References

The conventional model of communicative competence, with its strict

adherence to native speaker norms within the target language culture,

would appear to be invalid in accounting for learning and using an

international language in cross-cultural settings. A new pedagogic model

is urgently needed to accommodate the case of English as a means of

international and intercultural communication. This model should take

into account the following criteria:

1 Successful bilinguals with intercultural insights and knowledge

should serve as pedagogic models in English as an International

Language (EIL) rather than the monolingual native speaker.

2 Intercultural communicative competence should be developed among

EIL learners by equipping them with linguistic and cultural behaviour

which will enable them to communicate effectively with others, and

also by equipping them with an awareness of difference, and with

strategies for coping with such difference (Hyde 1998).

3 The EIL pedagogy should be one of global appropriacy and local

appropriation, in that it should prepare learners ‘to be both global and

local speakers of English and to feel at home in both international and

national cultures’ (Kramsch and Sullivan 1996: 211).

4 Instructional materials and activities should involve local and

international contexts that are familiar and relevant to language

learners’ lives.

5 Instructional materials and activities should have suitable discourse

samples pertaining to native and nonnative speaker interactions, as

well as nonnative and nonnative speaker interactions. Discourse

displaying exclusive native speaker use should be kept to a minimum,

as it is chiefly irrelevant for many learners in terms of potential use in

authentic settings (Widdowson 1998).

It is time for ELT to consider the implications of the international status

of English in terms of appropriate pedagogies and instructional materials

that will help learners become successful bilingual and intercultural

individuals who are able to function well in both local and international

settings.

statistics of English today’. English Today

Berns, M. 1988. ‘The cultural and linguistic

context of English in West Germany’. World

Englishes 7/1: 37–49.

Bex, A. R. 1994. ‘The problem of culture and

English language teaching in Europe’. IRAL 32/1:

57–67.

Canale, M. 1983. ‘From communicative

competence to communicative language

pedagogy’ in J. C. Richards and R. W. Schmidt

(eds.). Language and Communication. London:

Longman.

Crystal, D. 1985. ‘How many billions? The

1: 7–11.

Hyde, M. 1998. ‘Intercultural competence in

English language education’. Modern English

Teacher 7/2: 7–11.

Kachru, B. 1986. The Alchemy of English. Oxford:

Pergamon Press.

Kramsch, C. 1995. ‘The privilege of the non-native

speaker’. Plenary address at the Annual TESOL

Convention, April, Long Beach, California.

Kramsch, C. and P. Sullivan. 1996. ‘Appropriate

pedagogy’. ELT Journal 50/3: 199–212.

Towards intercultural communicative competence

Latulippe, L. 1999. ‘Lessons learned from being a

student again’. TESOL Matters 9/2: 13.

Nayar, P. B. 1994. ‘Whose English is it?’ TESL / EJ

[On-line serial], 1/1, F1. URL

http://berkeley.edu/~cwp/TESL-EJ.html.

Paikeday, T. M. 1985. The Native Speaker is Dead!

Toronto and New York: PPI.

Porto, M. 1996. ‘Integrating the teaching of

language and culture’. IATEFL Newsletter 132:

14–15.

Rajagopalan, K. 1999. ‘Of EFL teachers,

conscience, and cowardice’. ELT Journal 53/3:

200–6.

Thomas, L. 1996. ‘Language as power: A linguistic

critique of US English’. The Modern Language

Journal 80/2: 129–40.

64 Cem Alptekin

Widdowson, H. G. 1998. ‘Context, community,

and authentic language’. TESOL Quarterly 32/4:

705–16.

Поиск по сайту: