Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:30:13.410Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Multilithic English(es) and language ideologies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 May 2008

Alastair Pennycook
Alastair Pennycook
Affiliation:
University of Technology, Sydney, Australia, Alastair.Pennycook@uts.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Braj Kachru, Asian Englishes: Beyond the canon. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2005. Pp xxiv, 333. Pb. $27.95.>

Yamuna Kachru & Cecil Nelson, World Englishes in Asian contexts. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2006. Pp. xxiv, 412. Pb. $32.50.

Rana Rubdy & Mario Saraceni (eds.) English in the world: Global rules, global roles. London: Continuum, 2006. 218 pp. Pb. £30.00.

With the growth of Asia's manufacturing and service industries, the prediction that China and India, respectively, will have the first and third largest global economies within 30 years, a population that comprises over 50% of the world's people, and massive English language programs throughout the region, it is no surprise that the role of English in Asia has become a major concern. At a recent (2006) Asia TEFL conference in Japan, the notions of Asian English(es), along with Asian methodologies and Asian knowledge, were topics of considerable discussion. The size and diversity of Asia, however, makes it a very difficult entity to define: The Asia TEFL conference included delegates from Israel and Iran, and two of the books under review here, Braj Kachru's Asian Englishes: Beyond the canon (AEBC) and Yamuna Kachru & Cecil Nelson's World Englishes in Asian contexts (WEAC), include (with identical maps) Australia and New Zealand. In some ways, the idea of Asia is defined by what it is not: Europe and North America. It is also not, of course, South America or Africa, though with WEAC containing a chapter on African Englishes (as well as African American Vernacular English, or AAVE), it seems as if they might be allowed in. It is clear nevertheless that various notions of Asia – as an economic zone, as a cultural entity, and as a user of a type or types of English – are widely used. We need to take the notion of Asia and Asian English(es) seriously, if only to try to understand what is meant by Braj Kachru's explanation that AEBC is “essentially about the Asianness in Asian Englishes and their gradual, yet marked, distinctiveness” (p. xv).

Type
Review Article
Information
Language in Society , Volume 37 , Issue 3 , July 2008 , pp. 435 - 444
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bruthiaux, P. (2003). Squaring the circles: Issues in modeling English worldwide. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 13:159–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canagarajah, S. (1999). Resisting linguistic imperialism in English teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Krishnaswamy, N., & Burde, A. (1998). The politics of Indians' English: Linguistic colonialism and the expanding English empire. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Malcolm, I. (2001). Aboriginal English: Adopted code of a surviving culture. In Blair, D. & Collins, P. (eds.), English in Australia, 201–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mufwene, S. (2001). The ecology of language evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parakrama, A. (1995). De-hegemonizing language standards: Learning from (post)colonial Englishes about ‘English’. Basingstoke: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pennycook, A. (2007). Global Englishes and transcultural flows. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
Phillipson, R. (2003) English only Europe? Challenging language policy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Radhakrishnan, R. (2007). Globality is not worldliness. In Radhakrishnan, R. et al. (eds.), Theory as variation, 313–28. New Delhi: Pencraft International.Google Scholar
Rickford, J. R. (1997). Prior creolization of AAVE? Sociohistorical and textual evidence from the 17th and 18th centuries. Journal of Sociolinguistics 1:315–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zuberi, Nabeel (2001). Sounds English: Transnational popular music. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar