As we're talking 'Linguistic Imperialism', I thought this might be relevant to the discussion... It's an excerpt from something I wrote a few years ago regarding the British Council and its role in ELT...
“A knowledge of English gives rise in its turn to a desire to read English books, talk to British people, and learn about British life or some aspect of it… As a result… the British Council representative will receive many requests from people… who wish to visit the United Kingdom, usually to study some subject. From such applications are chosen the distinguished visitors… whom it is considered worth while to assist.” (Drogheda report summary as quoted in Donaldson, 1984, pp181-82)
The British government realised that if English language teaching overseas was to expand then special steps would have to be taken. However, there was a problem for the British Council in that it had little or no expertise in teaching English as a Foreign Language (EFL) in multilingual societies. This factor was to have major consequences for the way English Language Teaching (ELT) was to develop as both the Colonial Office and the Ministry of Education rejected the Council’s claims to educational expertise in this area.
Therefore in March 1956 An ‘Official Committee on the Teaching of English Overseas’, (TEO) which consisted of representatives from the Foreign Office, Scottish Office, Commonwealth Relations Office, Colonial Office, the Board of Trade, the Ministry of Education, the University Grants Committee and the British Council, reported to the Cabinet. The committee’s report was entitled ‘The Opportunity’ and it stated that:
“Opportunities unquestionably exist for increasing the use of English as a second language in most parts of the non-English speaking world… Within a generation from now English could be a world language – that is to say a universal second language in those countries in which it is not already the native or primary tongue… it is important that its expansion should take place mainly under Commonwealth and United States auspices” (as quoted in Phillipson, 1994, p149)
It may appear somewhat surprising that the United States is included as an ally in the battle for English domination; however, during the mid-fifties the threats to British English were perceived as alternative languages such as Arabic, Chinese and Hindi rather than American English. Although the report does note the threat from American cultural imperialism to traditional British export markets the report notes that “there was a preference overseas for the Queen’s English as opposed to American English” (Donaldson, 1984, p203) and the report goes on to state that:
“Britain has nothing to lose and much to gain by the closest possible collaboration with the United States.” (As quoted in Phillipson, 1994, p150)
This reflected the fact that American ELT and linguistics were far more developed than in Britain. This was due to America’s experience in Teaching English as a Second Language (TESL) to immigrants. Thus, the British Council and the State Department (the USA’s Foreign Office governmental equivalent) had already started co-ordinating strategy together and had even issued identical memos to their overseas offices endorsing co-operation between Britons and Americans in this field.
This report also marked a change in the policy of the British Council from that of ‘cultural’ to ‘educational’ affairs and from ‘developed’ to ‘developing’ countries (Pennycook, 1994, p148).
Pennycook further suggests that: “For Britain, it became especially useful to have a ‘non-governmental’ agency for continued cultural and political influence in the face of the demise of the colonial education service.” (Pennycook, 1994, p148)
There's more, but I think that's more than enough for now...
|