The Key to Global Understanding

8/11/2019 The Key to Global Understanding

1/33

The Key to Global Understanding: World Languages EducationWhy Schools Need to AdaptAuthor(s): Francois Victor TochonReviewed work(s):Source: Review of Educational Research, Vol. 79, No. 2 (Jun., 2009), pp. 650-681Published by: American Educational Research AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40469052 .Accessed: 28/02/2013 17:47

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.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 formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

American Educational Research Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to Review of Educational Research.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloade d on Thu, 28 Feb 2013 17:47: 08 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aerahttp://www.jstor.org/stable/40469052?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/40469052?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aera


2/33

ReviewfEducational esearchJune 009,Vol. 9,No.2,pp.650-681

DOI:10.3102/0034654308325898

2009AERA, ttp://rer.aera.net

The Keyto GlobalUnderstanding:World LanguagesEducation Why

SchoolsNeedto Adapt

FrancoisVictorTochonUniversityfWisconsin-Madison

This eviewrticle s a pleafor he ducation ommunityo reconsider heplaceofworld anguages eaching ithin he chools.With lobalization,languagesducationhould e one of he trategic oalsof ublic s well sprivate ducation. he rticle eviews esearchn he est ge evelor earn-ing language, he ssets fbilingualism,he roblemshat rise romackofrecognitionor ther anguagesndcultures, heways ochange urrentlanguage ducation,ndthe ntegrationf nternationalanguage olicies.The iterature eviewedoints t how he ssues iscussed an be resolvedto ncrease lobalunderstanding.

Keywords: bilingualism, oreign anguage, lobalization, anguagepolicy,linguistic uman ights, econd anguage cquisition.

Our ask s not omake ocieties afe or lobalizationut o make he lobalsystemafe or ecent ocieties.

John . weeney

Languages ther han nglish hould o onger e considered foreign : heyare world anguages, s well as English, t the ime f globalization. hisreviewarticle aises series f questions n the ationale orworld anguageearning ndits ntegrationnto chools s early s possible.Referring o the necessary oleoflanguageearning nd eachingnthe nternationalizationrocessmay ound kinto trying o break pendoors; uch s the hared nderstandinghat onversingwith ther eoples o often ntails: earning t least something bout heir an-guageand culture. o far, anguageswere earned or easons hatwere, n themain, umanistic r utilitarian, f not or leasure: xploring new ulture, rav-eling, nd finding job (Sieloff-Magnan Tochon, 001).Nowadays,earning

languages ther han ne's own maybecome matter f keeping ne's ob andmaintaining ne's survival. he mportance f anguages or mployments suchthat he Council f Europe 2002)hascreated uropass, language assport y

650

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/33

World anguages ducation

which itizens an increase heir mobility ithin he EuropeanUnion;namely,criteria re uch hat s a principle ne must t east partlymaster he anguage fthe ountry n which ne ntends o work r within hich ne wants o negotiatecontracts.1 itizens escribe heir anguagekills n a scalebasedon the CommonEuropean ramework fReference or anguages. sia s multilinguals well ndisopening roadly oEnglish Tsui&Tollefson, 007).Africa smultilingual,nditspopulations avegrown ccustomed o the nflux f overlappinganguages fpower uring ndafter olonization Fishman, 999;Maurais Morris, 003). ntheUnited tates, anguages aveoften een nterpreteds the idetrack or therpriorities. hereas 2.7% of Europeans re fluent n at eastone anguage therthan heirmother ongue, .3%of Americans an claim such bilingual luency(Trimnell, 005).

This article xplores hevalue of anguages n the chooling rocess, nd taddresses he takes f globalization rom schoolpolicyperspective: irst, sthere rationale egardinganguageearning hatmight ustify hanging he ur-rent -12 priorities? econd,why earn nother anguage?What re the dvan-tages nd ssets fbecoming roficientna second anguage, hatevertmay e?Third, hywouldn't ne anguage ecome heworld anguage, ndwhywouldn'tit be an appropriatedea?Fourth, hat re the takes f not aking areof otherlanguagesnschooling? ifth, hat re he ways odoit right, nd ixth, hat rethe nternationalriteria? ssuch, his rticle aswritten ith n nterdisciplinaryperspective.ndeed, mong he olutions hat ermit he ntegration f anguagesincurrent urricula s that f part-timeinguisticmmersion that s,teaching heusual disciplines n another anguagefor part of the week. The next ectionaddresses he irst uestion.

What s the BestAgeto Learn Another anguage?

If nvestmentsnfactories ere hemost mportantnvestmentsn he ndus-trial ge,themost mportantnvestmentsn an information gearesurelyinvestmentsn he uman rain.

Lawrenceummers, .S.treasuryecretary, ay10, 000

Is there rationale or tarting anguages arlier han ollege?Here s a peek:Research ndicates hat he bility o earn nother anguage ecreaseswith ge.With egard o the nimalkingdom, orenz 1965)defined critical eriod nlearning namely, hedevelopmentaleriod, uring hich ey xperiences avetheir eakeffect n learning, hereby esultingn the optimal ttunement f theanimals o their nvironment. or example, here s a right ime or parrows olearn ow osing, ypically 0 to 50 days fter irth. solated irds hat miss hatcritical eriodwillnotbe able to singfor ife. Penfield nd Roberts 1959)sug-gested hat here might e critical eriodmechanismsn humans s well. Thetheory as madepopular y Lenneberg 1967),who researched hebiologicalfoundationsf anguage.f he ight ime smissed, ehypothesized,earning aynot occur, r it will be defective. anguage cquisitionwouldbe biologicallyrestricted oearly hildhood, ptopuberty. e suggested hat he rain's bility oacquire anguagewould lose down t puberty, ith rain ateralization.

651



4/33

TochonPinker 1994)found imilar roblems ith ne deaf articipant hohadrecov-

eredfrom er handicap t the ge of 31 As such, arly anguage cquisition scharacterizedy ew rammatical istakes,lawlessontrol ver ccent nd hythm,and full ontrol ver morphosyntacticroductionNewport, 990).Compared ochildren, dult earners ave poor grammatical erformanceJ. S. JohnsonNewport, 989).n fact, fter to 6 years ld, gradual ecline n anguage rofi-ciency snoticed ntil dulthood J. . Johnson Newport, 991).A confirmationof hese arly tudies anbe found nLantolf ndThorn's indings2006),postulat-ing that ven dvanced dult ilinguals omeback to the tructures f their irstlanguagensituations f complex roblem olving, hichmay equire sing ver-arching trategies earned n early hildhood. he situation s different or arlybilinguals hobehave nd reflect ikenative peakers. tudies rom ational ur-

veys, s well s census ata with mmigrants,ndicate strong egativeorrelationbetween he geof their rrival nd heir bility o udgegrammaticality.heearlyconclusion f these indings yJ. S. Johnson nd Newport1989,1991), s sup-ported y Pinker, asthat, ndeed, critical eriodwould xist or he cquisitionofgrammar. cquisition ould ecrease hortly fter uberty. his heory asbeenwidely isputed.

Some ontradictingvidencewasfound. lder earners ay ometimeschievenative-like ompetencena second anguageBirdsong Molis,2001);as well,exceptions re found orwhomno qualitative hange s evaluated t the lose ofthe ritical eriod Bialystok, 005;Bialystok Hakuta, 999).Thequestion henbecamewhether he ritical eriodwouldbe the amefor he cquisition f themother anguage LI) and for he earning f a second anguage L2).DoesL2buildon LI? Bialystok nd Hakuta 1999)found noticeable imilarity crossspeakers f different anguages or given econd anguage, hich ndicated hatthere s more han simple ransfer rom hemother ongue o he econd anguage.Lenneberg1967)had ssumed hat he cquisition f other anguages ould en-efit rom his arly matrix f anguage kills p. 176)andthe erebral rganiza-tion or anguage earning eveloped n childhood. ccording ohis cumulativemodel f anguageearning, he ritical eriod or he mother ongue as rrelevantto second-languageearning. o drastic ecline n second-languagecquisitionwas noticed t the nd of the eriod, espite laims yJ. . Johnson ndNewport

(1989,1991)that he ritical

eriodhad an end

pointt

age15.

Bialytock nd

Hakuta evisited hese arlier esults nd ndicated breaking oint t age 20,rather han 15or puberty. owever, hecontinued ecline n second-languageacquisitionwell into adulthoodwas statistically ignificant. n analysis ofthe 1990census U.S.Department f Commerce, 995) ed these uthors o dem-onstrate hat he negative orrelation f self-evaluatedanguagemastery ith gewasstrong nd continuous, utno breaking oint n this eclinewasnoticeable.Thisfeature ontradicted undamentalonditions f he ritical eriod ypothesis.Therewasnoendpoint, obreaking oint. econd, here erenoqualitative if-ferences etween cquisition ithin nd outside he hypothesizedritical eriod:Adults an earn ven highly bstract ules hatwere upposedlynaccessible ith-out pecialized anguage cquisitionmechanismsypicallyearned nyoung ge.Last,censusdata demonstrate hat ocioeconomic tatus nfluences hecriticalperiod, hich ontradict he undamentalondition hat uch period erobust oenvironmentalariation. otwithstanding,rain esearch ndicates ifferencesn

652



5/33


language se over ge.Children ith rain amage re most ften ble to regainlanguage bility ith ractice,ncontrast oadults, ho re rarely bleto achievetheir rior roficiency. his finding upports heunderstanding hat here s adifference etween hildren nd adults n anguage earning Fabbro, 001). Theability o speaka second anguage s activated n different reas of the brain,depending n when n ife person earns t. Early ilinguals sesimilar, verlap-ping egions f Broca's andWernicke's reasfor oth anguages. atebilingualsnormally se different egions f Broca's area for ach language Kim,Relkin,Lee,&Hirsch, 997),which xplainswhy hildren andevelop he bility o peaktwo r three anguageswith ative roficiency.

To sumup,research n the ritical eriod or anguage cquisition as demon-strated continuous eclinewith ge in one's ability olearn new anguage.

However, t has failed o demonstrate ts theoretical remises: irst, here s nospecific ndpoint; econd, here s no drop fter critical hase, osharp ecline,nomean rop, or ny hange noutcomes lope i.e.,decline s monotonie);hird,there snoqualitative ifference etween hildren's nd dults' cquisition; ourth,the lleged ritical eriod ppears ighlynfluencedy nvironmentalnd ocioeco-nomic ariation. onetheless,here s a gradual ecline ver ge in the bility olearn language.uchdecline as many auses, mongwhich hysiological,ogni-tive, nd ocialfactors revail, uch s working-memoryimitations,ttention efi-cits, personalmotivation,nxiety nd belief n not being ble to succeed, imecommitment,ndthe bility o free egular ime or anguageearningRobertson,2002). The tandard iew s that eurobiologicalevelopmentsn a strict atura-tional imetablereate imits n anguageearning apacity Seidenberg Zevin,2006,p. 603).The sounds f other anguages re more recisely eproduced ndbetter earnedwhen he ound atterns f the first anguage nd the phonologicalmatrix re still n formation n early hildhood Moyer, 999).Moreover, rainresearch xplains hy hildren andevelop wo r hree anguages ith ative ro-ficiency hereas t s more ifficult or dults. onsidering ll these actors,t s avalid tand oencouragearly anguageearning or hildren. hus, he esponseothe uestion What s the est geto earn nother anguage? s as early s possi-ble. At uch arly ge, he anguageptitudesthehighest. tudies uggest hat hechild's rain, s compared othat f the lder hild r the dult, as more ynapses

andgreater lasticity nd s better uitedo

earningorld

anguages ResearchNotes, 996).Thus, here re sound easons or tarting anguage earning eryearly.

WhyLearn Languages?TheAdvantagesof LearningAnother anguage

Thosewhoknow othing f foreignanguages now othing f heir wn.

Johann olfgangonGoethe

Monolingualpeakers ften iscount heutility f world anguages. ut suchdisinterestsusually ninformed. here re clearbenefits n earning nother an-guage. tructural rain maging hows hat eing ilingual roduces hangesn he

653



6/33

Tochon

anatomy f thebrain: eoplewho peak wo anguages avemore reymatter nthe anguage egion f thebrain; he arlier hey earned he anguage, he argerthe rey rea Mechelli t l.,2004).Bilingual hildren ossess 1-year dvantageovermonolinguals or asks hat emand he nhibition f attention o rrelevantinformation. ilingual hildren re constantly orting ut extra erceptualnfor-mation. or every bject nd action, hey ave numerous ords romwhich ochoose.Bialystok nd Martin 2004)showed hat ilingual hildren avebetterinhibitory ontrol or gnoring erceptualnformation, hich nhances heir bil-ity opay attention oappropriatenformation nd nhibit ther nformation,nability f great alue n other ducational asks s well. Bilingualismlso has apositive mpact n literacy. ialystok, uk, nd Kwan 2005)demonstratedhatknowing ne language and writing ystem helps the learning f another.

Bilingualism astwo ffects n literacy cquisition: ne,understanding eadingand ts print ystem nd, wo, ransferringeading rinciples cross anguages. ssuch, ll bilinguals how n advantage vermonolinguals.

Exposure o a world anguage aspositive ffects n the mastery f themothertongue Archibald, oy,Harmel, Jesney, 006): t canenhance yntax, anguageskills nd narrative trategiesn reading nd writing, ocabulary,ognitive kills(e.g.,divergent hinking), etalinguistic kills, ttitudes oward thers, nd math-ematics cores nd skills Stewart, 005).Bilinguals rebetter hanmonolingualsin performing ot nlymetalinguisticasks ut asks hat emand igh evels fcontrolBialystok, 001).Students homaster wo anguages avemore inguisticspace o earchnmemoryKimbrough iler&Eilers, 002).Kormi-Nouri, oniri,andNilsson2003)compared 0bilingual hildren nd60monolingualhildrennthree ge groups n episodicmemory nd semanticmemory asks.Theyfoundpositive ffects f bilingualism n both orms f memory t all agelevels.Thesefindings uggest hat ilingual hildrenntegratend/or rganize he nformation ftwo anguages. earning nother anguage reates dvantagesnterms f ognitiveabilities,ncluding emory. lementary ilingual tudents howgreater cademicachievementn other reasof study, ncluding eading,ocialstudies, nd mathe-matics, nd hey arn igher ATandACTscores, speciallynverbal reas Curtain&Dahlberg, 004).Comparedoolder tudents, hey core ignificantly igher nthemath nd reading arts f the owa Test f BasicSkills Saunders, 998).Third

graders eing aught panishor

0min, hree imes erweek, howed ignificantgains n the Metropolitan chievementest cores nmath nd anguage fter nesemester f tudy Armstrong Rogers, 97).Children ho have wo anguagestend o dobetter nthe urriculum nd howhigher erformancentests nd xam-inations. tudies ndicate ncreasing reative hinking nd divergent hinking, swellas the bility o thinkmore reely nd elaboratelyDorny, 005).Childrenwho re proficientn two anguages ave woor more words or ach object ndidea, nd hey ometimesttach ifferent eaningsowords ia the wo anguages,whichmeans hat bilingual erson may evelop he bility othinkmore lexiblynot nly boutwords ut bout verything.

TheAmerican ouncil n theTeaching f Foreign anguages n.d.) dentifiesthreemajor reasof research n anguage earning orwhich ignificantvidencewas found. First, anguageearning upports cademic chievement:t correlateswith igher cademic chievement n standardized estmeasures,nd t s benefi-cial to both monolingual-English nd English-language earners. econd,

654



7/33


language earning rovides ognitive enefits o students: esearch rom roundtheworld hows hat ilingual eople end o do better t Qtestswhen omparedwithmonolingual eopleof the ame socioeconomic lass. Last,such earningaffects ttitudes ndbeliefs bout anguage earning ndother ultures: anguagelearners evelop morepositive ttitude oward he arget anguage nd/or hespeakers f that anguage. oreach of the hree ategories, he ouncil providesannotated ibliographiesf he tudies roviding he cientific videnceseealso,American ouncil n the Teaching f Foreign anguages, 999).

Lipton's urveys 2004)comprise series f studies hat emonstrate,mongother actors, hat hildren ho have tudied world anguage evelop sense fcultural luralism openness o and appreciation f other ultures) nd have animproved elf-concept nd sense of achievementn school.Theability oeasily

switch etween anguagesmakes hildren eel ompetent, nd t ncreases elf-esteem Rubio, 007). Languages regoodfor ll students. n a study yTochon,Kasperbauer,nd Potter 2007),low-income amily tudents ho had had earlyelementary panishwere ignificantlyetter t pplying omprehensiontrategiesto books read loud, nd theywerebetter t generating nd organizing deas nwriting hanwere heir ontrol roup eerswho had not beentaught panish.African merican tudentsnthe rogram sedmore ffective trategies or pell-ingwords, ndthey enerated ndorganizedmore deas andbetter o)than heirmatched ontrol roup eers id.

The assets f becoming t east partly ilingual eep motivating enerationsfcollege tudents. eviewing 4years f datapublishedn The Modern anguageJournal, antolf nd Sunderman2001)found our oalsfor he tudy f an-guages:One,humanistic oalsconstitute hemost obust ustification; or xam-ple, reading iterature n other anguagesncreases ne's understanding f othercultures. wo,the tudy f anguages onstitutes ractical nd utilitarian oals;that s,students elieve hat anguageearning illhelp hem ind ob and hat tis useful nbusiness, s well s personal ndeavors. hree, he tudy f anguagesenhances ne's intellectual nd inguistic evelopment; amely, tudying therlanguagesmproves ne's native anguage bility, s well s one's general eason-ing. Four, he tudy f anguage an improve ne's personal njoyment f andpleasure rom he benefits f traveling oand earning bout ther ultures hat

haveprestige Ossipov, 000).Other dvantages f earning nother anguage an nclude he ollowing:ass-ing npart fone'sheritage ochildren, ridging enerationsnd mprovingom-munication ithin he amily ndwith he xtended amily, uildingnternationallinks, xperiencing wocultures, eing ble to compare alues nd worldviews,andbecoming iliterateMarcos,1998).Furthermore,uch dvantages omprisedeveloping widerworldview;nderstandingifferent raditions,reeds, ustoms,andways f behaving; uilding olerance f difference ndpossibly educing ac-ism; nd aisingne's elf-esteemnd trengtheningne's dentityNoels, elletier,Clment Vallerand, 003; Norton, 006).

Language ducationalconomicss a newly eveloped ield f tudy, orn romtheunderstandinghat anguage ducational olicieshave conomic mplications(Breton, 998).Thestudy ncludes inguistic ariableswith he heoretical on-cepts nd tools f economics, nd t ndicates ther ypes f advantages f worldlanguage nowledgeGrin, 996).Studies n advertising orldwidendicate hat

655



8/33

Tochon

peopletend o prefer onsumption nd exchangewhenpresented n their wnlanguage, hich s clearly sound ationale nfavor fbusinesses' dapting othelanguage f heir ustomers.urvey ata ndicate correlation etweenelf-reportedlanguage kills nd self-reported arnings, hichmatches ourdieu's anguageandcultural apital heory1991;Grin, 006).Assuch, anguages consideredhypercollectiveood,which ncreases alue when t s shared. t a time f semi-globalizationGhemawat, 007),monolingualpeakers re at competitive isad-vantage or growing umber f obs. On average, ilinguals arn more n theUnited tates nd, morerecently, n the UnitedKingdom. his s the trend nEurope nd Asia as well.Technology s putting ore mployees n touch withsuppliers, ustomers, nd colleagues broad Ghadar& Spindler, 005).Worldlanguage luencys an asset, venfor hosewhonever ntend o set foot broad.

Job eekers ind hat world anguagesre required n a range f professions, romtourism osales,marketing nd transportation, edia, ustomer ervices, nsur-ance,Web ite developmentndgraphic esign, anking, ccountancy,ecretarialwork, he aw, ndteaching. oreover, ith he growth f Spanish-speakingesi-dents, ven he asic obs may equire ilingual kills.

Trimnell 2005)points t several ocial, conomic, rofessional,nd personalreasons hy eople houldearn language, hich ummarize eatlyn his ection.

Increasing lobalunderstanding.anguage earners tep nside hemind nd on-text f another ulture. nterculturalensitivity uilds ptrust ndunderstanding,canbridge hegapbetween eoples, nd promote eaceand nternational rade.

Economic artnerships, iplomacy,nd nternational ontacts equire trong om-prehension f he ultural alues nd belief ystems f he artners broad.Globalcitizenshipscharacterized yproficiencynother anguages.

Improvingmploymentotential. earning ow odealwith ther ultures ntheirownterms acilitates mployment. reasof the workforcen need of anguage-proficientmployeesnclude overnmentgencies, he ravel ndustry,ngineering,communications,ducation,nternationalaw, conomics, ublic olicy, ublishing,advertising,ntertainment,cientific esearch,nd broad rray f ervice ectors(Camenson, 001;DeGalan,2000).

Increasing ative anguage bility. rammatical nderstandingnables tudentsto use their mother onguewith moreprecision. nhanced istening kills ndmemory orrelate ith xtended orld anguage tudy. tudents' cores ncollegeentrance xams ncrease ncrementally ith ach additional earof world an-guage nstruction.

Sharpening ognitive nd life kills.Doingso enhances earning n other reas.Students emonstrate reater reativity ndhigher rder hinkinguch s concep-tualizing, easoningndproblem olving. hey re better quipped oadapt n afast-changing orld. hey earn o handle new ituations nd ncrease olerance

ofdifferent ifestyles ndworldviews.Increasing hances f ntry nto ollege r graduate chool.World anguages ndcultures repart f what n educated erson hould now.

656



9/33


Appreciatingnternationaliterature, usic, nd ilm. ranslationssubject otheinterpretation f the ranslator. he world's iterary nd artistic orks ave beenwritten n various anguages. ome elements o not haveequivalents n otherlanguages.

Making ravelmore easible ndenjoyable. traying way rom ourist enters ndexploring he ountry equires nowing he anguage.

Increasing nderstandingf neself ndone s culture. iewing ne'svalue ystemthrough he yes fothers s,put imply, aluable.Monolingual iews f heworldlimit heperspective. here re aspects f one's ife nd culture hat re acceptedasuniversal ruths ntil nother ayof thinking asbeen ncountered.

Making ifelong riends. ilingualism ncreases he number f peoplewithwhomone an nteract. nterestnother ultures elps ne onnect eeplywith ther eoplearound heworld.

Insum, heres a mountain f vidence upportinghe asefor anguageearning.

Won't EnglishBecome heWorld Language?

Onedoesnot nhabit country; ne nhabits language.

E. M. Cioran

Nieto 2002)describes hepower f the English anguage ndhow t s some-times iewed s the only oolnecessary or uccess.The CIA World act Bookindicates hat .68% of the world's opulation peaksEnglish s a first anguage(2008estimates).2wice his ercentagef peakersabout n additional 0%)canuseEnglish s their econd r hirdanguage, hich oesalongwith he most pti-mistic igures f Crystal 2006). f, s Crystal laims, billion eople re earningEnglishn bout 0countries, hen henumber f econd/foreign-languagepeak-ers of English n one generation ay till ccount or bout 10% of the worldpopulation t that ime wing oattrition, opulationncreasen the non-English-speakingountries,ndpoor anguage cquisition. urthermore,5%of heworld'spopulation onot urrently peakEnglish. here re well-documented easons obelieve hat 5% of theworldwillnot peakEnglish n 10 years. nglish eachingis of poor uality n many ountries, s reported n numerous tudies yTESOL(Teachers f English oSpeakers f Other anguages; eeDavidson, 008), nd trarely roduces asting esults, ll ofwhich ed TESOLtowrite eacher uality nthe ieldofTeaching nglish oSpeakers fOther anguages n2003andpublishits tandards orTeachers fAdult earners n 2008.

English s becoming neof the nternationalanguages,longwith he oporal

languagesbove 100 million

peakers: hinese, panish,Hindi/Urdu, rabic,Portuguese, ussian, urkic, engali,Japanese, rench nd German. ne of theimplicationsf he worldlinessfEnglishPennycook,994)s that t s not nymorethe roperty f English-nativepeakers. onsequently,he anguage equirementn

657



10/33

Tochonthe ob market, hichwasonceto possess n excellent astery f English,s nowbecoming ider ecauseEnglish oesnot uffice nymore: mployers eedbilin-guals ndmultilinguals, hichmakes t more ifficult orldwideormonolingualsofindobs.Given he hortagefpeoplewith anguagekills, ompanies'nly ption sto recruit ative peakers f other anguagesNuffield anguage nquiry, 000).English an be enforced,s other anguages avebeen nd rebeing mposed lse-where n multiple ays. For example, he 101 law aimed o maintain rench nQubec.However,his oesnotmean hat uch trategiesre ppropriate or hat heycan ucceed nmaking ne anguage ecome he nly anguage t home nd he an-guage f he world. nvasiveanguage olicies anbe overt r covert, ependingnwhether hey rerelated o official uthorities r topersuasiveconomic romotionof he tatus f one anguageShohamy, 006).Theformersexpressed y anguage

boards imilar o he rench cademy r he ritish ouncil, hich egulateanguageand xclude ialectal ariation.nternationalnstitutionsndmeans f communica-tionmay eused oovertly romoteertainanguages.or nstance,he nternet laysan mportantole npromoting nglish. y drawing nprojectsn ndia ndvariouscountrieshat rovidenternet ccess o treet hildren, arschauer2003) ndicatedwhat utstandingncentivehe nternet epresentsor he hildren obecome luentnEnglish, herebyncreasing heir inguistic nd socialcapital. he strategic ushtoward nglish s a world anguages obvious n works uch s Rothkopfs (1997):It s n the conomic ndpoliticalnterests f heUnited tates oensure hat f he

world smoving oward common anguage,tbeEnglish p.42).Globalizationnd the pread f Englishhaveraised oncerns bout he co-

nomic, olitical, ultural, nd inguistic egemonyf theWest ver he est f heworld Edge,2006).Globalizations connected oneoliberalismnd nequalityacross nd within ations Munck, 005).Sweeney2006)argues hat

English asbyno means ivested tself f cultural interland.n the on-trary, t embraces huge ange f messages,cons nd brands hat ogetherconstitute cultural egemony argreater han he British mpire verachieved,ndgreater ven han hat mplied y Amricanisation.hisforceisglobalisationtself,p. 1

Cultural eoimperialisms an deology hat anks ultures o that ominantulturescan control r eliminate ubordinate ultures Phillipson, 008).The movementtoward he officializationf English n countries uch s Korea, or xample, srooted n suchneoimperialismJung Norton, 002).Language tatus an beunderstoodsthe erceivedalue f he ocial utility f language, hichs not nlydetermined ymarket orces ut eeply nfluenced y ulture nd heway hat pe-cific cultural ctors ee their anguage Fishman, 006).Postcolonial heoriesacknowledgehat he olonial ontinues oshape ultures hat ave ut heir ies othe ormer ulersBhatt, 007). Nonetheless,his s only nesideof the tory. heinfluence s reciprocal: he colonized nfluences hecolonizer hrough ts ties(Friedman, 005).This ssue s complicated y the doption f English n many

countrieshat ere ot ormer olonies nd byformer olonies hat o onger equireresources rom he olonies. swell, here revoices xpressinghe all f he mpe-rial ream nd ts ftermath Schell, 004).Such ssues re blurred nd omplex.

658



11/33


Linguisticssimilationismarepublicannduniversalistic odel) efines qual-ity or itizens nthe asis f he omplete ssimilationf he migrant peakersntothe ominant, ational alues ndperceived hared dentitySchiffman,npress).Francewasexemplary f thismodel, ut t s moving oward erman eparation-ism.Assimilationismnd eparationismontrast ith he pluralistic, ulticulturalmodel ased nthe rotection f ultural iversity, hich uaranteesespect f hemigrants' ommon dentity. n Europe, heNetherlands nd Sweden follow hepluralistic odel.Thethirdmodel, eparationism,s characterized y restrictiveimmigration olicies. t mplies igid egal onditions hatmust e satisfiedf oneisto nter nd eside n he erritory.olicies rtificially aintainhe emporaryhar-acter of an immigrant's ettlement, ncluding hat of the seasonal migrant.Switzerland, ustria, ndBelgium ouldfallwithin his ategory. owever, here

areclaims hat these raditional odels f ntegration o onger xist Carrera,2006,p.2)because ocietyscontinuouslyhanging. otwithstanding,eoplewhohave n assimilationist rientationend o see anguagess a problem ecause an-guage iversity revents traightforward anagementf he nation-state.uch tti-tudes eneratenitiativesuch s the nglish-only ovement,ven hough nglishhasnot een, snot, ndwillnot e soon ndanger fbeing uperseded ySpanish,for xampleCrawford, 008).Onemajor rgument gainst hepossible,massiveassimilation f the world's peakers nto ne common, ominant anguage s itshigh ultural ost.The variety f worldviews ouldbe lost. Languagesdefineworldviewsnd onceptual niverses.hedisappearancef ne anguageanmeanthe deletion f a human's bility othink ifferently, n aspect f human ealityconstitutingneepistemic eam Tochon, 002),oneray rom he rism f humanlife nterpretation. n Earth, here s as much mportancen anguage ariety sthere s nbiological ariety. kutnabb-Kangas2000)hasdemonstratedhat iodi-versity round heworld s significantlyorrelated ith anguage iversity.

It is true, hough, hatnumerous ountriesmove toward ilingualism ithEnglish n their wn, pparently. ometimes, orruption eems oplay role nthe ecisionsmade egarding nglish May, 008).

Formany he erm lobalisationscruciallyinked ith he ise f he nglishlanguageSalverda, 002;Yano, 001). t s not urprisingherefore,nthe

lightf he

nseparablessociationstablishedetween nglish ndglobali-

sation, ohear his anguage eferred o as world nglish, nternationalEnglishndglobal nglish.Yildinm Okan, 007, .32)

In his ntroductiono the 2005congress f theWorldAssociation or ducationResearch, heChileanminister f education xpressed hat e had metwithmin-isters rom 2 nonaligned ountries. hey had decided oimplement ommonstandardsn all education rograms. ilingualism ith nglishwouldbecomepriority ocus.This policy defines neo-institutionalist erspective Boli &Ramirez, 992;Oguz,2005):It conceptualizes unified orld hrough tandardpolicies.Neo-institutionalistsmphasize he xclusive ole f tates s the egula-tory odies nglobalizationnd inguistic olicies. hey re n favor f the ctiveintervention f the nation-staten social ssues.Sucha top-down iewof educa-tional hange eems n arge art ncompatible ith 0years fresearchn he ield

659



12/33

Tochonof nnovation Fullan, 007). Systems heoristsndicate hat he enuine rinciplesof mergence, elf-organization,ndcomplexityre ntynomic ith uch view finnovation; hey osit hat ntropy s inevitable, hrough hichmultiple orldswill ontinue o exist Varela, hompson, Rosch,1991).

Thefantasy f worldwide ulture hatwould hape he anguage f choolingmust e confronted ith vidence ssued rom thnographictudies n the varietyofmanifestationsf chool hange nreal ettingsSpring, 008).Divergence re-vails Steiner-Khamsi,004).Similarly,inguistic ducational olicies andhowthey redetermined y nternationalnstitutionsuch s UNESCO(1999)andtheglobalmarket cannot einterpreteds having straightforwardmpact.Whereasscholars uch s Phillipson2006),Skutnabb-Kangas2006),andGrin 2005)seea clear onnection etweena) the nterests f hose npower t regional, ational,

and nternationalevels, b) the anguage hat s internationallyrivileged crosscountries,nd c)the olicies hat upport hese evelopments,few nalysts ues-tion he ink etween hese ariables ecauseof the relative utonomy f educa-tional ctors, ommunities,nd genciesBlock, 004;Pennycook,006;Ricento,2006).The study f global anguage olicies nd how such policies re mple-mented t the ocal evel s a new nd hallengingndeavor. European conomisthas calculated hat t s more ost-effective oadopt luralisticinguistic oliciesthan t s to move unilaterally oward nglish Grin, 005).Even f Englishweredisconnectedrom he xtreme orm funregulatedapitalismalledneoliberalismand ven f his economic monster ere neuteredLatouche, 006), he uestionof the ppropriatenessf English ssimilation ould emain s a haunting oubtafter he eath f housands f anguages,ultures, ndways f hinking ifferently(Batibo, 005;Dalby, 003;Hagge, 000).Thedenominationf linguistic eno-cide Skutnabb-Kangas,000)would ake ts fullmeaning.

Another spect hatmakes t mpossible or ny anguage obe mposedworld-wide s that anguages hiftwith ime Mesthrie, 006). English, he atest n aline of ingua rancae, ow describes language erving s a regularmeans fcommunicationetween ifferent inguistic roups na multilingualpeech om-munity Holmes, 001,p. 86).Linguae rancaerenotneutral, nd hese ermsused odefine he ossible eificationfworld nglish Jenkins, 007;McGroarty,2006; Rubdy and Saraceni, 2006; Seidlhofer, 004)- may be misleading.

Phillipson2007)suggests hat nglishmighte a

lingua ucula,ike cuckoo

substitutingts wn ggsfor he native's nes, nd nducing other pecies o takeon the eedingnd earning rocesses p. 3).The situation fEnglishwill hangeas it haschanged nthe ast Canagarajah, 007).Written nglishwill end o getfossilizedna simplified tandardRajadurai, 007),and t willgiverise o manyoralvariations.nglish s destined o plit nto multitude fpostcolonialnglishes(Trudgill, 004).English s destined o die over ime, s is anyother anguage,because ommunications an ever-changinghenomenon maybe ot ecause flinguicide r radical ttrition ut ather he radual ntegrationf large ariety fsubstrates hatwill not only differentiate ocalvarieties ut will progressivelybecome ncomprehensibleo one another Harrison, 007).Languages revaluedbecause f he deologies hey arry Gonzlez, 003;Maguire Curdt-Christianse,2007;Valds, 003; Wake, 005).Englishmaybe fashionable ow, ut t maybe out of fashion omorrowPhillipson, 003).The death f one anguage an be

660



13/33

World anguages ducationthe rebirth f a new anguage, s it happenedwhenLatinbroke nto numerousRomanceanguage arieties.

Despite choolnorms, tandards, nd assessment,anguages hange hroughtime. n one generation, rown-ups iscover hat heir hildren re developingunusualways f ommunicating,ew anguages, ttitudes, nd nnovative riting(Gogate, 002; Sebba,2003).Therelationships etween ounds nd meanings rearbitrary, et hey efine he world, nd t maybe painful o notice hat he goodold world sdisappearing ithwhatwas earlier onsidered ood anguage. ftergenerations f ttempts t convincing oreignershat heir anguagemight econ-sidered nferior nmany espectsLambert, 992), many uch oreigners asteredthe ominant anguage othe oint hat hey tarted ransformingt heir ay,withtheir eliefs, ensitivities, nd cognitive nd inguistic ubstrates nd pragmatic

influencesMacedo, 1994);that s,they hange he ules, heymake heir rrorsfashion. art f he youth oves t nd dopt t s their anguage. uch spostverbalnegation GiacaloneRamat, 003).With hese xchanges ome dentity hanges(Park, 008).And he cademic world ollows. ome American epartmentspe-cialize n what was earlier onsidered ad French, ith pecialtiesnslang, ocio-lects, nd noncolonial arieties, nd French niversities xplorePuertoRicanEnglish, bonics,African nd South Asian varieties f English nd their itera-tures, ot ospeak f the nglish poken ncomics Saraceni, 003); or, heymaydevote ourses o television hows such as Buffy heVampire layer nd TheSopranos. here re hairs nd journai f buffy logy Badman, 002); sopra-nology will ertainly hange he tandard. uchout-of-bordersiteratures ay ethe ound iteratures f omorrow, very lose tomorrow ith eclassifyingrite-ria that ppear uite ut of control. o valid inguistic riteria an be ustified odifferentiate language rom dialect Sebba,2008).Postulated rinciples ndcriteria hat istinguishanguage arieties rom thers re deological ndpoliti-cal,not cientific Kubota, 004).Linguists end o respond: languages a dialectwith n army. ialects an become anguages nytime s soon s they re ssoci-atedwith ower, alues, ndmoney. hese ssues re xcessively ifficult oeval-uatebecauseof the various nterests nvolved nd, n particular, ecauseof thelanguagedeologies hat nterferenpolicymaking. efining language s a formofpolicy, esides eing n ontological tand Clark, 006).

One ast rgument hy nespecificanguage annot e imposedworldwidesthat, aradoxically,anguages re temporary onceptual abrications.heydo notexist.NordoesFrench r talian r Chinese, hich overs undreds fvarieties isChinese efined y tswriting rby heMandarin ariety? here s no pure efi-nition, ostraightforwardnswer o the uestion What s a language? Reagan,2005).Languages social. t s a reference ospeakers, ontexts, ndcommunica-tional ituations. inguists ayhavedefinedanguagesscommunicationystemsfor ecades, pecifyinghe inite et f ymbols,ounds, bjects, ndgestures uledbygrammar, et heir nterprise asrecently een nalyzed s a simpleustificationfor heir rofessionPennycook,001).Maybegrammar ouldnotneed oexist fthere eren't rammariansnd inguists ho ivefrom t.Grammar aynot eallysucceedndefining he anguage ynamics. anguages o not need inguists ogetorganized. rganizinganguagesn schoolsmay venhave disorganizingffectand a socially eorganizingnd classifyingmpact Bourdieu, 991). Languagesmight e but structuralist ictions . . just afterthoughts Canagarajah, 999).

661



14/33

Tochon

Languages ave socialfunction. hey reways f dentifyingocialgroups ndstrata s much s they re ways f communicating.n thename f anguage om-plexity nd ubtlety,anguage ierarchiesrefabricated, ut inguists ave ealizedthat ny ystem s worth ny other ystem. ialect variations re as subtle ndarticulate s languages. hey re anguages. frican merican ernacular nglish(Ebonics) s found o have ubtle nd complex ense spects hat o not xist nmainstream nglish Green, 002;J. A. Walker, 001), f such tandard nglishexists Bex&Watts, 999; Trudgill, 006).Classificationsften gnore, or xam-ple, hat ot ll African mericans peakEbonics, ndnot ll persons ho peak tareAfrican merican. mposing ne language o the world quates mposingspecific ultural iction. nemore olitical logan.

To sum up, this ection escribes why t s not possiblefor ne language o

stabilize s a world anguage.Moreover, uch n objective if t ever ould bereached would generalize he oleof that anguage s a killer anguage termcoined ySkutnabb-Kangas,000),whichwould aise he uestion f the ppro-priateness or uch nvasive olicy. lthough nglishmayhavenumerous ulturalaspects n the ealm f thepositive, t s,for xample, ttached oa cross-nationaleconomic ulture hat as devastating orldwide ffects n local cultures, ocaleconomies,nd ocal ecologies, nd here reno ndications hat his ituation anbemodified oon.Rothkopf2008)argues hat he ack f ustainability ithin urcurrent ocietal ystem omes rom he ack ofmorality temming rom he orpo-rate global superclass, hich s obedient o shareholders ooking or heir wnbenefits ather han hose f the ommon ood.There s no global tructure ro-tecting itizens rom nternationalorporations hat re acting ikepsychopaths.Linguistic nd ultural iversity re mong he reasures f humanity; hey reourtools for urvival. ach culture as its own solution or elf-sustainabilityhatworks n pecific ontexts, he isappearancef whichwould eprive umanity fsolutions o future ossible roblems. hese rguments eed obesoftened, ow-ever, ecausepolicies ndtrends ecome lurred ynumerous ontexts ndcom-plicated y a variety f situations. s a species,we have choices o make, ndeconomy as it s currently efined n terms f short-term oalsand benefitsmaynotbethe eat of thehighest isdom.

Among he rguments aised re the following: irst, nglish s and will be

spoken yt east15% of heworld

opulation,ndwhether twillbe the

anguageof tomorrow s as yet undetermined. he postulated biquity f English s amyth. econd, ttrition n the number f second-languageearners s importantbecause nmany ountries,anguagesre aught ynative peakers ith o educa-tion raining rbynonproficientpeakers ith ducation raining. hird, anguagesareconstantly eing eshaped ndredefined; roadly hared anguagesmay oonsplit nnumerous ublanguages.he world ssimilationist roject s not easible,nor s it ppropriate. ne of thegreat trengths f the nglish anguage nachiev-ing ts prominence s an important orld anguage odayhas been ts ability oborrow nd daptwords rom ther anguages ndcultures lmost t will. Duringvarious eriods f ts development,nglishmassively orrowed rom variety fRomance anguages,ncluding rench, atin, nd Greek, nd significantly romItalian, panish, erman, anish, ndDutch Ward, 994). This penness pposesthe rend hat ims ofix he nglish orm nd oimpose ne world tandard.

662



15/33

ProblemsArising rom the Neglect f World Languagesand Cultures

If verythingsperfect,anguagesuseless.

Jean audrillard

Wecomenow o he ourth uestion f he ntroduction: hat re he takes f nottaking are f other anguages? any lements hat avebeen eviewedo far fferpartial nswers o the uestion. otbenefiting rom he dvantagesnd ssets istedin he econd ection, ornstance, ay reate roblemsndividuallynd ocially. neconsequencef he eglect or ther anguagess that ountries solate hemselvesndlose nternationalontracts nd

power ytheir

ncapacityo communicatenother

languagesndwith ther ultures, ot o peak f ther ssues f politicalmportance.Thisneglect asdeep mpactsnvarious isciplines,uch s sciences nd ngineering.Internationalizingducations a concern, utfewpolicymakers are ddress hethornyssue f he pparent orldwidenability f he ducation ystems o ntegrateworld anguagesmong heyoung, ith ew xceptions.

Linguicism a term oined by Skutnabb-Kangasn the mid-1980s is a phe-nomenon hat eeds obeaddressedn chools. t explains art f heneglect f heimmigrant hildren's ituation n schools nd the ttitude oward oreigners.tinvolves priori udgments bout omeone's ocialstatus, ealth, ndeducation,on the basisof howoneuses anguage. he vocabulary, he ccent, he entence

structure, nd the foreignness o the dominant anguage re all aspects elated osocial lassificationsnddiscriminatoryrejudices. heworld anguagessuemustbe considered special aseof the roader multiculturaleform hat s required oaddress he ssues fracism, exism, geism, bleism, inguicism,nd ther tereo-typical rejudicesTochon, 007).Bilingual hildren end o be rejected y theschool ystems nstead f being onsidered ssets hat anhelp heir eers earntheir anguage,s it s done n ndia n ome chools where hildren omewith iveor sixdifferent other onguesneachclass Mohanty, 006).

The elective ilingualismf children ho re lready irmly roundedn self-esteem nd n their mastery f their mother ongue epresents different duca-tional eality han he ilingualismf he ow-income igrants. he atter ituationraises ery ifferentssues,which rerelated o anguage uman ights. here s asocial lassdivide etween ubtractivend dditive ilinguals hat s related o theabsence f measures n the chools obridge hegapwith he anguage poken ntheminority hild'shome. hildren ho re forced o ssimilate nto he ominantculture ndwho re choolednsuch way hat heir anguages devalued end oreject heirmother ongue, hich s related o prejudice nddiscrimination.heirmother ongues subtracted ut Lambert, 992, .533).Because heiringuisticsystem s not ully evelopednthe irstanguage, hey truggle odevelopt n hedominant anguage.They could be deficient n both anguages nd so mightbecome semilinguals Skutnabb-Kangas,984).Theway oprevent his itua-

tionwould nvolve arents, riends,ocialworkers, nd eachers' aking ome imeevery ay oteach he hild hisorhermother ongue, oprovide heneeded ogni-tive tructure hatwillhelpbridge hegap with he chool anguage.However,some hildren orwhom hedominant anguages the econd anguage nd who

663



16/33

Tochonsucceed n the anguage hat s imposed y the choolmight ose motivation odevelop n n-depth ntelligence f their irst anguage, gain n relation opreju-diceanddiscriminationW.E.Wright, 007).

Bloomfield1927)was the first inguist onote case of what would ater ecalled, or while, emilingualism:White hunder, man round 0,speaks essEnglish hanMenomini, nd that s a strong ndictment, orhis Menomini satrocious p.437).Hansegrd1968, s cited nSkutnabb-Kangas,984, .253)wasthe irst netodevelop thorough tudy f his ssue, omparing he anguageof Finnishmigrant hildren iving nSwedenwith hat f Swedishmonolinguals.Themigrant hildren's bility n both anguages howed reduced epertoire fwords nd phrases ith grammaticalccurrences;educedinguisticsutomatism;the nability ocreatewith anguage;ackofmastery n he ognitive, motive, nd

volitional unctionsf anguage; ndpoor ndividual eanings. oorperformanceseemed ermanent mong hemigrants, hus eading o socialstigmata nd ife-longdevelopmental andicaps. ernstein's eficit ypothesis1972)mayhaveplayed role n the abeling f he roblem nwhich he lass-determined otionsofrestricted r laborated ode ccount or inguistic evelopment.henCummins(1976)introduced he dea that here wouldbe thresholds f anguage earning.Students' evelof anguage roficiency etermine hether heywillexperiencecognitive eficits rbenefits rom eing chooledn a second anguage. eachingthe ower hreshold ight e sufficient oavoid etardation,ut he ttainment fa second, igher evel f bilingual ompetence ight enecessary o eadto ccel-erated ognitive rowth p. 24).

Children ith ow proficiencyn both heir mother ongue nd econd anguagesuffer egativeffects hat an nfluence heir ognitivend motional rowth. ucha deficit omes t high ocial ostbecause t an be a contributingactoro seriesof future roblems,uch s unemployment,epression,nd llness Tochon, 997).These ssues ave timulated heated ebate, ith vidence nd ounterevidencendmassive riticism,o much o that ummins1994)partly ejectedhe erm emilin-gual n a paradoxicalncyclopediarticle. neproblem ith hismainstreamnter-pretationsthat t s deficit ased nd obuilds hierarchy etweenhe anguagefthe chool nd the anguage poken t home. ndeed, he nalysis f bilingualismremains ithin henormative aradigm f prescriptivism, ithin hich a) the an-

guagend

inguisticules f he

pperlass re

designateds the

oodones nd

b)the o-called ack f rules f he ow-incomelass s consideredn erms fhandicap:Aswith rescriptivism,he haracteristicsf better peech' re aken o beprecisely

those haracteristicshat o-called emilingualsack MacSwan,000,p. 16).Suchtermsmay ecome tereotypicalabels onsidered s concepts, hereas he heoryhasbeen oorly ubstantiated, ainly n he asis f chool ests. innenkamp2005)builds strong emonstrationf his roblem: hediagnosticf anguage eficit asimpairmentonnotationsnd hus nduces herapy.tbecomes

afuzzy oncept ithmanyngredientsfdeficiency,ut swelluseful or nappeal oresponsibilityodosomethinggainstts etrimentalonsequences.Thus, emilingualismnd double emilingualismecame lso a kind fweapon, political eapon oput ressure n those nstitutionsnd uthori-ties f ociety hicheft hildrenn his tate f ow proficiencynd inguis-tic nbetweenness [In sense] ts irst unction asnot o xplainnything,but o xplain hings way, n.p.)

664



17/33


Language ealitys a complex henomenon:t s blurred, ixed, olyphonic, ulti-glossic; tsnorms re onstantlyhanging s society tself schanging. hemodernemancipatoryttempts ay ppear eductive hen hey lash with ostmoderndeconstructionism.nce gain, inguistic lassifications ay rguably lay majorrole n ustifying he alaries f inguists ather han elping he oor nd heneedy.

Whateverhe nterpretation,he conomic esponseothe ubtractive ypothesisdeservesnanalysis ecause he abelhasbeen majormetaphoric otive or olit-ical ctivism. tfirst ight, twould eem hat chools annot conomicallyeach helanguage f everyminority or anthey fford eachingll the isciplinesneveryminorityanguage.n troubled conomic imes, t s often xpressed hat istrictscannot fford he uxury f nvestingn he oor.However,his ppears obe a short-sighted iewfor many easons. he rationale xpressed ornot eaching hildren

through hemedium f theirmother onguesmost ften n economical ne;how-ever, uch rationale oesnothold n n-depthxaminationf he ong-termonse-quences temming rom lack of quality ervice n the chools. here re seriouseconomic easons or oing therwise. ublic olicies, uch s enhancinghe tatusof particularanguage, ave een nalyzedn erms fbenefitsnd osts. inguistichegemonyan be detrimentalo ocal dentities ndcultures, onsequently avingan impact n local economies Suarez, 002)andcreating dependency owardexternal esources.t mplies reduction f inguisticapital or he eoplewho resubordinatedothe ominant anguagemposednthe chool ystem. he subordi-nated roup s denied ccessto the resources, nowledge,nd power hatwouldallow elf-determination.npreservingocialbalance nd pportunitiesor mploy-ment, rotecting nd promoting minority anguage ppears o be cost-effective(Grin& Vaillancourt, 999).Eventhough tudies n the conomics f anguageeducationre t their eginnings,t an lready eposited hat he ost f having opolicy t all is higher han hat f addressing he ssue. Theaddedexpenditureentailed y moving rom monolingualo a bilingual ducation ystem s muchsmaller han ommonly elieved. . . Theypoint n thedirection f a 3^4- ercentrange Grin, 006,p.88).Assimilationas cost n erms fpotentially iscrimina-tory nglish nforcement easureshatmay aradoxically lockmigrant peakersfrom qualopportunityosocialmobilitySchmidt, 006).

In many ases, nstitutional olicies reate ystemic arriers o the ntegration

of mmigrants uch hat heymayfeel s though heywere n a linguisticail(Fennelly, 005; Ouane,2003).The long-term conomic osts of subtractivebilingualism or whatever etter abel one mayfind, uch as linguicism areconsiderable, iven hat t eadsto underachievementBaker, 001). t creates heperception mong hildren nd parents hat hey re beingrejected y society,which auses psychologicalnxiety nd anger Ferguson, 998). t may esult nfuture nemployment, overty, he nability o integrate nto he middle lass(Miranda& WhelanAriza,2006),resentment, nd possible ocialviolence, nresponse o what an be considered nstitutional iolence Jose-KampfnerAparicio, 998), ll of which ead to a rejection f the native ulture nd a denialof one's knowledge f the mother onguePortes Rumbaut, 996).The socialcosts of such languagepolicies or lack thereof are appalling.Moreover,monolingual chools ose one of their most mportant ommodities t a time fglobalization namely, he fertile round or timulating ross-linguistic nd

665



18/33

Tochoncross-culturalearning mong ifferent hildren. rin 2005)demonstratedhat tis cheaper or ation-states odevelopmultilingualismhan t s to mpose ne ortwodominantanguages o their opulation. s well, here re great uman ostsat doing therwise. he problem s similar n most ountries. hen earning helanguage f he chool nterferes ith he cquisition f hemother ongue,he ossof his irm roundingnthe irst anguagewillhavedetrimentalonsequencesorthe hild's bility oacquire hedominant anguage, s well as develop sycho-logically S. C. Wright, aylor, Macarthur, 000).Self-esteem nd emotionalwell-being annot evelopn an environment here he native ulture, raditions,andworldviewsredevaluedS.C.Wright Taylor, 995).t s becoming crucialissue nAmerica, ut t s also a worldwide roblem ecauseof ncreasing assmigrations. he anguage eglect oncerns dult opulationss well.

To sum few f the ssues raised n this ection, irst, anguage roblems renot echnical ssues hat an bequickly ixed. eneralizedinguicismnd anguagediscrimination inder he pportunity f growing opulations n eachcountry osucceed n ociety. ewstrategies eed obedeveloped. eaching ilingual earn-ers n their anguage oes not mpede he cquisition f the majority anguage(Pagan, 005).Language iversity anbe used s a resource n achcountry, iventhat migrant ilingual hildren ossessthe anguage otential that s missingamongmany) ofillmultiple asks equiredt this lobal ime.Weneed o changethe anguage deologies, s well as the ssumptions bout anguages nd theirspeakers hat re enacted n schools, nd so articulate ew, alanced ower ela-tions Freeman, 004). The language-as-problemrientation ust ecome, sRuiz 1984)suggested, language-as-resource rientation.

Solutions:TheWay to Do It Right

Wehave trong videnceoday hat tudying foreignanguage as rippleeffect, elpingo mprovetudent erformancenother ubjects.

Richard iley, .S.secretaryf ducation nder resident linton

The ast uestion n the ntroduction as,What re theways o do it right, ndwhat re the nternational riteria or t? UNESCO(2003)addressed hegrowingconcern or inguistic uman ights nd o established air rinciples or choolingregarding heuse of anguages.f subtractivechoolings detrimental ogenera-tions f children hose potential or chievement ndemployments preemptedfrom he tart, hen here re trong easons or ushing air egislationso nterna-tionally rotect uch ightsKymlicka Patten, 003).UNESCOsupports

1 mother onguenstruction s a means f mproving ducational uality ybuilding pon heknowledgendexperience f the earners ndteachers ;

2. bilingual nd/or ultilingualducation t ll evels f ducation sameans

ofpromoting oth ocial nd gender quality nd s a key lement f inguis-tically iverse ocieties ; nd3. language s an essential omponent f nter-cultural ducationn order o

encourage nderstanding etween ifferent opulation roups nd ensurerespect or undamentalights. pp.28-30)

666



19/33


Languagesould e mainstreamednmiddle chools nd high chools, ut his oesnot uffice. Learning second anguage or 5hours eryear or ixyearswillnotlead ofunctional ilingualismndfluencyn he econd anguage Archibaldt l.,2006,p.4).There re other ays odo t right. here reways ogiveminority hil-dren nd lective-languageearners ccessto the most ffective eans or dditivebilingualism.ilingualducation,nglish s a second anguage,ndforeignanguageeducationhouldmerge nto broader reanamedworld anguage ducation.

World anguage rograms avebeendesigned or variety f school ontexts.Theseprograms ary n their oals,resources, ntensity, nd outcomes. here scurrent greement hat fter-school rograms re a good thing ut re not uffi-cient, ecauseworld anguages hould e integrated ithin he chool urriculumand ubmitted oregular ssessmentsnorder o be taken eriously y tudents nd

parents. our30-min essions n the anguage s considered minimum or ffi-cient lementaryanguagenstructionSandrock, 002).Thebest rogramsncludemother onguemaintenance, alf- nd full-day mmersion, ual language, ndalternate ays, f ndwhen ualified ersonnel s available. uch programs ocuson earningn nother anguage ather han earning bout he anguage. earningin language ther han hemother onguesa different xperience romust earn-ing second anguage.t has ts wn ustification.n second-languagecquisitiontheory, hildren cquire languagewhen hey eed o use t n context Krashen,1982).Acquisitions mmersive nd pontaneous,nopposition o earning, hichrepresents conscious ffort oassimilate ubjectmatter. eoplecan learn an-guagesforyears nd not be able to acquire he anguagen a way hatwill makethem luent. orthat eason, dvocates dvised witching rom theory f medi-ated nd explicit anguageearning oone of mmediate cquisition,nwhich helanguage ules re mplicitly cquired hrough istening nd practice. ocus onform an come afterward, ut tudents irst eed to be placed n a situation nwhich hey anexpress hemselvesn he argetanguage, ecause utput ncreasesacquisition Toth, 006). Content-based anguage ducation econceptualizesworld anguage eaching: tudents an earn he arget anguage ybeing aughtsubjectmatters n that anguage. kutnabb-Kangas2000)differentiates duca-tional ettings n terms f their trength n promoting igh evels f bi- or multi-lingualism nd bi- or multiliteracy.ome characteristicsf the trong orms f

additive ilingualducation re s follows:

Mother ongue aintenance:inguistic inorityhildren ith lower ta-tus I receivenstructionn heir I with view o maintainingnddevelop-ing kills n his anguagenddevelopingride n heir ulturaldentity.

Immersion:inguistic inorityhildren ith high tatus anguagereinstructed hrough hemedium f a world/minorityanguage n classesconsistingntirely fL2learners.

Dual anguage: mixed roup f inguistic inorityndmajoritytudentsare aughthroughhemedium f he earners' I andL2,with he ominantlanguageaughts a subject.

Alternate ays:Amixed roup f inguistic inorityndmajoritytudents

are aught singheir I andL2onalternate

ays.Pluralmultilingual:tudents ith ifferent is are aughthe urriculumthrough hemedium f their I with n L2 taught s a world anguagen

667



20/33

Tochon

grade . This hen ncreasinglyecomeshemedium f nstruction n ateryearswhen ther 2s are lso offered s world anguages,p. 146)

Examples ave lsobeenprovided y Ellis 2007).Here re some corefeatures f mmersion urricula R. K. Johnson Swain,

1997):The second anguage s the medium f nstruction; tudents nter withlimited nd quivalentevels f world anguage roficiency;upportsprovided orthemother ongue; he arget s additive ilingualism; orld anguage xposuresconfined othe lassroom;he rogram arallels he ocalcurriculum;he eachersare bilingual, ut he lassroom ulture orresponds o the ocal community.nimmersionchools, he econdanguages ntroduced arly, tartingnkindergartenor first rade, r ater.Mid-immersiontarts nGrade , and ate mmersion tartsinGrade or 7. All or part f the ubjectmatters re aughtn anguage ther hanthemother ongue. nother pproach, ommonnEurope ndCanada,s to formatenriched rogramsnwhich nediscipline rone rea staught n world anguage(Cloud,Genesee, Hamayan, 000).A variety f formats xist. orexample, llthe ubjects an be taught n the econd anguage rom indergarteno Grade3;fromGrade4, dual anguage s then rganizedwith 0% of the ubjects eingtaught n the mother ongue. ilingualism s additive n such ettings ecause hesecond anguage s added oa strong irst-languageasis,which s reinforced nmultiple ays t school, t home, n the layground,ngames ndtelevision,ndin out-of-school ctivities. oth first nd second anguages re valued,whichincreasesgeneral ognitive ctivities s well as first-language iteracy kills

(Bournot-Trites Tellowitz, 002).Whereas submersion

ilingualducation

devalues he anguage hat he migrant hild s speaking t home which herebyreduces he hances hat he heritageanguage illbemaintained),mmersiondu-cation ncreases hemastery f both anguagesnd o creates ilinguals.

Immersion edagogy equires pecial rainingCummins, 000):Teachersmustbuild ackgroundnformationn the opics eveloped,nd heymust ctivate heirstudents' rior nowledge;nstructionhould e redundantnough o ncrease om-prehension hrough araphrase, epetition, emonstration,nd gesture; raphicorganizers hould onvey onceptual nformationhat an be complemented ithhands-on ctivities n the ontent reas. mmersion equires ell-trainedeachersbecause he nvironment ust arget igher-order hinkingC.L. Walker Tedick,2000).Reciprocalearning,ooperativeearning,ndproject edagogy ill ncour-agestudents ogenerate nowledge ather han ecome assive ecipientsonsum-ing nformation. echnology ust e creatively sedas an amplifier f the worldlanguage ndculture Tochon Black, 007).Students an use encyclopediasnCD-ROM or he nternet,inkwith sister lass n pursuit fnontrivial rojects, nduse video ameras o communicate bout heir rojects. eading ndwriting ustbe integratedn a variety f genres. uality actors re key o the uccess f duallanguage nd mmersion. hen chools do not ake measures o bridge hegapbetween he anguage poken thome nd he anguage aught n he chools,whenthe onditions renotmet or uccessfulmmersion,tmay ead to mixed r nega-tive esults s far s other

isciplinesreconcerned.n

HongKong, longitudinalstudy ascarried ut yMarsh, au, ndKong 2000)toverify hethermmersionwith hinese s mother ongue nd English s second anguagewould ncrease

668



21/33

World anguages ducationstudents' chievement.he tudents erformed etter n heirmother onguend hesecond anguage, s compared ostudents ho were n the regular rograms.However, heprogram id not provide, n the Hong Kong context, hebenefitsclaimed yCummins'smodel 2000),because he esults ere ower n thenonlin-guistic isciplines. ournot-Trites nd Tellowitz 2002)objected, laiming hatquality actors hat re common nCanadawerenotmet n this rogram ndthatthe tudy tself ad imitations:he ubjectmatter eachers ere ot ll fluent n hesecond anguage; herewas little nglish-as-a-second-languageridging nstruc-tion; nd the valuations sedonlywritten ests.Moreover, omestudents amewith ow anguage roficiency nddidnot et nough upport.

Many tudies ave confirmed hat mmersion s an excellent pproach or llchildren de Courcy,Warren Burston, 002). Cummins's nterdependence

hypothesis1989),which ostulates hat anguage kills re transferred rom nelanguage o the other, as been confirmed n immersion tudies, s well as inelementary oreignanguage rograms, uch s FLES (Foreign anguage n theElementary chools) and Core French.Bournot-Trites nd Tellowitz 2002)reviewed esearch n French mmersion rogramsnCanadaandtheir mpact nstudents' chievementn linguistic nd nonlinguistic omains. heyfound hatimmersionn another anguage aspositive ffects n first-languagekills n allstudies. evoting nstructionalime othe econd anguage asnever een hownto have negative ffects n the chievement f the irst anguage. n the ontrary,several tudies ave hown hat irst-languagekills re nhanced, ven f nstruc-tion ime nthemother ongues reduced nfavor f econd-languagenstruction.TeachingmathematicsnFrench ith educednstructionimenEnglish nhanceschildren's chievementnmath ests dministered nEnglish, s compared othatof hildren ho earnmath ntheirmother ongue nly Bournot-Trites Reeder,2001).Thus, he tudents hoacquire heirmathematical nowledgen Frenchcan retrieve t n English.Other tudies ave confirmed hese esults Turnbull,Hart,& Lapkin, 003):Grade6 students ho earned mathematics n Frenchoutperformed on-immersiontudents; hey lso outperformed on-immersionstudentsnreading ndwriting, ven houghhe estswere dministered nEnglish.Studies ave oberead nd compared arefully egardinghe onditionsnwhichimmersion asorganized. uality actorsmust e met. uch factors ave been

developednCanada,for xample,which as a

rangef mmersion chools or

variety f anguages nd hus erforms ery igh mongworld core omparisons(Adam, 006).

Ithasprobably ecome lear long his xpos hat anguage eachingnvolvesmore han ust teaching anguages.Migrant hildren anhelp ther hildren earntheir anguage f principals nd districts nderstand he takes f such ction nterms f valuing ilingual hildren ndbuilding better ociety, society hat ancommunicateSchecter Cummins, 003).English-languageearners an solvethe second-language roblem f monolingual hildren n teaching hem heirmother ongue, nd they an be rewarded ith igher elf-esteem nd anguagelearning Tochon& Hanson, 003).Dual-language,wo-waymmersion choolsoffer solutione.g., panish n hemorning, nglish n he fternoon).Acquiringknowledgen a second anguage oesnot mpede he bility o accessthat nowl-edge n the irst anguage Archibald t al., 2006,p. 5).

669



22/33

Conclusion:World Languagesas the Path for Balancing ociety

Noculture an ive f t ttempts o be exclusive.

MohandasK.Gandhi

Languages lay n mportant ole n an ever-smaller orld. esponding o thedemand n higher ducation s not ufficient or he ypes f needs hat heworldis facing oday. anguage roficiency ust edeveloped uring outh. ilingualproficiencys to be developed rom n early ge. Forthat urpose, hedifferentcountries eed to initiate new concept f schooling n which choolsprovideimmersive

xperiencesn other

anguagesnd

cultures,s well as international

exchanges, hich s the eepway ogoanddo t right, f ross-cultural nderstand-ing s to bedeveloped. heuseof English s one of the actors ccounting or hecomplacencyegardinghe ack of econd-languageluencynAnglophoneoun-tries. owever,nvestmentnshort-runanguage ourses ppears ostly nd nef-fective. lobal xecutives ust e familiar ith more han 0 cultures o nteracteffectively. heonlyway o ddress he emand s to ntroduce orld anguagesincludinganguagesesscommonly aught from arly lementary rade evels.In the United tates, anguage tudy s a middle chool requirementn very ewstates. ome states equire chools o make anguages vailable, ut uch oursesremain noption or tudents ho re free o ake hem rnot. he situation nhighschools sgenerally imilar. o schools equire oreignanguage redits or rad-uation, lthough hey o for onors nd for pecific iplomas. ocalcurricula ayinterfere ithworld anguagesnthat tudents ay eexcluded y riteria elatedwith eneral erformance,chedules,nd ack offunding. he situation nEuropehas been total ontrast ince he arly 990s, uring hichmost f he ountrieshave einforcedheir eachingfworld anguagesBergentoft, 94).Learning neor two anguages s mandatory n all the EuropeanUnion ountries. urriculashow imilarities hanks o nternational ooperation nd a common ramework.The time evoted o foreign anguages llowsmost uropean tudents o achievecommunicativeompetencyntwoforeign anguagesnd ometimes hree.Worldlanguagesre ncreasinglysed s the medium f nstruction nother ubjects. heteaching f anguages egins arly nough hat he cquisition f nativelike ro-nunciationsfacilitated. ontinuity cross evels revents tudents rom aving ostart ll over when ccessingmiddle r high chool. xchange rograms reregu-larly ffered. n somecountries, hehome anguages nd minority anguages retaught nschools. his right sguaranteed y aw, nd t ncludes igh chool tu-dents s well. Several ountries ee competencyn a variety f anguages s anational sset.

Now, ny lementaryeachernany ountry, ithout uch raining,anbe con-fronted ith ssues f inguistic iversitynd ohave odealwith mix f first- ndsecond-languagetudents, ith he ole f managinghis ariety t best, ofocus n

curricula hat gnore he ituation f these hildren ndtheir ultural iversityndownership. any ducationalolicies end o mpose ne anguage fpower o im-plifymanagementndfor conomic urpose. owever, ariousinguists avepro-vided epeatedvidencehat eglectingheanguagef he hild as eep onsequences

670



23/33

World anguages ducationfor is orher chievement n choolCazabon, 996; . C. Wright t al.,2000).Thestrugglegainst inguicismspart f he ame et f ssues hat multiculturalnd aceeducation ave oface nd ddress. hesubtractiveheoryspart f he aradoxicaldeficit heorizingf mancipatory odernity.t onsiders hat tudents hohave oorknowledgef heirmother ongueend ohaveweak earningn he econdanguage.Their ituation s claimed obe different rom he ne of children hoarefirmlygroundedn he irstanguage. hey annot eally evelop n he econd anguagendsogrowwithin n environmentn which hey re valuated ndmisjudged orwhatthey renot namely, nskilledhildrennd owbrowhinkers because hey annotfully xpress hemselvesn he ominantanguageccordingo he ulesmposed ytheupper lass for heir wn hildren. hisphenomenons typicallymposed ntomigrant opulationshat remassivelyssimilatedo ther, ominantultures. nless

the onditions re created or dditive ilingualism,chools s they re currentlyorganized aybedetrimentalo the understandingndpsychocognitiverowth fmore han ne third f the tudents, epending n the ocation, situation hat s apotentialource funemploymentnd ocietal urden. orld anguageducationndbilingual ducation anbe of mutual ssistance ndenrichment hen eshapedstwo-waymmersionrograms. t time when nterdisciplinaritysclaimed obe theway hat cientific esearchhould e done, heboundary aised etween dditiveforeign-languageeachingndpalliative ilingualducations but olitical.t eemsfabricatedo eparateocial lasses: hosewhom he lites want o eedevelop lobalthinking nd hosewho re marginalized.

World anguages an support ocial ustice Osborn, 006).World anguageeducation esearchims o hed ight n one major hallenge o ducation ystemsaround heworld: ow o foster ommunication,eace, ndwell-being cross hecommunity f nations.With 008having eendesignated s a UNInternationalYear f Languages,he ssueof anguage ights nd he upport or anguage ari-ety refront-page. hereport f heUN International xpert roup n ndigenousLanguages 2008)indicates hat uch rights re both ollective nd individual.Specifically,ndividualsndcollectivities ave

(a)the ight omaintainnd o usetheir wn anguage;(b)the ight ohave ndigenousanguagesecognizedn onstitutionsnd

laws;(c)the ight omaintain ersonal ames, lacenames nd he roper ames

of heir anguages;(d)the ight obe educatedn hemother ongueeither n tate chools r

in heir wn chools);(e) the right o use indigenousanguagesn court nd administrative

proceedings;(f) the right onon-discriminationn the grounds f anguagen such

domainss work, ocial ecurity, ealth, amilyife, ducation, ulturalifeandfreedom f peech;

(g)the ight o take art npublic ffairs ndpublic ervice ithout is-criminationnthe rounds f anguage;and]

(h)the ight o stablishndigenous edian ndigenousanguagess wellas to have ccess omainstream edia n ndigenousanguages,p. 1)

World anguages re thekey oglobalunderstanding.

671



24/33

Notes

I am grateful or he feedback rovided y Gina Lewandowski, lizabethMiranda,DaniellaMolle, and Jaime Usmathat helped horten longer ersion f this review.Thankyou to NancyKendallfor helpful omments n an earlier ersion f this rticle.The usual disclaimer pplies.

'See http://europass.cedefop.europa.eu/.^eehttpsV/www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/.

ReferencesAmerican Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. (1999). Standards or

foreign anguage learning: Preparing or the 21st century. awrence, KS: AllenPress.

American ouncil on the Teaching f Foreign anguages, n.d.). What oes researchshow bout the benefits f anguage earning? Retrieved eptember 9, 2008, fromhttp://www.actfl.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=4524

Adam,D. (2006).Official anguages n Canada: Taking n the new hallenge.Ottawa,Ontario, anada: Office f the Commissioner f Official anguages.

Archibald, ., Roy, S., Harmel, ., & Jesney, . (2006).A review f the iterature nsecond anguage earning 2nded.).Calgary, lberta, anada:University f Calgary,LanguageResearchCenter.

Armstrong, .W., & Rogers,J. D. (1997).Basic skills evisited: he effects f foreignlanguage instruction n reading, math nd language arts. Learning Languages,2(3), 20-31.

Badman, . A. 2002).AcademicBuffy ibliography. layage:TheOnline nternationalJournal f Buffy tudies, . Retrieved eptember 2, 2008, from ttp //www. lay -geonline.com/essays/slayage7/Badman.htm

Baker, C. (2001). Foundations f bilingual education and bilingualism 3rd ed.).Clevedon,UK:MultilingualMatters.

Batibo,H. M. (2005).Languagedecline nd death n Africa: Causes,consequences,and challenges.Clevedon,UK:MultilingualMatters.

Bergentoft, . (1994).Foreign anguage nstruction: comparative erspective. nnalsof theAmerican cademy f Political& SocialScience,532, 8-34.

Bernstein, . (1972).Acritique f he oncept compensatory ducation. nC. B.Cazden,V.John, D.Hymes Eds.),Functions f anguage n the lassroom pp. 190-201).NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.Bex, T., & Watts, R. J. 1999). Standard English: The widening ebate. London:Routledge.

Bhatt, R. (2007, November). Colonial discourse, alter-native deologies, and thepolitics of linguistic nostalgia. Paper presented t the annual meeting of theInternational ssociation orDialogue Analysis, ast Jerusalem.

Bialystok, . (2001).Bilingualism n development: anguage, iteracy nd cognition.Cambridge, K: CambridgeUniversity ress.

Bialystok, . (2005).Consequences fbilingualism or ognitive evelopment. xford,UK: OxfordUniversity ress.

Bialystok, ., & Hakuta,K. (1999).Confounded ge: Linguistic nd cognitive actors

in age differences or econd languageacquisition. n D. Birdsong Ed.), Secondlanguage cquisition nd the ritical eriodhypothesis pp. 161-181).Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaum.

672



25/33


Bialystok, ., Luk, G.,& Kwan, . (2005).Bilingualism,iliteracy,nd earning oread:nteractionsmonganguagesndwritingystems.cientifictudies fReading,9(1),43-61.

Bialystok,., &Martin, .M.(2004).Attentionnd nhibitionnbilingualhildren:Evidenceromhe imensionalhange ard ort ask. evelopmentalciences, (3),325-339.

Birdsong, ., &Molis,M.(2001).Onthe vidence or maturationalonstraintsnsecond-languagecquisition.ournalfMemoryndLanguage,4,235-249.

Block, . (2004).Globalisationnd anguageeaching.LTJournal, 8('), 75-76.Bloomfield,. (1927).Literate nd lliteratepeech. mericanpeech, ,432-439.Boli,J., Ramirez, . 1992).Compulsorychoolingn heWesternultural ontext:

Essencendvariation.nR.Amove, .Altbach, G.KellyEds.),Emergentssuesin education: omparativeerspectivespp.25-38).Albany: tateUniversityfNewYork ress.Bourdieu, . (1991)Language nd symbolic ower R. Nice,Trans.).NewYork:RoutledgendKegan aul.

Bournot-Trites, , & Reeder, . (2001).Interdependenceevisited: athematicsachievementn an intensified rench mmersion rogram. anadianModernLanguage eview,8(1),27-43.

Bournot-Trites,.,&Tellowitz, . 2002,January). eport f urrent esearchntheeffects f econdanguageearning n irst anguageiteracy kills. alifax, ovaScotia, anada:Atlantic rovincesducationaloundation.

Breton, . (1998).Economicpproaches olanguage nd bilingualism. ttawa,Ontario, anada:Canadian eritage.

Camenson, . (2001).Careersn oreignanguages. ewYork:McGraw-Hill.Canagarajah,. (1999).ResistinginguisticmperialismnEnglish eaching. xford,UK:Oxford niversityress.

Canagarajah,. (2007).Lingua ranca nglish,multilingualommunities,nd an-guage cquisition. odern anguage ournal,7(5),921-937.

Carrera, . (2006).A comparisonf ntegrationrogrammesn the U. Trends ndweaknesses.hallenge, iberty Security. russels: entre or uropean olicyStudies. etrievedeptember 2,2008, rom ttp://www.libertysecurity.org/MG/pdf/A_Comparison_of_Integration_Programmes_in_the_EU_Trends_and_Weaknesses.pdf

Cazabon, . (1996,May).Thechallengesf eachingrench n a minority ituation.

InNewCanadian erspectives:heCanadian xperiencen he eachingfOfficialLanguages. etrieved eptember 2,2008,from ttp://www.patrimoinecanadien.gc.ca/progs/lo-ol/perspectives/english/sympo/challe_a.htm

Clark, . 2006).Languagessocial apital. ppliedemioticsSmiotiquepplique,18,30-45.

Cloud,N.,Genesee, ., &Hamayan, . (2000).Teachingontent.n Duallanguageinstruction: handbookor nriched ducationpp. 113-138).Boston:Heinle&Heinle.

Council fEurope2002).Commonuropean rameworkf eferenceor anguages:Learning,eaching,ssessment.ambridge, K:Cambridge niversity ress.

Crawford, . 2008).Advocatingor nglishearners: elected ssays. levedon, K:

Multilingual atters.Crystal, . (2006).Englishworldwide.n R. Hogg&D. DenisonEds.),Ahistoryof theEnglish anguage pp. 420-439).Cambridge, K:Cambridge niversityPress.

673



26/33

Tochon

Cummins, .1976).The nfluence fbilingualismn ognitiverowth: synthesisfresearch indingsnd xplanatoryypotheses. orkingapers nBilingualism,,1-43.Cummins, . 1989).Linguisticnterdependencend he ducational evelopmentfbilingualhildren. eviewfEducational esearch,9(2),222-25

Cummins, . 1994). emilingualism.nR. R. Asher Ed.), nternationalncyclopediaof language nd linguistics 2nd ed., pp. 3812-3814).Oxford, K: ElsevierScience.

Cummins, . 2000).mmersionducationor hemillennium: hat e have earnedfrom 0years f esearchn econd anguagemmersion.oronto, ntario, anada:UniversityfToronto, ntario nstitute or tudies nEducation.

Curtain, ., &Dahlberg, . A. (2004).Languagesnd children: aking hematch(3rd d.). Boston: earson.

Dalby, . 2003).Languagendanger: he ossof inguisticiversitynd he hreat oour uture. ewYork: olumbia niversity ress.Davidson,. 2008).TESOL certificates:eachingrdeceivinghe FL/ESL eaching

profession?ESOLLawJournal, , 110-1 5.deCourcy, L,Warren, ., Burston, . 2002).Children rom iverse ackgrounds

in n mmersion rogramme.anguagendEducation,6(2),112-127.DeGalan,J. 2000).Great obs for oreign anguagemajors 2nded.).NewYork:

McGraw-Hill.Dorny, . (2005).The sychologyf he anguageearner.Mahwah, J: awrence

Erlbaum.Edge,J. 2006).Re-)LocatingESOL n nage of mpire. asingstoke, K:Palgrave

Macmillan.Ellis,R. 2007).Educationalettingsnd econd anguageearning. sian ELJournal,9(4). Retrieved eptember 2, 2008, from ttp://www.asian-efl-journal.com/Dec_2007_re.php

Fabbro, . 2001).Thebilingual rain: erebral epresentationf anguages.rain&Language,9,211-222.

Ferguson, . (1998).The multiculturalhild n themonocultural an. n C. J. Diaz(Ed.),Bilingualism:uilding locksorbiliteracypp.67-103).Sydney, ustralia:UniversityfWestern ydney acarthur.

Fishman, .A. 1999).Handbookf anguage nd thnic dentity. xford, K:OxfordUniversityress.

Fishman, .A. (2006).Language olicy nd anguagehift. n T. Ricento Ed.),Anintroductiono anguage olicy: heory ndmethodpp.311-328).Maiden,MA:Blackwell.

Fennelly, . 2005,May). mmigrationndpovertyn heNorthwestrea tates JSRIWorking aper o.65).East ansing, I:Michigantate niversity,ulianamoraResearchnstitute.

Freeman, . 2004).Buildingncommunityilingualism.hiladelphia:aslon.Friedman, .L. (2005).Theworld sflat: Abrief istory f he wenty-firstentury.

NewYork: arrar, trauss ndGiroux.Fullan,M. (2007).Thenewmeaning f educational hange 4th d.). NewYork:

Teachers ollege ress.

Ghadar, .,& Spindler, . (2005). T: UbiquitousorceGlobal ectonics:art -Informationechnology).ndustrial anagement,7(4),14-17.Ghemawat,. 2007).Redefininglobal trategy: rossing ordersn worldwhere

differencestillmatter. ambridge, A: Harvard usiness chool ress.

674



27/33

World anguages ducationGiacalone Ramat, A. (2003). Typology nd second language acquisition. Berlin:

Moutonde Gruyter.Gogate,M. N. (2002).Simplified lobal English. A parallel anguagefor he world.

Journal f the implified pelling ociety, 7(2), 11-12.Gonzlez, N. (2003). Language Ideologies. Heritage Language Journal, 7(1),

141-162.Green, L. (2002).AfricanAmerican nglish: A linguistic ntroduction. ambridge,

UK:Cambridge niversity ress.Grin, F. (1996). Economicapproaches o languageand languageplanning Special

issue]. nternational ournal f the ociology f Language,121.Grin, F. (2005). Uenseignement es langues trangres ommepolitique publique

[Foreign anguages eaching s publicpolicy] Report No. 19).Paris: Haut Conseilde l'valuation e l'cole.

Grin, . (2006).Economie considerations n languagepolicy. n T. Ricento Ed.),Anintroduction o language policy: Theory nd method pp. 77-94). Maiden, MA:Blackwell.

Grin, ., & Vaillancourt, . (1999).Thecost-effectivenessvaluation f minority an-guagepolicies: Case studies n Wales, reland, nd the BasqueCountry. lensburg,Germany: uropeanCentre orMinority ssues.

Hagge,C. (2000).Halte la mort es langues [Stopping anguages' death]. Paris:EditionsOdiileJacob.

Hansegrd, . E. (1968).Tvsprkighet ller halvsprkighet Bilingualism r semilin-gualism?]. tockholm: ldus/Bonnier.

Harrison, . D. (2007).When anguagesdie: The extinction f the world's anguagesand the rosion f humanknowledge. xford, K: OxfordUniversity ress.

Hinnenkamp, V. (2005). Semilingualism, double monolingualism nd blurredgenres On (not) speaking a legitimate anguage. Journal of Social ScienceEducation, 1. Retrieved eptember 19, 2008, from http://www.sowi-online.de/reader/journal/ 005- /semilingualism_hinnenkamp.htm

Holmes,J. 2001)An ntroduction osociolinguistics. ew York: Longman.International xpert Group on IndigenousLanguages 2008). Report o the United

NationsHeadquarters rom -10 January 008. RetrievedMay4, 2008, from ttp://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfi/en/EGM_IL.html

Jenkins, . 2007). English s a Lingua Eranca: Attitude nd identity. xford, UK:OxfordUniversity ress.

Johnson, .S., & Newport, . L. (1989). Critical period effects n second anguagelearning: The influence f maturational tate on the acquisition of English as asecond anguage.Cognitive sychology, 1, 60-99.

Johnson, .S., & Newport, . L. (1991).Critical eriod ffects n universal ropertiesof language: The status of subjacency n the acquisition of a second language.Cognition, 9, 215-25S.

Johnson, . K.,& Swain,M. (1997).Immersion ducation: nternational erspectives.Cambridge, K: Cambridge niversity ress.

Jose- ampf er, , &Aparicio, . 1 98,May).Rethinking iolence n the ducationalcrisis of U.S.Latinos Working aper No. 38).AnnArbor:University f Michigan.

Jung, . K., & Norton, . (2002).Language

The Key to Global Understanding

Documents

Transcript of The Key to Global Understanding