Expanding on the Expanding Circle: where do WE go from here?

Berns, Margie

doi:10.1111/j.0883-2919.2005.00389.x

Cited by 59 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In assessing the status of research on the Expanding Circle, Berns goes further, urging everyone to “reconceptualize [its varieties] as being as valid as Inner and Outer Circle Englishes” (2005: 88). Her rallying cry for this “democratic stance” (p. 88) contrasts sharply with Graddol's dour declaration that an EFL country has “no local model of English” (2000: 11).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Colinguals among bilinguals

Schell¹

2008

World Englishes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discussions about intranational uses of English tend to follow the predominant theme of international uses, namely communication between people who do not have the same native language (L1). But how often do compatriots who share an L1 speak L2 English with each other? In other words, how many of a country's bilinguals are also colinguals? If citizens are not speaking English with each other, does it make sense for their educators, literati, or politicians to claim that they have their own national variety? Is spoken discourse the prime mover that generates independent canons? That is, does abundance or lack of speech interaction in intranational contexts act as a touchstone for separating norm-providing varieties (e.g. Indian English) from norm-dependent varieties (e.g. so-called "Japanese English")? These questions serve to reinforce the tripartite classification of Kachru's model, with a focus on the similarities between the Inner and Outer Circles, counterbalancing the tendency to combine the Outer and Expanding Circles.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Colinguals among bilinguals

Schell¹

2008

World Englishes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To our knowledge, studies comparing NES and NNES rating behaviour in oral testing are yet to be conducted in the Chinese context, which is arguably an important one since the variety of English spoken in that densely populated and rapidly developing country promises to be extremely influential (Berns, 2005).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Judgments of oral proficiency by non-native and native English speaking teacher raters: Competing or complementary constructs?

Zhang

Elder

2010

Language Testing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reports the findings of an empirical study on ESL/EFL teachers' evaluation and interpretation of oral English proficiency as elicited by the national College English Test-Spoken English Test (CET-SET) of China. Informed by debates on the issue of native speaker (NS) norms which have become the focus of attention in recent years, this study addresses the question of whether judgments of language proficiency by non-native English speaking (NNES) teachers, who are currently used to assess performance on the CET-SET, correspond to those of native English speaking (NES) teachers or whether the two groups draw on different constructs of oral proficiency. Data for the study were derived from two sources: unguided holistic ratings given by a group of 19 NES and 20 NNES teachers to CET-SET speech samples from 30 test-takers, and written comments to justify the ratings assigned. Results yielded by both quantitative (MFRM) and qualitative analyses of teacher data, revealed no significant difference in raters' holistic judgments of the speech samples and a broad level of agreement between groups on the construct components of oral English proficiency. However, the analysis of raters' comments revealed both quantitative and qualitative differences in the way NES and NNES teachers weighed various features of the oral proficiency construct in justifying the decisions made. The paper concludes by considering the implications of the study's findings for debates about the native speaker norm as the target for language learners and test-takers.

show abstract

“…As English is widely used in China, scholars have generally concurred that a Chinese variety of English, China English, is emerging (Chen and Hu, 2006; Hu, 2004; Jiang, 2003; Wei and Fei, 2003). How to study this new variety of English in the largest Expanding Circle country has become a central issue in the field of world Englishes (Berns, 2005). So far, formal study of China English, particularly its rhetorical strategies, has centered on an inference model.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rhetorical strategies, electronic media, and China English

You

2008

World Englishes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholars tend to explain or predict China English's rhetorical strategies on the basis of Chinese discourse and cultural preferences. This inference model, I argue, falls short in studying the Chinese variety of English because, first, it essentializes both China English and Chinese, treating their discursive strategies as two easily generalizable, static entities; second, it neglects context, which determines the semiotic meaning potential of any language. I propose an alternative model that studies China English with context treated as the main variable. In light of the context model and Aristotelian and Confucian rhetorical concepts, I examine how Chinese youths use English to foster a community and to realize their particular goals in a bulletin board forum. It has been found that they develop patterned rhetorical strategies in the contexts of requesting opinions, seeking advice, sharing experiences, and expressing feelings. These strategies evidence China English's growing meaning potential in electronic medium spaces because they differ remarkably from those identified in other contexts by previous scholarship, and they cannot be easily labeled as traditional Chinese. As China English finds its way into more contexts and domains, I suggest that we adopt the context model to fully unveil the language's expanding meaning potential.

show abstract

Expanding on the Expanding Circle: where do WE go from here?

Cited by 59 publications

References 7 publications

Colinguals among bilinguals

Colinguals among bilinguals

Judgments of oral proficiency by non-native and native English speaking teacher raters: Competing or complementary constructs?

Rhetorical strategies, electronic media, and China English

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About