The Construct of Native Speakerism Corrodes Language Learning

 

Image from: Pinterest, all rights reserved 

The Construct of Native Speakerism Harms the Core of  Language Learning

“Speak English like a native” is a marketing punchline, therefore loaded with a touch of frivolousness. It is disorienting and stresses the external, shiny appeal of speaking English in a Briton accent. Frankly, setting off to an unrealistic venture might feel less appealing than its realistic, yet rough and laborious counterpart; the acquisition of English as a foreign language-free of the inherent compulsiveness to sound like a native. The cohort English language teachers is familiar with native-speakerism- a notoriously blurry narrative. The risk involved is that vagueness wrecks havoc on the human brain. It engenders a rush to no clear destination: Is there an ideal native speaker to support such a comparison? As concluded by Lowe and Kiczkowiak (2016), scholars recognize now that speakerhood, similarly to race, is not a biological but rather a socially constructed trait (Davie, 2012, Faez, 2011; Holliday, 2013; Inbar-Lourie, 2005; Piller, 2002). Indeed, Davies (2003, 2012) points out that linguistically speaking, there are no grounds to maintain the distinction between “native” and “non-native speakers”.

Language learning is a transformative process and it entails the state of being genuine to oneself.

Prior to venturing on a comparative frame of reference, consider this: do all native speakers, irrespective of the language, have in-depth knowledge of their mother tongue? Knowledge as opposed to intuition.  Learning, being a meta-cognitive knowledge extends beyond intuition.

Unless any native speaker has undertaken official language learning the response to the question is  negative.

Lowe and Kiczkowiak (2016), inform that, sociolinguistic research shows that speakers might find the dichotomy of native/non-native simplistic and misrepresentative of their linguistic identities (Faez, 2011; Piller, 2002). As a matter of fact, the terms of “native speaker” and “non-native speaker” are subjective, ideological and value-laden (Lowe & Kiczkowiak, 2016).

As witnessed by Kowe and Kiczkowiak (2016), according to Holliday (2005), native-speakerism is so deeply embedded with English Language Teaching that it has become practically invisible.

The construct of native-ness is a long-standing one and, as with all self-evident truisms, calls for further scrutiny.

Native-ness is a tenuous construct, perpetuating linguistic and ethnic prejudice-devoid of scientific backing. According to Archakis and Kondili (2004), all languages and linguistic varieties are potentially equal, in the sense that all can potentially execute every function and all of them can develop, covering every aspect of the life of their speakers, once the corresponding needs emerge and the appropriate circumstances are provided (Kakridis & Ferrari, 2000 & 2001). All native speakers of a given language are endowed with the linguistic apparatus employed by the linguistic community in which they belong.

In the language learning field, themes of otherness, identity, belonging and dualism are inherent, perpetually  igniting discussion. As concluded by Holliday (2006), “native-speakerism is seen as a divisive force which originates within particular educational cultures in the English-speaking west.

While the adoption and resistance to the ideology take place to a greater or lesser degree throughout the English Language Teaching world, the ‘native speaker’ ideal plays a widespread and complex role outside as well as inside the English-speaking west (Holliday, 2006).

The innate quality of native-ness cannot serve as a measure  for success or progress; In the case of English as a foreign language, who is the ideal native? The native inhabitant of Great Britain, Ireland, New Zealand, India or the native speakers of English born in the Philippines?

Native speakers acquire their native language as a matter of undecided luck; it calls for determination, will, consciousness and perseverance to be a speaker of a foreign language. There is no common ground (to draw a comparison) other than language itself. Despite the progress and the change of heart that is being taking place in recent year regarding the topic of native-ness and its superiority, the acquisition of at least one different first language is persistently viewed to be an obstruct, rather than a facilitator.

 Image from: Pinterest, all rights reserved 

The Practical Dimension

In terms of its real-life extension of the native-ness, to what extent is it superior? As Swales (2004, 43) puts it, “in  research and scholarship”, we seem to be approaching a situation in which English is becoming a genuine lingua franca. Non-native speakers, or non-Anglophones, in Swales’ 2004, produce academic English alongside their native speaking colleagues. What status does native-ness have in this context?

Native-speakerism poses an inessential question in the first place. As concluded by Lowe and Kiczkowiak (2016), according to Holliday (2005), native-speakerism is so deeply embedded within English Language Teaching that it has become practically invisible.

English language learning has long ushered a modern, inclusive era with realistic expectations. Native speakerism is divided from the ideal. The goal is to facilitate learners obtain a clear view about the greatness of acquiring a foreign language: the ability to extend one ’s thought to the unfamiliar, to fulfil life goals and experience the excitement of autonomy in foreign surroundings.  

References

Αρχάκης, Α., Κονδύλη, Μ. (2004). Εισαγωγή σε Ζητήματα Κοινωνιογλωσσολογίας. Εκδ. Νήσος.

Lightbown, P., Spada, N. (2006). How Languages are Learned. Oxford University Press.

Romer, U., Arbor, A. (2009). English in Academia: Does Nativeness Matter? Anglistik, International Journal of English Studies. 20.2 (September 2009): 89-100. Accessed via: https://lexically.net/wordsmith/corpus_linguistics_links/Anglistik_2009_nativeness_89_R%C3%B6mer.pdf.

 

Lowe, R., Kiczkowiak, M. (2016). Native-Speakerism and the Complexity of Personal Experience: A Duoethnographic Study. Cogent Education. 3: 1, 1264171. Doi: 10.1080/2331186x. 2016.12.64171. Accessed via: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1264171?needAccess=true.