Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T22:56:54.889Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A rose by any other name? Learner English and variety–status labelling: the case of English in South Korea

An outsider's plea for correct variety-status labelling

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 April 2016

Jae Jung Song
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One of the major achievements of Braj Kachru's (1991) ‘liberation linguistics’ is that it has squarely placed Outer Circle varieties such as Indian English, Nigerian English and Singaporean English on a par with Inner Circle varieties such as American English and British English – in the face of negative attitudes, ranging ‘from amused condescension to racist stereotyping’ (Bruthiaux, 2003: 160). Following in Kachru's footsteps, many scholars have demonstrated that these Outer Circle Englishes are legitimate varieties of English, with distinct characteristics and with growing numbers of native speakers (e.g. Deterding, 2007; Jowitt, 1991; Sailaja, 2009). Indeed these Outer Circle English varieties are increasingly used, in respective countries, not only as the major or default medium of communication but also in the context of important domains such as education, media, government, literature and popular culture. The Kachruvian perspective has also given rise to the ‘egalitarian’ view that Inner Circle English speakers are no longer the only ones who can lay claim to the ownership of English. Outer Circle English speakers are now thought to be as much custodians of English as Inner Circle English speakers are.

Type
Research Article
Information
English Today , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , December 2016 , pp. 56 - 62
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

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

Ahn, H. 2014. ‘Teachers’ attitudes towards Korean English in South Korea.’ World Englishes, 33(2), 195–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahn, H. 2015. ‘Awareness of and attitudes to Asian Englishes: a study of English teachers in South Korea.’ Asian Englishes, 17(2), 132–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allkpop. 2014. ‘South Korea spends over $18 billion USD on private education, mainly on learning English.’ Online at <http://www.allkpop.com/buzz/2014/09/south-korea-spends-over-18-billion-usd-on-private-education-mainly-on-learning-english> (Accessed June 21, 2015).+(Accessed+June+21,+2015).>Google Scholar
Baik, M. J. & Shim, R. J. 1998. ‘Reply.’ World Englishes, 17(2), 273–279.Google Scholar
Bolton, K. 2003. Chinese Englishes: A Sociolinguistic History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bruthiaux, P. 2003. ‘Squaring the circles: issues in modeling English worldwide.’ International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(2), 159–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buschfeld, S. 2013. English in Cyprus or Cyprus English: An Empirical Investigation of Variety Status. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Card, J. 2006. ‘Appetite for language costs S Korea dear.’ Guardian Weekly, December 15. Online at <http://www.theguardian.com/education/2006/dec/15/tefl> (Accessed June 17, 2015)+(Accessed+June+17,+2015)>Google Scholar
Deterding, D. 2007. Singapore English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Educational Testing Service. 2015. Test and Score Data Summary for TOEFL iBT Tests: January 2014 – December 2014 Test Data. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
Edwards, A. 2010. ‘Dutch English: tolerable, taboo or about time too?’ English Today, 26(1), 19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Görlach, M. 2002. ‘English in Europe – European English?’ In Görlach, M. (ed.), Still More Englishes. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 135–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haarmann, H. (1986). Language in Ethnicity: A View of Basic Ecological Relations. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hadikin, G. 2014. Korean English: A Corpus-driven Study of a New English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hundt, M. & Mukherjee, J. 2011. ‘Discussion forum: New Englishes and Learner Englishes – quo vadis?’ In Mukherjee, J. & Hundt, M. (eds.), Exploring Second-Language Varieties of English and Learner Englishes: Bridging a Paradigm Gap. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 209–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hundt, M. & Vogel, K. 2011. ‘Overuse of the progressive in ESL and learner Englishes – fact or fiction?’ In Mukherjee, J. & Hundt, M. (eds.), Exploring Second-Language Varieties of English and Learner Englishes: Bridging a Paradigm Gap. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 145–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jowitt, D. 1991. Nigerian English Usage: An Introduction. Lagos: Longman Nigeria.Google Scholar
Kachru, B. 1991. ‘Liberation linguistics and the Quirk concern.’ English Today, 7(1), 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, C. B. 2012. ‘The Korean English linguistic landscape.’ World Englishes, 31(1), 70–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mollin, S. 2007. ‘New variety or learner English? Criteria for variety status and the case of Euro-English.’ English World-Wide, 28(2), 167–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moon, H. H. 2009. ‘Positions, functions and meanings of English in South Korea.’ Unpublished PhD thesis. Melbourne: La Trobe University.Google Scholar
Nesselhauf, N. 2009. ‘Co-selection phenomenon across New Englishes: Parallels (and differences) to foreign learner varieties.’ English World-Wide, 30(1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, J. S.-Y. 2009. The Local Construction of a Global Language: Ideologies of English in South Korea. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, K.-J. 2009. ‘Characteristics of Korea English as a glocalized variety.’ In Murata, K. & Jenkins, J. (eds.), Global Englishes in Asian Contexts: Current and Future Debates. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 94–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qiong, H. X. 2004. ‘Why China English should stand alongside British, American, and the other “world Englishes”.’ English Today, 20(2), 26–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sailaja, P. 2009. Indian English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Schneider, E. W. 2007. Postcolonial English: Varieties around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shim, R. J. 1994. ‘Englishized Korean: structure, status, and attitudes.’ World Englishes, 13(2), 225–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shim, R. J. 1999. ‘Codified Korean English: process, characteristics and consequence.’ World Englishes, 18(2), 247–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Song, J. J. 1998. ‘English in South Korea revisited via Martin Jonghak Baik (1992, 1994), and Rosa Jinyoung Shim (1994).’ World Englishes, 17(2), 263–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Song, J. J. 2012. ‘South Korea: language policy and planning in the making.’ Current Issues in Language Planning, 13(1), 1–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanlaw, J. 2004. Japanese English: Language and Culture Contact. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Google Scholar
Xu, Z. 2010. ‘Chinese English: a future power?’ In Kirkpatrick, A. (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of World Englishes. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 282–298.Google Scholar