Content uploaded by Ömer Gökhan Ulum
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ömer Gökhan Ulum on Apr 25, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics
icral2019
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS
ON RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
24-26 OCTOBER 2019
-
ler
Prof. Dr. Dinçay KÖKSAL
Prof. Dr. Arif SARIÇOBAN
11TH INTERNATIONAL
CONGRESS ON RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics
icral2019
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics - icral2019
FULLTEXT BOOK
Prof. Dr. Dinçay KÖKSAL
Prof. Dr. Arif SARIÇOBAN
Bu kitabın basım, yayın, satış hakları Uluslararası Eğitim Araştırmacıları Derneği’ne aittir. Anılan kuruluşun izni
alınmadan kitabın tümü ya da bölümleri mekanik, elektronik, fotokopi, manyetik ya da başka yöntemlerle
çoğaltılamaz, basılamaz, dağıtılamaz.
Yayıncı Sertifika No : 35376
ISBN : 978-605-82193-9-7
Kapak Tasarım : Dr. Öğretim Üyesi Deniz Kürşat
Baskı : Uluslararası Eğitim Araştırmacıları Derneği
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON
RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics - icral2019 Sayfa ii
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON RESEARCH IN
EDUCATION (ICRE)
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics -
icral2019
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON
RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics - icral2019 Sayfa iii
ADVISORY BOARD
Local Scientific Committee
Ahmet Beşe, Atatürk University
Ahmet Cuma, Selçuk University
Ali Temizel, Selçuk University
Ali Erarslan, Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University
Altan Alperen, Gazi University
Arif Sarıçoban, Selçuk University
Aylin Ünaldı, Boğaziçi University
Aysu Erden, Maltepe University
Aysun Yavuz, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University
Ayşe Akyel, Yeditepe University
Ayşe Gürel, Boğaziçi University
Ayşe Kıran, Hacettepe University
Ayten Genç, Hacettepe University
Ayşegül Amanda Yeşilbursa, Uludağ University
Bahar İşigüzel,, Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University
Belgin Aydın, TED University
Bengü Aksu Ataç, Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University
Cahit Bahadır Tosun, Konya Şelçuk University
Birsen Tütüniş, Kültür University
Burcu Varol Yıldız Teknik University
Cem Balçıkanlı, Gazi University
Çiler Hatipoğlu, Middle East Technical University
Deniz Ortaçtepe, Bilkent University
Derin Atay, Bahçeşehir University
Didar Akar, Boğaziçi University
Dilek İnal, Istanbul University
Dinçay Köksal, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University
Ece Zehir Topkaya, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University
Eda Üstünel, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University
Fatma Kalpaklı, Selçuk University
Esim Gürsoy, Uludağ University
Feryal Çubukçu, Dokuz Eylül University
Galip Baldıran, Selçuk University
Gonca Ekşi, Gazi University
Gölge Seferoğlu, Middle East Technical University
Gül Durmuşoğlu, Anadolu University
Gülcan Erçetin, Boğaziçi University
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON
RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics - icral2019 Sayfa iv
Gülden Tüm, Çukurova University
Gulru Yüksel, Yıldız Teknik University
Hacer Hande Uysal, HacettepeUniversity
Hasan Bedir, Çukurova University
Hayrettin Parlakyıldız, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University
Hüseyin Kandemir, Selçuk University
İlknur Keçik, Anadolu University, Turkey
İsmail Hakkı Erten, Hacettepe University
İsmail Hakkı Mirici, Near East University
Kadriye Dilek Akpınar, Gazi University
Kemal Sinan Özmen, Gazi University
Leyla Harputlu, Dokuz Eylül University
Leyla Martı, Boğaziçi University
Mehmet Demirezen, Ufuk University
Mehmet Hakkı Suçin, Gazi University
Mehmet Takkaç, Atatürk University
Meral Şeker. Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University
Muhammet Koçak, Gazi University
Murat Hişmanoğlu, Uşak University
Müge Tavıl, Gazi University
Mustafa Çakır, Anadolu University
Naci Kayaoğlu, Karadeniz Technical University
Nevide Akpınar Dellal, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University
Nhan Demiryay, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University
Nuriye BİLİK, Selçuk University
Nuray Alagözlü, Hacettepe University
Oğuz Cincioğlu, İstanbul University
Oya Tunaboylu, Süleyman Demirel University
Özlem Etuş, İstanbul University
Paşa Tevfik Cephe, Gazi University
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON
RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics - icral2019 Sayfa v
International Scientific Committee
David Block, ICREA/ Lleida University, Catalonia
David Lasagabaster, University of the Basque Country, Basque Country
Edgar W. Schneider, University of Regensburg, Germany
Enric Llurda, Lleida University, Catalonia
Eva Illes, Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary
Filomena Capucho, Portuguese Catholic University, Portugal
James F. D’Angelo, Chukyo University, Japan
Lili Cavalheiro, University of Lisbon, Portugal
Lucilla Lopriore, Roma Tré University, Italy
Isabel Peficanco Martin, Ateneo de Manila University, The Philippines
Marina Orsini-Jones, Coventry University, UK
Amy Alice Chastain, Emirates College for Advanced Education, UAE
Andy Kirkpatrick, Griffith University, Australia
Aya Matsuda, Arizona State Univesity, USA
Chritian Abello Contesse, The University of Seville, Spain
Myriam Pereiro, Université de Lorraine & CNRS, France
Natasha Tsantila, DEREE: The American College of Greece, Greece
Nicos Sifakis, Hellenic Open University, Greece
Nina Spada, Toronto University, Canada
Paola Vettorel, Verona University, Italy
Sávio Siqueira, Universidade Federal da Bahia, Brazil
Stephanie Schnurr, Warwick University, UK
Suzanne Hilgendorf, Simon Fraser University, Canada
Telma Gimenez, Universidade Estadual de Londrina, Brazil
Todor Shopov, St. Kliment Ohridski University, Bulgaria
Will Baker, Southampton University, UK
Ying Wang, China Three Gorges University, China
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON
RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics - icral2019 Sayfa vi
HONORARY PRESIDENT
Prof. Dr. Mustafa Şahin
Rector of SelçukUniversity,Turkey
Prof. Dr. Sedat Murat
Rector of Canakkale Onsekiz Mart
University,Turkey
Prof.Dr. Mahmut Atay
Dean of Faculty of Letters
PRESIDENTS OF CONGRESS
Prof. Dr. Arif Sarıçoban
Selçuk University, Turkey
Prof. Dr. Dinçay Köksal
Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University,
Turkey
ORGANIZING COMMITTEE
Prof. Dr. Gülsev Pakkan, Selçuk University
Prof. Dr. Muhlise Cosgun Ogeyik, Trakya University
Prof. Dr. Aysun Yavuz, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University
Prof. Dr. Hüseyin Kandemir, Selçuk University
Prof. Dr. Yılmaz Koç, Selçuk University
Prof. Dr. Galip Baldıran, Selçuk University
Prof. Dr. Ahmet Kâzım Ürün, Selçuk University
Prof. Dr. Ali Temizel, Selçuk University
Prof. Dr. Ahmet Cuma, Selçuk University
Prof. Dr. Ufuk Deniz Aşcı, Selçuk University
Prof. Dr. Nuriye Bilik, Selçuk University
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ece Topkaya, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Salim Razı, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Gonca Yangın Ekşi, Gazi University
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Kadriye Dilek Akpınar, Gazi University
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Hakan Demiröz, Cumhuriyet University
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Yusuf Demir, Necmettin Erbakan University
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Tolga Şen, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nihan Demiryay, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON
RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics - icral2019 Sayfa vii
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Özkan Kırmızı, Karabük University
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Hacer Hande Uysal, Hacettepe University
Assist. Prof. Dr. Burcu Varol, Yıldız Technical University
Assist. Prof. Dr. Galip Kartal, Necmettin Erbakan University
Assist. Prof. Dr. Hatice Okyar, Necmettin Erbakan University
Assist. Prof. Dr. Okan Haluk Akbay, Selçuk University
Conference Secretariat
Assist. Prof. Dr. Ali Erarslan
Asst. Prof. Dr. Ömer Gökhan Ulum
Research Assistant Dr. Hasan Çağlar Başol
Research Assistant Göktuğ Börtlü
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON
RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics - icral2019 Sayfa viii
İçindekiler
ADVISORY BOARD .................................................................................. iii
Local Scientific Committee ........................................................................... iii
FULLTEXT ................................................................................................ 1
ENGLISH TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS REGARDING THEIR PROFESSION ........................... 2
ENGLISH VERBAL BORROWINGS INTO BANGLA: STRATEGIES OF
ACCOMMODATION ......................................................................................................................... 4
AN EXPLORATION INTO MEDIATION IN HIGH SCHOOL EMI CLASSES ........................... 14
THE COLLAPSE OF INTELLECTUALISM IN EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION AND
THE RISE OF POST-TRUTH? ........................................................................................................ 27
REVISITING TRANSLATION IN EFL CLASSESS: PRE-SERVICE EFL TEACHERS’ VIEWS
AND RESEARCH FINDINGS ......................................................................................................... 33
YABANCI DİL OLARAK TÜRKÇE ÖĞRETİM KİTAPLARININ HUKUK TÜRKÇESİ
BAKIMINDAN İNCELENMESİ ..................................................................................................... 42
{-CA(k)}? IN COMMUNITY ADVERBS ...................................................................................... 54
CİNSEL İSTİSMAR SUÇLARINDA SANIK İFADE TUTANAKLARININ SÖYLEM
İNCELEMESİ: BİTLİS İLİ ÖRNEĞİ ............................................................................................... 62
STUDENT TEACHERS' FAMILIARITY WITH AND USE OF WEB 2.0 TOOLS AND MOBILE
APPLICATIONS: A TALE OF TWO STATE UNIVERSITIES ..................................................... 73
THE EFFECT OF GENRE-BASED READING INSTRUCTION ON CRITICAL LITERACY
SKILLS ............................................................................................................................................. 76
IS IT NECESSARY TO DISCOVER STUDENTS’ COGNITIVE ARCHITECTURE TO
OPTIMIZE ELP TEACHING AND LEARNING? .......................................................................... 85
RESEARCH IN ELT: TURKISH CONTEXT .................................................................................. 91
THE ROLE OF REFLECTION IN TODAY’S EFL CLASSROOM ............................................. 101
INTERACTIONAL FEEDBACK STRATEGIES: INSIGHTS FROM AN EFL CLASSROOM . 121
THE PERCEPTIONS OF INTERNET-BASED SIMULATIONS AMONG EFL LEARNERS ... 135
THE CONCEPTIONS OF UNDER-GRADUATE STUDENTS ON ENGLISH AS A LINGUA
FRANCA WITHIN AN IDEOLOGICAL CONTEXT ................................................................... 147
CULTURE AS REFLECTED THROUGH LANGUAGE IN DIRTY PRETTY THINGS .............. 154
LINGUISTIC STYLE IN PING/BING BY BECKETT .................................................................. 160
READERS’ EMOTIVE RESPONSES TO OBJECTIVE CORRELATIVE IMAGES IN EDGÜ’S
SHORT STORIES ........................................................................................................................... 171
FORMUN DÖNÜŞÜMÜ: ŞİİRE YAKLAŞAN HİKAYE VE “HAH” ......................................... 178
İKTİDAR SÖYLEMİNİN EDEBİYATA YANSIMA BİÇİMLERİ: “BERCİ KRİSTİN ÇÖP
MASALLARI” ÖRNEĞİ ................................................................................................................ 184
IMAGINARY OR IMAGED? SHAKESPEARE’S PLAYFUL REPRESENTATION OF
OBJECTS OF LOVE: A DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF FEELINGS AND EMOTIONS IN
SONNETS 17 AND 130 ................................................................................................................. 188
DİL VE CİNSELLİK BAĞLAMINDA DİLBİLGİSEL CİNSİYET .............................................. 193
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON
RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics - icral2019 Sayfa ix
UNFOLDING LANGUAGE LEARNING BELIEFS: A STUDY on STUDENT EFL TEACHERS202
REFLECTIONS OF PROSPECTIVE ELT TEACHERS ON RESOURCES IN LANGUAGE
EDUCATION .................................................................................................................................. 217
ENHANCING EFL TEACHERS’ KNOWLEDGE AND PRACTICES OF DYSLEXIA:
IMPACTS OF AN INSET PROGRAM IN TURKEY ................................................................... 222
MYTH or REALITY: EFFECTS OF L2 PRONUNCIATION TRAINING on PRE-SERVICE
TEACHERS’ COGNITION DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................. 236
AN INSIGHT INTO TEACHER SELF-EFFICACY AND METACOGNITION OF ENGLISH
LANGUAGE TEACHERS ............................................................................................................. 251
11TH INTERNATIONAL
CONGRESS ON RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
11
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON
RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics - icral2019 Sayfa 147
THE CONCEPTIONS OF UNDER-GRADUATE STUDENTS ON
ENGLISH AS A LINGUA FRANCA WITHIN AN IDEOLOGICAL
CONTEXT
Dinçay KÖKSAL
Prof. Dr., Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University
Yusuf KASİMİ
Asst. Prof. Dr., Düzce University
Ömer Gökhan ULUM
Asst. Prof. Dr., Mersin University
Abstract
English has come out as a global language in that it has soon been criticized as bringing
about language imperialism threatening the growth of various local languages. Much of our
involvement in globalization has to do with the change in our linguistic and cultural
preferences resulting from the basic and clear consequences of the current globalization
practices. The aim of this study is to discover the ideological dimension of English as a
global language within the sampling of a state university in Turkey. 20 undergraduate EFL
students participated in the study. Based upon a qualitative method of data collection, an
interview and a scenario technique were used in this study. With critical theory penetrating
into the conjuncture, new subsequent theories such as structuralism, post-structuralism
besides postmodernism forming unfamiliar discourses that were incorporated into the term
of critical theory get into humanities and social sciences all over the world. Post-
structuralism is appreciated for its attempts to propose a critical report of standardized
terms in the classical tenet, and it exploits such approaches like phenomenology, and
hermeneutics, as well as the linguistic shift which revises knowledge theories in language.
So, this study is based on a phenomenological research design in that it aims at detecting
the conceptions of EFL students on the cultural hegemony of English as a lingua franca.
Keywords: English as a lingua franca; cultural imperialism, ideology, hegemony
Introduction
The term ‘English as a lingua franca’ (ELF) has recently come up as a mean of
communication in English between people with different native languages (Seidlhofer, 2005).
As around only one out of every four English speakers in the world is a native English
speaker (Crystal, 2003), nearly all ELF relations occur among ‘non-native’ English speakers.
Though this does not hinder the interaction of native English speakers in ELF
communication, what is extraordinary about ELF is that, nearly in all situations, it is a
contact language among people who do not have a shared mother tongue or a national
culture, and for whom English is the opted foreign language (Firth, 1996). In a similar vein,
the lingua franca concept refers to any lingual medium of interaction among speakers of
diverse native languages for whom it is a foreign or second language (Samarin, 1987). Thus,
interaction through ELF refers to a contact between several diverse lingua-cultures in which
English is not the native language (House, 1999). ELF seems to possess a classical Marxist
notion of ideology as indicated by Cogo (2012) in that he claimed language perceptions are
strictly affected by ideology and identity. ELF also includes ideologies by indicating that
learners are the uninvolved static sufferers of powerful ideologies and this places ELF in a
risky state by revealing the confusing practices of ideology (Pennycook, 2001). Many
scholars implicitly or explicitly relate ideology with language. However, arguments on such a
relationship commonly fail to confirm that language is not basically and particularly a tool
for ideological practices but is formed and oriented by ideological practices. A big number of
prominent reports of the ideological and political exploitation of language, just like the
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON
RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics - icral2019 Sayfa 148
political language criticism of Chomsky, refer to ideological suggestions about how
languages perform, or should perform. The position of language in such reports should be
examined by political scholars rather than being considered as unproblematic (Cameron,
2006). Considering the issue from the mentioned points, this paper probes the conceptions
of EFL students on the cultural hegemony of English as a lingua franca.
Methodology
The aim of this study is to examine the ideological dimension of English as a global language
within the sampling of a state university in Turkey. 20 undergraduate EFL students
participated in the study. Based upon a qualitative method of data collection, an interview
and a scenario technique were employed in this study. To inquire the issue, the study
utilized heterophenomenology which is an approach to describe an explicitly third-person by
means of interpreting consciousness or experiences. In a similar vein, it is based on carrying
out scientific principles with an anthropological angle, associating the third-person's self-
reports with any possible evidence to perceive their cognitive state. Therefore, this
qualitative approach inquires the qualitatively diverse ways in which respondents have
experience of something or perceives something. For the semi-structured interview
questions, inter-coder reliability was conducted. For the coding reliability of the interview,
Kappa Coefficient for Inter-coder Reliability was calculated and it was found that the coding
process was highly reliable (K= .882, p<.001).
Findings and Results
This section includes the parts of the conducted interview. The sub-headings are
successively made up of Dimension of Ownership, Dimension of Usage, Dimension of Culture,
and Dimension of Proficiency. They are all composed of the emerging themes, frequencies
and percentages, and remarks of informants.
Dimension of Ownership
Table 1
English belongs to…
Item
f
%
Remarks
the whole world
18
90.00
Since it is a globally employed language, English
belongs to the whole world rather than specific
countries such as America and England.
England and America
2
10.00
Although it is said to be a global language,
English belongs to England and America.
Total
20
100.00
As can be observed from Table 1, majority of the informants (90.00%) state that English
language belongs to the whole world. On the other hand, a small number of respondents
(10.00%) suggest that English belongs to England and America.
Table 2
English as a global language…
Item
f
%
Remarks
common language
18
90.00
English is a global language as it is commonly
spoken all around the world.
easy to learn
2
10.00
English is a global language since it is very easy
to learn.
Total
20
100.00
Table 2 simply clarifies (90.00%) that English is a global language since it is commonly
utilized around the world. Further, a small number of participants (10.00%) also put
forward that it is a global language since it is easily learnt.
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON
RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics - icral2019 Sayfa 149
Table 3
The future of English…
Item
f
%
Remarks
positive
17
85.00
As a powerful universal language, English will
keep its status in the future as well.
negative
3
15.00
Other world powers such as China may end the
hegemony of English in the near future.
Total
20
100.00
It is easily understood from the table that majority of the students (85.00%) are positive
about the future of English as a global language. However, few informants (15.00%) declared
a contrary point of view.
Table 4
Monopoly of English culture…
Item
f
%
Remarks
no
18
90.00
Rather than belonging to only a particular culture,
English is composed of diverse cultures since it is
globally employed.
yes
2
10.00
English language belongs solely to English
culture.
Total
20
100.00
From Table 4, it is simply understood that most of the respondents (90.00%) are in the view
of multiculturalism. Yet, a small number of informants (10.00%) suppose that English
language belongs to just one culture.
Table 5
Standard English…
Item
f
%
Remarks
no
18
90.00
In such a globalized world with such a global
language, there is no standard English as far as I
know.
yes
2
10.00
I think British English is the standard English.
Total
20
100.00
One can easily understand from the table that a big number of participants (90.00%) put
forward that there is no standard English since it is globally used. However, a minority of
students (10.00%) declare a counter point of view.
Dimension of Usage
Table 6
Use of English while interacting with foreigners…
Item
f
%
Remarks
no
5
25.00
I also use Arabic, which is my mother tongue, as
well as German when speaking with foreigners.
yes
15
75.00
Since it is a global language, I use English when
speaking with foreigners.
Total
20
100.00
It is clearly observed from the table that majority of the informants (75.00%) use English
while communicating with foreigners. On the other hand, a small group of respondents
(25.00%) express an opposite argument.
Table 7
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON
RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics - icral2019 Sayfa 150
Interacting with expanding circle countries through English…
Item
f
%
Remarks
yes
20
100.00
Since it is a global language, Turkish people in
general try to use English when interacting with
people from such nations as Chinese, Japanese,
and Germans.
Total
20
100.00
It is clear from the table that Turkish people use English when interacting with foreigners.
In other words, all the respondents (100.00%) declare that Turkish people utilize English
when speaking with such nations as Chinese, Japanese, and Germans.
Dimension of Culture
Table 8
Knowledge of English and American cultures in order to understand English…
Item
f
%
Remarks
no
5
25.00
There is no relation between culture and language
learning.
yes
15
75.00
It is necessary to know both American and British
cultures in order to well understand English,
because culture and language are integrated.
Total
20
100.00
By looking at Table 8, one can clearly observe that most f the respondents (75.00%) are in
the view that knowledge of English and American cultures is required in order to
understand English. However, some participants (25.00%) declare that there is no relation
between culture and language learning.
Table 9
The effect of English on Turkish national identity…
Item
f
%
Remarks
no
13
65.00
We are firmly tied to our national identity. Thus,
English may give no harm to our national identity.
yes
7
35.00
We unconsciously lose our national identity if we
are much exposed to English.
Total
20
100.00
Table 9 clearly displays that most of the informants (65.00%) believe there is no effect of
English on Turkish national identity. Yet, some informants (35.00%) suggest people
unconsciously lose their national identity.
Dimension of Proficiency
Table 10
The function of English proficiency in understanding foreigners and their cultures…
Item
f
%
Remarks
functional
20
100.00
One who is proficient in English may easily
understand foreigners and their cultures.
Total
20
100.00
Table 10 refers to the function of English in understanding foreigners and their cultures. In
a similar vein, all the informants (100.00%) state that English proficiency is useful in
understanding foreigners.
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON
RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics - icral2019 Sayfa 151
Table 11
The function of using native like English…
Item
f
%
Remarks
unfunctional
4
20.00
It is not required to be native like in English as it
is enough to understand foreigners.
functional
16
80.00
It is highly beneficial to be a native like speaker
of English as it supplies great help in our work
life.
Total
20
100.00
As it is clearly observed from Table 11, most of the informants (80.00%) support the idea
that native like English is useful. On the other hand, a few students (20.00%) put forward
that it is not practical to be a native like speaker of English.
Table 12
The mean of knowing English well…
Item
f
%
Remarks
communication
10
50.00
To well know English means communicating
properly in English.
proficiency
5
25.00
To well know English means proficiency in
language skills, vocabulary, and culture.
native like English
2
10.00
To well know English means being a native like
speaker of English.
success in life
2
10.00
If you know English well, it means that you are
very successful in life.
grasping English culture
1
5.00
To well know English means grasping English
culture and integrating it with language.
Total
20
100.00
From the table, it is easily understood that half of the respondents (50.00%) refer to
communication when explaining the mean of knowing English well. Further, a few
respondents mention proficiency when referring to the mentioned issue. On the other hand,
such utterances as native like English (10.00%), success in life (10.00%), and grasping
English culture (5.00%) were expressed by only few informants.
Discussion
In their study, Young and Walsh (2010) explored the attitudes of ‘non-native English
speaking’ teachers about the utility and convenience of varieties such as English as an
International Language (EIL) and English as a Lingua Franca (ELF), compared with native
speaker varieties. Thus, they referred to the contemporary theoretical discussion regarding
‘convenient’ target models of English in diverse contexts worldwide. They found out that
teachers might work without any apparent knowledge of ‘which English’ was the target. In
their study, teachers also declared a pragmatic point of view on varieties of English, with a
need to believe in a ‘standard’ form of the language, although this does not accord with the
fact of Englishes which are employed worldwide. In our study, we probed the perceptions of
EFL university students on English as a lingua franca and found out that majority of the
informants believed that there is no standard English.
Further, in their study, Kaypak and Ortaçtepe (2014) investigated the relation between
Turkish exchange students' attitudes towards learning EFL and their study in ELF contexts.
They discovered that there is a bi-directional relation between students' pre- and post-
beliefs about English language learning and their attitudes towards their experiences while
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON
RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics - icral2019 Sayfa 152
studying abroad. Moreover, they found out that the respondents displayed a commitment
toward native-speaker norms and they changed their interest from accuracy to intelligibility,
which supported them in achieving their ultimate aim to gain excellent interaction in ELF
communities. In the present study, although the informants did not study in an ELF
context, they declared similar point of views.
Jenkins (2009) began with explaining her own interpretation of both WE and ELF in her
study, focusing primarily on ELF though. She inquired two frequent and diametrically
contrary reactions to ELF: the first one promoting monolithicity and denying pluricentricity,
the second one fostering too much diversity, lacking standards. Afterwards, she examined
the attitudes implicit in the second of these positions, discovering the probable impacts of
these attitudes on the identities of ELF speakers from Expanding Circle countries. Besides,
Jenkins (2012), in another study, explored the development of research into ELF, analyzed
some of the misconceptions about it that have been uttered, and examined its future in
terms of ELT pedagogy. In our study, we also inquired similar concepts on the future of ELF
by asking the issue to EFL university students. In their study, Jenkins, Cogo, and Dewey
(2011) initially considered how the latest phenomenon of English as a Lingua Franca
(henceforth ELF) adjusts to the former notion of lingua francas as well as with older forms of
ELF. Then, they examined the beginnings of ELF in its contemporary manifestation,
containing the initial ELF studies. Discussing the principle domains in which ELF studies
have been performed to date, they went on inquiring research into lexicogrammar,
phonology and pragmatics. Additionally, they found out that although the youngsters’
beliefs on ELF are easygoing, there is still some resistance towards it, which is also clear in
our study.
Moreover, House (2003) argued against the extensive belief that the English language in its
status as lingua franca is a big threat for national languages, as well as for multilingualism.
She clarified the issue by explaining a distinction between ‘languages for communication’
and ‘languages for identification’. She explained three research projects one focusing on the
influence English has on discourse norms in prominent genres in other languages; the next
one on the nature of interactions in English as a lingua franca; and the last one on
international degree programmes in which English is the language of instruction. Our study
also focused on the mentioned terms by examining the attitudes of EFL students on the
issue.
Conclusion
As a global language which is utilized in every aspect of our daily life, English is the property
of the overall world. Culture and language are inseparable since language mirrors culture.
Accordingly, an integration of diverse cultures, along with British and American, makes
English a universal communication tool. It seems that English will continue to be the
dominating global language in the future as a result of the power of America. So, the
ideology of English as a lingua franca seems to be continuing in the future as well. The
hegemony of English will require EFL students to be proficient in English language and
culture.
References
Cameron, D. (2006). Ideology and language. Journal of political ideologies, 11(2), 141-152.
Cogo A . (2012). ‘English as a Lingua Franca: concepts, use, and implications’ ELT Journal
66/1: 97–105.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a Global Language (Second edition). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Firth, A. (1996). ‘The discursive accomplishment of normality. On “lingua franca” English
and conversation analysis’. Journal of Pragmatics 26: 237–59
House, J. (1999). Misunderstanding in intercultural communication: Interactions in English
as a lingua franca and the myth of mutual intelligibility. In C. Gnutzmann (Ed.),
Teaching and learning English as a global language (pp. 73–89). Tübingen:
Stauffenburg.
11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON
RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
III. International Conference Research in Applied Linguistics - icral2019 Sayfa 153
House, J. (2003). English as a lingua franca: A threat to multilingualism?. Journal of
sociolinguistics, 7(4), 556-578.
Jenkins, J. (2009). English as a lingua franca: Interpretations and attitudes. World
Englishes, 28(2), 200-207.
Jenkins, J. (2012). English as a Lingua Franca from the classroom to the classroom. ELT
journal, 66(4), 486-494.
Jenkins, J., Cogo, A., & Dewey, M. (2011). Review of developments in research into English
as a lingua franca. Language teaching, 44(3), 281-315.
Kaypak, E., & Ortaçtepe, D. (2014). Language learner beliefs and study abroad: A study on
English as a lingua franca (ELF). System, 42, 355-367.
Pennycook A . (2001). Critical Applied Linguistics: A Critical Introduction. . Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Samarin, W. (1987). Lingua franca. In U. Ammon, N. Dittmar, & K. Mattheier (Eds.),
Sociolinguistics: An international handbook of the science of language and
society (pp. 371–374). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Seidlhofer, B. (2005). English as a lingua franca. ELT journal, 59(4), 339-341.
Young, T. J., & Walsh, S. (2010). Which English? Whose English? An investigation of ‘non-
native’teachers' beliefs about target varieties. Language, Culture and
Curriculum, 23(2), 123-137.