ArticlePDF Available

English as a Lingua Franca from the classroom to the classroom



English has served as a means of communication among speakers of different first languages (i.e. a lingua franca) for many centuries. Yet its present spread and use are so new that English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) in its current global manifestation did not exist as recently as 1946 when this Journal was launched. During the 20 years or so since it was first identified and empirically researched, however, ELF has grown from a minority interest within applied linguistics to a major field of study in its own right. And most recently, attention has turned to its implications for the ELT classroom. This article explores the development of research into ELF, examines some of the misconceptions about it that have been expressed (including in this very Journal), and considers its future in terms of ELT pedagogy.
English as a Lingua Franca from
the classroom to the classroom
Jennifer Jenkins
English has served as a means of communication among speakers of
different first languages (i.e. a lingua franca) for many centuries. Yet its
present spread and use are so new that English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) in
its current global manifestation did not exist as recently as 1946 when this
Journal was launched. During the 20 years or so since it was first identified
and empirically researched, however, ELF has grown from a minority interest
within applied linguistics to a major field of study in its own right. And most
recently, attention has turned to its implications for the ELT classroom. This
article explores the development of research into ELF, examines some of
the misconceptions about it that have been expressed (including in this very
Journal), and considers its future in terms of ELT pedagogy.
Introduction: from
the classroom . . .
It is fitting that an article on English as a Lingua Franca (henceforth,
ELF) should appear in this special issue of ELTJ, Keith Morrow’s final
one as Editor, since it was in the 1990s under his watch at ELTJ that, to
my knowledge, the first article on ELF (Jenkins 1998)was published in
an internationally read journal. At that time, ELF was virtually unknown
even in applied linguistics/sociolinguistics/World Englishes circles,
and for the sake of transparency, the better-known term ‘English as an
International Language’ (or EIL) tended to be used instead. The two
terms are, nevertheless, regarded by ELF researchers as synonymous,
and over the past decade, ELF has gained ascendance, whereas EIL has
fallen into minority use mainly because of its ambiguity.
But what, exactly, is ELF? In essence, as stated in the Abstract, it is a
means of communication between people who come from different
first language backgrounds. The website of the first and largest ELF
corpus, the Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English, or VOICE
(see, adds that ELF is ‘additionally acquired’.
This may seem obvious as far as non-native English speakers (NNESs)
are concerned, since English, by definition, is not their L1. But it is less
obvious in respect of native English speakers (NESs), because English,
by definition, is their L1 and, as will be discussed below, ELF is not a
language variety in the traditional sense of the term. The crucial point,
ELT Journal Volume 66/4 Special issue October 2012; doi:10.1093/elt/ccs040 486
© The Author 2012. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.
by guest on September 17, 2012 from
however, is that ELF (unlike EFL) is not the same phenomenon as English
as a Native Language (ENL), and therefore needs to be acquired by L1
English speakers too, albeit that their starting point, native English—
rather than some other language—makes the process lessarduous.
It follows that any user of English, be they from an L1 English country,
a post-colonial English country, or a country where English is neither
L1 nor official language, can be a user of ELF. It also follows that those
for whom English is the L1 do not determine the linguistic ‘agenda’
of ELF. Rather, NESs constitute a small minority of those who use
English for the purposes of intercultural communication, and the
NNES ELF-using majority therefore should not feel the need to defer
to them for appropriate English use (see Seidlhofer 2011: 2). By the
same token, NES ELF users need to be able to adjust (or accommodate)
their habitual modes of reception and production in order to be
more effective in ELF interactions. It is in this sense that ELF can be
described as ‘additionally acquired’ byNESs.
Despite the phenomenal increase in the use of ELF around the world,
the prevailing orientation in English language teaching and testing,
and ELT materials remains undoubtedly towards ENL, with correctness
and appropriateness still widely driven by NES use regardless of
learners’ current or potential communication contexts. For example,
typical ‘global’ ELT coursebooks, such as Headway and Oxford English
Grammar Course, provide classroom models for production based
largely or entirely on ENL (even if they may include recordings of
non-native Englishes in order to raise awareness of their existence),
whereas there are few examples indeed of coursebooks that adopt a
more ELF-oriented, or at least NNES-oriented, approach, for example
the New English File tentatively, and the Real Lives, Real Listening
series more explicitly. Thus, learners of English who are more likely to
use their English to communicate with other NNESs than with NESs,
more often than not with no NESs present, are still being encouraged
to aim for the kind of English that British or North American English
speakers use among themselves. And when students around the world
have completed their English language courses, it is this same native
English (again, typically British or North American) that is assessed in
the supposedly ‘international’ ELT examinations.
It was actually in the ELT classroom that Ifirst became aware of ELF
myself. For it was during the 1980s as an EFL teacher in London
trying to instil near-native English into groups of students from a
range of L1s (from mainland Europe, Latin America, and East Asia)
that Inoticed two things. Firstly, although they generally ‘learnt’
the rules they were taught, these students tended not to use them in
natural(istic) conversation. In other words, when they spoke freely
among themselves whether inside or outside the classroom, they often
used other forms that seemed to be influenced both by their individual
L1s and by factors relating to English itself (in so far as they all favoured
the same ‘incorrect’ form regardless of their particular L1). Secondly,
in most cases, their use of these alternative forms did not impede their
mutual understanding either during classroom discussions, role plays,
English as a Lingua Franca 487
by guest on September 17, 2012 from
simulations, and the like, or in social settings outside the classroom
such as the café or pub, and when it did affect understanding, the cause
most often seemed to be pronunciationrelated.
Despite the fact that successions of such EFL students were using
their own versions of English effectively among themselves inside and
outside my classes, Iknew from my teacher training on Cambridge
ESOL (then University of Cambridge Local Examination Syndicate)
courses that their non-nativelike forms were (and still are, as Iwrite
in 2012)characterized in the mainstream second language acquisition
(SLA) and ELT literature as errors: ‘interlanguage’ errors if classroom
learning is still in progress, and ‘fossilized’ errors if it has ended. An
‘interlanguage’ approach might (or might not) be relevant to EFL, where
students learn English primarily in order to be able to communicate
with NESs. But it seemed to me even then that it was irrelevant to the
kinds of lingua franca uses to which my student groups were putting
their English in their daily interactions with each other, or were likely to
put them in their future working and sociallives.
It was this observation that led me to conduct my first ELF research,
which focused mainly on the ways in which ELF users accommodated
to each other pronunciation-wise depending on the activity in progress.
Naïve though that early ELF pronunciation research (for example
Jenkins 2000)now seems by comparison with the more-nuanced ELF
research and conceptualizing that followed, the empirically supported
presentation of ELF as ‘an adaptable and creative use of language in its
own right’ rather than ‘a deviant or erroneous version of native English’
(Seidlhofer 2011: back cover) was entirely new. And together with
Seidlhofer’s (2001) call for descriptions of ELF, it provided an impetus
for the establishment of the ELF paradigm.
I turn now to consider briefly the key ELF areas of research and to chart
how understanding of ELF has developed and advanced over recent
years (though for a more detailed discussion of developments in ELF
research, see Jenkins with Cogo and Dewey 2011).
ELF: forms and
In describing my students’ apparent reluctance to use some of the
native English forms Ihad taught them, Ireferred to the influence
of both their various L1s (to which can be added any other languages
they spoke) and English itself. ELF research has subsequently begun to
demonstrate how these influences work. Starting with English itself,
one important finding has been that forms identified as ‘typical ELF
forms’ are often remarkably similar typologically to those that have
already developed in both native and post-colonial Englishes. That
is, ELF users, like native and post-colonial English users, seem to be
exploiting the potential of the English language in ways that are found
in any natural language development (see Seidlhofer 2011 on the
‘virtual’ English language), often as a means of regularization. This is
resulting in forms that differ from native English and are widely shared
among ELF speakers from many different L1s, who may use them even
488 Jennifer Jenkins
by guest on September 17, 2012 from
though—as in the case of my 1980s students—they know the native
English version and the rule from which it derives. But despite their
typological similarity to the kinds of forms found in native English,
these NNES-led innovations tend to be regarded in ELT as errors until/
unless they are eventually ‘sanctioned’ by NESuse.
To take a few examples, there is a tendency for uncountable nouns
to become countable across all three English-using groups (native,
post-colonial, and neither). The process simply seems to occur more
slowly in native English than in post-colonial Englishes (which already
use countable forms such as ‘furnitures’ and ‘staffs’ that would be
considered errors in native English), and even more slowly than in the
rest of the world (i.e. the places where English is neither the mother
tongue nor an official language), whose speakers make copious use
of forms such as ‘advices’, ‘feedbacks’, and ‘informations’. Other ELF
forms arising from regularization that have precedents in native and
post-colonial Englishes include zero marking of third person present
singular –s, as in ‘she think’; merging of ‘who’ and ‘which’ (as native
English already does in employing ‘that’ in defining relative clauses
for both people and things, see Cogo and Dewey 2012), for example
‘the book who . . . ’; and use of a multi-purpose question tag form such
as ‘isn’t it?’ or ‘no?’. To these lexico-grammatical items can be added,
pronunciation-wise, realizations of the phonemes /θ/ and /ð/, which
are produced by numerous NNESs from a range of L1s with either
[s] and [z] or [t] and [d], or a combination of the two sets, for example,
‘think’ pronounced [sɪŋk] or [tɪŋk], not [θɪŋk], and ‘then’ pronounced
[zen] or [den], not [ðen].
Turning to the second kind of influence, that of ELF speaker’s L1s/other
languages they speak, a large body of research into ELF pragmatics
demonstrates how ELF users draw on their bilingual or plurilingual
resources (their L1s as well as any other languages they speak in
addition to English) in order to project cultural identity, signal solidarity
with an interlocutor, and prioritize communicative efficiency over
correctness according toENL.
Much of the research into ELF pragmatics has focused on the use of
code switching and demonstrates that the prevailing ELT view of code
switching, that it is used primarily to fill gaps in lexical knowledge,
is often far from the truth. Klimpfinger (2009), for example, draws
on the VOICE corpus to demonstrate how code switching provides
multilingual ELF users with an additional linguistic tool and serves four
main functions:
specifying an addressee
introducing another idea
signalling culture
appealing for assistance
with only the fourth implying a language gap. It is, however, the
signalling culture function that has received most attention in ELF
pragmatics research. Cogo (in Cogo and Dewey op.cit.), shows, for
English as a Lingua Franca 489
by guest on September 17, 2012 from
instance, how a French ELF speaker uses the expression fleur bleue to
gloss the English idiom ‘cheesy’, despite the fact that his German and
Italian interlocutors have indicated that they already know the meaning
of ‘cheesy’. The German interlocutor then glosses the English idiom
with her native form kitschig. In both cases, the speakers are signalling
their cultural identity, while intelligibility problems are pre-empted and
the conversation enriched by their explanations of their L1forms.
As well as switching into their own L1, ELF speakers are found to
make use of their plurilingual resources to switch into the L1 of an
interlocutor in order to signal a plurilingual identity and/or promote
a sense of solidarity with the interlocutor by demonstrating ‘a special
bond to another language or culture’ (Klimpfinger op.cit.: 361). ELF
speakers are also shown to switch into languages that are not the L1
of anyone present. For example, Cogo (in Cogo and Dewey op.cit.)
demonstrates how a Japanese L1 speaker signals rapport with an
Italian L1 interlocutor by switching into Spanish to offer biscuits
(galletas), Spanish being close to Italian and known by both speakers. In
addition, as Baker (2009) points out, ELF users may eschew national
lingua-cultural associations altogether in favour of an identification that
is more multi-lingua-cultural. He demonstrates (p.581), for example,
how a Thai and French-Belgian negotiate different interpretations of
the word pétanque, arriving at a new one that transcends any national
Other research into ELF pragmatics focuses, like Jenkins’s early
pronunciation research, on the use of accommodation strategies and
ways in which ELF users adjust their speech to make it more like
that of their interlocutors so as to signal solidarity and/or promote
intelligibility. For example, Hülmbauer (2009) demonstrates the
strategy of accommodative dovetailing, according to which one
interlocutor knowingly repeats the ‘incorrect’ form another has
uttered, and the first speaker repeats it again. While this makes for
effective lingua franca communication, it would be seen, according to
traditional SLA/ELT, as lack of competence by the first speaker and its
reinforcement by the second. In a sense, then, it is the opposite of the
use of reformulation as a corrective device in EFL classrooms, whereby
the teacher may reformulate a learner’s ‘incorrect’ utterance regardless
of its communicative effectiveness, and the learner then repeats the
‘correct’, i.e. ENL, form.
ELF variability
As the above discussion of ELF pragmatics research findings
demonstrates, ELF communication by its nature entails a substantial
element of ‘online’ variability, to the extent that English speakers
from a highly diverse range of lingua-cultural backgrounds negotiate
and accommodate their English in situ. This means, in turn, that
ELF cannot be conceptualized as a language ‘variety’ (or even several
‘varieties’) in the traditional sense of the term. While it is indeed the
case that researchers have been able to identify forms that differ from
ENL and are frequently and systematically used by ELF speakers from
many different L1s, as well as others that are characteristic of ELF
speakers from individual L1s (in so far as there are distinctive features
490 Jennifer Jenkins
by guest on September 17, 2012 from
of, say, Chinese use of ELF, German use of ELF, etc.), this is not the
whole story. For even the earliest ELF research, for example Jenkins
(2000), had documented ways in which contextual factors led to
variation (in the latter case, phonological accommodation). And more
recent research has increasingly noted, and begun to account for, the
central role of these contextual factors in determining the ELF forms
that occur in any particular interaction.
ELF, thus, does not fit into existing frameworks, and it makes better
sense to approach it from a different perspective altogether, that of the
notion of ‘communities of practice’ (see Seidlhofer 2011: 87–8). Such
an approach is able to account for both ELF’s observed regularities
across speakers and its variability in the context of the specific, and
often very small, community’s interaction (for example a meeting of
an international group of physicists or environmentalists), as speakers
jointly develop a shared repertoire to suit their specific purposes on that
specific occasion. Or, as Hülmbauer (op.cit.: 325) puts it, ‘ELF speakers
with their individual backgrounds and resources contribute to a
situational resource pool which changes as speaker constellations change’
(her italics).
The problem for some working at the more traditional end of
ELT and SLA, and in World Englishes, seems to be a difficulty in
conceptualizing language except in relation to the nation state, each
with its (relatively) fixed, bounded, native language. In ELT and SLA,
this translates into the belief that only ENL, the English of NESs,
is a ‘proper’ English variety, with the main debate being whether
EFL learners should opt for a standard British or North American
(or, occasionally, Australian) version as their target model, and SLA
research focusing on how this native version can best be acquired. In
World Englishes, with its ‘varieties of English’ approach, according
to which the post-colonial nations each have their own relatively fixed
English variety (Indian English, Nigerian English, and so on), the issue
is slightly different, even though the conclusion is similar. That is,
the argument goes, English is not an official language used in daily
communication among the indigenous populations of the so-called
EFL countries and thus does not fit into the traditional World Englishes
varieties paradigm. It therefore ‘follows’ that English speakers from
countries such as Germany and Japan should be taught a native or
post-colonial variety of English. Somewhat ironically, then, the ELT
industry and the World Englishes paradigm are in agreement on ‘EFL’
speakers’ lack of right to their own English, if on littleelse.
In both cases, the position leads to misinterpretations of ELF. On
the one hand, as far as many ELT practitioners and mainstream SLA
researchers are concerned, ELF is simply a case of ‘anything goes’ and
constitutes linguistic anarchy to the extent that NNES ELF speakers
‘fail’ to defer to ENL. In addition, ELF may be described in the ELT
literature as a ‘reduced’ or ‘simplified’ version of English, whereas ELF
research findings demonstrate, on the contrary, that ELF is as rich as
any other English, including that of NESs. It is also claimed that ELF
researchers wish to impose ELF on all learners of English and remove
English as a Lingua Franca 491
by guest on September 17, 2012 from
from them the choice of which kind of English to learn rather than,
as is the case, provide a greater element of choice. Meanwhile, from
a World Englishes perspective, ELF is widely seen as a monolithic
English, a single global ELF ‘variety’, somewhat amusingly, the opposite
of ‘anything goes’. Of course, none of these accusations is true, as those
who make them would discover, were they to read the copious ELF
literature in this dynamic, fast-movingfield.
I would not for a moment want to suggest that ELTJ is particularly
guilty of publishing misinterpretations of ELF research, as this is by no
means true: several other well-known journals including, for example,
English Today and World Englishes are equally or more guilty in this
respect. However, as anyone reading my article is likely to have access
to other issues of ELTJ, Iwill mention a few instances where the kinds
of misinterpretation to which Irefer have appeared in thisJournal.
Unfortunately ELTJ’s 15-reference rule prevents me from giving specific
details as Ido not wish to waste my precious reference allowance on
such items. But if Imight ‘cheat’ a little, readers will find examples
of the kind of thing Imean by consulting the following recent issues
of ELTJ: 64/4, 65/4, and 66/1, the latter item being an astonishingly
misinformed ‘Point’ forming part of a ‘Point and counterpoint’.
Looking further back, the most misinformed article on ELF to appear in
ELTJ to date is that of Kuo (2006). To my mind, it is a pity that Kuo’s
gross misrepresentation of ELF is so frequently and uncritically cited.
By contrast, when presented to an ELF-informed audience (in a paper
at the 4th International Conference of ELF in Hong Kong 2011), her
arguments did not stand up at all to scrutiny.
Conclusion: . . . to
the classroom
And so we return to the classroom, although not in order for me to
provide specific pedagogic recommendations. For ELF researchers have
always been careful to point out that we do not believe it is our place
to tell teachers what to do, but that it is for ELT practitioners to decide
whether/to what extent ELF is relevant to their learners in their context.
ELF researchers have also always argued in favour of learner choice as
to which kind of English to aim for (a choice which, it has to be said,
often is not available in traditional EFL classrooms). All they ask is that
learners are presented with the sociolinguistic facts of the spread of
English around the world before they make their choice. Thus, although
both Jenkins (2007: 241)and Seidlhofer (2011: 196–8) make tentative
suggestions for incorporating some general ELF-oriented principles
into ELT as and when required, they do not see it as their role to
encroach any further on to teacher territory.
The process of introducing (or not introducing) ELF into ELT, as
Dewey (2012) observes, begins with teachers and therefore with teacher
education. He points out that although ELF research findings question
many long-held beliefs about what and how English should be taught
and tested, hitherto there has been little discussion of what this means
in practice for ELT professionals. And this has led to a feeling of unease
and insecurity among them, as tends to happen whenever existing
language standards or pedagogies are challenged (see Jenkins 2007).
492 Jennifer Jenkins
by guest on September 17, 2012 from
Dewey’s response (op.cit.) is to recommend working with teachers to
help them explore the possibilities of an ELF approach. He reports on
his own attempt to work collaboratively with teachers to do precisely
this, an attempt which, he reports, has so far proved fruitful.
Others, too, consider the pedagogic challenges raised by ELF research.
For instance, ELF is being researched in relation to learner motivation.
Kormos, Kiddle, and Csizér (2011) explore the English language learning
motivations of 518 Chilean learners. These researchers are interested
in the possibility that traditional models of motivation may not apply
now that English ‘has become an international language serving as a
lingua franca in a globalized world’, and that ‘[c]onsequently, a new
language-learning goal has emerged: international posture’ (p.496).
Crucially, they find ‘the most important learning goal of the surveyed
students was related to the status of English as a lingua franca’ (p.513).
Other empirical research, such as that by Ranta (2010), reveals that
younger NNESs are developing an awareness that the English they are
taught in their ELT classrooms, both the idealizations and the ‘real’
native English, often does not reflect the kind of English they need to
communicate in their intercultural livesoutside.
Given the growing awareness of the need for pedagogical issues to be
addressed in relation to ELF, it is timely that the organizers of the 5th
International Conference of ELF (Istanbul 2012)have made it their
conference theme. Although at the time of writing, the conference
has not yet taken place, it is evident from the programme (see http:// that there will be plentiful discussion of practical as
well as theoretical issues. This may lead, in turn, to the development
of ELF-oriented materials, which, admittedly, have been thin on the
ground to date. In fact, the only book for teachers currently devoted to
an ELF approach is Walker’s (2010) handbook on teaching ELF-oriented
pronunciation, whereas as mentioned earlier, there are very few
ELF-oriented coursebooks indeed for teachers to use in their classrooms
with their students.
Meanwhile, there is as yet little evidence that the global examination
boards, such as Cambridge ESOL, IELTS, and TOEFL, are taking
account of ELF or are even willing to engage in debate with ELF
researchers. The 2012 Going Global conference (see http://ihe. which, like all the previous Going
Global conferences, was heavily sponsored by IELTS and TOEFL, is a
case in point. From the online programme, it appears to have had only
two talks on English language issues, one of which focused specifically
on ‘how to understand and use’ TOEFL scores. By contrast, my proposal
for a talk (‘Internationalizing English for the international university’),
which included a challenge to these kinds of examinations from an ELF
perspective, was rejected.
On the other hand, the negative orientations of testers and ELT/SLA
traditionalists are increasingly being countered by a growing receptivity
towards ELF, especially among younger ELF users and researchers.
This is witnessed, for example, by a notable growth in the number of
younger NNESs studying for PhDs in ELF and going on to publish
English as a Lingua Franca 493
by guest on September 17, 2012 from
in the field. To this can be added other positive signs such as the
establishment of ELF corpora in addition to VOICE, for example ELFA
(the corpus of ELF in Academic Settings) and ACE (the Asian Corpus
of English) among many others, and the launch of both the Journal of
ELF and a new book series, Developments in ELF (De Gruyter Mouton).
So it may not be too much longer before ELTJ is able to come full circle
and report on ELF in the ELT classroom.
Baker, W. 2009. ‘The cultures of English as a
lingua franca’. TESOL Quarterly 43/4: 567–92.
Cogo, A. and M. Dewey. 2012. Analysing English
as a Lingua Franca: ACorpus-driven Investigation.
London: Continuum.
Dewey, M. 2012. ‘Towards a post-normative
approach: learning the pedagogy of ELF’. Journal
of English as a Lingua Franca 1/1: 141–70.
Hülmbauer, C. 2009. ‘“We don’t take the right
way. We just take the way that we think you
will understand”—the shifting relationship
of correctness and effectiveness in ELF
communication’ in A. Mauranen and E. Ranta
(eds.). English as a Lingua Franca. Studies and
Findings. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge
Scholars Publishing.
Jenkins, J. 1998. ‘Which pronunciation norms
and models for English as an International
Language?’ ELT Journal 52/2: 119–26.
Jenkins, J. 2000. The Phonology of English as an
International Language. Oxford: Oxford University
Jenkins, J. 2007. English as a Lingua Franca: Attitude
and Identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jenkins, J. with A. Cogo and M. Dewey. 2011.
‘Review of developments in research into English as
a lingua franca’. Language Teaching 44/3: 281–315.
Klimpfinger, T. 2009. ‘“She’s mixing the two
languages together”—forms and functions of
code-switching in English as a lingua franca’ in
A. Mauranen and E. Ranta (eds.). English as a
Lingua Franca. Studies and Findings. Newcastle
upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Kormos J., T. Kiddle, and K. Csizér. 2011. ‘Systems
of goals, attitudes, and self-related beliefs in
second-language-learning motivation’. Applied
Linguistics 32/5: 495–516.
Kuo, I-C. 2006. ‘Addressing the issue of teaching
English as a lingua franca’. ELT Journal 60/3:
Ranta, E. 2010. ‘English in the real world vs.
English at school: Finnish English teachers’ and
students’ views’. International Journal of Applied
Linguistics 20/2: 156–77.
Seidlhofer, B. 2001. ‘Closing a conceptual gap:
the case for a description of English as a Lingua
Franca’. International Journal of Applied Linguistics
11/2: 133–58.
Seidlhofer, B. 2011. Understanding English as a
Lingua Franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Walker, R. 2010. Teaching the Pronunciation
of English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
The author
Jennifer Jenkins is Professor of Global Englishes,
Director of the Centre for Global Englishes at
the University of Southampton, and founding
Co-editor of the Journal of English as a Lingua
Franca. She has published numerous articles on
ELF along with two monographs, The Phonology
of English as an International Language (Oxford
University Press 2000)and English as a Lingua
Franca: Attitude and Identity (Oxford University
Press 2007), as well as a university coursebook,
World Englishes (second edition, Routledge
2009). She is currently writing a book on ELF
and English language policy in higher education
(Routledge 2013).
494 Jennifer Jenkins
by guest on September 17, 2012 from
... English instruction that prefers NS norms may not sufficiently prepare learners to use the English language with individuals from various English-speaking backgrounds [3]. However, English teaching practices, testing, and teaching materials remain to target NS norms [4], which is the reason why NS norms continued to have a strong effect on English learners [5]. The notion of ELF has been examined in the field of English language teaching (ELT). ...
Full-text available
This study examines English textbooks used in Taiwanese junior high schools (Grades 7 to 9) from the perspective of English as a lingua franca (ELF) and with regard to the national English curriculum. In this study, English textbooks that are currently used in junior high schools in Taiwan were examined based on an analysis framework featuring ELF attributes. These ELF attributes were proposed and enumerated in light of previous studies on the analysis of English textbooks and the national English curriculum. This study revealed that the examined textbooks partially reflected an ELF perspective with the manifestation of the ELF attributes to a different extent. Moreover, it demonstrated that the ELF-oriented content was displayed in various forms of activities and exercises (e.g., listening, reading, writing, and discussion) and that the subject matter of the units covered a wide range of topics. In light of the research results, the author provides suggestions for the design of ELF-oriented textbooks at the junior high school level, such as promoting learners’ awareness of ELF, encouraging the development of intercultural communication strategies in learners, considering learners’ experiences in the learning of English, and entailing meaningful learning of English for learners.
... Nonetheless, despite the "current dominance" (Levis, 2005, p.371) and "increasing recognition" (Pennington & Rogerson-Revell, 2019, p.133) of intelligibility as the goal of pronunciation teaching in academic research, "both the nativeness and intelligibility principles continue to influence pronunciation in the language curriculum" (Levis, ibid), and research shows that in course syllabi and classroom practices, many L2 English teachers and learners still strongly adhere to L1 English pronunciation norms and prefer to aim for nativeness or native-likeness (e.g. Gao, 2015;Jarosz, 2019;Jenkins, 2005Jenkins, , 2012Pennington & Rogerson-Revell, 2019;Scales et al., 2006;Walker, 2010;Wen, 2012). ...
Full-text available
Since the 1990s, the emphasis on intelligibility as a goal in pronunciation teaching rather than near-native or nativelike competence has been reinforced by the increasing use of English as a lingua franca. The insight of the intelligibility principle has greatly impressed researchers in China’s English education, but has “very limited and weak” impacts on English pronunciation teaching and learning in China. English education in China has been systematically conducted from schools to universities under the direction of national syllabi and curriculum standards issued by the Ministry of Education. Using the documentary research method, this paper, the first try of its kind, takes a historical look at China’s national syllabi and curriculum standards for schools issued after 1949, focusing on the conception of the nature and the role of pronunciation and pronunciation teaching, pronunciation goals, teacher’s role, as well as requirements or suggestions about what to teach and how to teach. By tracing the process of developments in pronunciation teaching notions and principles that were and/or are officially advocated in China, the paper reveals two important facts. First, the English national syllabi and curriculum standards have encompassed both the nativeness principle and the intelligibility principle, though implicitly giving dominance to the former one, which in part accounts for the favor for the nativeness principle in formal English education, especially in schools, in China. Second, with the notion of English as a lingua franca adopted in the syllabi and curriculum standards, the intelligibility principle has been gaining more and more weight. Consequently, by elaborating that the two principles are by nature not incompatible, it is proposed that the current curriculum standards go further to take balanced attitudes towards the two principles so as to lead Chinese English teachers and students to set more realistic and instrumental-pragmatic pronunciation goals in line with varying English learning purposes. The findings and the proposal could be adopted by teachers and learners so as to change the school reality and may shed light on future relevant revisions of the current national English curriculum standards, teaching material development, teacher training, and pronunciation teaching methodology research.
... This indicates the importance of language skills in making students master English language learning. Jenkins [68] asserts that English teaching and learning thrive when students are able to proficiently practice language skills inside and outside the classroom. Thus, the current study supports Jenkins' view about the important role of the teacher in helping students master language areas. ...
Full-text available
Teacher professional development (PD) is a continuous process through which teachers try to improve their pedagogical skills. Educational initiatives (a form of expert mentoring) represent one type of teacher PD practices. This study investigated the role of educational initiatives in improving language teacher professional growth from supervisors’ perspectives. The study focused on engaging a group of high school English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) teachers in Egypt in a set of educational initiative activities with their mentors, and then asking the mentors to evaluate the teachers' PD objectives, pedagogical practice gains, and attitudes. Ten supervisors who acted as mentors and 30 English language teachers took part in the study. Using a quantitative observation sheet, the study measured the mentors' perceptions of the trainee teachers' target objectives from educational initiatives, their rating of the teachers' pedagogical performance after engaging them with these initiatives, and their evaluation of the teachers' attitudes towards their professional development. The study found differences in the mentors' perceived ratings of the teachers' professional interests, growth, and attitudes. Discrepancies were also noted within the observed aspects in the same dimension. The author discusses these results and provides some practical recommendations and suggestions for future research.
... English as a lingua franca had expanded its role and functions into non-native speakers' (EFL) life (Jenkins, 2020). To put it differently, the approval of English as a language also had grown largely globally (Majanen: 2008). ...
Full-text available
The aims of this study were to discover if the learners of English of UM English Education Department of UM Parepare experience problems in speaking English and if so, why, and what type of attitudes they have towards accents and how these attitudes influence their English speech. This study is a qualitative phenomenological research based on the linguistic phenomenon among Indonesian English learners derived from their learning experiences. The phenomenon in question shows that most Indonesian learners have learned English for 6+ years but still unable to communicate. Most of those learners complained about the ‘obsolete’ method of teaching which has been too focused on grammatical learning and fewer interests on the practical use of English itself. The data was taken from document reviews, in-depth interviews, and direct observation given to the importance of spoken English learning attitude. The findings obtained through interview and question on three level of scholars (fresh year students, sophomores and more senior students, and alumnus). The result of this study showed that most of students get difficult to speak English because of avoiding mistakes and error. This attitude of making mistake was derived from the social pressure situation in pronouncing their accent through the English words. Another finding is, there are many of students have some negative attitudes towards the Indonesian accent in pronouncing English words.
... There are many authors who support the use of a lingua franca model in English language teaching, namely, Kirkpatrick (2007), Andrews (2008), Cook (1999), Jenkins (2000Jenkins ( , 2002Jenkins ( , 2006Jenkins ( , 2012, Sifakis and Bayyurt (2017), or Tomlinson (2006:130), among others. This last author expresses the need for a curriculum and methodology to teach English as an international language and shares with Jenkins (2006: 174) the wish that testing is also present in ELF teaching. ...
Full-text available
English is no longer the language belonging to about 375 million native English speakers. It is also an international language spoken by more than a billion of second and foreign language users. The models used to teach English as a second or foreign language have traditionally been mainly native speaker models. However, in the last few years, a large number of researchers have suggested integrating a model of English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) into the English classroom because it has several benefits for international communication, since international intelligibility is now the main goal. In this work, a research study has been carried out to analyze how Spanish students of English (B2 level) value some of the main tenets of the ELF model, such as the importance of confidence, intelligibility and the dichotomy native vs. non-native accent while speaking the foreign language.
... Ellenkezőleg, a kétnyelvűek őrizzék meg saját nyelvi identitásukat, ezzel is gazdagítva, sőt bizonyos értelemben megújítva az angol nyelvet. Ami pedig az anyanyelvűeket illeti, ők igyekezzenek minél jobban alkalmazkodni az ELF-használók igényeihez, közlendőjüket ne tűzdeljék tele idiómákkal, szlenggel, ritka nyelvi fordulatokkal és utalásokkal (Jenkins 2012). ...
Full-text available
Tanulmányom az angol nyelv és a globalizáció összefüggéseit boncolgatja, kiemelve, hogy az angol világnyelvi primátusát az angol anyanyelvű államok, mindenekelőtt az Egyesült Államok gazdasági és politikai ereje alapozta meg. Ennek ára azonban az, hogy az anyanyelvű beszélők ma már nem egyedüli birtokosai a nyelvnek, nem ők határozzák meg a beszédhasználati szabályokat. A kommunikáció sikere a pragmatikai hatékonyságon múlik, amit a beszélők rendelkezésére álló nyelvek váltogatásával is el lehet érni. Ez az új szemlélet a nyelvoktatás módszertanára is jelentős hatással lehet a jövőben. Külön fejezetben tárgyalom az idegennyelv-oktatás magyarországi helyzetét, végül felvázolom az angol jövőjével kapcsolatos forgatókönyveket, a többnyelvűség irányába ható tényezőket.
... Especially, there are some examinations (e.g. TOEFL and IELTS) which are supposed to be 'international' (Jenkins, 2012) but they are not in terms of representing and acknowledging linguistic diversity in their assessment rubrics and descriptors. ...
Full-text available
This paper aims at describing the usage of and ideological backgrounds behind three terms: Global English (GE), World Englishes (WE), and English as a Lingua Franca (ELF). These terms may seem similar or they may even be used interchangeably. In order to analyze the domains of their usages, and find out the underlying ideologies, various studies were reviewed. Each term is described separately along with its ideological background. After that, a synthesis is put forward under the heading of which similarities and differences among the three terms have been noted. The study reveals major ideological differences among GE, WE and ELF. They also exhibit different levels of hegemony too.
Due to colonization and globalization, the English language has spread around the globe like no other language before. A multitude of different varieties of English have emerged, non-native speakers clearly outnumber native speakers these days, while, at the same time, new native speakers of English are emerging in formerly second language contexts. Despite these developments, the focus of English language teaching (ELT) is still largely geared towards the two standard varieties British and American English as the only truly acceptable teaching norms. The present chapter sets out to illustrate why introducing different varieties of English and rethinking our old native speaker stereotypes are of crucial importance for successful and up-to-date ELT. We further argue that corpus linguistic methods are well-suited to introduce linguistic variation and the connection between language and culture, as ELT has long been geared towards raising intercultural awareness. We finally provide some examples of potential practical application of authentic corpus material to achieve such aims.
Full-text available
The global expansion of English has raised a call for English-language teachers around the world to frame English as an international language (EIL). This is especially true in rapidly developing contexts such as China, where teachers are expected to prepare learners to engage effectively in intercultural interactions. As such, the present study sought to investigate pre-service English teachers' beliefs about EIL and the impact of teacher education on informing these beliefs. Data were gathered from an online EIL perceptions questionnaire delivered to 75 Chinese pre-service English teachers who, at the time, were studying for an MA TESOL degree in the UK. Follow-up, semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight participants. The findings indicate that although the participants generally held positive beliefs about EIL, and the MA programme had played a critical role in favourably influencing these beliefs, they were misaligned with the participants' imagined implementation in their future teaching practices. This misalignment suggests that the transition from theory to practice is often complex and is likely an issue that many teachers in similar situations experience. Thus, suggestions for future research are proposed alongside practical ideas for educators regarding how to integrate EIL into their teaching.
Full-text available
In the present study, we surveyed the English language-learning motivations of 518 secondary school students, university students, and young adult learners in the capital of Chile, Santiago. We applied multi-group structural-equation modeling to analyze how language-learning goals, attitudes, self-related beliefs, and parental encouragement interact in shaping motivated behavior and to investigate age- and group-related differences in the internal structure of language-learning motivation. We compared our findings with previous studies using similar instruments in different settings, and based on our findings, we proposed a new interactive model of language-learning motivation, which consists of goal systems, attitudes, self-efficacy beliefs, and future self-guides.
Full-text available
The cultural dimension of foreign and second language use and teaching has risen in prominence since the 1980s. More recently there has been much interest in and debate concerning the use of English as a lingua franca (ELF). However, there has been little empirical investigation into what communication through ELF might mean for an understanding of the relationships between languages and cultures. This article reports on a qualitative study investigating seven users of English in a higher education setting in Thailand engaged in intercultural communication. Analysis of these examples of intercultural communication, together with the participants' metadiscussions of culture, revealed cultural frames of reference perceived of and made use of in a hybrid, mixed, and liminal manner, drawing on and moving between global, national, local, and individual orientations. Although the limited number of instances reported means that further research is needed to confidently make generalisations, it is suggested that cultural forms, practices, and frames of reference through ELF may be viewed not as a priori defined categories, but as adaptive and emergent resources which are negotiated and context dependent. Therefore, ELF needs to move beyond the traditionally conceived target language—target culture relationship to incorporate an awareness of dynamic hybrid cultures and the skills to successfully negotiate them.
Full-text available
From the perspective of the speakers themselves, this is the first book to explore attitudes towards ELF in general and ELF accents in particular, their effects on ELF speakers' identities, and ways in which the problems can be addressed in teacher education, English language testing, and ELT materials.
Full-text available
We begin by considering how the recent phenomenon of English as a Lingua Franca (henceforth ELF) fits in with the older notion of lingua francas in general as well as with older versions of ELF. We then explore the beginnings of ELF in its modern manifestation, including the earliest ELF research, and tackle the thorny issue of defining ELF. After discussing the main locations and domains in which ELF research has been carried out to date, we move on to examining research into three linguistic levels, lexicogrammar, phonology and pragmatics, concluding with a discussion of very recent findings revealing ELF's linguistic fluidity. Next, we discuss research into two domains where ELF has proved especially prevalent: business English and academic English. This is followed by a consideration of ELF as a globalized and globalizing practice. We end the article by exploring the implications of ELF research for ELF-oriented English teaching and the role that attitudes are likely to play in this. We conclude that while the relaxed attitudes towards ELF of younger people are promising, strong resistance is still felt by many others, and that the major challenge remains in convincing the examination boards that they should take account of ELF.
This chapter discusses three major issues in the teaching of English pronunciation: Why, What, and How. As the world evolves into a global village, the need for English to function as a lingua franca is ever increasing. Thus, the goals of teaching English pronunciation have become manifold. The traditional aim of acquiring one “standard” pronunciation will not suffice. Learners nowadays have to learn to communicate with English speakers from different varieties: British, American, Australian, Indian, etc. This chapter will first argue why, more than ever before, pronunciation plays a major role in second language learning. It then outlines key components of English pronunciation that deserve instructional attention. These include segmental as well as suprasegmental features of speech that research has shown to be important in cross-cultural communications among bilingual or multilingual speakers of English in the world today. The last part will explore a number of pedagogical options for teaching pronunciation and will focus on the teaching of pronunciation features that will enable our L2 learners to communicate comfortably in diverse international settings. The use of online resources for exposing L2 learners to the many varieties of spoken English will also be explored as a viable pedagogical option in L2 classrooms.
There have been considerable recent demographic shifts in the use of English worldwide. English is now undoubtedly(and particularly) an international lingua franca, a lingua mundi. The sociolinguistic reality of English language use worldwide, and its implications, continue to be hotly contested. Plenty of research has questioned, for example, the ownership of English, but less attention has been paid to the linguistic consequences of the escalating role English plays. This is one of the first books to provide a detailed and comprehensive account of recent empirical findings in the field of English as a lingua franca (ELF). Dewey and Cogo analyze and interpret their own large corpus of naturally occurring spoken interactions and focus on identifying innovative developments in the pragmatics and lexicogrammar of speakers engaged in ELF talk. Dewey and Cogo's work makes a substantial contribution to the emerging field of empirical ELF studies. As well as this practical focus, this book looks at both pragmatic and lexicogrammatical issues and highlights their interrelationship. In showcasing the underlying processes involved in the emergence of innovative patterns of language use, this book will be of great interest to advanced students and academics working in applied linguistics, ELF, sociolinguistics, and corpus linguistics.
This paper considers the impact on pedagogy of ELF research and theory in relation to language teacher education and development. As has been much remarked, research in ELF has reached the point where established principles and sanctioned good practice in ELT (English Language Teaching) require substantial reassessment. Empirical work and theoretical discussions pose profound questions to the ELT profession, with major implications for common beliefs and assumptions about all manner of concerns, especially the language syllabus, teaching materials, and language assessment. Yet, as we have also seen, any discussion of major change in pedagogy tends to provoke controversy and unease among practitioners. There has thus far been relatively little indepth exploration of what teachers might do to incorporate an ELF perspective in practice. Modifying the curriculum or materials in response to ELF requires fundamental rethinking and (re)training in approaches to teaching. This paper reports ongoing attempts to engage and work collaboratively with ELF‐aware teachers to re‐examine current methodology and practice in context‐ relevant ways. Only by working with teachers can we properly explore the feasibility of incorporating an ELF perspective in order to move beyond a norm‐driven approach.
The status of English as a lingua franca (ELF) has become an increasingly popular discourse in Applied Linguistics and current ELT. It has been suggested that native speakers and their Englishes have become relatively unimportant in international communication and that research interests should now fall on non-native speakers and their use of English. In this article, I will examine the conceptual and operational framework underpinning the case for a description of English as a lingua franca and address issues and problems that need to be taken into account if such a description is to be implemented in second language pedagogy. I will argue that a native-speaker model could serve as a complete and convenient starting point and it is up to the TESOL professionals and the learners in each context to decide to what extent they want to approximate to that model.