Teaching Foreign Languages in an Era of Globalization: Introduction

Author(s): CLAIRE KRAMSCH

Source: The Modern Language Journal , Spring 2014, Vol. 98, No. 1, TEACHING FOREIGN
LANGUAGES IN AN ERA OF GLOBALIZATION (Spring 2014), pp. 296-311
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the National Federation of Modern Language Teachers
Associations

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43651759

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

National Federation of Modern Language Teachers Associations and Wiley are collaborating with
JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Modern Language Journal

This content downloaded from

195.181.171.237 on Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:51:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Teaching Foreign Languages in an
Era of Globalization: Introduction
CLAIRE KRAMSCH

University of California, Berkeley

Department of German
5323 Dwinelle Hall

Berkeley , CA 94720
Email: [email protected]

Through its mobility of people and capital, its global technologies, and its global information networ
globalization has changed the conditions under which foreign languages (FLs) are taught, learned, a
used. It has destabilized the codes, norms, and conventions that FL educators relied upon to help
learners be successful users of the language once they had left their classrooms. These changes call f
more reflective, interpretive, historically grounded, and politically engaged pedagogy than was called f
by the communicative language teaching of the eighties. This special issue will explore how we are
conceive of such a pedagogy.
Keywords : globalization; multilingualism; communicative competence; symbolic competenc
reflexivity; complexity

THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A TIME WHEN Heller, 2003; Heller & Duchêne, 2012; May, 2012),
language teaching and learning has and
been language
more educators (e.g., Block, 2010;
interactive and more imaginative Kramsch, 2010, 2012a) have interpreted this
than today.
Communicative pedagogies have made tension
theas class-
one between the modern world as we

room more participatory, electronic have known it and the world of late modernity
chatrooms
ushered
have loosened the tongues and the writing ofin by today's economic interdependence,
even
large-scalehave
the shyest students, video and the Internet migrations, global information tech-
made authentic materials available as never nologies, and global media known under the
before, telecollaboration and social networks name of globalization. Following Blommaert
have increased students' access to real native
(2010), I will define globalization as "shorthand
speakers in real cultural environments -for
and yet
the intensified flows of capital, goods, people,
there has never been a greater tension images
betweenand discourses around the globe, driven by
what is taught in the classroom and what the
technological innovations mainly in the field of
mediahave
students will need in the real world once they and information and communication
left the classroom. In the last decades, that world technology, and resulting in new patterns of
has changed to such an extent that languageglobal activity, community organization an
teachers are no longer sure of what they are
culture" (p. 13).
supposed to teach nor what real world situations The term globalization covers several phenom
they are supposed to prepare their students for.na that have come to the fore in the last thirt
Social critics (Appadurai, 1996; Vertovec, 2007),years - the so-called late modern period. Th
sociologists (Castells, 1996, 2009; Giddens, 1991),
beginning of globalization as we know it is usuall
sociolinguists (Blommaert, 2010; Cameron, 2006; set around the mid-1980s, with the financial
deregulation of markets under Ronald Reagan
and Margaret Thatcher (Cameron, 2006), al-
The Modern Language fournal, 98, 1, (2014) though it can be seen as having developed much
DOI: 1 0. 1 1 1 1 /j . 1 540-478 1 .20 1 4. 1 2057.x earlier as an intrinsic feature of late capitalism
0026-7902/14/296-311 $1.50/0
(see Lo Bianco, this issue). Together with the
© 2014 The Modern Language fournal invention of the Internet in the 1970s and the

This content downloaded from

195.181.171.237 on Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:51:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Claire Kramsch 297

March 2012.of
unraveling I thank all the presenters at that
the So
1980s, colloquium for their stimulating insights that,
deregulation
dented together with the present
flow of contributions,
capit have
people around
shaped this special issue. the
educators Joseph applauded
Lo Bianco first gives a wide-brush
many historical account of the link between the
opportunitie
trade, teaching
and of FLs and the emergence of the
cross-ferti
Today, nation-statemodern
the in the 19th century. As globalization
a
coexist weakens the exclusive link
with between one nation-
increa
product state and one
of national language,
the it seriously puts
18th-
into question the notion
characterized by of the foreign
all in FL t
take for teaching.
granted: He urges foreign and heritage language
th
each with
teachers andtheir
teachers of English to enter na into
national culture;
serious dialogue about the future of the
language in
languagesthe 21st century.
with their
naries thatZhu Hua and Li Wei examine how China's
ensure th
by geopolitical strategy of promoting cit
well-educated Mandarin
expected Chinese
to as a global language has been received
emulate;
languagesand implemented
over in the United
regioKingdom (UK)
clear boundaries
and the effects it has had on the population be of
languagesimmigrant
and speakers of Cantonese.
among Globalization
one can clearly know whether someone is brings to the fore a confrontation between
speaking French, German, or Chinese, standard national policies and global diversity.
Spanish or regional Spanish; the codified norms Richard Kern explores what the Internet
of correct language usage and proper language can bring to FL education in a global age. While
use that language learners have to abide by for technology-mediated communication can expose
fear of not being understood or not being learners to a diversity of genres and registers
accepted by native speakers. The language as they are used in the real world of global
teaching profession in this sense has been a exchanges, and increase learners' creativity, it
highly modernist profession. can also occult difference and reinforce

But globalization has changed the nature of the stereotypes.

game and is putting into question the modernist José del Valle tackles the age-old question o
tenets of our profession. In our late modern era, which Spanish to teach in the United States in
scholars are concerned that globalization is era of globalization. Taking a historical perspe
bringing about deep changes into our ways of tive, he discusses ways of sensitizing Span
thinking, learning, and knowing that educational learners to the varieties of Spanish around t
institutions are not prepared to deal with. globe without establishing a hierarchy amon
Language and language education are at the them and without abandoning the normativi
forefront of those concerns. essential to the pedagogical enterprise.
Anne Freadman picks up on those challenge
THIS ISSUE by proposing that memory studies, which br
back the historical dimension of language offe
The contributors to this special issue representby philology, might be used as a principle fo
various aspects of FL education at the secondary, healing the rift between the synchronic and
tertiary, and teacher education level; they diachronic
teach dimensions of the study of langu
a variety of languages (e.g., Chinese, and French,
the study of literature at the college level
Italian, Russian, Spanish) in various parts The of the concluding article, by Angela Scarin
world; and they approach the issue of globaliza- rethinks what teacher education should look like

tion from various perspectives as it impacts to prepare FL teachers for the global challenges
language teaching, teacher training, education ahead. She advocates espousing an expanded
research, and language policy under various view of language and helping teachers develop
institutional conditions. Some of the contribu- more reflexivity on their own practice and on
tions were presented at the colloquium "Foreign their role as mediators between cultures.

Languages in an Age of Globalization" that I was Drawing on the contributions to this special
invited to organize at the American Association issue, I first explore the need to reconceptualize
for Applied Linguistics meeting in Boston on what
24 is meant by FL teaching and learning as we

This content downloaded from

195.181.171.237 on Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:51:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 298 The Modern Language Journal 98 (2014)

spatially
move from a modern to a late bounded, historically
modern unselfconscious,
perspective
on language education. I andthen
culturallydiscuss
homogeneous"what (Appadurai, 1996,
p. 48). teaching of foreign
globalization means for the
and heritage languages in theI want specific
to examine thesecase
three beliefs
of in their
the
United States, in particular themanifestations
more specific challenges it
as they apply to FL
education
presents to the Standards in classrooms
(2006) and vs. the
thedemands
MLAof the
real world outside
(2007) Report. Finally, I consider thethe classroom.
implications
of globalization for the American FL classroom.
Order/ Stability vs. Mobility /Competition
WHAT DOES GLOBALIZATION MEAN FOR
THE TEACHING OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES As language teachers have been relying on
AROUND THE WORLD? stable syntaxes and lexicons, attested by reliable
grammars and dictionaries, they have also relied
In the introduction to their edited volume
on the hierarchy native speaker or native speaker
Dangerous Multilingualism, Blommaert academyand his (NS) vs. nonnative speaker (NNS) to
colleagues (Blommaert et al., 2012), following
establish norms of correct usage. It is true that the
Foucault (2003), characterize modernity along has been severely attacked in the last
NS myth
three axes that are put into question by globaliza-
thirty years in applied linguistics (see, for exam-
tion. These axes will be readily recognized by
ple, Davies, 2004; Leung, Harris, 8c Rampton,
language educators as forming some of the
1997)self-
, but it is still alive and well in FL classrooms,
evident truths of their profession. I list them here
in textbooks, and in publicity flyers for travel and
together with their accompanying modernist
study abroad. However, FL teachers have also
beliefs.
taken for granted that when it comes to teaching
style, the best pedagogical style is that of the
learners' national culture, not of the target
Axes of Modernity
culture; for example, it is considered best to
Order vs. Disorder in Language Use. There are teach American learners Chinese by using an
correct and incorrect, appropriate and inappro- American teaching style rather than a traditional
priate ways of using language. Students learn Chinese style (Lantolf 8c Genung, 2002).
to distinguish true from false, right from wrong, A major exception is, of course, the teaching of
well-argued from badly argued issues, and this languages with international reach through a
knowledge can be tested through true/false and variety of private and state-sponsored institutions,
multiple choice tests and essay questions. Stan- for example, the Cervantes Institute for Spanish
dard forms of the language are to be preferred to (see del Valle, this issue), the Confucius Institute
nonstandard forms like regional accents or for Mandarin Chinese (see Zhu Hua 8c Li Wei,
dialectal features. this issue), and the British Council for English.
English in particular is often associated around
Purity vs. Impurity. Linguistic systems have
the world with a global neoliberal pedagogy of
clearly classified structures and parts of speech.
interaction, participation, problem-solving, and
They also have clear boundaries that are to be
risk-taking that supersedes the traditional peda-
abided by; hybrid forms and codeswitchings are to
gogy of national educational systems (Block, Gray,
be avoided; being bilingual means being able to
8c Holborow, 2012). The tension between local
use each language in its monolingual, authentic,
and global pedagogical styles is one of the results
pure form.
of globalization. The field of SLA/applied
linguistics itself, which has to a large extent
Normality vs. Abnormality. The monolingual
gained its present reputation on the basis of
and monocultural speaker/ writer of the standard
language represents both the linguistic and research
the done on the acquisition of English, is
now being drawn upon by teachers of other
cultural norm for any learner of the language.
These norms have to be enforced through the languages, who are under pressure to adopt the
disciplinary mechanisms of the educational insti-
same pedagogic approaches as used for English in
tution. Modernist approaches to language the are teaching of other FLs. For example, Angela
based on an "ethnolinguistic assumption (...)Scarino (this issue) argues that Chinese teachers
that aligns language use and ethnic or cultural
in Australia, who are learning to teach intercul-
group identity in a linear and one-on-one turally, have to unlearn their own native speaker
relationship" (Blommaert et al., 2012, p. 3). Chinese ways and bridge over to the linguistic and
This group identity is "rightly territorialized,cultural ways of their Australian learners. As the

This content downloaded from

195.181.171.237 on Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:51:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Claire Kramsch 299

education of
mobility has exacerbated the competition
Chin
Chinese between FLs currently in demand - such
teachers of as
Republic,Chinese, Spanish, and Arabic - and languages
Taiwan, an
ly find that are less in demand - such as Russian, French, h
themselves
same school or German (Furman, Goldberg, & Lusin, 2007).
with ve
teaching In theand
case of the Mandarin taught through the
differ
drew Corcoran, Head of the Chinese American Confucius Institutes in the UK, it competes with
International School in San Francisco, personal the Cantonese spoken by ethnic Chinese immi-
communication) . grants. Zhu Hua and Li Wei (this issue) remark:
The competition between teaching styles is also "One Chinese language's gain seems to have led
a competition between the symbolic value of to another Chinese language's loss" (p. 328).
different languages on the global market where In sum, globalization has exacerbated the
languages other than English compete unequally competition among the FLs taught at educational
with English as a global language (Edwards, institutions around the world, it has skewed the
2012). In the European Union, 38% of citizens playing field in favor of English, and it has fueled
claim to be able to conduct a conversation in
linguistic rivalries between nation-states as to
which language will counterbalance the over-
English, whereas only 14% acknowledge knowing
either French or German. In 19 out of 29 whelming power of global English.
countries polled, English is the most widely
spoken language in addition to anotherPurity
tongue.
/Authenticity vs. Cultural Hybridity
In Sweden this is the case for 89% of the
While the monolingual NS has been contested
population, in the Netherlands for 87% (Euro-
as a target model for FL learners, the purity ideal
barometer, 2006) . With the current global finan-
embodied in the authentic NS still remains intact
cial crisis, many institutions in the Scandinavian
for FL educators. To be sure, they acknowledge
countries are cutting back on their FL programs
the increasing
and investing all their resources in the teaching of variations and nonstandard man-
what they perceive as the only truly necessaryifestations of the language as it is used in real life,
language to succeed in a global world: Englishbut their teaching is pegged to the pure linguistic
(Cameron, 2012; Lampa, 2007). In Finland, standard
88% established by the national gatekeeping
academies
of the population perceive English as being the monitored by NSs. Even when they
most useful language to know and theacknowledge
only that educated NSs are nowadays
more often than not bilingual in English and
language that should be taught in schools (Euro-
barometer, 2006; Salo, 2012). The competition another language, they consider bilingualism to
between English-as-a-basic-skill (Lo Bianco, bethis
nothing but double monolingualism (see
issue) and other languages is felt around the 1999). The linguistic and cultural hybridi-
Heller,
world as higher education institutions compete ty described by Makoni and Pennycook (2007) is
for international students by offering courses not in
something that FL educators strive to incul-
cate in their students in institutional settings. The
English that not only teach the traditional subject
Confucius Institutes' modernist belief in the
matter as it would be taught in the local language,
superiority of Putonghua over other regional
but teach it in a pedagogic style that is consonant
with a global neoliberal conception of languageand community varieties of Chinese, such as
Cantonese, is confronted with the postmodernist
and language use (de la Baume, 2013; Phillipson,
2009). global reality of diaspora Chinese communities
Thus, in this period of late modernity, who the resent being made into foreigners of a
modernist hierarchy between standard languages culture of which they feel they are the authentic,
and local dialects has been complexified by a that
newis, the legitimate representatives (Zhu Hua &
hierarchy where standard national languages Li Wei, this issue).
have to compete on the global market of linguisticBut what is authenticity? As the saying goes,
exchanges with global English, as well as with people seek authenticity when they have lost a
other standard languages and local varietiessense(see of history. This saying applies to the
modernity
Lo Bianco, this issue) . One would think that in the vs. late modernity debate that Fread-
United States, FLs are not in competition man with (this issue) discusses in her article. Modern-
English, but in American academia they ist do
approaches to language teaching, she argues,
compete for enrollments with courses taught have inespoused the synchronic view of language
typical of the social sciences and have therefore
English, for example in World Literature courses.
Furthermore, the global instrumentalization difficulty
of finding congruence with the teaching of

This content downloaded from

195.181.171.237 on Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:51:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 300 The Modern Language Journal 98 (2014)

In particular,
literature or culture that is with so much communication
diachronically based.
Quoting Andreas Huyssen happening now online,
she notes "aglobal technologies
turning
towards the past that standscompel us to review
in stark our notions
contrast toofthe
cultural
privileging of the future soauthenticity. As Kern (this of
characteristic issue)earlier
remarks: "No-
tions of
decades of twentieth-century cultural authenticity(p.
modernity" are similarly
368), pro-
and she adds: . . deep intercultural understand-
blematized by the anonymous origin and massive
ing - cannot be achieved without
reappropriation retrieving
of much material availablea
on
systematically diachronic the Internet" (p. 331). The
perspective innetwork
our communica-
dis-
cipline" (p. 367). Language
tions of learners can fundamen-
the Internet have introduced only
tal changes made
understand the situated choices in socially
by distributed
inter- genre and
locutors in conversations or by conventions
register writersand in texts
have if
problematized the
they understand how the communicative
"subjectivity norms,[of speak-
appropriate pragmatics,
and standardexperience
ers] is locked into the historical grammar that language
of teachers
strive to teach
groups" (Freadman, this issue, their students.
p. 368), thatOnis, the Internet,
their collective memories -people no longer
in other observe if
words, a strict
they separation
understand what a text relies on but does not between languages; comprehensibility online
need to say. trumps accuracy and appropriateness.
In the modernist view of second language Moreover, electronically mediated forms of
acquisition (SLA), scholars like Susan Gass (1998) communication, as Kern notes, "cannot be un-
were able to make the distinction between ambiguously associated with particular genres -
language learning and language use, a distinction
in fact each of them can support multiple genres
that many FL educators have long internalized. (and consequently if one expects a particular
In this view, learners first have to acquire genre the
to correspond to a particular medium
forms of the language and only once they have
one may find oneself in a genre-based misunder-
acquired them may they put them to use in (pp. 333-334). Such semiotic fluidity
standing)"
authentic communication activities. However, as presents a challenge to the traditional normativi ty
Firth and Wagner (1997) remarked, in a view of of FL education, which is expected to teach
FL education as lifelong learning in a mobile, usable skills but is increasingly outpaced by
global world, it becomes much more difficult the changes brought about by global means of
to distinguish between learning and use, or, as communication.

Block (2014) puts it, between multilingualism Indeed, in FL education, computer mediated
of learning and multilingualism of use. If FL communication has produced ambiguous results.
education is to prepare students to participate in On the one hand, the benefits are evident: greater
that world, then educators have to put into enthusiasm of learners, greater volume of lan-
question the strict integrity of individual lan-guage produced, increased output that leads to
guages as enforced in modernist times. Many greater proficiency, more creativity, playfulness,
SLA/ applied linguists go so far as to advocate autonomy. On the other hand, language educa-
"disinventing" languages (Makoni & Pennycook, tors have noted a greater shallowness of content,
2007, p. 1), "translanguaging" (Garcia, 2009, a greater self-centeredness, an increased genera-
p. 45), and "codemeshing" (Canagarajah, 2011, tional and social class gap (Foer, 2013), and a
p. 401) as real world language use that should be downplaying of cultural difference. As Kern
included in classroom practice (Cenoz & Gorter, remarks: "The risk is that the technology that
2011). defeats distance will also quash difference"
FL educators may rightly feel that it is not their (p. 339).
mission to encourage their students to codeswitch In sum, with globalization, the purity of the
with abandon in their classes, especially if they are standard language and the authenticity of its use
paid to teach satisfactory levels of proficiency in by authentic NSs are put into question. Alterna-
one FL. However, with globalization, we seem to tive sites of language use, such as the Internet and
have entered an era where different degrees of online exchanges, are exposing students to the
purity and authenticity are expected in different heteroglossic real world of linguistic hybridity,
venues of learning and use. There is much to be "truncated multilingualism" (Blommaert, 2010,
said for teaching the pure standard language in p. 103), and phatic exchanges that are no longer
classrooms, at least as a cultural icon of national what communicative language pedagogy had in
pride (Heller 8c Duchêne, 2012), but it is clear mind when it aimed at teaching learners how to
that classroom reality is not the hybrid hetero- interpret, express, and negotiate intended mean-
glossic reality of the world outside. ings (Breen 8c Candlin, 1980).

This content downloaded from

195.181.171.237 on Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:51:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Claire Kramsch 301

equivalences
Normality provided by dictionaries and stan-
/Standardiz
and dard grammars.
Rapid Change
Before we turn to the specific case of FL
While many
education in the United States, I wouldaspe
like to
academic
consider onelanguage
more major challenge not captured
TV by the three axes discussed above, namely,
discussions, pub the
cal works of
change in the symbolic value literat
of language learning
itself.
standard grammar
many uses of lang
online chats, marke
and Language Learning as convers
emails, Use Value vs. Language
acterized Learning
by as Exchange Value
pragma
uncertainty, and
The communicative revolution of the 1970s a
that inject additiona
and 1980s, which forcefully emphasized the need
supposedly stable sig
for learners to acquire usable skills, contrasted
the predictable
with previous approaches that taught how tonor
The anglicization
master the intricacies of the linguistic system o
guages around the
without any concern about its use value as a mode
hypersemioticization
of communication. With globalization, this use
2010; Kramsch, 2012
value is still important but it is framed differently.
ing phrases In their book, Languagenow
in Late Capitalism: Pride al
speaking: "c'est tro
and Profit , Heller and Duchêne (2012) show how
too much," and "it's too much," but not all of
proper, educated language use, promoted as an
them are appropriately used by any speaker in any
object of pride by the modern nation-state, is now
situation. Globalization puts pressure on educa- being seen as a source of profit in a globalized
tors to diversify their teaching of language rules
economy. Knowledge of a FL, they argue, is
and conventions at the microlevel of age, gender,
becoming increasingly desirable for its exchange
social class, and ethnicity and to teach what the value , that is, its ability to add to the learner's
diverse forms mean. For example, "c'est tout economic and symbolic capital. They write:
meuch" in the mouth of a young French NS can
mean: "I am speaking French but I am using the
During the 1990s and into the 21st century language
English phrase with the American meaning of
and culture have come to be seen primarily in
'over the top' to show that I am cool and 'with it.' economic terms. This economic discourse does not
However, even though I can pronounce the abruptly or entirely interrupt or replace older
English the American way, I don't want to sound discourses which treat language as political and
American, nor even bilingual, so I use a French cultural capital, associating it with the formation of
accent to assert my French identity. I can only do the nation-state; rather, the two are intertwined in
that because I am 20; my 80 year old grandmother complex ways.
would sound ridiculous speaking like that." Of (p. 3)
course, one would not want to teach beginning
learners of French how to produce these variousAs communicative language teaching (CLT) gave
nuances, but the contributors to this specialway to task-based language teaching (TBLT) and
issue all urge FL educators to give a much greatercontent-based instruction (CBI), also called
role to metalinguistic awareness and "metaprag- content and language integrated learning
matic reflexivity" (Blommaert & Rampton, (CLIL) in Europe, it has tightened the instru-
2011, p. 8) in their communicative pedagogies, mental goals of communication as problem
if only in receptive form, in order to give them a solving, appraisal, and control, and brought
glimpse of the broader horizon while they are language learning yet closer to the real world of
working on their standard conjugations and work and the economy. It has not abandoned the
declensions. teaching of national cultural information and
In sum, in addition to increasing the competi-
literary samples, but it has made them into goods
that can be exchanged for greater symbolic
tion among languages, and increasing the hybrid-
distinction. Knowledge of a FL has become what
ity of language itself, globalization multiplies
Heller and Duchêne (2012) call an "added value"
exponentially the possibilities of making meaning
by switching and mixing codes, modes, modali-(p. 2), that enables speakers to better meet their
consumer needs such as bringing their message
ties, genres, and registers far beyond the simple

This content downloaded from

195.181.171.237 on Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:51:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 302 The Modern Language Journal 98 (2014)

upon to help learners

across and getting the commodity they be successfulbut
want, users of
itthe
language
can also give them additional once they had power
symbolic left their classrooms.
and
prestige. These changes call for a more reflective, interpre-
It is no coincidence that beginning FL text- tive, historically grounded, and politically en-
books have become more and more like tourist gaged pedagogy than was called for by the
brochures (Gray, 2013; Thurlow & Jaworski,communicative
2010; language teaching of the eighties.
Vinall & Kramsch, 2014) . The commodification I willofdiscuss what such a pedagogy might look like
language and of language teaching materials at American
in educational institutions in the last

the new global economy has become a source of section, but first we need to review two documents
great concern to language educators in Europe that have been influential in defining FL educa-
and North America (see, e.g., Block, 2010; tion
Block in the United States and that now need to be
et al., 2012; Block 8c Cameron, 2002; Heller, revisited in light of globalization.
2003). They point out that whereas communica-
tive language teaching used to mean personal
engagement with interlocutors from different
cultures in one-on-one, one-at-a-time, face-to-faceHOW DOES GLOBALIZATION AFFECT FL
negotiation of difference, through global infor-EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES?
mation technologies and social networks it has
American FL education at the secondary and
become a means of making contact and staying in
touch by surfing diversity, not engaging with the postsecondary levels has been framed in t
last two decades by two documents that each tr
difference (for the distinction between diversity
to define the skills that will be needed in the 21st
and difference, see Bhabha, 1994).
century. I examine each of them in turn and how
Heller and Duchêne's analysis echoes Castells's
each is problematized by globalization.
(2009) diagnosis of what he calls "the global
network society" (p. 37). In his latest book,
Communication Power , Castells (2009) defines
Standards for Foreign Language Learning
culture as "the set of values and beliefs that

inform, guide, and motivate people's behavior"

The Standards for Foreign Language Learning
(p. 36). Distinguishing between global(2006),
culture
first published in 1996, followed from the
and local cultures, he writes: Proficiency framework of 1986, itself conceived
prior to the onset of globalization. As Byrnes
(2012)
What characterizes the global network society discussed recently, these standards have
is the
contraposition between the logic of the had their greatest impact in secondary instruction
global
and
net and the affirmation of a multiplicity ofonly
locallimited impact on FL education at the
selves (. . .) The common culture of thecollege
globallevel. Indeed the bifurcation into lan-
network society is a culture of protocols of guage
communi-
programs and literature/ cultural programs
cation enabling communication between different
at colleges and universities, later deplored by the
cultures on the basis not of shared values but of the
MLA (2007) Report, has persisted despite some
sharing of the value of communication.
notable exceptions (Byrnes, Maxim, 8c Norris,
(pp. 37-38, emphasis added)
2010) and the disciplinary connections envisaged
by the Standards did not get realized at the college
FL educators seem to be confronted now with the
level as could have been hoped for. Whether the
task of having to teach two kinds of culture:Five
a Cs represented only a mnemonic heuristic, or
global culture of communication for the sakea of
serious conceptualization of the language
communication and local cultures of shared learning enterprise, they captured the imagina-
values. The tension between these twotion ways of
of the profession on departmental Web sites,
conceiving of communication, negotiation, mission and
statements, and at teacher training
meaning increases the communicative workshops
gap be- both at the high school and at the
tween generations and between teachers collegiateand
levels. Precisely because the five notions
their students. have changed meaning since 1996, and because
In sum: Through its mobility of peopleyoung and FL learners might interpret them differ-
capital, its global technologies and its global ently from their older teachers, Magnan, Murphy,
information networks, globalization has changed and Sahakyan (2014) undertook an in-depth
the conditions under which FLs are taught, study of college-level FL students' understanding
learned, and used. It has destabilized the codes, of the Standards that I will refer to in the following
norms, and conventions that FL educators relied section.

This content downloaded from

195.181.171.237 on Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:51:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Claire Kramsch 303

The Five that the

Cs in college-level
an students Era
they studied in of
their first two years of FL instruction place the
Let us, then,
greatest value notrevisit
th
on Cultures, Connections, and
their modernist presup
Comparisons, but on Communities and Commu-
current late modernist
nication, and on the conversational power that
ing to the comes
Standards
from fluency in the language. Students (20
21st century should
linked the interpersonal str
and interpretive skills of
Standards 1 . 1 and 1.2, and the extracurricular and
1. Communication: 1
information, lifelong learning goals express
of Standards 5.2 with the f
and exchange pleasure that comes from talking with speakers of
opinion
interpret the target language and the self-enhancementand
written
that fluency brings to an ideal self (Magnan et al.,
variety of topics.
2014). Indeed, as the authors found out, second-
2. Cultures:. 2.1 under
between year
the students "seemed more driven [than first-
practices
between year thestudents] by theirproducts
images of their ideal selves
the culture studied. as users of the target language" (p. 235). For sure,
3. Connections : 3.1 connect with other disci- these students appear to understand well the link
between communication and culture, but what
plines and acquire information through the
foreign language; 3.2 acquire informationthey like most is not negotiating meanings and
and recognize the distinctive viewpoints only
norms, but interacting orally with people and
available through the foreign languages and participating in new communities. "It seemed that
its cultures. these students were reducing all communication
to the oral interaction they valued most" (Magnan
4. Comparisons'. 4.1 understand the nature of
language and 4.2 the concept of culture et al., 2014, p. 242).
through comparison with their own.
It has been argued (Byrnes et al., 2010) that
5. Communities:. 5.1 participate in multilingual college FL education has intellectually more
communities at home and around the world, ambitious goals than high school FL education.
both within and beyond the school setting; But colleges differ greatly in their intellectual
5.2 become lifelong learners by using the goals in the first two years of language instruction
and there is no consensus among the faculty of
language for personal enjoyment and
enrichment. collegiate language departments (see Byrnes,
2012, for a noteworthy exception) as to what
those goals should be. At a time when only
The first C, Communication, focused on the
transmission of information, the exchange of enrollments decide the fate of courses, faculty
retention, and departments' survival, educators
opinions, and the expression of likes and dislikes,
as well as on understanding and interpretation. struggle to meet a variety of student goals -
It required a certain amount of communicative instrumental, touristic, humanistic, and artistic -
in an effort to survive.
competence, defined by Breen and Candlin
(1980) as "the interpretation, expression, andThe second C, Cultures in FL education, used
negotiation" (p. 92) of intended meanings to as mean mostly national culture; today, as
well as the negotiation of the very norms previously
of mentioned, the link between one
national language and one national culture has
interaction and interpretation that differ from
culture to culture. Today, the meaning of been significantly weakened as people belong to
communication, as discussed by Castells (2009)different cultures and change cultures many
for the new global information age, seems to times
be over the course of their lifetime. National
restricted to communication for communica- cultures themselves have become hybrid and
fragmented. No wonder, then, that not a single
tion's sake, that is, phatic exchanges and reassur-
student in Magnan et al. 's (2014) survey sees
ing human contact; it does not seem to include
Cultures as the main point of language learning
negotiation of meaning nor of norms of interac-
andin
tion/interpretation. Indeed, this is reflected the term foreign as in "foreign languages and
cultures" becomes difficult to uphold. The
the attitudes of adolescents and young adults,
who, as Freadman and Kern (both this issue) authors write: "In today's world of multicompe-
point out, are often more eager to make tence (Cook, 1992), it is indeed difficult to define
themselves heard and responded to than to probe what is foreign , a label we can no longer relegate to
and explore the intended meanings of others. languages other than English or to cultures other
Interestingly, Magnan et al. 's (2014) survey shows than an essen tialized and idealized notion of what

This content downloaded from

195.181.171.237 on Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:51:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 304 The Modern Language Journal 98 (2014)

is American" (p. 231). In fact

goal forthat is one
college students reason,
learning a foreign or
Magnan et al. argue, why the students
heritage language. But under study
what communities do they
put such a low value on understand the fourthby that term?standard:
The term no longer
Comparisons (see the subsequent discussion).
represents speech communities bound by nation-
The third C, Connections with other disci- al boundaries. With global communication net-
works, communities have for the most part
plines, akin to the foreign-languages-across-the-
curriculum (FLAC) efforts, is not as easy now to
become deterritorialized, portable communities,
envisage as it was in 1996. Many students in
real and imagined, that people carry in their
Magnan et al.'s (2014) corpus cannot even heads. To be sure, FL learners still dream of
imagine they might gain any disciplinary knowl- communities of native speakers that they hope to
edge taught in a FL that they might not get when become accepted by during work or study abroad,
taught in English. Their conception of the but more often than not these communities are
relationship of language and thought clearly imagined differently from the imagined commu-
does not extend to ideologies, perspectives, and nities of foreign nationals (e.g., Kinginger, 2004;
intellectual traditions that in a global world so Wolcott 8c Motyka, 2013). Often, American
heavily influence global communication and are a students, brought up on global communication
source of so many international misunderstand- technologies, do not realize how restricted their
ings and even conflicts. The students in Magnan view of community is as compared to the view
et al.'s (2014) study give the impression that they of people around the world who still operate
are sensitive to and have an understanding of the through local face-to-face interactions in real
"constitutive view of language study (language time. Given the growth of anti-Americanism
represents what we are, think, and reveal about around the world, "participât (ing) in multilingual
ourselves) as opposed to an instrumental view communities . . . around the world" (National
(language consists of communicative and infor- Standards, 2006, p. 9) has become a much more
mation gathering skills) " (p. 246) , but they do not complex and challenging enterprise than it was in
extend the relativity of language and thought to the nineties.

the knowledge they acquire in English during As FL educators are currently updating the 2006
their academic career. For example, they appar- Standards (Cutshall, 2012; Magnan et al., 2014)
ently do not consider that Chinese history taught and trying to downplay the notion of hierarchy
in Mandarin Chinese in an East Asian Languages among the goals areas (1-5) by emphasizing their
department at an American university might be interrelatedness, the core of the paradox brought
very different from the same history taught in about by globalization remains, namely: How do
English in the History department of that same we teach local knowledges, local mindsets, and
university. local languages through a global set of ideologies
The fourth C, Comparison with the so-called regarding language, culture, communication, and
American culture of American learners, has learning? Before we explore this question, we
become inordinately more difficult now that need to look briefly at the second document,
American society is more and more dividedissued in 2007 by the AdHoc Committee on
economically, socially, and politically. What
Foreign Languages of the Modern Language
does it even mean for Americans to compare Association in the wake of 9/11.
the foreign culture with their own? The Standards
have been faulted for their too dichotomous
The MLA Report and Its Recommendations
view of culture (Phipps 8c Levine, 2010), but the
MLA (2007) Report is no less dichotomous in It its
has only been seven years since the publica-
tion as
exhortations to FL majors to "grasp themselves of the MLA (2007) Report and already
Americans, that is, as members of a society notions
that is such as "translingual and transcultural
foreign to others" (p. 237). Magnan et al.'s competence"
(2014) (p. 237) and "operating between
languages"
students have a healthy distrust of stereotypes, but (p. 37) are in need of recontextualiz-
they seem to want to dispel them throughing direct
in the face of globalization. While the phrase
contact with members of other communities on "translingual and transcultural competence"
an individual basis and by avoiding divisive topics
(MLA, 2007, p. 237) drew on Marie Louise Pratt's
work in postcolonial studies and acknowledged
rather than exploring differences and negotiating
global misunderstandings. the power and status differential between speak-
Together with the first C, Communication, ers of majority and minority languages (Kramsch,
Magnan et al. (2014) found that the fifth C, the spread of electronic social networks,
2010),
Communities, has now become the most valued which has affected students' social habitus and

This content downloaded from

195.181.171.237 on Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:51:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Claire Kramsch 305

the main question raised in this pra

conversational Introduction:
nicativeWhyplaying
should American FL educators care about f
metaphor globalization? In of
answering each"opone, I draw on
(MLA, 2007, p.
the wealth of insights gained from the37)
articles tha
for learning to
constitute this special issue. m
cultural worldview
1 . What does it mean to abandon the educated native
ing" (Garcia, 200
speaker ( NS ) as the goal of instruction f What
(Canagarajah, 2011
is to happen with the current approach
"translingual to
and
instruction that focuses on communication ,
(MLA, 2007, p. 237
proficiency, grammar instruction, and other
ability to overcom
aspects of what might be called "traditional"
conflictual versions
language instruction ?
use of various ling
repertoires" (Blom
to need. The real living monolingual NS in all his/her
While the MLA Report has always foundphonological,
a stylistic, ethnic, and social diversity
greater echo at the postsecondary level (see for
was never the goal of instruction. The goal was
always a standard variety of a more or less
example, Phipps & Levine, 2010) than in K-12, its
recommendations regarding the FL major are educated urban metropolitan speaker. The gap
now caught in the larger debate about the future
between this target and the real, multilingual NS
of higher education under neoliberal conditions
reality of today's world is growing larger because
of global symbolic and economic competitive-of the global mobility, the Internet, social net-
ness. The humanistic goals of FL education works, and the global influence of English and
proposed by the MLA are seen by many as being Anglo-American pragmatics. It doesn't mean we
in conflict with the more instrumental, economic
should stop teaching the standard, but we should
goals of the world of business and finance, and
stop pretending this is how all native speakers
the communication industry (Block et al., 2012;
speak in all walks of life and in all circumstances.
Freadman, this issue). Sometimes adherence to the standard language is
The changing role of Spanish as an eminentlyappropriate; at many other times it is appropriate
local and eminently global language - the para-
to use other norms and registers.
dox of our time - might serve as a model to The purpose is not to abandon all standard
rethink not only the teaching of Spanish as apedagogic norms of language use as the goal of
instruction. It is, rather, to strive to make our
heritage language, but the teaching of all foreign
languages in an era of globalization. Precisely students into multilingual individuals, sensitive to
because Spanish intersects with so many histories, linguistic, cultural, and above all, semiotic diver-
and presents so many linguistic, cultural, andsity, and willing to engage with difference, that is,
political norms and contexts, in which the United to grapple with differences in social, cultural,
States is imbricated, it can nurture the kind of political, and religious worldviews. Engaging with
reflexivity that a postmodern era calls for. As del difference means mastering the linguistic code
Valle (this issue) writes: "What is crucial from the well enough to be able to assume responsibility
position that I am taking here is less the choice of for one's linguistic choices and to respond
one particular norm over others than the impor- appropriately to the choices made by others.
tance that students be made aware that a choice But while diversity can be noncommittal, differ-
was made and be equipped with the necessary ence requires putting oneself on the line. While a
analytical tools to see the cultural, political, and
modernist pedagogy focuses on developing gram-
social context of the choice" (p. 360) . matical and lexical accuracy, fluency, and com-
It is now time to consider more concretelyplexity,
how and on describing genre and performing
FL classrooms can meet the challenges posed genre-based
by tasks (Byrnes & Maxim, 2004), a
postmodernist relational pedagogy practices
globalization as outlined in the previous sections.
translations of all kinds across codes, modes,
WHAT DOES A FOCUS ON GLOBALIZATION modalities, genres, and points of view and
MEAN FOR THE AMERICAN FOREIGN encourages the learner to adopt an alien speak-
LANGUAGE CLASSROOM? er's perspective. This point is made forcefully
by Freadman (this issue): "There is a certain
The following are frequently asked questions
humility required for the enterprise of intercul-
tural understanding:
that will serve to structure possible responses to One's own voice may, as in

This content downloaded from

195.181.171.237 on Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:51:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 306 The Modern Language Journal 98 (2014)

music, harmonize in anytheory,

culturalbilingualism
environment
and multilingualism? Here
only on condition the opinions diverge
of a well-attuned between
ear" (p.social
374) scientists and
for the stories of others.humanists.
Such an For approach
many social scientists,
does the Stand-
not invalidate the more modernist
ards are, at best, anapproaches,
education policy statement,
not a scientific
but redraws their final horizon to fitresearch
a globalstudy. Most psycholin-
world
of increased semiotic uncertainty
guistic SLA, they and symbolic
argue, provides a scientific basis
for naturalistic,
power struggles. In a similar vein, Kern not instructed, learning. Socio-
(this issue)
proposes teaching language cultural
"not theory
justis aas
theory about the nature of
a norma-
tive system but also as an learning,
adaptive with special
practiceemphasisthaton language
interacts with its cultural and
learning; technological
it has little to say about the nature of
mediations" (p. 344). language as a social semiotic (Byrnes, 2006). By
contrast, for humanists like Anne Freadman (this
2. What does it mean toissue),
take the multilingual
memory studies can bring back to FL
individual as the model of instruction ?
language instruction the diachronic dimension
that got lost with the demise of philology and the
It means that the focus is no longer on discrete
ascendancy of synchronic linguistics. Integrating
and testable skills but on a processes: Awareness of
curriculum around the notion of narrative
Language with a capital L, cognitive flexibility,
includes, she argues, stories and storytellers, the
metaphoric imagination, symbolic competence
universal and the particular, permanence and
(Kramsch, 2009; Kramsch & Whiteside, 2008) . We
variations and the idea of genre as process, not
have to continue teaching what we have always
product.
taught, but use the opportunity to reflect on
Clearly we need both perspectives. Whatever
language and language use. Return to translation
the scholarly basis chosen, globalization today is
as a way of improving and understanding of both
demanding more from teachers than just apply-
the L2 and the LI. Explore the savvy management
of LI and L2 in the classroom. Teach discourse
ing the findings from research to their teaching
practice. Whether linguists or humanists, they are
analysis, linguistic and pragmatic variation,asked
per- to reflect with their students on the
spective and point of view, both in the L2 at the
subjective aspects of language learning and
intermediate and advanced levels and as capstone
teaching: how they perceive themselves an
courses taught in English for FL majors (del Valle,
others, the stories they remember from the past
this issue). Teach language choice right from the
the way they imagine the future. How all this
start and - as the learners become more profi-
impacts in the present the questions learners a
cient - teach the meaning of linguistic and
of their teachers and teachers of their students
discursive choices; indeed, as Byrnes (2012)
(see Scarino, this issue), and the stories they both
repeatedly reminds us, the lower levels of the
ask other speakers and writers to tell them
curriculum should be designed according to the
(Freadman, this issue).
skills that will ultimately be required at the upper
levels. Help learners manage identities and4. If the purpose is to learn something about
subject positions by discussing how speakers, language, can't one learn that just through
writers, interlocutors, and fictional characters English ?
position themselves vis-à-vis others through lan-
guage (see, for example, the use of translating,
Foreign languages become crucial for rethink-
transposing, and transcribing exercises in
ing the future of American education. Equally
Kramsch & Huffmaster, 2014). The goal is not
distant from a totalizing tourist gaze on FL and
just to expose students to a diversity of accents,
cultures, and a totalizing view of language as
and registers, but have them critically engage with
formal symbolic system, each language presents a
the social and political differences that they
index.
unique case study in local particularity, starting
with its unique grammar right up to its unique
literature. Focusing on local particularity enables
3. What should serve as the scientific basis for FL
teachers and learners to avoid both the tourist's
study ?
exoticized transactional approach and the philol-
To which area of research should FL teachers
ogist's decontextualized grammar/ translation
approach.
turn to make informed pedagogic decisions: The It can open students' eyes to the way
meaning is produced, and to the processes of
Standards? The MLA Report? Psycholinguistic
SLA research? A broader view of SLA based on
power and control that enter into the construc-
tion and dissemination of knowledge. By
sociocultural theory, ecological, and complexity

This content downloaded from

195.181.171.237 on Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:51:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Claire Kramsch 307

multiplying the
talk about, whether it be politics, ways
sex, or religion, is
zation prompts FL
a political act. If the goal of FL education in an e
era of globalization is to form
predetermined raise awareness of what a
mation, language can andmore
and cannot do (see question on 2),
then teachingand
historically FLs necessarily becomes
subje a political
(del Valle, this
activity, that is, an activity inissue).
which power relation-
ships get discussed and negotiated. This facet of
5. Doesn't this
globalization confronts the result
language educator
relativism ?
with a dilemma: On the one hand many teachers
and students believe and are told by their
If, as Heidi Byrnes ad
institutions that politics has no place in the
as a "social semiotic"
language classroom. On the other hand, many
is seen "as a dynamic
topics discussed in writing or online in the FL are
meaning-making" (By
political in nature (e.g., Kramsch, 2012b, 2013;
task of the teacher is
Kubota, 2012; Wertsch, 2012). The very choice of
and registerial repe
which language to learn becomes a political
textual meaning-ma
choice. For example, while the teaching of
by linking the disc
Mandarin is promoted by the Chinese govern-
environment of the la
ment to explicitly promote the political goals of
for meaning-making
the nation-state, these goals clash with those of
individual users' sit
the Cantonese-speaking ethnic Chinese students
Byrnes' s systemic f
who have different personal and political interests.
situational context is
As Zhu Hua and Li Wei (this issue) write, at stake is
genre and register th
who "has the legitimacy to represent the authentic
lexicogrammatical fea
Chinese language and culture" (p. 327) .
So here, the language
indeed relative to the demands of the situation.
Modernist pedagogies tended to restrict culture
to customs and practices rather than beliefs and
A modernist pedagogy feels it necessary to
values (see Castells's earlier definition). With the
standardize the situation to make it teachable. A
global reach of the Confucius Institutes clashing
pedagogy for global times must wonder whether
with the local culture of ethnic Chinese, Chinese
this is the best way to teach learners how to link
text and social context in a world that has become
teachers are faced with a delicate political problem
that cannot be avoided. It is often thought that the
much more unstable, in part because, as Fread-
use of computer-mediated communication pro-
man (this issue) argues, people have different
vides a politically neutral space of interchange, but
memories that bring the past into the present.
Kern (this issue, p. 344), quoting Morozov (2011,
Culture, as "the way intergenerational memories
p. 298) warns us: "All too often the design of
pervade present conversations" (p. 373), requires
technologies simply conceals the ideologies and
a diachronic approach typical of the humanities,
political agendas of their creators." While it is not
not the synchronic approach of the social
the role of FL teachers to impose on their students
sciences. This brings us back to the crucial issue
their views on events, it is their responsibility to
of teacher professional development (see ques-
expose them to various perspectives (even contro-
tion 10).
versial ones) and to help them discuss the points
6. If FL educators focus on historical and subjective of view adopted by speakers, writers, and bloggers
meaning construction , doesn *t that lead them to on these events - and not only to make them
take a political stance toward history and culture practice the conventional, formal features of
in the FL classroom ? textual genres and registers. It is also their
responsibility to model for their students through
The global Internet and the enormous inter- narratives of personal experience the deep
connectedness it brings about is also the source of emotions that memories and beliefs generate in
growing inequalities and injustices around the those who hold them.

world (Packer, 2013). The teaching of foreign

languages under global conditions necessarily 7. Ultimately , what is the value added of globaliza-
acquires political meaning. The very choice of tion for foreign language learners and teachers ?
using global English or the country's national Yes, sources of knowledge are decentered, norms
language when traveling abroad is a political and perspectives , and interpretations have in-
choice. What one chooses to talk about or not to creased, but what does this mean for instruction ?

This content downloaded from

195.181.171.237 on Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:51:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 308 The Modern Language Journal 98 (2014)
Globalization requires us tois focus
9. What lessin on
the role of literature foreign language
predetermined, stable, predictable
education in this globalfacts
age ? of a
linguistic, functional, or cultural nature, and
Appadurai (1996)
more on such fluid discourse suggests that in aas
processes globalized,
deterritorialized world, where cinema, television,
comparison, contrast, analysis, interpretation,
inferencing, and de- and and video technology play a powerfulIt
recontextualization. role,
"imagination
prompts us to rethink the role of theand fantasy are antidotes
teacher from to the
finitude of social experience"
a classroom manager and information (p. 53). Indeed,
provider tothe
a fellow analyst and interpreter (albeit a more and
increasingly touristic flavor of FL textbooks
the ever more attractive multimedia materials that
experienced one), and someone who can help
accompany
students place the facts into them offer
their pathways for imagining
appropriate
other possible
historical and subjective context. lives. He adds: "For the new power
If we are teaching FL not of the imagination for
primarily in the fabrication
academic of social lives
purposes but for their use is inescapably
in thetied up with
real worldimages,by ideas, and
secondary school studentsopportunities and first- that come
and from elsewhere, often
second-
year students at colleges and moved around by the vehicles
universities, most of massof media"
(p.
them nonmajors, then FL instruction must take 54). These "scenarios of possibility" (Heath,
into account the discourse 2000, p. 126) have their
skills roots in the same
necessary topoetic
navigate this new global world. imagination as works of literature. As Freadman
(this issue) notes, "the personal narratives that are
8. What if these skills of the comparison, contrast
basis of memory studies , some of
may fulfill
analysis , interpretation etc., whatdo is called
notfor by Shanahan (1997),
correspond to in valor-
what the students want from learning
ising 'the a foreign
extent to which the affective element is
language? (Magnan et al., 2014)
embedded in the nature of symbolic expression'"
(p. 371). Whether these are dreams of opportu-
The feminist activist Gayatri nity associated with the learningSpi-
Chakravorty of English, or
vak, describing the tension between local activism with
dreams of escape and adventure associated
for social justice and the global forces of the learning of other alien languages, FL educa-
capitalism, shows a kind of political engagement tion is always a trial run for the construction of an
that could inspire FL educators on how to deal imagined multilingual subject (Kramsch, 2009).
with this difficult question. Acceding to the wishes Thus, globalization brings back an interest in
literature, but not as it was studied in modernist
of FL students is, she would say, a kind of problem-
solving solution. It forgets that student desires times. Today, as Freadman (this issue) argues,
themselves come from elsewhere: the global personal stories can provide a "narrative hook"
media, the available global social networks, the (p. 370) to engage students' imagination and
global film industry, the global economy. Learn- emotional investment to empathize with charac-
ers who give priority to communication and ters even if they cannot fully understand experi-
communities have internalized discourses from ences they have not themselves lived through.
Facebook and the world of electronic connectivity
10. How can language teachers be best prepared to
that have made them forget that there are other
deal with the effects of global migrations , global
valuable forms of engagement with others, with technologies , and global media on FL education ?
language and with themselves, that she calls
There is a consensus among the contributors
cultural infrastructures. She writes about the "slow
and deep language learning that must accompany
to this special issue that the increased complexity
accessing cultural infrastructures so real
in long
the way we are to conceive of language,
term change might be envisaged [. . . This communication,
is] the culture, and learning in an era
distinction between problem solving and of the
globalization calls for greater reflexivity and
uncoercive rearrangement of desires - between interpretive capacities on the part of both
doctors without borders and primary health care, and learners. While modernist perspec-
teachers
let us say" (Spivak, n.d., p. 2). FL educatorstives
are in
on FL education have favored doing over
reflecting, and performance over analysis and
charge of the primary health care of their students
and that means showing, modeling, performing, interpretation, late modernist approaches add a
and helping them perform the uncoercive reflective element or self-awareness that enable
rearrangement of [their] desires - which Spivak language users to better interpret the communi-
sees as the very goal of the humanities (Spivak, cative situations in which they are to make
2004). situated choices. Angela Scarino (this issue)

This content downloaded from

195.181.171.237 on Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:51:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Claire Kramsch 309

suggests careful that teac

attention to their students' experience
theoretical
and memories,underst
but also through reflection on
culture,theirand learn
own experience informed by a multidisci
learningplinary
includes c
professional training. For FL learners,
jective and intersub
developing their own voice increasingly means
guage developing
but alsoan ear for the from
voices of others - n
memories, emotio
doubt a crucial, if lifelong, educational goal.
participants in co
reference to Gadamer's hermeneutics and to the

fusion of horizons that results from understanding

REFERENCES
the other and the self in relation to one another
underscores the diachronic humanistic mission of
Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at large: Cultural
the language teacher as well as his/her social and dimensions of globalization. Minneapolis, MN: Uni-
political mission in a global world. Her reference versity of Minnesota Press.
to Hasan's reflection literacy (2003) and Kramsch
Bhabha, H. (1994). The location of culture. London:
and Whiteside's (2008) notion of symbolic Routledge.
Block, D. (2010). Globalization and Language teaching.
competence builds on the fundamental insight,
advocated also by Byrnes (2006), that language In D. Block 8c D. Cameron (Eds.), Globalization and
teachers are teachers of meaning, and that the language teaching (pp. 287-304). London:
Routledge.
notion of meaning should be expanded to
Block, D. (2014). Becoming multilingual and being
include its interpretive and discursive symbolic
multilingual: Some thoughts. In J. Cenoz 8c D.
dimensions. The professional repertoire of lan- Gorter (Eds.), Multilingual education: Between
guage teachers should include, in that respect, a language learning and translanguaging. Cambridge:
deep reflection on their own personal experi- Cambridge University Press.
ences and professional trajectories. Block, D., 8c Cameron, D. (Eds.). (2002). Globalization
Appadurai (1996), reflecting on the deterri- and language teaching. London: Routledge.
torialization of social life brought aboutBlock,
by D., Gray, J., 8c Holborow, M. (2012). Neoliberalism
globalization, wrote: "Lives today are as much and applied linguistics. London: Routledge.
acts of projection and imagination as they areBlommaert, J. (2010). The sociolinguistics of globalization.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
enactments of known scripts or predictable out-
Blommaert, J., 8c Rampton, B. (2011). Language and
comes" (p. 61 ) .José del Valle and Anne Freadman
superdiversity. Diversities , 13, 1-21.
(both this issue) each echo this sentiment as they
Blommaert, J., Leppänen, S., Pahta, P., 8c Räisänen, T.
argue for reinforcing the link between the study (Eds.). (2012). Dangerous multilingualism: Northern
of language and literary/ cui turai studies in order perspectives on order , purity and normality. London:
to restore the domains of imagination and Palgrave Macmillan.
fantasy. While fantasy might be seen as having
Breen, M., 8c Candlin, C. (1980). The essentials of a
individualistic and even escapist connotations, communicative curriculum in language teaching.
imagination in its collective forms can be seen Applied Linguistics, 1, 89-112.
Byrnes,
today as the prerequisite for empathy and a H. (Ed.). (2006) . Advanced language learning: The
contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky. London:
staging ground for moral action. Continuum.

Byrnes, H. (2012). Of frameworks and the goals of

CONCLUSION collegiate foreign language education: Critical
reflections. Applied Linguistics Review , 3, 1-24.
Ultimately, what globalization encourages
Byrnes, FL
H., 8c Maxim, H. H. (Eds.). (2004). Advanced
educators to do is not to lose sight of theforeign
whole language learning: A challenge to college
even as they are busy teaching testable structures
programs. Boston, MA: Heinle Thomson.
Byrnes,of
and drawing up the structural progression H., Maxim, H. H., 8c Norris, J. M. (2010).
Realizing advanced foreign language writing
course syllabi. Keeping an eye on the whole means
development
catching the essence of a word, an utterance, a in collegiate education: Curricular
design, pedagogy, assessment. Modern Language
gesture, a silence as they occur inside and outside
Journal, 94( si).
the classroom, and seeing them as a manifestation
Cameron, D. (2006) . Styling the worker: Gender and the
of a speaker's or a writer's voice, informed by an
commodification of language in the globalized
awareness of the global communicative situation,
service economy. In N. Coupland 8c A. Jaworski
rather than just by the correct way of constructing
(Eds.) , The discourse reader (pp. 433-453) . London:
sentences, paragraphs, and texts. For FL Routledge.
educa-
tors, such an awareness is developedCameron,
through
D. (2012). Verbal hygiene. London: Routledge.

This content downloaded from

195.181.171.237 on Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:51:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 310 The Modern Language Journal 98 (2014)
Canagarajah, S. (2011). Codemeshing in academic Language in late capitalism (pp. 1-21). London:
writing: Identifying teachable strategies of trans- Routledge.
languaging. Modern Language Journal, 95, 401-417. Kinginger, C. (2004). Alice doesn't live here anymore:
Castells, M. (1996). The information age: Economy, society Foreign language learning and identity recon-
and culture. Vol. I. The rise of the network society. struction. In A. Pavlenko 8c A. Blackledge (Eds.),
Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts
Castells, M. (2009). Communication power. Oxford: (pp. 219-242). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual
Oxford University Press. Matters.

Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2011). A holistic approach to Kramsch, C. (2009). The multilingual subject. Oxford:
multilingual education: Introduction. Modern Oxford University Press.
Language Journal, 95, 339-343. Kramsch, C. (2010). Theorizing translingual/ transcul-
Cutshall, S. (2012). More than a decade of Standards: A tural competence. In G. Levine & A. Phipps (Eds.),
look at how far we've come. Language Educator, 7, Critical and intercultural theory and language pedagogy
42-47. (pp. 15-31). Boston: Heinle Cengage Learning.
Davies, A. (2004). The native speaker in applied Kramsch, C. (2012a). Imposture: A late modern notion
linguistics. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.), The in post-structuralist SLA research. Applied Linguis-
handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 431-451). tics, 33, 483-502.
Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Kramsch, C. (2012b). Editor's introduction to the
de la Baume, M. (2013, May 24). Bid in France to add special issue on "History and memory in FL
courses in English raises fear for language. New study." L2 Journal, 4, 1-8.
York Times, AIO. Kramsch, C. (2012c). Authenticity and legitimacy in
Edwards, J. (2012). Multilingualism: Understanding lin- multilingual SLA. Critical Multilingualism Studies, 1,
guistic diversity. London: Continuum. 108-128.
Eurobarometer. (2006). Special Eurobarometer 243. Euro- Kramsch, C. (2013). History and memory in the
peans and their languages. Accessed 15 March 2009 development of intercultural competence. In F.
at http://ec.europa.eu/education/languages/pdf/ Sharifian 8c M. Jarmani (Eds.), Language and
doc631_en.pdf intercultural communication in the new era (pp. 23-
Firth, A., 8c Wagner, J. (1997). On discourse, communi- 38). London: Routledge.
cation, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA Kramsch, C., 8c Huffmaster, M. (2014). Multilingual
research. Modern Language Journal, 81, 285-300. practices in the foreign language classroom. Inj.
Foer, J. S. (2013, June 9). How not to be alone. New York Cenoz 8c D. Gorter (Eds.), Multilingual education:
Times, SRI 2. Between language learning and translanguaging.
Foucault, M. (2003). Abnormal. New York: Picador. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Furman, N., Goldberg, D., 8c Lusin, N. (2007). Enroll- Kramsch, C., 8c Whiteside, A. (2008). Language ecology
ments in languages other than English in U.S. in multilingual settings. Towards a theory of
institutions of higher education. Fall 2006. New symbolic competence. Applied Linguistics, 29,
York: MLA. 645-672.
Kubota, R. (2012). Memories of war: Exploring victim-
Garcia, O. (2009). Bilingual education in the 21st century:
Global perspectives. Maiden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. victimizer perspectives in critical content-based
Gass, S. (1998). Apples and oranges: Or, why apples are instruction in Japanese. L2 Journal, 4, 37-57.
not oranges and don't need to be. A response Lampa,
to B. C. (2007) . Mother tongue plus two. European
Firth and Wagner. Modern Language Journal, 82, languages in Sweden: Unrealistic educational
83-90. goal? Language Policy, 6, 333-358.
Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: SelfLantolf,
and J., 8c Genung, P. B. (2002). "I'd rather switch
society in the late modern age. Stanford: Stanford than fight:" An activity-theoretic study of power,
University Press. success, and failure in a foreign language class-
Gray, J. (Ed.). (2013). Critical perspectives on languageroom. In C. Kramsch (Ed.), Language acquisition
teaching materials. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave and language socialization. Ecological perspectives (pp.
Macmillan. 175-197). London: Continuum.
Leung, C., Harris, R., 8c Rampton, B. (1997). The
Hasan, R. (2003). Globalization, literacy and ideology.
World Englishes, 22, 433-448. idealized native speaker, reified ethnicities, and
Heath, S. B. (2000). Seeing our way into learning. classroom realities. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 543-560.
Cambridge Journal of Education, 30, 121-132. Magnan, S. S., Murphy, D., 8c Sahakyan, N. (2014). Goals
Heller, M. (1999). Linguistic minorities and modernity: of
A collegiate learners and the Standards for Foreign
sociolinguistic ethnography. London: Longman. Language Learning. Modern Language Journal, 98,
Supplement.
Heller, M. (2003). Globalization, the new economy, and
the commodification of language and identity.
Makoni, S., 8c Pennycook, A. (2007). Disinventing and
Journal of Sociolinguistics, 7, 473-492. reconstituting languages. In S. Makoni 8c A.
Heller, M., 8c Duchêne, A. (2012). Pride and profit:Pennycook (Eds.), Disinventing and reconstituting
Changing discourses of language, capital and languages (pp. 1-41). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual
nation-state. In A. Duchêne 8c M. Heller (Eds.), Matters.

This content downloaded from

195.181.171.237 on Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:51:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Claire Kramsch 311

May, S.
(2012). Languag
order, purity and normality (pp. 25-40). New York:
London: Routledge.
Palgrave Macmillan.
MLA Ad Hoc Shanahan, D. (1997).Committe
Articulating the relation between
Foreign languages
language, literature, and culture: Toward a new an
structures for
agenda for foreign languagea teaching chan
and re-
234-245. search. Modern Language Journal , 81, 164-174.
Morozov, E. (2011). The net delusion: The dark side of
Spivak, G. C (n.d.). The engaged feminist intellectual.
internet freedom. New York: Public Affairs. Accessed 10 June 2013 at http://inkrit.de/
National Standards in Foreign Language Education tagungen/ document/280-spivak.pdf
Project. (2006). Standards for foreign language
Spivak, G. C. (2004). Righting wrongs. South Atlantic
learning: Preparing for the 21st century. Yonkers, Quarterly , 103 , 523-581.
Thurlow, C., 8c Jaworski, A. (2010). Tourism discourse:
NY: American Council for the Teaching of Foreign
Languages. Language and global mobility. London: Palgrave
Packer, G. (2013, May 27). Change the world: Silicon Macmillan.

Valley gets political. New Yorker ; 44-55. Vertovec, S. (2007). Super-diversity and its implications.
Phillipson, R. (2009). Linguistic imperialism continued. Ethnic and Racial Studies , 30, 1024-1054.
London: Routledge. Vinall, K., 8c Kramsch, C. (2014). The cultural politics of
Phipps, A., & Levine, G. (2010). What is language language textbooks in the era of globalization. In
pedagogy for? In G. Levine & A. Phipps (Eds.), X. L. Curdt-Christiansen 8c C. Weninger (Eds.),
Critical and intercultural theory and language Language, ideology, and education: The politics of
pedagogy (pp. 1-14). Boston: Heinle Cengage textbooks in language education. London: Routledge.
Learning. Wertsch,J. (2012). Texts of memory and texts of history.
Salo, O.-P. (2012). Finland's official bilingualism - A L2 Journal, 4 , 9-20.
bed of roses or of Procrustes? In J. Blommaert, S. Wolcott, T., 8c Motyka, M. (2013). Subjectivity and
Leppänen, P. Pahta, 8c T. Raisänen (Eds.), spirituality during study abroad. A case study. L2
Dangerous multilingualism: Northern perspectives on Journal, 5, 22-42.

This content downloaded from

195.181.171.237 on Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:51:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms