
August 2019	68
September 2019	52
October 2019	85
November 2019	103
December 2019	119
January 2020	91
February 2020	66
March 2020	50
April 2020	56
May 2020	35
June 2020	47
July 2020	41
August 2020	47
September 2020	32
October 2020	98
November 2020	41
December 2020	64
January 2021	75
February 2021	27
March 2021	22
April 2021	48
May 2021	34
June 2021	45
July 2021	14
August 2021	18
September 2021	31
October 2021	45
November 2021	53
December 2021	48
January 2022	38
February 2022	57
March 2022	17
April 2022	44
May 2022	26
June 2022	27
July 2022	30
August 2022	19
September 2022	15
October 2022	25
November 2022	39
December 2022	32
January 2023	24
February 2023	63
March 2023	25
April 2023	47
May 2023	37
June 2023	15
July 2023	21
August 2023	16
September 2023	13
October 2023	24
November 2023	36
December 2023	28
January 2024	24
February 2024	55
March 2024	27
April 2024	38
May 2024	37
June 2024	17
July 2024	10
August 2024	14

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

Recommend to Your Library

Affiliations

Online ISSN 1477-4526
Print ISSN 0951-0893
Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
About Oxford Academic
Publish journals with us
University press partners
What we publish
New features
Open access
Rights and permissions
Accessibility
Advertising
Media enquiries
Oxford University Press
Oxford Languages
University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
Cookie settings
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Architecture and Design
Asian and Pacific Studies
Business and Economics
Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
Computer Sciences
Cultural Studies
Engineering
General Interest
Geosciences
Industrial Chemistry
Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies
Jewish Studies
Library and Information Science, Book Studies
Life Sciences
Linguistics and Semiotics
Literary Studies
Materials Sciences
Mathematics
Social Sciences
Sports and Recreation
Theology and Religion
Publish your article
The role of authors
Promoting your article
Abstracting & indexing
Publishing Ethics
Why publish with De Gruyter
How to publish with De Gruyter
Our book series
Our subject areas
Your digital product at De Gruyter
Contribute to our reference works
Product information
Tools & resources
Product Information
Promotional Materials
Orders and Inquiries
FAQ for Library Suppliers and Book Sellers
Repository Policy
Free access policy
Open Access agreements
Database portals
For Authors
Customer service
People + Culture
Journal Management
How to join us
Working at De Gruyter
Mission & Vision
De Gruyter Foundation
De Gruyter Ebound
Our Responsibility
Partner publishers

Your purchase has been completed. Your documents are now available to view.

English as a lingua franca and linguistic justice: insights from exchange students’ experiences

This paper focuses on English as a lingua franca, an area of research that has gone through several phases of reconceptualization over recent years. What has not changed despite the reframing is the insistence that ELF, with its focus on intelligibility rather than formal accuracy, is not to be judged on the basis of standard English norms. In response to these claims, researchers have argued from linguo-political and philosophical perspectives that re-labelling English ‘ELF’ does not remove native-speaker privileges and linguistic injustice. This paper addresses the topic by presenting some results of an investigation into students’ language choices and practises during study abroad. Drawing on data gained by means of a questionnaire survey and semi-structured interviews, it will show that, despite their use of English in lingua franca situations, a considerable number of students adhere to standard English as an appropriate model and measure their own proficiency in English and progress in language learning against native-speaker norms.

1 Introduction

In an early linguistic justice analysis, Jonathan Pool (1991) argued that there were only two alternatives to ensure equality in multilingual communicative situations. The first is where everyone learns everyone else’s language. The second one is where everyone learns a language that is external to the group. As regards the first option, one must admit that (in Europe) high-level competence in several languages will probably be restricted to an elite of the intellectual and gifted few ( Ammon 2003 ; Gooskens 2019 ). Quality and success in the learning of foreign languages vary hugely, but statistics on the matter are sobering. According to the European survey Eurobarometer (2012), 54% of the EU population are fluent in a language other than their mother tongue and 25% are fluent in two other languages ( European Commission 2012 ).

The second alternative puts artificial or planned languages on our agenda, which indeed would offer a relatively neutral solution. Everything we know about the realities of Esperanto communication suggests that the use of a deliberately constructed language that needs to be acquired by everyone, that is relatively easy to learn even by adults after the so-called critical age, that is a suitable means for everyday conversation as well as a literary medium and a language for special purposes, can present an effective solution from the perspective of linguistic justice (see, for example, Fiedler and Brosch 2022b ). However, this option does not seem to have found enough supporters, in the short run at least, whether because of a lack of knowledge about it or lack of political will (see Brosch and Fiedler [2018] and Fiedler [2015] for a more detailed discussion).

In addition to the two solutions that Pool mentions, there is, theoretically, still a third option. It is the idea of adopting a language that has already been learnt and used worldwide and viewing it detached from its native-speaker origin and cultural baggage, affording it legitimacy in various forms as an equal means of communication that can be used and designed by everyone according to their abilities and needs. In this context, one school of thought (some authors use the term “movement” [ Berns 2009 ; Holliday 2008 ; O’Regan 2014 ], Park and Wee [2014] speak of a “research project”) has drawn much scholarly attention in recent years: English as a lingua franca (ELF). This article is concerned with this approach. It challenges its practical feasibility and implementation by presenting some results of an investigation on students’ linguistic realities during study abroad and especially their reflections on the use of English. Before describing this investigation in Section 3 , ELF and its recent reconceptualization will first be presented in more detail.

2 ELF: different views on an area of research

When ELF came into being as an area of research in the second half of the 1990s, its focus was the empirical description of English in international encounters among non-native speakers by means of corpus projects. These have revealed a set of properties of ELF on different linguistic levels. Jenkins’ groundbreaking book The Phonology of English as an International Language (2000) has shown, for example, that in oral communication the interdental fricatives /ð/ and /θ/ are often substituted with alveolar and labiodental fricatives (/z/ /s/; /v/ /f/) or alveolar plosives (/d/ /t/); uncountable nouns such as information and advice are often used with the plural ending -s ; the relative pronouns which and who are treated as interchangeable for animate and inanimate nouns, and verbs in the third person are often used without the inflectional ending -s (see Seidlhofer 2004 ). It was found that these uses are usually unproblematic because they do not cause misunderstanding. Being oriented towards intelligibility and communicative efficiency instead of native speaker prestige, ELF advocates do not consider these features to be errors but variants or differences ( Jenkins 2006 : 140), characteristics of ELF “as an emerging English that exists in its own right and which is being described in its own terms ” ( Jenkins 2007 : 2 [original emphasis]).

ELF publications have elicited negative responses and criticism, as Jenkins (2007) describes in detail. These concern above all the status of ELF as a variety. The English used by non-native speakers is ever changing, depending on communicative settings and partners’ linguistic competencies, and thus too heterogeneous and fluid to be codified. As a consequence, ELF researchers have meanwhile given up describing it as a variety (see Jenkins 2015 ).

In addition, debates on ELF focus on the question of whether ELF should present a basis for a teaching model. Edmondson and House (2003: 338f.) voice their opinion for changes as regards goals and contents of teaching programmes: “(W)e suggest that the teaching of ‘Culture’, as embodied in the appreciation of literary texts, and gaining insight into other cultural aspects of a country or countries where English is L1 can have no central role to play.” Other researchers, such as Gnutzmann ( 2007 do not see it as an alternative to a standard English or native-speaker-based model in English language teaching. One reason is that it is difficult to predict the future needs and communicative purposes of today’s learners and because a new paradigm such as this can only be introduced when it is accepted by its users.

Sowden (2012: 93/94) argues that the introduction of an additional ELF teaching model can have a divisive effect on society and in this way aggravate inequalities rather than diminish them: “It is highly likely that where choice existed, the more affluent, ambitious, and well connected would opt for schools where native-speaker standards prevailed, and the poorer sections of the community would be relegated to schools where ELF was the norm.” Indeed, various studies have revealed that non-native learners and users of English definitely prefer a native standard, especially British and American English, as these varieties represent “real” or “authentic” English and are considered prestigious ( Erling 2005 : 227; Gnutzmann et al. 2014 ; Hynninen and Kuteeva 2017 ; Jenkins 2007 : 186; Mollin 2006 : 199; Wright 2004 : 176).

Other points of criticism have referred to the representation of ELF communication as “neutral” or “culture-free” (for a discussion, see Fiedler 2011 ) and smooth, “robust”, and cooperative. With regard to the latter aspect, it is noteworthy that the so-called let-it-pass principle, i.e. the observation that “[u]nclear talk is routinely ‘passed over’ on the common sense assumption that it will either eventually become clear or end up as redundant” ( House 2003 : 558), which was described as characteristic of ELF interactions in English (e.g. by Firth 1996 ; House 2003 ; Seidlhofer 2011 ), has been challenged in its general validity in recent studies ( Cogo and House 2017 : 174). In addition, studies including speakers of various proficiencies, such as Knapp’s (2002) investigation, have shown that “the co-operative and consensual style reported in recent studies as a typical feature of ELF interactions seem to be restricted to certain types of situations” (p. 241) (see also Park and Wee 2014 ).

Furthermore, the restriction of ELF research to spoken communication is often criticised as a major flaw (see Gazzola and Grin 2013 : 96; Sowden 2012 : 95). Some of the features described as typical of ELF usage (see above) would probably be immediately changed into standard English if the texts were transferred into writing. This is in line with the finding of a study of the use of English as a lingua franca in international business ( Ehrenreich 2011 ) that “[w]hile endonormativity is the general rule in most interactions, […] [e]xonormative standards play a role with regard to a select number of written texts, e.g. contracts or the corporate website” (p. 26).

For several authors, ELF is a mere re-labelling of English ( Gazzola and Grin 2013 , O’Regan 2014 ). Grin (2011: 59) points out that “[t]he differences between what is labelled as ‘English as a lingua franca’ and simply ‘English’, in terms of their consequences for language status, are superficial, and mostly of little importance”; and Phillipson (2003: 40) refuses the term as “[…] communicative inequality is obscured when English is referred to as a ‘lingua franca’, a concept that appears to assume communicative equality for all”.

Recently, ELF researchers have emphasised ELF as a multilingual strategy. Hülmbauer and Seidlhofer (2013: 390) , giving wrong word formations such as financiate (for ‘finance’), the use of information as a countable noun, and the use of false friends (e.g. grossly ) as examples, point out:

ELF is used as a shared resource which becomes activated in linguistically diverse settings. (…) No matter how much of the plurilingual influence is directly observable on the surface structure of ELF talk – the important thing is that there is, in principle, room for integration of plurilingual elements. ELF thus clearly has to be viewed as a multilingual mode. ( Hülmbauer and Seidlhofer 2013 : 390)

In a similar vein, Jenkins (2015: 77) , influenced by the development of the concept of ‘translanguaging’ ( García and Li 2014 ), presents a reconceptualization of English as a lingua franca as “English-within-multilingualism”. In my view, however, the occasional interpolation of words and sentences by ELF interactants from their multilingual repertoire (traditionally called code-mixing and code-switching), as recently described by some authors adopting the new perspective of ELF (e.g. Cogo 2020 ), does not yet seem to justify a repositioning of ELF as “English as a Multilingua Franca (EMF)” ( Jenkins 2015 ). Neither does our data suggest that students, when they use English as a lingua franca, regard their communication as multilingual.

ELF has been discussed as a strategy to reduce linguistic injustice ( Van Parijs 2011 ; De Schutter 2018 ). Its understanding of non-native speakers of English as self-confident and competent users instead of “defective communicators” ( Seidlhofer 2004 : 213), and its claim to respect linguistic diversity based on the argument that if the teaching of English focuses on features that are “crucial for international intelligibility” ( Seidlhofer 2003 : 136), it “leaves other languages intact” (p. 137), are to be seen in the context of linguistic equality. Recent publications also show that ELF researchers see their point of departure in disadvantages that non-native speakers experience, such as in higher education (see Jenkins 2020 ). From a linguistic justice perspective, however, well-intended efforts for more equality in communication can turn out to have detrimental effects. If non-native English is a legitimate form dissociated from the English of native speakers, a “neutral” English, then there is no need to criticise inequality of international communication. If it presents a “multilingual mode” or a “multilingua-franca” because of the multilingual background of its speakers, then there is no reason any more to complain about the loss of linguistic diversity due to the dominance of English (see Grin 2018 ). English when used as a lingua franca is still English, however, and despite the idea that non-native speakers’ lexical and grammatical imperfections are tolerated, it should not be ignored that non-native speakers are put at a disadvantage, as they have to invest a great deal of time, money and energy into language learning and may still communicate with difficulty. This is why recent developments of ELF in particular should be carefully scrutinised (for further critiques of ELF, see Fiedler 2010 and 2011 ).

3 English as a lingua franca: exchange students’ experiences

3.1 presentation of the study and major findings.

This study draws on data obtained within a large-scale research project on European exchange students’ language practises and choices which was part of the “Mobility and Inclusion in Multilingual Europe” (MIME) research project funded by the European Commission’s 7th Framework Programme for Research and Development (2014–2018). The data was collected between autumn 2015 and spring 2018 by means of online questionnaires before and after the students’ stays abroad (more than 500 respondents) and interviews during their stays (78 participants). The participants’ countries of destination were (in order of frequency): France, the UK, Spain, Sweden, Norway, Italy, the Netherlands, Ireland, and Poland. [1]

The data on students’ language proficiencies confirms the key role that English plays in higher education today (see Table 1 ). It was the language spoken by all the respondents, with 18.1% of students of philological subjects and 12.0% of those studying non-philological subjects having already reached the highest level of proficiency (C2) prior to their stay abroad. Interestingly, 22.3% of students of non-philological subjects reported that English was the only foreign language in which they were able to communicate. This figure was 10.4% among students of philological subjects. These relatively high percentages, considering the high level of education that university students have, corroborates the Eurobarometer data mentioned in the introduction and thus the limited success of the EU’s policy of multilingualism, which aims for European citizens to speak two foreign languages in addition to their mother tongue (the so-called M+2 formula).

Proportion of students who speak languages besides English (%).

	English	Foreign language 2	Foreign language 3	Foreign language 4
Students of philological subjects	100	89.6	44.0	14.0
Students of non-philological subjects	100	77.7	33.7	8.5

A major finding of our study is that a large majority of exchange students consider learning the language of the host country an important incentive for their stay. In practice, however, student enthusiasm is often stymied by a lack of adequate language courses and/or poor organisation, causing students to spend most of their time with other exchange students, as opposed to with locals. This was especially the case in countries with less widely spoken languages, where the language of instruction is usually English. Nevertheless, most students managed to acquire some knowledge of the local language or to improve their proficiency. Among non-philologists, the number of students without any knowledge of the host country’s language dropped to a third and the number of students who passed an A1/A2 course more than doubled. One in ten students, however, returned home without any knowledge of the local language. Among the students of philological subjects, the number of people without any knowledge fell to almost zero, and more than half of all students were proficient users of the local language (having reached C1/C2 level) by the end of their stay.

The students were asked about the languages that they used in particular contexts: at the university (in seminars and lectures), when talking to other exchange students or to local students, in university institutions, and in their everyday lives outside of university. The respondents’ answers showed that English predominated in all these situations, and that it was only in everyday life outside of university that local languages played a more important role (see Figure 1 ).

Language choices in specific situations (outgoing students).

The Erasmus programme itself also strengthens the role of English (see Cojocaru 2018 , Salomone 2022 : 51/52). Our study shows that this is based on three factors. The first and most important one is the use of English as the students’ working language at host universities. Secondly, English has a significant impact as the dominant means of communication among Erasmus students. They resort to it as a common means of communication whenever people from various linguistic backgrounds come together. Its use is perceived as easy and convenient, especially in comparison with the local language, which they have often started to learn only in their host country (see also Kalocsai 2009 ). The third factor, which is closely related to the previous two, is students’ experience of having successfully managed their stay abroad by means of a foreign language. They may not have achieved their goal of learning a new language, as this turned out to be too difficult in the time they had at their disposal, as the conditions for doing so were not favourable, or because it did not prove necessary. Nevertheless, using English made their stay abroad successful from a linguistic perspective. From a psychological point of view, this positive personal experience is an important reason why the Erasmus programme strengthens the status of English.

3.2 Exchange students’ attitudes to ELF

The findings that are relevant to this article were above all obtained from the semi-structured interviews during the exchange students’ stays abroad. It was here that they expressed their opinions on the use of English as a lingua franca. Questions of the use of English by native and non-native speakers were not included in the catalogue of questions guiding the interviews, but the format of semi-structured interviews gave the participants the opportunity to speak at length and to lead the conversation in directions that interested them. The fact that they raised the topic on their own initiative, either in the final open question of the questionnaire or in the interviews, is indicative of the importance that they attach to it.

As for their attitudes to ELF, the students can be divided into two major groups. The first stressed the positive consequences of using English as a non-native language, such as the ease of communication and their access to the many varieties that English now encompasses. The second group focused on negative aspects, such as some speakers’ comparatively low level of proficiency and the disadvantageous effects that this had on the quality of their studies and on their own degree of proficiency.

For example, when asked how they managed the linguistic challenges of their studies abroad, most students reported that they encountered no particular difficulties using English at their host universities. Six of the interviewees explained their trouble-free communication when using English, and the boost this gave their self-confidence, by the fact that the language served as a lingua franca, i.e. that it was used by non-native speakers.

(1) “I can follow very well. […] at the uni where I am there are almost exclusively international professors, who don’t speak English as their mother tongue, so you are surrounded all the time by people who also speak acquired English, which makes everything easier.” (Student of economics in Russia) [2]

(2) “Everything runs smoothly […] Well, I think this is also because the Greeks are not native speakers and neither am I, and one meets in the middle easily, when there is something one doesn’t understand, one is on the same level easily.” (Student of education in Greece)

Some students (both incoming and outgoing, and regardless of the subjects they were studying) emphasised as positive the fact that their stay abroad made them aware of the many ‘Englishes’ that exist, both as regards native-speaker accent varieties and forms of English influenced by learners’ mother tongues. They considered this good preparation for future encounters in the language:

(3) “and maybe my understanding of accents has improved, since we have many different accents of international students here, the French accent, the Danish, Chinese, but also the Spanish accent.” (Student of English in Britain)

(4) “I would say that my understanding of English grew better […] the accents are mixed. When you have to decipher, sometimes it’s deciphering what a person is saying. […] It’s nice when you can understand the RP [= Received Pronunciation, the accent traditionally regarded as the standard for British English – S.F.] or American English, but […]. But you will not only speak to Americans and others, you will meet, for example, Hindu persons and Chinese people and English and the English world will be complicated to understand. And yeah, that’s a part of the learning.” (Slovak student of English in Germany; interview conducted in English)

The majority of students who mentioned that English is spoken as a lingua franca (more precisely, nine out of sixteen) took a negative view, however. They criticised their fellow students or teachers for the poor English that they spoke, as this had a negative impact on the quality of teaching (see 5 and 6), or they expressed their disappointment concerning the development of their own English proficiency (see examples 7 and 8).

(5) Interviewer: ‘Would you say you can follow the classes well?’ “As for the lecturers, it depends. There are teachers who speak very good English, as they maybe have connections with Great Britain. Well, the British accent prevails <laughs>. But I must say that there are also lecturers who haven’t gained much experience in English, who have not yet practised speaking English so much. This has made the lessons worse […] but in general the teachers were able to use English, of course. It varied considerably.’ (Student of education in Hungary)

(6) “The professors try very hard, but the quality is not very high. The only course – I still have chosen an additional course in Business Communication Skills, here the professor comes from Liverpool. That’s really enjoyable. As for the others, it happens occasionally that they ask us about terms and they paraphrase them. That’s a pity, I had been hoping for more.’ (Student of business studies in Poland)

(7) Interviewer: ‘Is there anything else you would like to tell me about your linguistic situation, something we have not yet spoken about?’ “Well (…) The English that is spoken here is not always the best, as there are many Erasmus students here, and all Erasmus students live in the same hall, so that one has a lot to do with them (.) and therefore I’m not sure, one understands one another without any problems in English, but I can imagine that this is not perfect English, so that one simply takes over other speakers’ mistakes.” (Student of mechanical engineering in Norway)

(8) ‘What I am a bit afraid of and what makes me less secure is that the people I talk to here aren’t native speakers of English, and the lecturers aren’t either. When they mark my essays or what I’m writing here, they will overlook my errors, especially in grammar […] I’m a bit afraid that mistakes creep in that I do not notice.’ (Student of medicine in Sweden)

Several interviewees assumed that their English proficiency was decreasing during their stay abroad, [3] and they saw the main cause for this again in their use of the language with non-native speakers.

(9) “I feel like my English has become worse […] The thing is that I studied half a year abroad already and made friends with native speakers, native speakers of English and that I share a flat with native speakers in Germany. That means that last year, for one and a half years I was permanently surrounded by native speakers, which I believe improved my level of English considerably, and here I’m not together with native speakers and I – that’s what I notice talking to people who are not so good at English – restrain myself in my language use, I use simpler words, less complex sentences etc., and in fact, at the beginning I was asked two or three times to use less difficult words and to talk a bit more slowly. I was asked by Italians and Japanese students not to talk so fast and much English. […] Well, I know that I had level C1 before […] I hope not to have fallen back to level B2. Let’s wait and see till the end of January, it could happen.” (Student of sociology in Lithuania)

(10) ‘I would rather say that my English has deteriorated, as I have lost my British accent due to the many types of English here […] At the beginning, when I arrived I was told that I have a British accent when I speak English and meanwhile nobody says so <laughs>. This has got lost.’ (Student of meteorology in Sweden)

The interview findings are confirmed at least in part by our questionnaire data. In the questionnaire, a considerable number of our respondents (33.2% of those studying philological subjects and 34.1% of those studying other subjects) reported that on the basis of their language tests (see footnote 3) their proficiency in English did not change or even deteriorated. However, these results must be regarded with caution because a number of students had already reached the highest level (C2) in their test before going abroad and were, therefore, not able to improve their level.

4 Discussion

This investigation shows that exchange students have different attitudes towards English as a lingua franca. While some of them view the use of English by non-native speakers mainly positively, as it facilitates understanding and opens up the international community of Erasmus students which they may not otherwise have had access to, as Peckham et al. (2012) describe, other exchange students focus on contacts with native speakers, and English is like any other language in this respect. They consider their interactions with these to be advantageous for improving their language. Despite the dominance and overall successful use of English as a non-native language over the course of their stay abroad, this group of exchange students adhere to native-speaker norms and regard these as the benchmark of their own proficiency. This is also in line with investigations that describe that non-native speakers tend to adopt ready-made constructions from native-speaker talk for their own speech ( Howarth 2002 ; Partington 2003 ), up to the point that in academic writing, for example, they apply techniques such as “language re-use” (i.e. copying fragments of previously published texts) in their wish to meet linguistic requirements ( Flowerdew 2007 ; Gnutzmann and Rabe 2014 ).

In line with Bourdieu (1991) , in a network of power relations including economic, social and cultural forms of power, language can be seen as an important form of symbolic power through which to gain access to economic and social power. Knowledge of English plays a major role in this context. It is, as Prodromou (2008: 249) argues, a “weapon in the hands of the oppressed” that gives them access to formal education and job prospects. For some people, even a rather low level of proficiency might be a powerful instrument, depending on the field of activity. For others, for example university students striving for positions of responsibility in society, a reduced form of English provides only a “broken weapon”, with “reduced linguistic capital” (250).

Innovation is highly dependent on acceptability. As regards ELF, this includes non-native English being received as suitable by non-native and native speakers alike. There has been little research on the question of to what extent native speakers of English are willing to agree on the linguistic consequences that their language’s role as a lingua franca has for its use and are tolerant of deviations from standard English norms. Kalocsai (2009) , in her study of Erasmus students using English during their stays in Hungary and the Czech Republic, found that English native-speaking students were not central members of the international community of exchange students that used English, but peripheral ones, as they did not use strategies such as accommodation, negotiation, and cooperation, which is why they were judged as “uncaring and inefficient communicators” by non-native speakers ( Kalocsai 2009 : 40).

The topic of English as a lingua franca and native speakers’ positions on its development has attracted attention beyond educational settings. When in December 2017 The Telegraph (2017) , reporting on misunderstandings among politicians because of native speakers’ unilateral use of English idioms, took up the topic, quoting from an article by J. Jenkins in which she proposed that native speakers of English should avoid using idiomatic speech and adjust their ways of speaking to international users, the contents of the more than 200 online comments did not give reason to be optimistic that ELF might quickly be accepted among native speakers. [4]

5 Conclusion

This article has dealt with English as a lingua franca, focussing on the question of whether it might be a contribution to establishing linguistic justice worldwide. The topic remains controversial because, on the one hand, its use by non-native speakers in a large number of settings makes ELF a sociolinguistic reality that serves people well, especially in oral communication, and cannot be ignored. On the other hand, this does not fundamentally change the situation that a single language is the dominant medium of international communication, and that the language that is used as a lingua franca is at the same time a native language for some of the interlocutors, which causes inequality.

Since the users of a language are the most important factor in communication, this article has been concerned with their perceptions and attitudes. We examined the experiences of exchange students, since stays abroad, especially under the Erasmus programme, are a prime example of English serving as a lingua franca. The study shows that students have diverging opinions. While some of them welcome how easy it is to communicate among non-native speakers, others have reservations about English as a lingua franca and adhere to native-speaker varieties as their target norms. They consider ELF to be unauthentic and fear that it may put them in a position of weakness.

Empirical work such as that presented here tells us that communication cannot be reduced to intelligibility. As Salomone (2022: 36) argues, “[a]t least for now, though individuals might informally speak to each other of necessity in non-standard English, the most valued common means of global communication is a form of English that is not simply mutually intelligible but one in which the written and spoken forms correspond with each other”. English cannot be detached from its origin, as many of its non-native users are aware of the existence of a “real” English and they associate non-native English with low prestige. Psychological factors such as feelings of inferiority or superiority play an important part in language use. Given the complexity of language issues, a comprehensive approach to the management of linguistic diversity must be an interdisciplinary effort. In addition to linguistic factors, non-linguistic aspects (i.e. political, economic and social conditions giving rise to inequality and unfairness) have to be considered as well ( Hultgren 2020 ).

For the realisation of a model such as ELF, its users’ consent is essential. In the same way it is necessary that first-language speakers of English are willing to be tolerant of variation introduced by non-native speakers. This aspect has hardly been addressed and should be included in further investigations of the topic.

Funding source: European Commission

Award Identifier / Grant number: â€˜Mobility and Inclusion in Multilingual Europe

Ammon, Ulrich. 2003. Global English and the non-native speaker: Overcoming disadvantage. In Humphrey Tonkin & Timothy Reagan (eds.), Language in the twenty-first century , 23–34. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins. 10.1075/wlp.1.03amm Search in Google Scholar

Berns, Margie. 2009. English as lingua franca and English in Europe. World Englishes 28(2). 192–199. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971x.2009.01578.x . Search in Google Scholar

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1991. Language and symbolic power (edited and introduced, John B. Thompson, translated, Gino & Matthew Adamson). Cambridge: Polity Press. Search in Google Scholar

Brosch, Cyril Robert & Sabine Fiedler. 2018. Esperanto and linguistic justice: An empirical response to sceptics. In Michele Gazzola, Torsten Templin & Bengt-Arne Wickström (eds.), Language policy and linguistic justice , 499–536. Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978-3-319-75263-1_17 Search in Google Scholar

Cogo, Alessia. 2020. ELF and translanguaging. In Kumiko Murata (ed.), ELF research methods and approaches to data and analyses. Theoretical and methodological underpinnings , 38–54. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781003021650-5 Search in Google Scholar

Cogo, Alessia & Juliane House. 2017. Intercultural pragmatics. In Anne Barron, Yueguo Gu & Gerard Steen (eds.), Routledge handbook of pragmatics , 168–183. London & New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315668925-15 Search in Google Scholar

Cojocaru, Florentina-Cristina. 2018. Developing (new) language skills through student mobility – the impact of an Erasmus+ experience. Revista de Științe ale Educației 37(1). 53–65. https://doi.org/10.35923/jes.2018.1.05 . Search in Google Scholar

De Schutter, Helder. 2018. Linguistic justice and English as a lingua franca. In François Grin & Peter Kraus (eds.), The politics of multilingualism , 167–199. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/wlp.6.08des Search in Google Scholar

Edmondson, Willis J. & Juliane House. 2003. English in the world and English in the school. In Hubert Cuyckens, Thomas Berg, René Dirven & Klaus-Uwe Panther (eds.), Motivation in language: Studies in honour of Günter Radden , 321–345. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.243.21edm Search in Google Scholar

Ehrenreich, Susanne. 2011. The dynamics of English as a lingua franca in international business: A language contact perspective. In Archibald Alasdair, Alessia Cogo & Jennifer Jenkins (eds.), Latest trends in ELF research , 11–34. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Search in Google Scholar

Erling, Elisabeth. 2005. Who is the ‘Global English’ speaker? A profile of students of English at the Freie Universität Berlin. In Claus Gnutzmann & Frauke Intemann (eds.), The globalisation of English and the English language classroom , 215–229. Narr: Tübingen. Search in Google Scholar

European Commission . 2012. Europeans and their languages (Eurobarometer June 2012), 1–145. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_386_en.pdf . Search in Google Scholar

Fiedler, Sabine. 2010. The English-as-a-lingua-franca approach: Linguistic fair play? Language Problems & Language Planning 34(3). 201–221. https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.34.3.01fie . Search in Google Scholar

Fiedler, Sabine. 2011. English as a lingua franca – a native-culture-free code? Language of communication vs. language of identification. Apples – Journal of Applied Language Studies 5(3). 79–97. Search in Google Scholar

Fiedler, Sabine. 2015. The topic of planned languages (Esperanto) in the current specialist literature. Language Problems & Language Planning 39(1). 84–104. https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.39.1.05fie . Search in Google Scholar

Fiedler, Sabine & Cyril Robert Brosch. 2019. Der Erasmus-Studienaufenthalt – Europäische Sprachenvielfalt oder Englisch als Lingua franca? Leipziger Universitätsverlag. Available at: http://www.interlinguistik-gil.de/wb/media/beihefte/Fiedler-Brosch-Erasmus.pdf . Search in Google Scholar

Fiedler, Sabine & Cyril Robert Brosch. 2022a. The language choices of exchange students. In François Grin, László, Marácz & Nike K. Pokorn (eds.), Advances in interdisciplinary language policy , 275–296. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Search in Google Scholar

Fiedler, Sabine & Cyril Robert Brosch. 2022b. Esperanto: Lingua franca and language community . Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins (forthcoming). 10.1075/wlp.10 Search in Google Scholar

Firth, Alan. 1996. The discursive accomplishment of normality: On ‘lingua franca’ English and conversation analysis. Journal of Pragmatics 26. 237–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(96)00014-8 . Search in Google Scholar

Flowerdew, John. 2007. The non-anglophone scholar on the periphery of scholarly publication. In Augusto Carli & Ulrich Ammon (eds.), Linguistic inequality in scientific communication today [AILA review] , vol. 20, 14–27. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/aila.20.04flo Search in Google Scholar

García, Ofelia & Wei Li. 2014. Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education . Basingstoke: Palgrave. 10.1057/9781137385765 Search in Google Scholar

Gazzola, Michele & François Grin. 2013. Is ELF more effective and fair than translation? An evaluation of the EU’s multilingual regime. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 23(1). 93–107. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12014 . Search in Google Scholar

Gnutzmann, Claus. 2007. Teaching and learning English in a global context: Applied-linguistic and pedagogical perspectives. In Sabine Volk-Birke & Julia Lippert (eds.), Anglistentag 2006 , 319–330. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier. Search in Google Scholar

Gnutzmann, Claus & Frank Rabe. 2014. ‘Theoretical subtleties’ or ‘text modules’? German researchers’ language demands and attitudes across disciplinary cultures. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 13. 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2013.10.003 . Search in Google Scholar

Gnutzmann, Claus, Jakisch Jenny & Rabe Frank. 2014. English as a lingua franca: A source of identity for young Europeans? Multilingua 33(3–4). 437–457. https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2014-0020 . Search in Google Scholar

Gooskens, Charlotte. 2019. Receptive multilingualism. In Simona Montanari & Suzanne Quay (eds.), Multidisciplinary perspectives on multilingualism: The fundamentals , 149–174. Boston & Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9781501507984-008 Search in Google Scholar

Grin, François. 2011. Interview. In Lingua franca – chimera or reality? (edited by the European Commission, Directorate General Translation). (Studies on Translation and Multilingualism [1], 59–70). 10.5040/9781838711764.0012 Search in Google Scholar

Grin, François. 2018. On some fashionable terms in multilingualism research. In Peter Kraus & François Grin (eds.), The politics of multilingualism , 248–274. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/wlp.6.11gri Search in Google Scholar

Holliday, Adrian. 2008. Standards of English and politics of inclusion. Language Teaching 41. 119–130. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444807004776 . Search in Google Scholar

House, Juliane. 2003. English as a lingua franca: A threat to multilingualism? Journal of Sociolinguistics 7(4). 556–578. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2003.00242.x . Search in Google Scholar

Howarth, Peter. 2002. The conventional language of press conferences: Scripted and spontaneous English speech. In Stefania Nuccorini (ed.), Phrases and phraseology –data and descriptions , 127–144. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Search in Google Scholar

Hülmbauer, Cornelia & Barbara Seidlhofer. 2013. English as a lingua franca in European multilingualism. In Anne-Claude Berthoud, François Grin & Georges Lüdi (eds.), Exploring the dynamics of multilingualism , 387–406. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/mdm.2.18hul Search in Google Scholar

Hultgren, Anna Kristina. 2020. Introduction: Global English and social justice. Nordic Journal of English Studies 19(3). 1–9. https://doi.org/10.35360/njes.573 . Search in Google Scholar

Hynninen, Niina & Maria Kuteeva. 2017. “Good” and “acceptable” English in L2 research writing: Ideals and realities in history and computer science. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 30. 53–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2017.10.009 . Search in Google Scholar

Jenkins, Jennifer. 2006. Points of view and blind spots: ELF and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 16(2). 137–162. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2006.00111.x . Search in Google Scholar

Jenkins, Jennifer. 2007. English as a lingua franca: Attitude and identity . Oxford: Oxford University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Jenkins, Jennifer. 2015. Repositioning English and multilingualism in English as a Lingua Franca. Englisches in Practice 2(3). 49–85. https://doi.org/10.1515/eip-2015-0003 . Search in Google Scholar

Jenkins, Jennifer. 2020. Red Herrings and the case of Language in UK higher education. Nordic Journal of English Studies 19(3). 59–57. https://doi.org/10.35360/njes.577 . Search in Google Scholar

Kalocsai, Karolina. 2009. Erasmus exchange students: A behind-the-scene view into an ELF community of practice. Apples – Journal of Applied Language Studies 3(1). 25–49. Search in Google Scholar

Knapp, Karlfried. 2002. The fading out of the non-native speaker: A case study of unco-operative lingua franca communication. In Karlfried Knapp & Christiane Meierkord (eds.), Lingua franca communication , 217–244. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 10.3726/978-3-653-04730-1/11 Search in Google Scholar

Mollin, Sandra. 2006. Euro-English: Assessing variety status . Narr: Tübingen. Search in Google Scholar

O’Regan, John. 2014. English as a Lingua franca: An immanent critique. Applied Linguistics 35(5). 533–552. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt045 . Search in Google Scholar

Park, Joseph Sung-Yul & Lionel Wee. 2014. English as a lingua franca: Lessons for language and mobility. Multilingual Matters 1(1). 53–73. https://doi.org/10.14426/mm.v1i1.21 . Search in Google Scholar

Partington, Allen. 2003. The linguistics of political argument . London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203218259 Search in Google Scholar

Phillipson, Robert. 2003. English-only Europe. Challenging language policy . London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203696989 Search in Google Scholar

Pool, Jonathan. 1991. The official language problem. American Political Science Review 85. 495–514. https://doi.org/10.2307/1963171 . Search in Google Scholar

Prodromou, Luke. 2008. English as a lingua franca: A corpus-based analysis . London: Continuum. 10.1093/elt/ccn064 Search in Google Scholar

Salomone, Rosemary. 2022. The rise of English. Global politics and the power of language . Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780190625610.001.0001 Search in Google Scholar

Seidlhofer, Barbara. 2003. English for Europe, or European English? In Rüdiger Ahrens (ed.), European language policy , 123–138. Heidelberg: Winter. Search in Google Scholar

Seidlhofer, Barbara. 2004. Research perspectives on teaching English as a lingua franca. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 24. 209–239. 10.1017/S0267190504000145 Search in Google Scholar

Seidlhofer, Barbara. 2011. Understanding ELF . Oxford: Oxford University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Sowden, Colin. 2012. ELF on a mushroom: the overnight growth in English as a Lingua Franca. ELT Journal 66(1). 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccr024 . Search in Google Scholar

The Telegraph . 2017. Idiomatic English means Brits struggle to communicate with the world . http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/14/idiomatic-english-means-brits-struggle-communicate-world/ (accessed 3 December 2021). Search in Google Scholar

Van Parijs, Philippe. 2011. Linguistic justice for Europe & for the world . Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199208876.001.0001 Search in Google Scholar

Wright, Sue. 2004. Language policy and language planning: From nationalism to globalization . London: Palgrave MacMillan. 10.1057/9780230597037 Search in Google Scholar

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

X / Twitter

Supplementary Materials

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

International Journal of the Sociology of Language

Journal and Issue

Articles in the same issue.

English as a Lingua Franca and Its Implications Essay

To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
As a template for you assignment

Introduction

English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) is a topic that is relatively well-covered by recently published literature. This phenomenon is rather widespread, especially in education, due to its ability to facilitate instruction (Yao, Garcia & Collins, 2019). However, it is also associated with multiple challenges. Therefore, both the positive and negative aspects and implications of ELF need to be taken into account when considering ELF use in language teaching.

Many recent studies investigate ELF, which may be the result of the widespread nature of the phenomenon. As a result, it is relatively easy to find its definitions. Most commonly, ELF refers to the use of English in multilanguage (and multicultural) groups that do not share any language (Jenkins, 2015; Yao et al., 2019). The goal is to enable or facilitate communication; ELF is supposed to be the common language that all the involved people can utilize.

Additionally, the use of English by non-native speakers who choose this option is also termed ELF (Jenkins, 2015). ELF is a good choice for multilanguage groups since English is very widespread; in fact, the term “linguistic imperialism” can be used as a reference to the contribution of colonization to this trend (Yao et al., 2019, p. 210). However, ELF is not always viewed as a positive phenomenon; its benefits and negative implications can be considered (Knapp, 2015; Yao et al., 2019). As for the areas of use, the term (and ELF itself) can be employed in education, public administration, and various working environments. Among other things, ELF can be integrated into language teaching.

The implications of ELF for language teaching are rather numerous, but several key outcomes can be noted. On the one hand, the use of a single, common language for educational instruction facilitates the process. This way, educational institutions can accept many transnational students, offer them important services, and also limit education expenditures, which may make them more accessible and competitive in the educational market (Yao et al., 2019). Therefore, ELF, as well as other types of uniformity, has its benefits for institutions and students, and they need to be considered by ELF educators.

However, the linguistic hegemony of ELF also has certain negative effects. Certain evidence may indicate reduced academic achievement associated with ELF (Yao et al., 2019). Yao et al. (2019) highlight the fact that the evidence is conflicting and that ELF issues may be attributed to inefficient ELF implementation. Still, the problem is noteworthy, especially for students who are not fluent speakers.

Other difficulties for transnational students include the stress and additional workload associated with learning ELF, linguistic and cultural barriers, and problems in communicating and connecting with professors (Knapp, 2015; Yao et al., 2019). Research also suggests that the common belief of the simplicity of English is not fully supported by practice or theory (Knapp, 2015). Therefore, neglecting the challenges of ELF is unlikely to be helpful to an ELF classroom.

As a personal statement, it can be proposed that ELF is a rather efficient solution, but its challenges need to be taken into account. ELF use in education appears to be justified by modern educational standards and the situation in the educational market. Furthermore, the idea of teaching the English language with ELF has its merits (Knapp, 2015). However, the negative features of ELF remain a major issue, and they require individual, tailored, diverse solutions that depend on students’ needs.

To summarize, ELF is a logical consequence of the ubiquity of English, and it is predominantly employed for convenience and improvement of communication. It is capable of achieving these outcomes, which makes it exceptionally valuable, but in many environments, including educational ones, people can struggle with linguistic and cultural barriers. As a result, for successful ELF language teaching, assisting struggling students is a primary concern.

Jenkins, J. (2015). Repositioning English and multilingualism in English as a Lingua Franca. Englishes In Practice , 2 (3), 49-85. Web.

Knapp, K. (2015). English as an international lingua franca and the teaching of intercultural communication. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca , 4 (1), 173 – 189. Web.

Yao, C., Garcia, C., & Collins, C. (2019). English as lingua franca: Exploring the challenges and opportunities of English language on Vietnamese graduate student learning. Journal for the Study of Postsecondary and Tertiary Education , 4 , 209-225. Web.

The Nature of Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching
Second Language Learning Theories
American College Student: Learning a Second Language
“English Is Not Normal”: Article Summary and Reflection
Reasons for Studiyng Chinese Right Now
Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching
English Language Learners' Assessment Types
"Intertextuality and the Discourse Community" Analysis
"Invention as a Social Act" Analysis
Richard Straub: Really Responding to Other Students' Writing
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, July 6). English as a Lingua Franca and Its Implications. https://ivypanda.com/essays/english-as-a-lingua-franca-and-its-implications/

"English as a Lingua Franca and Its Implications." IvyPanda , 6 July 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/english-as-a-lingua-franca-and-its-implications/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'English as a Lingua Franca and Its Implications'. 6 July.

IvyPanda . 2021. "English as a Lingua Franca and Its Implications." July 6, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/english-as-a-lingua-franca-and-its-implications/.

1. IvyPanda . "English as a Lingua Franca and Its Implications." July 6, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/english-as-a-lingua-franca-and-its-implications/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "English as a Lingua Franca and Its Implications." July 6, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/english-as-a-lingua-franca-and-its-implications/.

English as a Lingua Franca

Essay , 2018 , 7 Pages , Grade: A

Autor:in: Elena Agathokleous (Author)

eBook for only 5.99 € Download immediately. Incl. VAT Format: PDF – for all devices

The paper discusses English as a Lingua Franca. Lingua Franca (LF) is the term used when referring to a common language between interlocutors of different native languages, usually of also different ethnic and cultural backgrounds. Back in the 14nth century AC, the expansion of trade between people of different ethnicities around the Mediterranean area, led to the creation of a pidgin language, a language with simple grammar and lexicon, which made communication between traders possible. This pidgin language was a mixture of mostly Italian with additions from other languages like French, Spanish, Arabic, Greek and Turkish. Today the term Lingua Franca has expanded to include vehicular languages used around the world used amongst people with different origins and native languages. English is the current, most widespread language to be used as a lingua franca, raising issues of proper definition, effective methods of research, successful teaching and evaluation and respect for the global multicultural environment of the world today.

Depending on your browser, you might see this message in place of the failed image.

Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

Introduction: English as A Lingua Franca

Nordic Journal of English Studies

Related Papers

Yasemin Bayyurt

Sandra Mollin

Peter De Costa

World Englishes and culture in English as a foreign language (EFL) education

Servet Celik , Şakire Erbay Çetinkaya

Bethany Ryan

Lssa Saala Saalt Joint Annual Conference 2013

Brenda Spencer

Sostenis Pasang

ELF is described as English communication occurring between non-native English speakers who have different first languages (Kirkpatrick, 2011; Maley, 2009; Seidlhofer, 2005). Furthermore, Seidlhofer also argues that the notion of ELF can refer to English as an international language (2005). It is also stated elsewhere that the notion of ELF is proposed to recognize its distinctions from English as a native language (ENL)(Sewell, 2013). The claims that English functions as a global lingua franca cannot be denied regardless the support and disagreement over this theory (Seidlhofer, 2005). In this paper I elaborate the issues pertaining to ELF from the perspectives of learners and teachers.

ELT Journal

Gibson Ferguson

Academia Letters

Luis Guerra

Michele de Courcy

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Macabéa - Revista Eletrônica do Netlli

Masina Depperu

Thi Thuy Minh Nguyen

Kamal Sridhar

SMART M O V E S J O U R N A L IJELLH

Bel Abbes Neddar

Awad Alhassan

Journal of NELTA

Bal Krishna Sharma

A discussion on the meaning of native speaker and its characteristics.

Guillem Mas

nematullah shomoossi

Suryani Yanie

Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group

Willy Renandya

Susi Alemán

Aditi Dubey-Jhaveri

Panha Phatana

The Cultural and Intercultural Dimensions of English as a Lingua Franca

John O'Regan

Journal of English Language and Literature

Sweta Sinha

English in Education

Monika Mondor

hakan aydogan

Valerie Sartor

International Journal of Applied Linguistics

Barbara Seidlhofer

Elt Journal

World Englishes

S. N. Sridhar

Vitória Prochet

Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal

Raul Garcia

TamijeSelvane Durai

We're Hiring!
Help Center
Find new research papers in:
Health Sciences
Earth Sciences
Cognitive Science
Mathematics
Computer Science
Academia ©2024

COMMENTS

English as a Lingua Franca
The purpose of this paper is to provide a historical perspective on the establishment of English as a lingua franca and discuss the state of affairs today.
How the English Language Conquered the World
English accounts for 60 percent of world internet content and is the lingua franca of pop culture and the global economy. All 100 of the world's most influential science journals publish in English.
English as a Lingua Franca
English as a Global Language Essay. Global languages have been in existence for many years. They have been outweighing each other for top position as lingua francas. Latin and Greek for example, have once had their fair share as lingua francas. Latin, which played a key role in the domination and expansion of the Roman Empire, was spoken far ...
What Is English As A Lingua Franca?
Undoubtedly, English is a lingua Franca now and English should be learnt with the culture of the target language to a certain extent in order to learn English language.
English Language As A Lingua Franca English Language Essay
In lingua franca interactions it functions as a 'native-culture-free code'. This paper challenges the existence of the dichotomy with regard to the English language as it is used today. It argues that the insight that "language is far more than an instrument of communication" (Edwards 2010: 68) also holds true for lingua franca contexts.
English as a lingua franca
English as a lingua franca ( ELF) is the use of the English language "as a global means of inter-community communication" [ 1][ 2] and can be understood as "any use of English among speakers of different first languages for whom English is the communicative medium of choice and often the only option". [ 3][ 4] ELF is "defined functionally by its use in intercultural communication rather than ...
English as a Lingua Franca
What is English as a Lingua Franca? An introduction to the field Alessia Cogo Goldsmiths, University of London 'English', as a language, has for some time been seen as a global phenomenon and, therefore, as no longer defined by fixed territorial, cultural and social functions. At the same time, people using English around the world have been shaping it and adapting it to their contexts of ...
Barbara Seidlhofer: Understanding English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford
The opening chapter, titled 'What is this thing called English', argues that the emergence of English as global lingua franca, defined here as the use of English among speakers of different first languages, calls for a reconceptualization of English as a resource appropriated by bilingual users on their own terms and adapted to their own purposes. Here, Seidlhofer draws a distinction ...
English as a Lingua Franca
The phenomenon of English as a lingua franca (ELF), in other words English used among speakers who have different first language backgrounds, has existed since the British began to colonize parts of Asia and Africa in the late 16th century. However, it is only during the past thirty years that ELF has spread to the rest of the world, seen a ...
(PDF) English as a Lingua Franca: Attitude and Identity by JENKINS
Chapter 11 ("English as a Lingua Franca") discusses the role of English as an international lingua franca, and describes specifically the linguistic features and communicative strategies of English when used as a lingua franca by speakers from countries that comprise the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.
English as a lingua franca: Facts, benefits and costs
What are the costs? The paper first tries to identify the areas of life where English already serves as a lingua franca in the world and those where the language faces sharp competition. The discussion goes on to show that the future advance of English will depend heavily on the motives to learn the other major languages in the world as well.
English as a Lingua Franca: An Immanent Critique
Over the past 15 years or so there has developed a school of thought within English language education and applied linguistics globally which refers to the phenomenon and use of English as a lingua franca (ELF). The thinking of ELF movement researchers has placed their work at the centre of current debates about the form, function and ...
English as a Lingua Franca: concepts, use, and implications
Sowden's article raises a number of questions concerning English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) and criticizes it as a simplified and culturally neutral means of communication. In this response, I address the issues concerning the conceptualization and use of ELF as well as the implications for ELT. I provide up-to-date evidence of ELF research and ...
English as a lingua franca and linguistic justice: insights from
This paper focuses on English as a lingua franca, an area of research that has gone through several phases of reconceptualization over recent years. What has not changed despite the reframing is the insistence that ELF, with its focus on intelligibility rather than formal accuracy, is not to be judged on the basis of standard English norms. In response to these claims, researchers have argued ...
English as lingua franca . Or the sterilisation of scientific work
This essay discusses the impact of defining English as the lingua franca in academia, taking it as an additional barrier to achieving more equitable participation and a diversity of perspectives in scientific publications in the field of communication studies. Two aspects are particularly problematised. The first is the characterisation of a so ...
English as a lingua franca: Facts, benefits and costs
What are the costs? The paper first tries to identify the areas of life where English already serves as a lingua franca in the world and those where the language faces sharp competition.
English as a Lingua Franca and Its Implications Essay
English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) is a topic that is relatively well-covered by recently published literature. This phenomenon is rather widespread, especially in education, due to its ability to facilitate instruction (Yao, Garcia & Collins, 2019). However, it is also associated with multiple challenges.
Functions of idioms in English as lingua franca: An appraisal system
To this end, the corpus of English as a lingua franca in academic settings and the Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English were searched for idiom tokens through whole-phrase and keyword search. The idioms and their variations were classified based on the AS.
English as a Lingua Franca
English is the current, most widespread language to be used as a lingua franca, raising issues of proper definition, effective methods of research, successful teaching and evaluation and respect for the global multicultural environment of the world today.
PDF English as a lingua franca: an overview of communicative strategies
The present contribution discusses the importance of communicative strategies in introducing English as a Lingua Franca (ELF). A brief meta-analysis of the research conducted in the area of pragmatics reveals that one of the most salient elements of using ELF is the users' ability to conduct meaningful exchanges through various communicative strategies. The results of the case study show ...
Introduction: English as A Lingua Franca
English as a lingua franca is a child of the postmodern world: it observes no national boundaries and it has no definite centres. In many ways, it is part of a transcultural flow, with its speakers using it in their own ways, constructing their own identities and forming their own groupings.
English as a Lingua Franca
Speakers of English as a lingua franca (ELF) represent the largest contemporary group of English users around the world. Much empirical research into the phenomenon of ELF over the past 10 years or so has focused on identifying the linguistic regularities of their English in diverse contexts of use. More recently, research has demonstrated the ...

English as a Lingua Franca

English as a Lingua Franca: A Historical Perspective

ELF versus ENL and EFL

Features of ELF

English Language Teaching and ELF

English as a Lingua Franca and Culture

English as a Lingua Franca in Intercultural Communication

Issues in ELF and Teacher Education

Works Cited

How the English Language Conquered the World

What is English as a Lingua Franca? An introduction to the field

Accommodation and negotiation of meaning

Attitudes and orientations

Reconceptualizing “language” in ELF research

Identity – shifting between user and learner

Linguistics

How to Subscribe

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section English as a Lingua Franca

Related Articles Expand or collapse the "related articles" section about

Other Subject Areas

English as a Lingua Franca by Jennifer Jenkins , Will Baker LAST REVIEWED: 07 August 2023 LAST MODIFIED: 22 April 2020 DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199772810-0262

Sign in through your institution

English as a Lingua Franca: concepts, use, and implications

Personal account

Institutional access

IP based access

Society Members

Sign in through society site

Sign in using a personal account

Viewing your signed in accounts

Signed in but can't access content

Short-term Access

Email alerts

Affiliations

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

English as a lingua franca and linguistic justice: insights from exchange students’ experiences

1 Introduction

2 ELF: different views on an area of research

3 English as a lingua franca: exchange students’ experiences

3.2 Exchange students’ attitudes to ELF

4 Discussion

5 Conclusion

Supplementary Materials

Journal and Issue

English as a Lingua Franca and Its Implications Essay

Introduction

English as a Lingua Franca

Introduction: English as A Lingua Franca

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

COMMENTS