16.3223, Review: Applied Ling/Socioling: Lin & Martin (2005)

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-16-3223. Tue Nov 08 2005. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.

Subject: 16.3223, Review: Applied Ling/Socioling: Lin & Martin (2005)

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry at linguistlist.org>
 
Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org) 
        Sheila Dooley, U of Arizona  
        Terry Langendoen, U of Arizona  

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, Wayne
State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.

Editor for this issue: Lindsay Butler <lindsay at linguistlist.org>
================================================================  

What follows is a review or discussion note contributed to our 
Book Discussion Forum. We expect discussions to be informal and 
interactive; and the author of the book discussed is cordially 
invited to join in. If you are interested in leading a book 
discussion, look for books announced on LINGUIST as "available 
for review." Then contact Sheila Dooley at dooley at linguistlist.org. 

===========================Directory==============================  

1)
Date: 08-Nov-2005
From: Nkonko Kamwangamalu < nkamwangamalu at Howard.edu >
Subject: Decolonisation, Globalisation 

	
-------------------------Message 1 ---------------------------------- 
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 14:59:11
From: Nkonko Kamwangamalu < nkamwangamalu at Howard.edu >
Subject: Decolonisation, Globalisation 
 

EDITORS: Lin, Angel M. Y.; Martin, Peter W.
TITLE: Decolonization, Globalization
SUBTITLE: Language-in-Education Policy and Practice
SERIES: New Perspectives on Language & Education
PUBLISHER: Multilingual Matters
YEAR: 2005
Announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/16/16-2092.html

Nkonko M. Kamwangamalu, Department of English, Howard 
University, Washington, DC

INTRODUCTION

Decolonization, Globalization: Language-in-Education Policy and 
Practice is an edited collection of papers aimed not only at presenting 
regional reports on language policy and practice in postcolonial 
contexts, but also at "theorizing and problematizing issues in these 
contexts.." (p.1) The volume seeks to explain how postcolonial 
formations, both social, cultural, economic and educational, collude 
with new forces of globalization and global capitalism to perpetuate 
educational, social and material inequalities in postcolonial contexts. 
As the editors put it, what distinguishes this volume from similar 
anthologies on language policies and practices in postcolonial 
societies is that it attempts to "link old colonization processes with new 
globalization processes, seeing the latter as in many ways a 
continuation of the former and yet not in a simple binary imperialism-
resistance logic, but in new, complex ways that also offer new 
opportunities of collusion and interpenetration, hybridization and 
postcolonial reinvention, ways that go beyond the essentialist, 
nationalist, national identity and 'two cultures' politics that defined 
earlier phases of decolonization, nationalism... in many postcolonial 
societies" (p. 2). Noting that the project of decolonization that has 
been going on in the post-colonies is now being replaced by another 
project, that of globalization, the editors call for "institutional changes 
that ... will allow people who, due to family habitus, excel more in local 
than global languages [such as English] to have a chance for socio-
economic mobility" (p.12). The debate around the consequences of 
globalization, the papers in this volume argue, must move from mere 
critical deconstruction paradigm, one that focuses on a criticism of 
existing language policies and practices, to a critical construction 
paradigm and look into the nitty-gritty of the everyday realities of 
students and teachers to come up with constructive suggestions for 
policy and practice alternatives. (p. 13)

SUMMARY

The collection, edited by Angel M.Y. Lin and Peter W. Martin, consists 
of 12 chapters including a foreword by Luke Alan and an afterword by 
Suresh Canagarajah. The introductory chapter, titled "From a critical 
deconstruction paradigm to a critical construction paradigm: An 
introduction to decolonization, globalization and language-in-
education policy and practice" (pp. 1-20), is written by the editors 
themselves and seems to be designed to provide a critical overview of 
all the chapters that make up the collection. Highlighted in this chapter 
is the role that English plays in encounters between the West and 
postcolonial societies. English is seen as an indispensable resource 
and linguistic capital which many postcolonial peoples and 
governments seek for themselves and their younger generations, ... [it 
is] the most important language for socioeconomic advancement and 
for access to higher professional education and to ..knowledge-
intensive job market (p. 3), [it is] the medium that drives the shift from 
the project of decolonization to that of globalization in postcolonial 
societies, and is one that ruling multilingual elite use to exert internal 
colonialism and produce subaltern identities in these societies. 

In the chapter "Nation-building in a globalized world: language choice 
and education in India", E. Annamalai addresses the very theme of the 
shift in language policy and practice from decolonization to 
globalization in postcolonial societies, with a focus on the role of 
English in education in the Indian subcontinent. He describes how 
India has addressed the tension between the need for nation-building, 
which requires replacing English with local languages, and that for 
developing skills and knowledge for an industrial economy, which 
requires the retention of English. In response to this conflict India has 
given a statutory recognition and elevation of Indian languages as the 
medium in the domains of power such as public administration, law 
and education, but in practice it has delayed their actual use until they 
become ready through internal development to perform the assigned 
roles. As is often the case, delayed implementation has been a recipe 
for policy failure. Since English is not equally accessible to all, it does 
not equalize opportunities but rather reproduces inequality. Annamalai 
argues that for language-in-education policies to succeed in India 
education must be decolonized. This entails questioning the colonial 
dichotomy between tradition and modernism, which says that local 
languages are good for keeping cultural traditions and practices and 
English for embracing modernity and material progress. He concludes 
that as long as education perpetuates this dichotomy, then in India 
nation-building will remain notional. (p.36)

Angel Lin offers -- in a very condensed and at times hard-to-process 
style (see, for instance, the 12-line sentences on pp. 48 & 51) -- trans-
disciplinary perspectives on language-in-education policy and practice 
in Hong Kong. In particular, Lin examines existing critical analyses of 
colonial and capitalist discourses (pp.41-45), of social stratification 
mechanisms, and of critical ethnographies (pp. 45-51) in the former 
British colony. Her discussion also considers two critical projects 
including one aimed at destabilizing the centre-periphery dichotomy in 
the process of academic knowledge production; and second, that of 
reflexively problematizing and revisioning the role of the academic 
researcher researching on language-in-education policies and 
practices in neo-colonies. She advocates the need to do away with 
the dichotomy of centre-periphery in academic disciplines, where the 
periphery applies the theories produced by the center. Instead, Lin 
argues for the concept of 'multiplying the centers' (p.39) and for 
multidirectional and multifarious ways in which theories, applications 
and knowledge are generated, appropriated, reappropriated, 
circulated and recirculated. Against this background, Lin believes that 
the 'centre-theory-periphery-application dichotomy in the academic 
disciplines can be reworked into more fruitful networks of hybrid types 
of studies which interpenetrate and interilluminate one another' (p.39). 
In conclusion Lin calls on researchers working in the periphery to 
develop self-reflexive, trans-disciplinary epistemological and political 
perspectives in a critical project of language-in-education policy and 
practice research that not only challenges the noted dichotomy but 
also goes beyond mere academic knowledge production and 
consumption (p. 39). 

Rani Rubdy's chapter (pp. 55-73) addresses the tensions and 
conflicts of interests in Singapore's language-in-education policies, 
especially the tensions and conflicts associated with the ideology of 
pragmatism, of multilingualism, and of meritocracy. The ideology 
of 'pragmatic multilingualism' is based on the principle of 
multiracialism, which means equal status and treatment for all races 
(Chinese, Malay, Indians, and Others) and their languages (Chinese, 
Malay, Tamil (and English?) and cultures. The author notes that 
despite this policy English has, because of its instrumental value, been 
the dominant language in the Island-State. It is explained that English 
dominates because it is perceived as ethnically neutral for it 
apparently does not favor any major community in the city-State. As 
such, the language serves two purposes: At the community level 
English is said to foster racial harmony and national unity. At the 
individual level the language is said to be available to all and so it 
provides equal opportunities for everyone irrespective of their ethnic 
background (p. 59). Rubdy does, however, question the 'social 
equalizer' role of English. This is because, according to the author, in 
Singapore's socio-economic structures there has always been an 
asymmetry in power relation between the English-speaking elite and 
the non-English-speaking masses, as can be inferred from the 
ideology of meritocracy. The latter, which is a euphemism for elitism or 
what Alastair Pennycook terms "the planned reproduction of socio-
economic inequality", dictates that the individual's rewards after school 
are closely linked to success in school (p. 66). 

The third ideology, that of multilingualism, is based on the idea that all 
four official languages of the city-state, English, Chinese, Malay and 
Tamil, be available as media of instruction [for their respective 
speakers]. It seems that the ultimate goal of this ideology has been to 
promote bilingual education apparently in any two of the four official 
languages. Rubdy observes that in reality, however, in Singapore 
bilingual education has come to be defined as 'proficiency in English 
and one other official language' (p. 61). This confirms further the 
asymmetry noted earlier in power relation between English and ethnic 
mother tongues in Singapore, where English is the medium for 
acquiring new knowledge and keeping the nation abreast with its 
economic and development objectives; and the mother tongues are 
for preserving old knowledge and ethnic cultures (p.62). In spite of this 
positive image of English, the language has also been seen as a 
carrier of undesirable Western values and a threat to Asian ones. To 
counter this, Rubdy remarks that in 1979 the Government of 
Singapore launched the Speak Mandarin Campaign. The unplanned 
effect of this Campaign has been the emergence of Singlish, 
Singapore's local colloquial English, as the symbol of intra-ethnic 
identity and cultural integration in Singapore (p.64). The emergence of 
Singlish has, expectedly, triggered another campaign, the Speak 
Good English Movement, whose goal has been to counter the ill 
effects of Singlish and re-emphasize the importance of Standard 
English (p.65). In the final section of the chapter Rubdy considers the 
social consequences of the Speak Mandarin Campaign and the Speak 
Good English Movement. These include an increase in power status 
for English and Mandarin at the expense of other languages, social 
stratification and divisiveness, and language shift.

The chapter by Peter Martin (pp. 74-97) examines classroom 
language practices in two rural schools in Malaysia. In particular, 
Martin discusses the discrepancies between official language policy - 
which recognizes Malay as the official language and requires that 
subjects such as mathematics and science be taught through the 
medium of English -- and what the author calls 'the voices of the local 
classroom participants' (p. 75). Drawing on data from lesson 
recordings Martin shows that, contrary to the official language policy, 
teachers and learners make use of codeswitching or 'safe' language 
practices involving English and Malay rather than the learners' primary 
languages, Se'ban and Kelabit. And yet, codeswitching is not 
recognized officially as a resource and is, rather, described as 'bad 
practice' (p. 88). The chapter concludes with a plea for the 
development and use of learners' primary languages in the classroom, 
alongside Malay and English.

Abdolmehdi Riazi describes the political-linguistic history of Iran, with a 
focus on four eras: the era of the Persian Empire (550BC-211AD), 
during which Old Persian was used as official language; the era of the 
Islamization of Iran along with the spread of the Arabic language and 
culture (7th century); the era of the Qajar dynasty (1794-1925), which 
was marked by the exposure of Iran to Western culture and language, 
especially English; and the era of the Islamic Revolution (1979-
present), which saw the return of Persian as the official language of 
the state. The article then concentrates on teaching methods 
employed for L1 (Persian) and L2 (Arabic or English) teaching; and 
highlights the impact of globalization, which uses English as medium, 
on the status of languages and language learning in Iran (p.113).

In their chapter Timothy Reagan and Sandra Schreffler report on an 
institutional language policy adopted by the Istanbul Technical 
University (ITU) in Turkey. They do so against the background of the 
dilemma often facing tertiary institutions in developing countries, 
whether to use a language of wider communication as the principal 
medium of instruction and, in so doing, succumb to linguistic 
imperialism; or to use a local language and, in this process, cut off 
students from the international scholarly community. Traditionally ITU 
has used Turkish as the medium of instruction. However and given the 
influence and power of English globally, the institution has adopted a 
language policy that requires students to complete one-third of their 
university courses in English. The policy is intended to ensure that 
students acquire competence in English to be able to compete in what 
has become an English-dominant world, while at the same time 
maintaining a scholarly and academic context in which the Turkish 
language remains viable. The later sections of the article describe the 
English language program designed to implement the adopted 
institutional language policy. Reagan and Schreffler remark, however, 
that "neither students nor their teachers ..[are aware] of the 
underlying rationale and justification for the program, [which is to 
challenge English linguistic imperialism,] nor do they seem to 
recognize the political and ideological forces that have driven the 
policy" (p.127).

The next three chapters discuss language-in-education policies and 
classroom practices in Africa, and are followed by an afterword by 
Suresh Canagarajah. Grace Bunyi's chapter (pp. 131-152) reports on 
the functions of codeswitching in a rural school in Kenya, among them 
improve communication between the teacher and the learners, 
enhance learners' understanding of lesson content, classroom 
management, etc. Bunyi apparently attributes codeswitching incidents 
to teachers' incompetence in the English language. She argues that 
this practice (CS) may be doing more harm than good to the learners, 
and calls for in-depth interpretive research that will explain how 
poverty interacts with the classroom practices she has described in 
this chapter (p. 148). 

In her chapter (pp. 153-172) Margie Probyn concentrates on 
language-in-education policy in post-apartheid South Africa, and 
describes the tension between the need to promote the indigenous 
languages and redress inequality on the one hand, and the 
instrumental need to acquire English for participation in the global 
affairs on the other. She shows that there is a mismatch between 
language policy and practice, and that teachers commonly switch from 
English to the learners' home language for a range of communicative, 
affective and management purposes, much as described by Bunyi with 
respect to the Kenyan context. Unlike Bunyi, however, Probyn argues 
for teachers' codeswitching skills to be recognized as legitimate 
classroom strategies, and to be woven into effective classroom 
practice for the strategic and coherent use of both the learners' home 
language and the official medium of instruction, here English (p.167). 
She concludes, however, that "even if CS is recognized, school 
communities are unlikely to be convinced of the value of indigenous 
languages since politically and economically these languages have a 
lower status vis-à-vis English" (p.168). 

In the next chapter Birgit Brock-Utne also documents the use of 
codeswitching in African classrooms, specifically in Tanzania and 
South Africa. Also, the author critically revisits the argument often 
advanced mostly by Western donors that Africa's multilingualism, 
among other factors, hinders the development and use of African 
languages in the educational system. Drawing on the work of Kwesi 
Prah and others on harmonization Brock-Utne argues, and I agree 
with her, that the argument against multilingualism and related factors 
does not hold. Prah's work shows convincingly that the number of 
languages spoken in Africa has, against the background of a painful 
colonial history and vested interests, been overstated. Also, there are 
countries in Africa, among them Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi, 
Botswana, to name a few, where indigenous languages are not used 
throughout the entire educational system despite the fact that the 
majority of the population in these countries speak one major 
indigenous language. Like Probyn, Brock-Une calls for the 
legitimization of codeswitching and for its use not only in teaching but 
also in students' examination answers.

In the final chapter Suresh Canagarajah addresses the theme that 
runs throughout all the chapters that make up this collection, namely, 
the tensions between language policies and practices in postcolonial 
communities. Canagarajah remarks that these tensions should be 
seen as normal rather than as unusual, for language planning 
involves constant negotiation among various stakeholders. He points 
out that the negotiation takes place against the background of two 
competing projects, the on-going project of decolonization on the one 
hand, and the emerging project of globalization resulting from the 
spread of English on the other. As a response to the tensions noted 
above, Canagarajah suggests the ecology model and the continua of 
biliteracy proposed by Nancy Hornberger (for details, see p. 198). 
Within this framework codeswitching is seen as a productive strategy, 
one that can contribute to the development of students' 
communicative and thinking skills. Drawing on Hornberger's work 
Canagarajah argues that irrespective of whether codeswitching is 
used in the classroom or not, it is important that nations give all 
languages not only a place in their curriculum but also a functional 
status in their social and economic life. Giving the former without the 
latter is a recipe for policy failure (p. 200).

EVALUATION

Decolonization, Globalization: Language-in-education policy and 
practice is a must-read for anyone who is interested in issues in 
language-in-education policies and practices in post-colonial societies. 
I have found the volume to be cohesive, resourceful and well-written, 
except for the complex, 12-line sentences that one comes across in 
some of the chapters. I strongly recommend the volume as required 
reading for graduate seminars in language policy and planning. In 
what follows I comment on the scope of the collection and on some of 
the objectives it set out to achieve. With regard to the scope, the 
collection provides a partial but critical survey of language-in-
education policies and practices in the neo-colonies. Aside from 
Reagan and Schreffler's contribution on Turkey and Riazi's chapter on 
Iran, the majority of the contributions in this collection focus on Asia 
and Africa. It is not clear why post-colonial societies in Latin America 
are not represented in this volume. In spite of its limited scope, the 
volume provides useful insights into language-policy failure in post-
colonial societies. 

The collection seems to have the following two objectives, among 
others: one, underscore the similarity between the failed project of 
decolonization and that of globalization and, two, urge language 
researchers to move away from "mere critical deconstruction 
paradigm" and concentrate on "a critical construction paradigm 
[to] ..come up with constructive suggestions for policy and practice 
alternatives" (p. 13). Virtually all the contributions in this volume have 
met the first objective but they have not, in my view, delivered on the 
second. Instead, much of the discussion in the volume offers a 
criticism of post-colonial language policies (see chapters by 
Annamalai, Lin, Rubdy and to a lesser extent Riazi) and a description 
of classroom practices such as codeswitching (see chapters by Bunyi, 
Probyn and Brock-Utne). These practices have been documented 
extensively over the past two decades (e.g., Martin-Jones 1988, 
Rubagumya 1994, Camilleri1996, Elridge 1996, Espiritu 1996, Lin 
1996, Butzkamm 1998, to list a few). It is not surprising, then, that 
current literature on these practices hardly breaks new grounds.

The legitimization or recognition of classroom practices such as 
codeswitching is not the answer to the problems facing indigenous 
languages and their speakers in post-colonial societies. As Probyn 
notes pointedly, "even if CS is recognized, school communities are 
unlikely to be convinced of the value of indigenous languages since 
politically and economically these languages have a lower status vis-à-
vis English" (p.168). Canagarajah makes a similar point when he says 
that "it is important that nations give all languages not only a place in 
their curriculum but also a functional status in their social and 
economic life" (p. 200). Put differently, what is missing in language 
policies in post-colonial societies is an awareness of the relationship 
between language and the economy. Until policy-makers officially 
recognize and establish this link, no progress can be made in attempts 
to promote indigenous languages in domains such as education. In 
this regard, I have found the Turkish case study of an institutional 
language policy discussed by Timothy Reagan and Sandra Schreffler 
most illuminating. The case shows convincingly that ex-colonial 
languages and indigenous languages can coexist, in a productive 
way, in post-colonial communities. The problem is that they hardly do, 
and competing forces ensure that they do not, as is evident from the 
tensions, described throughout this volume, between language 
policies and practices in these communities. 

REFERENCES

Butzkamm, W. 1998. Codeswitching in a bilingual history lesson: The 
mother tongue as a conversational lubricant. International Journal of 
Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 1, 2: 81-99.

Camilleri, A. 1996. Language values and identities: Codeswitching in 
secondary classrooms in Malta. Linguistics and Education 8: 85-103.

Elridge, J. 1996. Codeswitching in a Turkish secondary school. ELT 
Journal 50, 4: 303-311.

Espiritu, C. C. 1996. Codeswitching in the primary classroom: One 
response to the planned and the unplanned language environment in 
Brunei. A response. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural 
Development 1, 2-4: 145-148.

Lin, Amy. 1996. Bilingualism or linguistic segregation? Symbolic 
domination, resistance and codeswitching in Hong Kong schools. 
Linguistics and Education 8: 49-84.

Martin-Jones, M., ed. 1988. Codeswitching in the classroom: A review 
of research in bilingual education programs. Lancaster: Center for 
Language in Social Life Working Paper series No. 22.

Rubagumya, C. M., ed. 1994. Teaching and Researching Language in 
African classrooms. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 

ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Nkonko M. Kamwangamalu is a graduate of the University of Illinois at 
Urbana-Champaign. He teaches Linguistics and English at Howard 
University in Washington, D.C. His current research interests include 
codeswitching, multilingualism and language policy, language and 
identity, African Englishes, African American English, and African 
linguistics.





-----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-16-3223