教学思想与教学改革

Foreign Language Planning: The Neglected Sociolinguistic Aspect of ELT in China

外交学院英语系 武波

Abstract: In this paper, it is argued that English ought to be considered to become the official second language in the social administration of contemporary China. The overall social, political and educational situation in today's world is analyzed with specific statistics and related literature, meanwhile the current ineffectiveness of foreign language planning in China is put into question. Finally, it is concluded that Mandarin Chinese should continue to be the language used by the Chinese nation. However, that does not mean that we cannot modify our foreign language policy in this country. It is the view of the author that, the Chinese government should start considering to enact laws and regulations to make English the other official language, besides Chinese, used at least in the educational sector.

Key words: educational language policy; foreign language planning; China

Ⅰ. Introduction

With more and more research devoted to the investigation of English Language Teaching （ELT）in China's institutions of higher learning, there emerges a new question for the profession and its policy makers. That is to say, do we look at the problem of poor English teaching result in a comprehensive manner?

There are quite a lot of controversies on the validity of college English teaching, as it is an issue which has direct relevance to so many people in the society. It is argued that, universities and colleges produce too many graduates who cannot speak, listen and understand English in a real communicative situation. This reality is described, sadly, as “English of the deaf” and“English of the mute” by some government officials. In short, the teaching of English in China is very often associated with the handicapped. In a sense, the whole profession of ELT in China is overshadowed—it is handicapped itself.

However, the current inefficiency of ELT pedagogy is concerned more and more with how the authorities perceive and evaluate the status of English in a rapidly developing modern China. It is obvious that China is increasingly integrated into the modern world. The issue of foreign language education is no longer an issue of education only. It has become an issue of economy and politics. Many people would agree with the author that the future of China's ELT education, at the tertiary level in particular, will be inevitably related closely with the status of English in China. A recent example of the author is at hand, it can shed light on the popularity of English in the life of modern Chinese. When I took home the certificate of my Ph.D. degree received from Beijing Foreign Studies University the other day, I was asked by my wife why there was no English in the certificate? I realized immediately that the general public in China is already in need of the international language. Who is to take the responsibility of investigating into the relationship between China's modernization drive and English as a second language in China? It is the country's top leaders, not the powerless practitioners of ELT or even the educational authorities.

When there is the need for English to become a working language of administration in China today, the most important thing for Chinese teachers of English to consider and finally make proposal to the authorities is that,it is time for English to be regarded as a second language in our country,not a foreign language any more.The future of China is vitally related to the issue of English used as a major medium of communication in China.

Therefore, it is hypothesized in the paper that the current reform on college English education will not go very far unless the government intervenes at a higher level. It is also suggested that there ought to be a special “Commission of English” established in the State Council, so that China's national economic and social developments will be based on an international footing. That is, English is no longer something we can ignore in our social development.The Chinese culture and society must receive this lingua franca positively.For a developing country, no one can achieve global economic success without taking into account the issue of English as a second language, especially for a rapidly growing nation like China in the new century.

Any discussion on the language policy of a certain nation today can not ignore the fact that English is the powerful international language of the world today. Troike once comments:

From a minor language in 1600, English has in less than four centuries come to be the leading language of international communication in the world today. This remarkable development is ultimately the result of 17th, 18th, and 19th century British successes in conquest, colonization, and trade, but it was enormously accelerated by the emergence of the United States as the major military world power and technological leader in the aftermath of World War Ⅱ. The process was also greatly abetted by the expenditure of large amounts of government and private foundation funds in the period 1950—1970, perhaps the most ever spent in history in support of the propagation of a language.

（Troike, 1977: 2）

For China to communicate well with the rest of the world, either Chinese or English must be chosen as the lingua franca in China today.However,are we sure that we can afford all those investment as English has received in history so that we may continue to promote Chinese as a foreign language for our international friends?

As for this question, Crystal points out objectively that:

The prospect that a lingua franca might be needed for the whole world （emphasis original）is something which has emerged strongly only in the twentieth century, and since the 1950s in particular. The chief international forum for political communication—the United Nations—dates only from 1945. Since then, many international bodies have come into being, such as the World Bank （also 1945）, UNESCO and UNICEF （both 1946）, the World Health Organization （1948）and the International Atomic Energy Agency （1957）. Never before have so many countries （over 180, in the case of some UN bodies）been represented in single meeting-places. At a more restricted level, multinational regional or political groupings have come into being, such as the Commonwealth and the European Union. The pressure to adopt a single lingua franca,to facilitate communication in such contexts,is considerable,the alternative being expensive and impractical multi-way translation facilities.

（Crystal, 1997: 9-10）

Before we start the discussion on the status of English in the administration of different countries and regions, it is advisable to read some interesting news reports released by the prestigious English Company （UK）Ltd. The following two reports are in clear contrast, but in terms of economic success, it is not difficult to see which side is better off, Taiwan or Russia.

Taiwan's drive to English

In April last year, Taiwan's “Premier” Yu asked the “Ministry of Education” to study the feasibility of treating English as the second official language. This followed growing concern about proficiency levels in English after Taiwan joined the World Trade Organization.The China Post reported in March this year that:

“Premier” Yu Shyi-kun is trying to jump start a campaign to turn English into a second official language, ordering that all major policy plans be submitted to the “Cabinet” in both Chinese and English. In a drive to boost Taiwan's globalization and increase its ability to take part in international activities, all major plans drafted by government agencies should be presented in both languages, Yu said. .... so that foreigners may find them easier to understand.

（Global English Newsletter,Posted: Mar 202003 by the English Company）

New Russian language law bans English

The status of Russian has suffered a number of blows in recent years as eastern European, the Baltic and central Asian states, have all asserted their newly independent identities. Russian has been one of the “losers” in the restructuring of the world linguistic order, with fewer people around the world interested in learning it as a foreign language, and more countries demoting its status.

Now Russian seems to be the latest language suffering from the impact of global English.Last year,the New York Times reported on attempts by the Russian Academy of Science commission to reform the spelling system so it can deal with the flood of loanwords and how these proposals were met with a mix of skepticism and derision in most quarters—most notably by President Putin's wife, Lyudmila, who is apparently a trained linguist.

Last year, the Duma （lower house of parliament）backed a law making fluent Russian mandatory for citizenship. Now it has passed a law designating Russian as the official language and banning the use of English loanwords where Russian equivalents existed.

（Global English Newsletter,Posted: Feb 172003 by the English Company）

Given the two examples cited above, it is not difficult to realize that the language policy in Taiwan is more realistic than that in Russia. But there might be doubts about the reason behind this opinion. Ferguson （1983）is a good reference for those who are still suspicious of the issue. He says:

The spread of English is as significant in its way as is the modern use of computers. When the amount of information needing to be processed came to exceed human capabilities, the computer appeared on the scene, transforming the processes of planning and calculation. When the need for global communication came to exceed the limits set by language barriers, the spread of English accelerated, transforming existing patterns of international communication.

（Ferguson, 1983: ix）

That is to say, what is functioning here is not something done deliberately by the human beings. Instead, the market force is the real factor that does the selection. Phillipson once remarks in a similar vein:

In language pedagogy, the connections between the English language and political, economic, and military power are seldom pursued. Language pedagogy tends to focus on what goes on in the classroom, and related organizational and methodological matters. In professional English teaching circles, English tends to be regarded as an incontrovertible boon, as does language policy and pedagogy emanating from Britain and the USA. It is felt that while English was imposed by force in colonial times, contemporary language policies are determined by the state of the market （“demand”）and the force of argument （rational planning in the light of the available “facts”）.

（Phillipson, 1992: 8）

Technically speaking, language planning involves two major components, i.e. corpus planning and status planning.According to Kloss （1969: 81）,“corpus planning”refers to all actions aiming at modifying “the nature of the language itself”, while “status planning” is concerned with whether the social status of a language should be lowered or raised. Obviously, it is not the business of the Chinese to modify the English language. What is at issue here is the status of English in contemporary China.

The following table by Haugen is perhaps useful in shedding light on the supposed higher status of English in China today. Haugen proposes that the implementation phase be considered an educational process （1983: 275）. This is what we see in his twofold descriptive model which accounts for both of the linguistic and the social aspects of language planning.

Ⅱ. Some Important “New” Information

It is quite obvious that China is already a country where English is used as a second language to some extent. Evidence for this fact is not difficult to find:

（1）Signs and broadcasting at airports are in both Chinese and English;

（2）English radio and TV programmers are numerous, with more and more native-speaking announcers working for Chinese stations;

（3）Telecommunication service providers like China Mobile offer bilingual services to their subscribers;

（4）There are more and more English newspapers and publications in China, and partially bilingual editions are available in many local newspapers and magazines;

（5）News headlines and stories in English are common at major Internet Service Providers（ISP）, such as www.sohu.com and www.sina.com;

（6）Many universities and other educational institutions run their websites bilingually, even the China National Office for Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language!

（7）Many ISPs provide chat room services entirely in English, for people not from the student population only;

（8）The signs on motor ways, and some good city roads are in Chinese and English;

（9）People exchange name cards, the majority of which are in Chinese and English;

（10）Menus at restaurants, especially in tourist resorts like Suzhou and Kunming, are printed bilingually;

（11）More and more foreign movies are shown, without dubbing any more, but with Chinese voice-over or subtitles;

（12）Many press conferences by the government are conducted with good interpretation services;

China is incorporating into the world rapidly, the Internet characterizes the new world best in the present new age. To make the connection between languages and information technology, the following table may shed light on the importance of English on the web:

One logical conclusion from this long list of information is that, a more progressive China needs English to make further progress. Just as Graddol （1997: 38）points out:

Responses to the English 2000 global consultation questionnaire suggest that most English language teaching professionals believe English is essential for progress but do not think that learning the language leads to negative social consequences:

2.11 English is essential for progress as it will provide the main means of access to high-tech communication and information over the next twenty-five years （95%agreed）.

1.2 Competence in English encouraged elitism and increases socio-economic inequalities （59% disagreed）.

（English 2000, 1995: 55, 43）

Ⅲ. A Hypothesized Way Out

China has the largest population of speakers of Chinese in the world. Moreover, the Chinese language is still the only language that survived from ancient history. Therefore, it is very unlikely that the Chinese government will adopt English in the administration of public affairs in this country. However, that does not mean that we cannot modify our foreign language policy in this country. It is the view of the current author that, the Chinese government can and should start considering to enact laws and regulations to make English the other official language, besides Chinese, used at least in the educational sector. The reason for doing so is quite obvious:

There is no reason to believe that any other language will appear within the next 50 years to replace English as the global lingua franca. The position of English has arisen from a particular history which no other language can, in the changed world of the 21st century, repeat.

（Graddol, 1997: 58）

To present a more vivid illustration on the contrast of influence English and Chinese have on the world, the author quotes the following table for reference:

Garvin once makes it clear that the overall failure of the language reform policy exemplifies the fact that implementation of language planning decisions depends on nonlinguistic variables （1973: 24）. That is to say, the issue of China's educational language policy is far from well considered and implemented. There is the fundamental need for a clearly targeted objective on the part of the Chinese authorities. The government needs, first of all, to set up a special commission, the mission of which is to do in-depth analysis of the current linguistic situation in China. The nation's ambitious goal of rejuvenating itself has already produced impressive achievements, economically but not culturally. If the communication between China and the rest of the world is to develop and accelerate, either Chinese as a foreign language for the rest of the world or English as a second language for China must be considered seriously. The choice will be made sooner or later.

Crystal notes that:

The need for a global language is particularly appreciated by the international academic and business communities,and it is here that the adoption of a single lingua franca is most in evidence, both in lecture-rooms and board-rooms, as well as in thousands of individual contacts being made daily all over the globe.

（Crystal, 1997: 10-11）

Obviously, the Chinese authorities should start considering making English the second language in the sectors of education and foreign trade at least.

The issue of promoting Chinese learning all over the world is not relevant to the present discussion. However, it is the current author's belief that, economically speaking, to speed up China's modernization drive, it is more practical and economical to adopt English as a second language in China than to spread Chinese internationally. If there is an easier way out, why don't we choose the shrewd alternative? After all, the basic thing for a nation's overall competitiveness nowadays is its economic achievement.

Of course, some people would point out that there is a cultural and ideological reluctance on the part of the Chinese nation. They would say that would threaten the Chinese people's cultural identity. However, there is still no sound evidence to support this worry. Take Singapore for example, English is an official language in the country. Despite this fact, the people of Singapore are still very much oriented by their cultural legacy. As the majority of the people in Singapore are Chinese, the influence of Chinese culture is evident everywhere in the country. Besides, the economic and social developments in Singapore are praiseworthy.

Furthermore, if someone thinks that to adopt English in daily administration in the Chinese government would jeopardize the national security of China, then the fact provided by Crystal may help eliminate this concern:

The use of a single language by a community is no guarantee of social harmony or mutual understanding, as has been repeatedly seen in world history （e.g. the American Civil War, the Spanish Civil War, the Vietnam War, former Yugoslavia, and contemporary Northern Ireland）; nor does the presence of more than one language within a community necessitate civil strife, as seen in several successful examples of peaceful multilingual coexistence （e.g. Finland, Singapore, Switzerland）.

（Crystal, 1997: 13）

In short, the experience of Singapore and other countries is well worth our attention. Because young people are the future of a country, it is advisable to start using English as an additional official language in the educational sector in China. This can help improve the communicative ability of the students and, at the same time, to help foreign people understand the educational environment in China better. If they can see that the educational environment in China is functioning according to international norms, they would be more likely to put faith in the future of China's economic development and social progress.

As the teaching of English in China is a huge educational and social activity today—someone estimate that there are currently more than 300 million people learning English in various institutions （c.f. the official website of Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press）—one expert's warning is not something we can afford to ignore:

Governments who wish to play their part in influencing the world's linguistic future should therefore ponder carefully, as they make political decisions and allocate resources for language planning. Now, more than at any time in linguistic history, they need to adopt long-term views, and to plan ahead—whether their interests are to promote English or to develop the use of other languages in their community （or, of course, both）. If they miss this linguistic boat, there may be no other.

（Crystal, 1997: 23）

Ⅳ. Conclusion

Languages are always competing with each other from ancient history. Some are successful in staying till the modern day, because they achieved their dominant position after fierce economic and military struggle. Some others, however, simply get extinct as a result of the failure in social, economic and military battles against other linguistic communities on the part of their speakers. That is why the number of natural languages in the world has been decreasing continuously. The problem related to this type of linguistic unjustness is the business of language policy or language planning from a purely sociolinguistic perspective.

However, ignoring the moral issue of English as the emblem of “Linguistic Imperialism”（Phillipson, 1992）, it is easy to see that a modern developing country needs to decide whether to make use of a helpful and profitable lingua franca,such as English,or continue to shut itself away from the strong and fast tide of globalization. The tide is multi-dimensional, economic, cultural, technological and educational. Nobody can afford to miss the valuable chance for economic development and social progress today because the opportunity is indeed precious now.

In short, it is quite reasonable and practical to adopt a realistic attitude and a practical approach with respect to the foreign language educational policy of the Chinese government. In other words, if you cannot beat them, join them. After all, it is all about how one sees the real thing in the light of realistic and optimal social management. Deng has a point when he says: Black or white, the one that catches mice is the good cat.

References

1．Crystal, D. 1997. English as a Global Language[M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

2．Daoust, D. 1997. Language Planning and Language Reform [A]. in F. Coulmas （ed.）. The Handbook of Sociolinguistics[C].London: Blackwell Publishers:436-452.

3．English 2000. 1995. English in the World: The English 2000 Global Consultation Report[M]. Manchester: The British Council.

4．English Company. 2003. Global English Newsletter[OL]. http://www.engcool.com/GEN/weblog.php. （accessed 16/12/2011）.

5．Ferguson,C. A. 1983.Foreword[A].in B. B.Kachru（ed.）. The Other Tongue: English across Cultures[C]. Oxford: Pergamon: 7-11.

6．Garvin, P. 1973. Some Comments on Language Planning [A]. in J. Rubin and R. Shuy （eds.）. Language Planning: Current Issues and Research[C].Washington,D.C.: Georgetown University Press:24-33.

7．Graddol,D. 1997. The Future of English?[M].London: The British Council.

8．Haugen, E. 1983. The Implementation of Corpus Planning: Theory and Practice [A]. In J. Cobarrubias and J. A. Fishman（eds.）. Progress in Language Planning[C]. Berlin: Mouton:269-289.

9．Kloss, H. 1969. Research Possibilities on Group Bilingualism: A Report[M]. Québec: Université Laval, C.I.R. B.

10.Phillipson,R. 1992. Linguistic Imperialism[M].Oxford: Oxford University Press.

11.Troike,R.C. 1977.The Future of English[A].Editorial,The Linguistic Reporter[C].19（8）:2.