International

English in the
global village
MARKO MODIANO
A novel view of how English might or should be
modelled at the turn of the millennium -
followed by some solicited comments

ENGLISH is fundamentally dissimilar to other painstakingly examined and codified. In fact,

languages which have functioned as a lingua no other lingua franca has been so thoroughly
franca. For instance, there are more people investigated. Despite this grand effort to both
who speak English as a foreign or second describe and establish prescriptive models,
language than there are mother-tongue speak- English seems to be rushing forward, always
ers (there are also more beginning students of one step ahead of the practitioners responsible
English than there are L2 speakers). Yet, for teaching the language. It comes as no sur-
despite being notoriously monolingual, LI prise then that many traditional perceptions
speakers have, nevertheless, conducted about the status of English are currently under
advanced studies of their language. For review. Sociolinguists, for example, have
instance, linguistic variation has been well noticed some interesting shifts in both attitude
scrutinized, and a great deal of work has been and usage, especially concerning the relation-
done on regional dialects and accents, as well ship between AmE and BrE, and the way in
as on Creole and pidgin English. The major which English is used as a tool in cross-cultural
varieties, especially AmE and BrE, have been communication (Modiano 1996/1998).

Kachru and the inner circle codification procedures are carried out: the
establishment of dictionaries, grammars, and
DESPITE the need for discussion and study of educational materials (Kachru, 1985). Speak-
an international variety of English (EIL: ers of local varieties living in communities
English as an International Language), it seems where, for the most part, other speakers of the
that the current agenda for the language same variety are encountered, will benefit, it is
among many sociolinguists is the legitimiza- argued, from instruction which teaches the
tion of varieties of English which are flourish- English which is used and thus needed for local
ing in the third world. Kachru's model of the communication purposes. In these cases,
concentric circles of world Englishes has been because the learning and usage of a major vari-
used to support the belief that local varieties of ety (in most cases, AmE or BrE) effectively
English (referred to as the "outer circle"), such marginalizes speakers of local varieties, an
as Singapore English, or the variety spoken in insistence on the superiority of established
Nigeria, should be used as educational models educational models is not in keeping with a
in those regions, and that it is imperative that democratic ideology of linguistic diversity.

22 English Today 58, Vol. 15, No. 2 (April 1999). Printed in the United Kingdom © 1999 Cambridge University Press

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 23 Oct 2010 IP address: 193.144.12.2

 In speech communities where near-native speaker, second language speaker, foreign
proficiency in a major variety is juxtaposed language speaker, and learner - establishes the
with a local variety which has traditionally framework of Kachru's model. As Margie Berns
been defined as sub-standard, the use of a so poignantly explains:
"prestige" variety establishes class stratifica- Kachru describes these [the inner circle
tion and social division. But people should feel varieties] as the traditional bases of English,
free to use the language which is characteristic where it is the primary language. Non-native
of their culture, and local varieties of English, speakers traditionally look to the English
inherently linked to systems of cultural identi- spoken there, especially to the British but
fication, it is argued, should be promoted. In increasingly also to the American variety, as
the event that the local variety is difficult for providing the standards and norms of English
other speakers of English to understand, the to which they are to conform and the models
they should use in formal language learning
international members of the community often settings (Berns 1995: 4).
turn to code-switching, and in so doing most
likely attempt to speak something which This "inner circle" is a Eurocentric frame where
resembles either AmE or BrE. If one accepts Britain and its former colonies are the bulwark
Kachru's support of local varieties as educa- of English, and as such possess the language
tional standards, the function and value of (keeping in mind that within this group there is
code-switching is undeniable, seeing as it is a pecking order, with elaborate systems of pres-
naive to expect native and non-native speakers tige and presumed inferiority). Others, the "mar-
to understand a vast number of local varieties. ginalized" peoples of the outer and expanding
On a global scale, the only viable condition for circle, are claiming the language for their own
the ease of communication is the use of intra-national use, and as such are justified in
varieties which are comprehensible to a large their codification, nativization, and institution-
number of people. alization efforts. The systemization and legit-
The use of educational standards based on imization of indigenized varieties is, in the con-
local varieties, something fast becoming the ceptual framework of Kachru's model, a natural
order of the day for millions of speakers of development of the language, and one which has
English in the outer circle, is taking place far-reaching human-rights implications.
within cultural confines defined by mother- As English takes on the responsibilities of a
tongue speakers of the inner circle. That is to lingua franca, non-native speakers are taking a
say, the cultural apparatus deployed when con- more active role in the development of the
ceptualizing the language is dependent on the language, not only in respect to the manner in
definitions and linguistic ideologies which which they develop educational models for the
emanate from the supposed purveyors of the teaching of local varieties, but also in their
language, the mother-tongue proprietors of understanding of how the language is used in
English, and all of her standard varieties, cross-cultural communication. Understand-
American, British, Canadian, Australian, and ably, when observing the language as it is used
New Zealand English. A hierarchy - native internationally, they experience a great deal of
multiplicity, not only in pronunciation and
vocabulary, but also in other respects. This
MARKO MODIANO is a senior lecturer in English indicates, as I see it, that in the teaching of EIL,
at Gavle University, Sweden. He holds a Ph.D. in emphasis should be placed on a descriptive as
English from Uppsala University. Among his
opposed to a prescriptive model. Such position-
publications in sociolinguistics are 'A Mid-Atlantic
Handbook' (Studentlitteratur, Lund, Sweden 1996) ing is in direct contrast to the near-native profi-
and a number of articles on educational standards ciency BrE educational standard which has
for English language teaching and learning in the been successfully promoted and practiced in
European Union. He continues to conduct research many parts of the world.
in sociolinguistics, with current projects focusing on The proponents of BrE assume a position of
the definition of a 'standard English,'the authority, and with the British Council's support,
theoretical platform for teaching English as a impose upon learners notions of purity, consis-
second/foreign language, linguistic human rights, tency, and correct usage. Insisting that Standard
the role of English worldwide, and the emerging
definitions of English as an International British English is the most prestigious accent,
Language. and indeed is the international standard, they
effectively establish a mind-set which impacts

INTERNATIONAL ENGLISH IN THE GLOBAL VILLAGE 23

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 23 Oct 2010 IP address: 193.144.12.2

profoundly, not only on the educational mate- Kachru's definition of the inner circle re-estab-
rials in use, but also on the framework upon lishes the notion that the language is the prop-
which culture in the international context is erty of specific groups, and that correct usage is
defined. It could be argued that proponents of determined by experts who speak a prestige
AmE also assume positions of authority and in variety. This inner-circle position indicates that
practice also partake in linguistic imperialism. English is a language which comes from a geo-
In my research, however, I have found the Amer- graphical location, the spread being the result
ican position on the question of international of the historic exploits of specific peoples.
educational norms and hierarchies of prestigious Moreover, Kachru's paradigm supports a belief
accents and varieties to be far less resolute in that the language is associated with distinctive
comparison to British attitudes about English frames (in this case, with the Anglo-American
(see Phillipson, 1994). and Christian sphere of influence). These
From an EIL perspective, Kachru's conceptu- assumptions are, in my opinion, indicative of
alization of "inner circle varieties" is problem- an antiquated view of the English language.
atical. Kachru's model, for example, is inter- It is clear, in historical terms, that English is
preted in different ways, depending on the an Indo-European language. As a Germanic
manner in which the observer views the language it is based in the tongues once spoken
language. The centralized position of the major by the northern Germanic tribes who brought
varieties might be taken as a given by some their language and culture to the island of
observers of the English language, while it may Britain after the withdrawal of the Roman
be considered inaccurate among proficient legions. England then served as home for these
speakers of the language living and working Germanic nomads who migrated across the
outside of this privileged circle. Moreover, in channel. From there, many of these people
allowing the "major varieties" a symbolic cen- continued, not only to unsettled areas, but also
tral positioning, it is easy to assume that all of to populated regions where the language con-
the speakers of these varieties are proficient in tinued to evolve. In the post-colonial era,
the language in a more global sense. This is not increasing numbers of people are adopting the
the case. A large number of LI speakers living language, not only to communicate with native
in regions where the major varieties are rooted speakers, but also for communication within
do not speak varieties which are easily compre- their own communities. These new speech
hensible internationally (assuming that they communities have developed cultural activities
are incapable of code-switching). These speak- such as literature and film in English. They
ers are not as worthy of a central position when often conduct government and law proceed-
compared to other speakers of the language, ings in English. Scientific research, as well, is
whether they be LI speakers of standardized published in English. Moreover, there are quite
varieties or second/foreign language speakers often domestic news services and television
who are excellent communicators in an inter- and radio programming in English (see Kachru,
national context. For these reasons I find 1991).
Kachru's model less useful when viewing the As a result, English now has relevance to vast
development of EIL. numbers of people living outside the confines
Granted, the paradigm of inner, outer, and of the "English speaking world" (defined, as it
expanding circle is an excellent point of depar- is by some, as the regions where the major vari-
ture for determining the development of the eties are dominant). Thus, the spread of
language in various parts of the world. Indeed, English has not been restricted in any geo-
the legitimization and codification process graphical sense, and in time the language has
starts with the recognition and communicative come to influence life in many parts of the
value of local varieties. Moreover, a break with world. Michael Toolan, discussing "New
near-native proficiency models in language English" as the "English used in mainstream
education is in fact a logical step (Kachru, public discourse in countries where English is a
1982). We must cast off outmoded beliefs in major native language" and "Global" as "public
the superiority of BrE, and indeed even AmE, international English," notes that "these two
and instead embrace a more modern under- standard Englishes are increasingly treated not
standing of the language. In view of the excel- as Anglo-Saxon and metropolitan properties,
lent work carried out in thisfield,my aim is not found by or shared with others, but as
to devalue the Kachru model. Nevertheless, resources owned by larger constituencies of

24 ENGLISH TODAY 58 April 1999

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 23 Oct 2010 IP address: 193.144.12.2

 People who
do not know The centripetal circles of
English
international English

users... In the case of Global, its non-English think, to assume that at least one of the inter-
majority of users are increasingly claiming locutors is not proficient in EIL. While I am
ownership of it" (1997:3). This indicates, aware that critics of this theory will claim that
clearly, that there is a growing awareness of it is impossible to make such clear-cut distinc-
the role which non-native speakers play in the tions, it is evident that good communicators
development of EIL. are easily recognizable, and that the same can
be said of their opposite. Furthermore, I do not
think that it is difficult, because of an excessive
The centripetal circles of regional accent or dialect, to designate such an
international English LI speaker as someone poorly equipped to
In my model of global English, I propose that communicate internationally (granted, natu-
the inner circle be occupied by proficient rally, that they are incapable of code switching
speakers of EIL (defined here as a general term into a form of EIL).
which includes all of the varieties which func- In terms of responsibility for defining the
tion well in cross-cultural communication). language, I would argue that the proficient
This speaker of EIL need not necessarily be an non-native speakers of EIL, rather than the
LI speaker. LI speakers of excessive regional native speakers who are not proficient in EIL,
accents and dialects, for example, who are are better equipped to define and develop
incapable of code-switching into EIL, do not English as a tool in cross-cultural communica-
belong in this first category. In such a defini- tion. In this respect, my model establishes a
tion, we highlight communicative abilities, system of accountability for the language, and
while at the same time it is made clear that here I call for a spreading of the responsibility
native speakers who speak with strong accents to include non-native speakers of English, and
and dialects, and as such have varying degrees as such to dismantle the mind-set of the
of difficulty in the international context, are mother-tongue speaker as someone who enjoys
not as efficient communicators as those non- positions of privilege. A variety is defined by
native speakers who have mastered EIL (it is speakers of the variety. A lingua franca by defi-
understood here that proficiency in EIL nition is not geographically restricted. Yet, the
includes the ability to generate comprehensible Eurocentric notions of language having a
English as well as skill in comprehension). mother culture, a geographical center, estab-
The immediate argument here is where to lishes positions which are often detrimental to
draw the line? Common sense tells us that those who live outside this center of power.
deviation from an internationally understand- This traditional positioning has already taken a
able norm is acceptable up to the point where it considerable blow to its stability. The advent of
impedes communication. If a conversation is American English as the most influential vari-
constantly breaking down, requests for clarifi- ety of the language, for example, with the
cation repeatedly misunderstood, and misun- ongoing Americanization of virtually all of the
derstanding passes for agreement, it is fair, I other Englishes, illustrates effectively how sys-

INTERNATIONAL ENGLISH IN THE GLOBAL VILLAGE 25

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 23 Oct 2010 IP address: 193.144.12.2

 terns of prestige and power in language evolve. language in an internationally comprehensible
The decline of BrE as the center of a global vari- manner, those who use the language locally in
ety of English, and the ensuing emergence of a manner which is not as conducive to cross-
EIL based on a descriptive model of a lingua cultural communication, and those who are
franca, further illustrates this point. learning the language. Keep in mind that the
It is logical to assume that many proficient establishment of an international form of
non-native speakers of EIL believe that the English in no way negates the value of local
learning of English is a gateway to greater varieties of the language. At the focal point is
cooperation and understanding between peo- the notion that speakers of English who speak a
ples from divergent cultural backgrounds, and variety which is not operational in interna-
that this can be supported by promoting forms tional contexts must also speak EIL if they want
of the language which function in the interna- to be effective cross-culturally in English. The
tional context. This is not always the case with benefits of code switching are apparent.
the second circle in my model, which is Because the value of moving into EIL when
reserved for speakers who have achieved vary- communicating cross-culturally is equally valid
ing degrees of proficiency in a variety far for native as well as non-native speakers, this
enough removed from EIL to require code model establishes a democratic basis for
switching when communicating internation- language development. Furthermore, the
ally. Here, we have native speakers who speak model effectively dismantles the outdated
regional dialects or have strong accents, non- notion of the importance of near-native profi-
native speakers who speak internationally ciency based on a prestige variety, and while
incomprehensible indigenized varieties, and there are non-native speakers who will con-
speakers of Creole varieties whose use of the tinue to pursue near-native proficiency in AmE
language is obscure to speakers of EIL. or BrE, the movement for EIL does not desig-
It is conceivable that people who speak Eng- nate such accents as being required tools for
lishes which are not efficient varieties in cross- effective cross-cultural communication.
cultural communication are quite comfortable
with their limitations. My model, however, is
based on an understanding that a desire to EIL as an educational model
speak a variety which deems an individual pro- Accents and lexical registers which are compre-
ficient in EIL compels that individual to learn hensible to a large number of speakers of the
the language as it is understood and used by a language worldwide fall under the heading
wide range of people. As the need to communi- EIL. But for EIL to achieve status as a legitimate
cate internationally increases, more and more variety in its own right, educational norms
members of this second circle move inward and must be developed. One argument often heard
in time obtain levels of proficiency which place against the establishment of an educational
them in the first circle. The third category is standard is that because EIL attempts to
reserved for learners in the process of attaining include so many different forms of English, it is
proficiency in either a regional accent or difficult to teach. For example, with pronuncia-
dialect, or in an indigenized variety. It is also tion, which dictionary definition is the most
reserved for learners of standard varieties. It is internationally understood, the AmE entry, the
apparent that the categories are determined by OED form, or other alternatives, such as the
the communicative abilities of the individual, pronunciation guides in the new Australian
and not by citizenship or residence in a specific English dictionaries? As to lexical items, which
country. Note that while the movement is of these are more "international" and which
inward, illustrating how speakers of English are more "regional," the AmE or the BrE term?
who want to interact with others in the global Furthermore, in grammar, who decides what is
village gravitate toward the center as they com- EIL and what is more regionally confined in
municate more and more effectively in the usage? We have already seen the publication of
international forum, the central group, profi- reference works which are international,
cient speakers of international English, is where entries include standard AmE and BrE
expanding. forms, and mention forms common in other
This model, with three levels, is a conceptu- varieties when these features of language
alization of English as a common denominator become commonplace on a global scale (see
uniting people. We have those who use the McArthur, 1998). This is the first step in the

26 ENGLISH TODAY 58 April 1999

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 23 Oct 2010 IP address: 193.144.12.2

codification process. It is inevitable that other strives to use features of the language which
EIL educational aids, dictionaries as well as are most easily understood by the interlocutor,
grammars and language-learning textbooks, and, if this means that one mixes features of
will become more and more commonplace in various varieties, this is not necessarily a bad
classroom settings where English as a second/ thing.
foreign language is taught.
Some lexical items which are familiar to
speakers of AmE or BrE are often experienced Conclusion
as difficult to comprehend by speakers of other EIL is by definition a composite of the features
varieties. At the same time, experience teaches of English which are easily understood by a
us that there are forms which go over very well broad cross-section of native and non-native
in cross-cultural communication, and it is this speakers. It is not a short list of lexical items
collective body of language features which and simplified phrases to be used in encounters
makes up the foundation of EIL. In the teaching where one or more of the interlocutors has a
of EIL, it is important that instructors discuss limited knowledge of English. EIL is rich in
international features of language, as well as descriptive terminology, is open for change
the alternatives which are available, and and development, is the English for global
explain how these forms of language operate in communication. Language, instead of creating
various speech communities. For example, barriers, or upholding systems of membership
when discussing the BrE terms solicitor and and exclusion, should promote cooperation
barrister, it is imperative, I think, that students and understanding between peoples from dif-
are taught that these designations are particu- ferent walks of life. For the English language to
lar to British society, and that a large number be capable of living up to such ideals, it is
of native and non-native speakers of English imperative that we establish educational mod-
find such terminology confusing. Instead, the els which focus on cross-cultural communica-
AmE term lawyer is the common term not only tive ability and which give status to proficient
in North America, but is also understood inter- speakers of the language regardless of their
nationally. In AmE, condominium is common- other linguistic abilities. Demoting the impor-
place, yet little is known of this term in many tance of near-native proficiency goals in
English speaking cultures. In EIL, greater clar- English language instruction is a first step. Dis-
mantling antiquated notions of prestige
ity is achieved if one speaks of a privately owned
accents naturally follows. Dropping an
apartment.
unhealthy insistence to keep English "pure," or,
There is a long list of terms used in various
if you will, free from Americanisms, brings us
varieties which are not readily understood in closer to a more realistic understanding of how
an international context, and one task of the the language is being used, and the direction it
EIL instructor is to point out where such terms is expected to take in the decades ahead.
are used and where there is a likelihood that Finally, the understanding that the interna-
they will cause bewilderment. With pronuncia- tional variety of the English language is defined
tion, moreover, as standardized pronunciation by native speakers must become a thing of the
in the major varieties fall within the confines of past. In the global village, English is public
EIL, choice here is more a question of style and domain. ED
less of comprehensibility. Grammar as well, if
we take the standard grammars of AmE and
BrE as points of departure because they are so References
similar, is less important when compared to Berns, Margie. 1995. 'English in the European Union.'
lexical choice. Nevertheless, it can be useful to In English Today 11.3: 3-11.
be aware of some of the more striking differ- Kachru, Braj B. 1982. 'Models for non-native
ences between AmE and BrE grammar. There is Englishes.' In Braj B. Kachru, ed., The Other Tongue,
also the issue of consistency, that is to say, of, pp. 31-57. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
for example, the mixing of AmE and BrE. Here, —. 1985. 'Standards, codification and sociolinguistic
realism: the English language in the outer circle.' In
there is nothing in the ideology of EIL which Randolph Quirk & H. G. Widdowson, eds., English in
insists that consistency in a major variety of the World: teaching and learning the language and
English eases communication in an interna- literatures, pp. 11-30. Cambridge: University Press.
tional context. On the contrary, an important —. 1991. 'Liberation linguistics and the Quirk concern.'
tenet of EIL is that a good communicator In English Today 25, 3-13.

INTERNATIONAL ENGLISH IN THE GLOBAL VILLAGE 27

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 23 Oct 2010 IP address: 193.144.12.2

McArthur, Tom. 1998. 'Guides to tomorrow's English.' Major Varieties of English: Papers from MAVEN 97.
In English Today, 14.3: 21-26. Vaxjo: Acta Wexionensia.
Modiano, Marko. 1996. The Americanization of Euro- Phillipson, Robert. 1994. 'English language spread
English.' In World Englishes 15.2: 207-215. policy.' In the IntemationalJournal of the Sociology
—. 1998. The Emergence of Mid-Atlantic English in of Language, 107, 7-24.
the European Union.' In Hans Lindquist, Staffan Toolan, Michael. 1997. 'Recentering English: New
Wintborg, Magnus Levin & Maria Estling, eds., The English and Global.' In English Today 13.4: 3-10.

FEEDBACK
Because the issues which Marko 2, when they switch to use of EIL (or what I
Modiano seeks to raise in his article called Global, 'the public international English
used by globetrotting professionals' - in English
are central to the current debate Today, 13:4, 1997, p.3), as moving in, advanc-
about English as a world medium, it ing, or progressing; and I'm not sure that some-
was decided not to leave discussion one fluent in acrolectal Singaporean English,
informally to future issues of ET but switching to Global, is (or believes they are)
acting that way either. The Modiano circles
instead to invite a number of represent the world specifically from the view-
observers to add their comments point of EIL, which is a perfectly reasonable
immediately. The six who responded thing to do, but is not a neutral mapping of
Englishes. But I wholeheartedly agree that that
follow below inner circle, of EIL/Global, does seem to be
establishing a real identity, and attracting
more users.
Linguistic assets While BrE and even AmE do not directly dic-
tate the terms of Global in the way they were
MICHAEL TOOLAN once expected to, much needs to be clarified. The
Newer nativizing Englishes from outside the UK
Marko Modiano's model of the circles of and North America have a greater influence than
English, centripetally drawn around the 'sun' of hitherto. But just where BrE and AmE are or are
EIL, has its attractions. It plausibly displaces not invoked as models needs attention: my
native English from being at the core, the acme impression is that at the level of pronunciation
of contemporary kinds of English, just by virtue (Modiano often mentions accent), a broad tol-
of being native. And it revises the Kachru pic- erance of (standard) AmE or BrE or other vari-
ture to downplay national varieties and nation- eties is observed. In vocabulary and syntax I
ality in favour of individual competence (many think North American or North American-
Norwegians will occupy the innermost circle, a derived norms predominate. But it is at the level
very few others may be in the outer darkness of of pragmatics, of knowing the appropriate rou-
'People Who Do Not Know English'). But I'm tines for politely complaining, agreeing, prais-
also a little doubtful of the 'circles' representa- ing, thanking, enquiring, collaborating, etc. etc.,
tion (with its hints of Dante's Inferno?), partly that the identification of Global norms or stan-
for the reasons of 'false hierarchizing' that dards is perhaps most interesting, and perhaps
Modiano notes in the Kachru version. (I am least AmE/BrE-determined. Hence American
also very sceptical of the 'global village'
metaphor.) In the Modiano version, it seems MICHAEL TOOLAN is Professor of English
that concentric circles (as distinct from a Venn Linguistics at the University of Birmingham, having
diagram of overlapping ones, or a spectral previously taught for many years at the National
array with no sense of certain shades as better, University of Singapore and the University of
more desirable) are retained particularly Washington, Seattle. He has published extensively
because of those centripetal arrows, represent- on narrative, stylistics, discourse analysis and
ing stumbling EFL learners on their journey theory of language. His most recent book is Total
towards EIL proficiency. In particular I don't Speech: An Integrational Linguistic Approach to
Language'. Duke University Press, 1996.
see non-metropolitan native speakers in circle

28 English Today 58, Vol. 15, No. 2 (April 1999). Printed in the United Kingdom © 1999 Cambridge University Press

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 23 Oct 2010 IP address: 193.144.12.2