Title:

A quantitative study of ideal English instructor discourse in building learners’ intercultural and linguistic awareness: ELF context

Broad topic: ELT- English instructors (how they contribute towards)/Narrow topic: skills of NNEST in ELT- intercultural and
linguistic awareness/Context: ELF/ Methodology: quantitative, discourse analysis

As a consequence of the recent phenomenon of globalisation, which has led to a series of developments in different domains, the
use of English as a lingua franca (ELF) has drastically intensified. English has become present in geographical contexts where it
has had no previous historical presence, being eagerly used as the principal means of communication among speakers of different
linguistic backgrounds to facilitate interaction worldwide (Maringe & Foskett, 2010, p.; Pineda & Tsou, 2021, p.209).
Consequently, this situation led to a heightened interest in potential implications and applications of ELF in English language
teaching (ELT) since English language learners are ELF users not only inside but also outside of the classroom (Pineda & Tsou,
2021, p.212). In this context the discussion about the ideal English language instructor becomes prominent.

In spite of the evident contemporary needs of reflected in ELT which are concerned with the incorporation of linguistically and
culturally aware practices with the aim of exposing learners to an ELF-aware teaching environment, enabling them to access a
wider sociolinguistic and intercultural repertoire (McKay, 2002), and encouraging ethnic, racial, cultural, religious, and linguistic
diversity (Selvi, 2009, 51), literature still supports the “native speaker fallacy” (Phillipson, 1992, p.185), which elevates the
idealized ‘native speaker teacher’ while ‘stereotypicalizing’ the ‘non-native teacher’ (Selvi, 2011, p.187). Under these
circumstances, this PhD research proposal endeavours to suggest a contribution to the ELT and NNEST research by analysing the
NNESTs’ discourse using CDA (critical discourse analysis) (e.g., Halliday, 1975) focusing on essential ELF-aware discourse
features, such as intercultural and linguistic awareness and specific interpersonal skills and the way in which they contribute to
the development of learners’ intercultural communicative competence that is highly required in the era of globalisation and the
use of English as a contact language among a multitude of cultural contexts (e.g., Alptekin 2002; Baker 2009, 2011, 2015;
Bayyurt 2006, 2012; Kural and Bayyurt 2016).

ELF represents a sociocultural and sociolinguistic phenomenon that is characterised by the use of English globally, among
speakers that do not share the same L1, with the aim of attaining mutual comprehension. ELF communications are distinctively
variable and fluid due to the interlocutors’ linguacultural backgrounds, levels of proficiency, interaction purpose, processing
constraints, and affordances (Canagarajah, 2018, p.). The hybrid quality of ELF led Jenkins (2015) to reconceptualise ELF as a
multilingua franca, which implies that English is always potentially involved “in the mix” (p.74), regardless of whether and how
much, it is used. Therefore, the current generation of English language learners requires a type of English language instruction
that provides them with the necessary knowledge to navigate the global world (Morreale & Pearson, 2008, p.226). Language
educators in today’s classrooms have the responsibility to not only teach in such a way that learners acquire necessary linguistic
abilities but to also prepare them for a variety of ELF international situations they might face outside of the classroom and
empower them to use their English resources to communicate as effectively as possible with speakers in local and global
contexts, where English is used as a contact language (Morreale & Pearson, 2008, p.233).

There has been a wealth of studies on English language instructors particularly applied on the debate between NNEST vs NEST.
Most studies have taken a perceptual approach investigating NNESTs’ self-perceptions on their English language proficiency
(Kamhi-Stein et al., 2004; Llurda & Huguet, 2003), NNEST factors affecting NNESTs’ command of English (Reves & Medgyes,
1994), NNEST effects of their language proficiency on teaching (Samimy & Brutt-Griffler, 1999), NNESTs’ perceptions of their
native counterparts (Tang, 1997), as well as learners’ perception of NNEST’s performance as English instructors in a variety of
international contexts (Hong Kong, e.g., Ping & Ma, 2021; Hungary, e.g., Reves & Medgyes, 1994; Spain, e.g., Llurda &
Huguet, 2003; Japan and Korea, e.g., Kasai et al., 2011).

Literature review
 Native speaker perception studies (for instance)
 What is the trend – what are instrtors generally referring to/ what are students generally referring to/ what are the
conclusions/ what is it concluded about the ELF view to ELT

Although the majority of the studies existing studies offered an insight into the potential benefits of having NNEST lead ELF
aware English classes, particularly due to the strong intercultural awareness, interpersonal skills and other skills (that you
can cite after you describe a study or two), they offered only a superficial confirmation of the existing potential of NNEST to
acquire an equal position as English language instructor.

In order to offer a credible and stronger argumentation in depth discourse analysis should be carried out which demonstrate how
the unique discouse features possessed by NNEST influence learners and contribute to them acquiring the necessary linguistic
and cultural knowledge to navigate the contemporary ever-globalising world.
In the Norwegian context, to the best of my knowledge there have only been contributions concerning the interaction between
ELT and ELF, none of them exclusively focusing on NNEST (Rindal, 2014; Rindal, 2020). Meanwhile, in a recent chapter
entitled “Developing Awareness of ELF in English Language Education”, Flognfeldt (2022) addressed the issue of the ideal
English instructor in a conceptual exploration of ELF awareness in English language education in Norway.

Literature review
 What are the Norwegian studies claiming
 What are they infering about the NNEST debade

Simply being a ‘native speaker’ of the original inner-circle, thought to have the full right over the ownership of English is no
longer enough to teach English. What is more, the purist view to language ownership which correlates linguistic ownership with
the use of a language as L1 (Haberland, 2011, p. 939) is regarded by Davies (2003, p.5) as an “idealization” (p.5) that does not
hold in reality. That is because the idea of ownership has not only become more accessible and flexible, now considered a simple
“empirical fact” (Flognenfeld, 2022, p.127), which implies that the emphasis is placed on ability to communicate, rather than on
linguistic ownership. Simultaneously, according to Kohn (2011) linguistic ownership is emergent, which means that individuals
can choose their “target language orientation by construction” (p. 90).

The ideal English language instructor should display an appropriate level of ELF-awareness (Bayyurt, 2017, p. 139), which
encompasses good intercultural and linguistic awareness as well as strong interpersonal skills. Intercultural awareness represents
as “a conscious understanding of the role culturally based forms, practices, and frames of reference can have in intercultural
communication, and an ability to put these conceptions into practice in a flexible and context specific manner in real time”
(Baker, 2011, p.202), while linguistic awareness refers to an awareness of language teaching and learning as well as an awareness
of the language itself (Flognfeldt, 2022, p.119).

Awareness of the language itself  Mussou 2018 3 NNESTs are praised for their knowledge of grammar and language
structure, resilience, resources, patience, kindness, dedication, enthusiasm, multicultural awareness, and sense of
commitment.
Medgyes (1994) and Braine (1999) were the first to uncover the characteristics and assets of NNESTs.

Kamhi-Stein et al. (2004) observed that NNESTs an ESL medium in the USA demonstrated their strengths in terms of multi-cultural awareness,
bilingual ability and experience in L2 learning.

Moussu (2006) in the US and Reves and Medgyes (1994) in Hungary concluded that a great asset of NNESTs’ is represented by their
understanding of students’ needs and ability to estimate and predict learner difficulties. In addition, Reves and Medgyes (1994) observed that

In Hungary, Reves and Medgyes (1994) found that NNESTs’ ability to estimate learner
ability and predict learner difficulties, their use of the L1 for clarification and more successful grammar teaching were
considered their strengths.

In terms of teaching and learning awareness, Moussu (2018) described NNESTs as “real models” (p.3) in ELT possessing a good
understanding of language learner strategies (e.g., Lasagabaster & Sierra, 2005) and being able to linguistic difficulties (e.g.,
McNeill, 2005) since they have at been second-language learners themselves and can relate personally to what their students’ are
experiencing.

Medgyes (1994) and Braine (1999) uncovered the characteristics and assets of NNESTs, who constitute the vast majority of
English teachers in the world. Moussu (2018) described NNEST as “real models” (p.3) in ELT due to the fact that they share not
only the students’ cultural, social but also emotional experiences. Furthermore, as members of the ELF community themselves,
NNEST are also able to share their knowledge of what is “appropriate in contexts of language use” (Widdowson, 1994, p.387). In
terms of interpersonal skills, Moussu (2018, p.3) characterised NNEST as resilient resourceful, patient, kind, dedicated,
enthusiast, and commitment.

Consequently, learners exposed to an ELF-aware teaching environment should become able to acknowledge their own and
others’ culturally induced behaviour, explain their own cultural standpoint and use language to accommodate other interactants’
language proficiency (Tomalin & Stempleski, 1993, p.5).

As a result, on a micro level, learners of

English as an international language can gain access to a wider
sociolinguistic and intercultural repertoire (McKay op.cit.). On a macro
level, it lends further support to the establishment of a professional milieu
that ‘welcome[s] ethnic, racial, cultural, religious, and linguistic diversity’
(Selvi 2009: 51). (Selvi, 2011,p.188)

Salient components are the development of pragmatic

communication strategies and genre awareness, which are needed to
ensure the intended perlocutionary effect of mutual understanding (flognfeld, 2022, p.118)

NNEST and ELF and Native-Speakerism – theoretical foundation

Deficiency and post-deficiency orientation

Deficiency orientation: does not offer recognition to users of English that use English with particular characteristics
reminiscent of their L1 that stir away from the considered standard/ norm

 a nativist or normative ideological framework – language rules and samples represent native English speaker
(NES) usage  non-native English-speaking teachers and learners will feel as they should follow a native
English-speaking standard (Galloway 2013; Lee and Hsieh 2018; Tsou and Chen 2016) – implications for
ownership
 Linguistic ownership – it is rather a matter of biological design (Flognfeldt, 2022, p.127)
Original thought - original inner-circle language users, can no longer be seen as the owners of
English
It does not matter who used to own English and who owns it now, what is essential is that
English can be activate when there is a need for it (Flognfeldt, 2022, p.127)
 (in)competence dichotomy (Selvi, 2011, p.187)
 “being born into a group does not mean that you automatically speak its language well” (Rampton, 1990, p. 98).

The Post-deficiency approach (Flognfeldt, 2022, p.118) – aimed to raise awareness of the use of English as LF in the
multilingual and multicultural world.

 “post-normative approach” (Dewey, 2012)

 hybrid and variable features in learners’ pronunciation “could be interpreted more frequently as communicative
competence than as limited L2 proficiency” (Rindal, 2014, p.17)
 “learner users are positioned as agents in their own learning process” (Flognfeldt, 2022, p.126) – Socio-
constructivism
 o “all perception, learning, action and communication is the result of individual processes of cognitive
(and emotional) construction, overlaid and shaped by collaboration in social groups” (Kohn, 2011, p.
79).  methodological basis for the construction of the new approach because it allow the investigation
all English manifestations including the use of ELF.

ELT has been for long governed by ideologies of ‘Native-Speakerism’ (Holliday 2005) which idealize the ‘ native speaker’ for
truly possessing an innate and intuitive linguistic competence in that language (Chomsky, 1965) while considering ‘non-native
speakers’ “defective communicator, limited by an underdeveloped communicative competence” (Firth & Wagner, 1997, p.285).

Characteristics of ELF communication (Canagarajah, 2018; Ishikawa, 2017; Kimura & Canagarajah, 2018;
Larsen-Freeman, 2018; Rindal, 2020)

 Flexible
 Hybrid
 Open
 Fluid
 Situated
 Contingent

Strategic competences of ELF – pragmatic and accommodation strategies (Jenkins, 2014)

 Convergence - ensure communicative efficiency
 Divergence
 Negotiation of meaning