Multilingualism, Lingua Franca, or Both? Aspects of the Emergence of English in Europe and the Implications on Teaching and Learning English as a Foreign Language in Germany.
Multilingualism, Lingua Franca, or Both?
Aspects of the Emergence of English in Europe and the Implications on Teaching and Learning English as a Foreign Language in Germany
Contents
. INTRODUCTION...............................................................................
1
2. THE ROLE OF ENGLISH IN EUROPE.........................................................
3
2.1 THE WORLDWIDE SPREAD OF ENGLISH............................................
3
2.2 THE PRESENT SITUATION OF ENGLISH IN EUROPE................................
4
3. LINGUA FRANCA VERSUS MULTILINGUALISM...........................................
6
3.1 THE CONCEPT OF LINGUA FRANCA................................................
6
3.2 THE CONCEPT OF MULTILINGUALISM..............................................
7
3.3 DOES EUROPE NEED A LINGUA FRANCA?.........................................
7
3.4 THE LANGUAGE DEBATE IN THE EU................................................
7
4. THE TEACHING OF ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE (EFL) IN GERMANY........
1
4.1 THE HISTORY OF EFL IN GERMANY.................................................
1
4.2 THE PRESENT SITUATION OF EFL IN GERMANY...................................
2
4.3 THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE LANGUAGE DEBATE ON EFL........................
3
4.3.1 METHODICAL CHANGES....................................................................
3
4.3.2 DIDACTIC CHANGES........................................................................
4
4.3.3 STRUCTURAL CHANGES....................................................................
4
4.4 WHICH "ENGLISH" SHOULD BE TAUGHT?.........................................
5
5. CONCLUSION..................................................................................
7
6. BIBLIOGRAPHY...............................................................................
8
. INTRODUCTION
The European process of integration is preceding, and, thanks to the common currency of the Euro, the European Union (EU) has made progress towards a feeling of community. However, the union of 15 countries, resulting in 11 official languages (Mackiewicz, 1998) has led to a language problem, which will increase when the intended enlargement of the EU of the Eastern European countries is put into action. The multitude of different languages in the EU raised the language debate and the questions which position these languages should take and which language should be used for communication within the EU.
In order to avoid that Europe gets lost in a disorder of many official and working languages, some people argue for the use of English as a lingua franca (ELF), as it is already widely used in different areas of communication in the EU. Some even propose that English should be made the official language of Europe. On the contrary, others fear that if English is used as lingua franca, other languages, in particular minority languages, will be eliminated and therefore call for multilingualism. Another point is the preservation of a national identity, which some people feel is endangered by the emergence of English in Europe.
The dominant role of English as lingua franca has already become reality in many areas of communication in the EU, for instance it is almost exclusively used as the language of business and science. The European language policy works against this, intending a pluralistic model that supports multilingualism in Europe. On the other hand, this declaration of intent contradicts the actual practise and there are a growing number of people calling for a uniform, common language in the EU.
All over Europe, the issue of the language problem has evolved a discussion about the implications on the teaching and learning of foreign languages, in particular English as a foreign language (EFL).
In Germany, opinions are divided on the question whether English should be taught in a socio-cultural background (as it has been in the past) or, in the face of internationalisation and the development of the EU, rather as a lingua franca, teaching only basic communication skills without consideration to the socio-cultural background of English native speaker countries. Also, some people argue that too much emphasis has been put on teaching and learning English, and with that neglecting other languages of the European Union. The concept of multilingualism is therefore often mentioned as the only solution Europe can agree upon. Both lines, should one or the other be realized, would inevitably lead to changes in the foreign language curriculum.
The cultural as well as linguistic diversity of Europe is a challenge, not only a political and economical, but also an educational one. Opinions differ widely amongst linguists, language teachers and other scholars. Therefore, a solution is impossible to predict and various factors have to be taken into account. However, to overcome the linguistic barrier, one or the other solution has to be found.
This paper will discuss the various opinions and views on the question whether Europe should use English as a lingua franca, foster multilingualism or find other ways of solving the language problem. Furthermore, the paper examines the implications of the emerging predominant role of English on teaching EFL, using the example of Germany.
2. THE ROLE OF ENGLISH IN EUROPE
The following chapter will give a short overview of the reasons why English has spread out around the world to such an extent as it is today. Further, a closer look will be taken on the situation of English in Europe today, with an emphasis on the factors that contributed towards the position that English holds in Europe today.
2.1 THE WORLDWIDE SPREAD OF ENGLISH
English spread through two major diasporas. The first, beginning in the 16th century during the reign of Elizabeth I, involved large-scale migrations to North America, New Zealand and Australia. The second, beginning in the late-18th century, arose from the expansion of colonial power, particularly into Africa, India and the South Pacific. Coupled with the emerging economic power of Britain in the 19th century and the United States in the 20th, this ensured the present-day status of English. In this respect, the spread of English has been due to the enormous political and economical power of Britain, and nowadays, the United States. In recent times, the mass media, e.g. satellite TV and the Internet, has made a further contribution towards the establishment of English as a global language that should not be underestimated.
As Crystal (1997) states in book "English as a Global Language", English became a world language not because of intrinsic linguistic qualities, but because it 'happened to be in the right place at the right time' at significant moments in history. Graddol (1997) states that English has become a global language "at a time when the world itself is undergoing rapid change".
Today, English is the official or joint official language in over 60 countries, and it has a prominent place in an additional 20 countries. Kachru (1985) established a classification of speakers of English, grouped as firstly the "Inner Circle", which refers to the traditional cultural and linguistic base of English and comprises speakers who use English as their native language (for example the UK, USA, and Australia), secondly the "Outer Circle", which refers to the institutionalised non-native varieties (for example countries such as India, Ghana, and the Phillipines that had been colonized by countries of the "Inner Circle"). English speakers from the "Outer Circle" use English as a second or additional language. Thirdly, the "Expanding Circle" includes those countries where English is mainly taught and spoken as a foreign language (for example China, Japan, and Germany).
2.2 THE PRESENT SITUATION OF ENGLISH IN EUROPE
According to a survey of 12 member states of the EU conducted by Eurobarometer in 1994, the three most learnt and spoken languages in the EU were English, German and French, with English being in front. Also, Europeans were asked which language, apart from their native language, they find the most useful one. 75% indicated English, 40% French, 23% German and 18% Spanish as most useful.
How can we explain that English holds this leading role in Europe? It can be argued that this is because of the status, or prestige, English has in our society.
First of all, the number of people who speak a language has a great impact on the perception of the usefulness and importance of a language. It has been estimated that over 2 billion people, roughly one-fifth of the world's population, speak English (Crystal, 1985). Although others reckon that this is overestimated, 800 million speakers with 57% non-native users (Strevens, 1982) is still an impressive number.
Besides that, English is the language most used in international or academic conferences. Diplomats, scientists and business people use it and the language of airports, advertisement, technology, sports and music ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
First of all, the number of people who speak a language has a great impact on the perception of the usefulness and importance of a language. It has been estimated that over 2 billion people, roughly one-fifth of the world's population, speak English (Crystal, 1985). Although others reckon that this is overestimated, 800 million speakers with 57% non-native users (Strevens, 1982) is still an impressive number.
Besides that, English is the language most used in international or academic conferences. Diplomats, scientists and business people use it and the language of airports, advertisement, technology, sports and music is English, too.
In Europe, English functions as one of the official languages of the EU and is used in the areas mentioned above. European languages adapt more and more English words, in particular the German language. In regard to career opportunities, English has become indispensable and large companies already use English as a working language. Moreover, English has become very popular with the younger generation, as so-called trends, e.g. music, movies, etc. are mostly set in the United States or Great Britain. Another example is the increasing use of English in education: more and more German universities offer classes taught only in English and even "International Universities" have been found (for example the International University of Bremen, where the language of communication and teaching is not German, but English). For these reasons, English has the "largest communication potential" (Ammon, 2000), and its marketplace value is considerable: it obviously pays to learn English (for private and professional purposes). Kachru (1986) associates English with power and it is only natural that Europe does not want to miss out on this, neither economically nor politically.
To sum up, the frequency of English and its' status have contributed to the fact that English can be regarded as the 'World Language' and it has not made a stop at Europe.
3. LINGUA FRANCA VERSUS MULTILINGUALISM
The multilingual and multicultural nature of Europe has become both a cliché and an unsolved dilemma. The social, economic and political ramifications of the language debate are deeply embedded in the attitudes, beliefs and traditions of nations and citizens. The hegemony of the English language, the increasing profile of regional and minority languages and the enlargement of the Union into Central and Eastern Europe are all controversial issues which affect individual European citizens and their neighbours on a daily basis.
In this chapter, a definition of the concepts of lingua franca and multilingualism will be given. Moreover, the current point of issue whether Europe needs a lingua franca or has to support multilingualism will be addressed. Also, different aspects of the current language policy of the European Union as well as contrary opinions will be discussed. It is not intended to propose a universal theory, but to illuminate different viewpoints of the language debate in order to work out the effects the different standpoints would have on the teaching of EFL in Germany.
3.1 THE CONCEPT OF LINGUA FRANCA
According to the Cambridge International Dictionary of English, lingua franca is defined as "a language which is used for communication between groups of people who speak different languages but which is not used between members of the same group".
In this respect, English becomes a lingua franca as soon as two people who are not native speakers of English communicate with each in English. Hence English is used as an "aid" or "communication tool".
Within the European Union, business contacts largely occur in English, and English is sometimes considered as a "neutral ground" for conversation among speakers of different languages (Görlach and Schröder 1985: 227).
In the course of the emergence of the Internet, one often strikes on expressions such as "English has become the lingua franca of the Internet", meaning that the majority of information is conveyed through English.
3.2 THE CONCEPT OF MULTILINGUALISM
The Cambridge International Dictionary of English states that people or groups are multilingual if they are "...able to use more than two languages for communication...", whereas monolingual means speaking or using only one language. It should be noticed that there is a distinct difference between the terms 'multilingual' and 'bilingual' (defined by the Cambridge International Dictionary of English as "...being able to use two languages for communication..."), as 'multilingual' addresses the abilility of being able to use various (more than two) languages in different situations and levels. Another important fact is that, in the language debate of the EU, multilingualism, also referred to as plurilingualism, does not necessarily mean being fluent in several languages, but rather being able to understandand communicate basic things in various languages.
3.3 DOES EUROPE NEED A LINGUA FRANCA?
If at a meeting of 22 participants, everyone spoke her/his own language, that would have to be interpreted into all other languages by 231 interpreters and, according to the European Commission, about 100 million pages have been translated in 1995, which is connected with great expenditure. Besides these existent language barriers between member states of the EU, it is often claimed that the maintenance of all European languages as official and working languages would lead to a chaos, which, in the media, is often depicted as the "Tower of Babel".
Obviously, language barriers are an obstacle for the exchange of people, goods and information. In so far it is crucial that some type of solution, e.g. decision on the role of Europe's languages, has to be agreed upon in order to establish a peaceful coexistence of all countries of the EU.
3.3 THE LANGUAGE DEBATE IN THE EU
As stated above, the language barriers found in Europe have to be overcome in order to make an integration that benefits all countries and citizens equally, practicable. Therefore, it is decisive for the future of Europe which point of view will succeed. Roughly, viewpoints show three trends:
. Multilingualism in Europe with a negligence of English
2. English as lingua franca, e.g. English as the official language of the EU as well as for communication
3. Multilingualism plus English as a lingua franca, e.g. acquisition of other languages is supported, but the role of English as an official and working language as well as a language for communication in certain areas is acknowledged
The Council of Europe promoted in 1998 the "widespread plurilingualism by encouraging all Europeans to achieve a degree of communicative ability in a number of languages" and argues that:
"Learning foreign languages serves to facilitate the private and professional mobility of the citizens and the exchange of ideas, should contribute to overcoming prejudices and developing mutual interest and tolerance among European citizens and serrves to protect and support the rich heritage of linguistic and cultural diversity as a source of mutual enrichment."
This shows that the Council of Europe takes the strong view that it is essential to maintain cultural as well as linguistic diversity. However, it has to be said that the Council of Europe does not oppose ELF itself, but rather emphasises the importance of the other languages of the EU, which may be because of a fear of loss of identity and being taken over by English speaking countries' culture and values.
The "Deutsche Philologenverband" insists on the protection of the cultural and linguistic diversity and even declares this as the 'trademark' of Europe. Tove Skutnabb-Kangas (2002) also argues for multilingualism, although he holds a rather economical view:
"...When Europe, North America and Japan in the near future will be lesser economic players (...) knowledge in non-European languages becomes an important economic (and political) asset. Therefore, we need to be plurilingual and have English as only one of the languages."
Others, as House (2001), say that "the role of English as a worldwide lingua franca is irreversible. It is therefore more fruitful to accept this role than either bemoan it or follow the European Union's hypocritical language policy". She also argues that "English is already 'de-nativised' to a large extent because the global number of non-native speakers is now substantially larger than its native speakers".
On the other hand, it is claimed that, by using ELF, native speakers of English would have a communicative advantage over non-native speakers in so far as it takes less concentration to, for instance, discuss in the native language than in a foreign language. Finkenstaedt and Schröder argue that this an unjust trump cart English native speakers would have (Finkenstaedt, Schröder, 1990: 35). The consequence of this point of view would be to use a language that is not spoken by any member of the EU, but as the intended introduction of Esperanto, an artificial language, has failed, this approach is not exactly promising. With reference to this issue, Ignaz Bender, vice-chancellor of German universities, proposes the solution of the "Sprachenpakt", which implements that "If the whole world speaks English, every English native speaker should speak a foreign language, too" (Bender, 2000). This could be seen as a revolutionary approach, but, as it only aims at mere justice, could also be regarded as absurd.
As an alternative approach, the viewpoint of multilingualism plus ELF is hold by Raasch (2001), who argues in favour of this a solution 'in between' the two others. He promotes the profit learners have from learning various languages, though he acknowledges the importance of ELF in Europe. In his view, English should be taught and learnt as a lingua franca, detached from the cultural context, in the first place. He suggests that people who are interested in learning English in the sense of a 'lingua culturalis', e.g. intensively and with consideration to a cultural context of, for instance the UK, should be able to do so after they have acquired a sufficient command of English as a lingua franca (ELF).
Consequently, if we assume that English in Europe is not used as a "language for identification", but as a "language for communication" (House, 2001), the fear of loosing the identity would be ungrounded, as English in this case would be regarded as a language detached from its cultural context. Despite that, the fact that multilingualism is beneficial for the coexistence of all European countries, should not be disregarded, and consequently, other languages apart from English should be promoted. Labrie and Quell (1997), who investigated the results of several surveys conducted by Eurobarometer in 1994, concluded their research with:
"An equitable and mutually acceptable solution of the communication challenges which lie ahead for Europe's future in the next century will not come about effortlessly. (...) Investigating in multilingualism means investigating in a peaceful and democratic future for all of Europe."
In case the approach of multilingualism plus English is accepted, it one possible scenario could be the situation of so-called diglossia, which is "said to exist where there are two varieties with distinct functions" (Ferguson, 1959). One variety is called the prestige form (or H) and is used in formal settings and writing. The other variety (or L) is used in informal conversation (Ferguson, 1959). Consequently, English would be H (as official and working language of the EU) and, for instance, German would be L (as language for everyday communication). To carry on with this scenario, all other EU languages would have the state of L, too, and as a consequence, communication amongst Europeans in an informal context could happen via the use of the L-languages. As a result, multilingualism as well as a ELF could be put into practise. I acknowledge that this is a rather speculative view, and reality is more complex. However, if English would be regarded as a "language for communication" (House, 2001), it could take the position of a lingua franca in certain areas of life, for instance business, political affairs and administration to make communication smoother, without being a threat to European languages and culture. To ensure this, other EU languages have to be taught and learnt increased in order to guarantee now one will feel underprivileged or disregarded and the linguistic and cultural diversity as such will be preserved.
Hence, the teaching of foreign languages will have to be reconsidered, which will be discussed in the following chapter.
4. THE TEACHING OF EFL IN GERMANY
Firstly, this chapter will give a short insight into historical aspects of the teaching of EFL in Germany, in order to demonstrate the change from a very conservative concept to the concept of interculturalism.
Secondly, the present situation of EFL in Germany will be illuminated and the implications of the language debate in the EU on the curriculum will be discussed.
Finally, details of the effect of a possible acceptance of the model Multilingualism plus English and the future of EFL in Germany will be examined.
4.1 THE HISTORY OF EFL IN EUROPE
The teaching of foreign languages in Europe exists since the mid-19th-century. Each epoch has its own understanding, which influences the methodology, of the aim and object of teaching foreign languages (Denninghaus, 1986).
In the beginning of the teaching of foreign languages knowledge of a language was regarded as theoretical and the acquisition of grammar, vocabulary and written language was emphasized. This was due to the fact that the society did not have the necessity to have a good command of a foreign language in practise.
The reformative approach, which came about after World War II, assumed that the actual language was the spoken language and that the latter could be acquired by continuous repetition (Denninghaus , 1986: 69). Shortly afterwards, this behaviouristic approach was criticized and the cognitive (communicative) approach was developed which placed emphasis on communicative skills (competence in grammar and discourse as well as sociolinguistic and strategic competence (Canale und Swain,1980)).
Lately, the view of teaching foreign languages has changed again. Hence, a new approach, intercultural competence, was developed. The universal educational aspect of learning a language was revived and, apart from the acquisition of oral and communicative competence, the confrontation with multiculturalism leading to intercultural competence, was emphasised.
4.2 THE PRESENT SITUATION OF EFL IN GERMANY
.
In Germany, English is a compulsory school subject and is taught throughout all educational institutions, e.g. in "Hauptschule", "Realschule", "Gymnasium" as well as vocational school and is taught throughout Year 5 (equal to Year 6 in Great Britain) to Year 13. English, in comparison to other languages such as French or Spanish, is stressed in the curriculum (Finkenstaedt and Schröder, 1990: 28).
The curriculum for foreign languages is administered and published independently by the "Länder" (counties). In general, they have similar objectives concerning the teaching of foreign languages, which are reflected in the curriculum. As an example, the curriculum for EFL in Rheinland-Pfalz1 from 2000 states that the knowledge of languages is indispensable for the unity of Europe. It is argued that the teaching of foreign languages must not be restricted to imparting only linguistic ability, but rather comprehend an active confrontation with the 'real life' of the countries of the target language as well as enable pupils to recognize similarities and differences of the foreign culture in comparison to their own. It is stated that the teaching of foreign languages should have the function of a medium between the foreign and the familiar, encourage critical thinking about the own identity and therefore lead to a peaceful coexistence within the multicultural society.
The current situation of EFL is reflected in the curriculum, which shows a clear emphasis on the teaching of languages as a mean to impart intercultural competence. Though this is a reasonable approach, the role of predominant role of English in Europe has not been considered to such an extent as it is necessary, mainly because curricula were developed in a time when the union of Europe and the resulting problems were unforeseeable. Still, the recent discussion about introducing EFL in primary school and parents as well as the public calling for the teaching of EFL from Year 1 on indicates that there is a great demand of English. Therefore, it is unavoidable that the role of English will have to be taken into consideration to a greater extent.
4.3 THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE LANGUAGE DEBATE ON EFL
Bausch et.al. (1998: 9) claim that the European society is multilingual and therefore pupils have to be prepared for this reality:
"Die europäische Gesellschaft ist vielsprachig und wird das auch in Zukunft bleiben. Der Fremdsprachenunterricht an den Schulen in Deutschland steht vor der Aufgabe die Schüler und Schülerinnen auf diese Wirklichkeit vorzubereiten".
This reality is, in my point of view, Multilingualism plus English, because this would be in mutual interest for every side. The demand for preservation of other European languages than English and, at the time, for English as a lingua franca would be met. Therefore, assuming that this concept will be realised, the current concept and methodology of EFL needs rethinking
The problem that arises from the linguistic situation and the language debate in the EU can be specified with the following questions: Firstly, "How can we achieve, through a change of the teaching of foreign languages, that pupils learn as many languages as possible and will be prepared for the multilingual context in Europe as good as possible?" and secondly "How can we ensure that pupils can handle the role of English as a Lingua Franca, e.g. have a sufficient command of English?"
Vollmer (1998) offers an answer by proposing that learning a foreign language should be made more effective and suggests for this smaller classes and an earlier beginning to learn EFL (e.g. in primary school). Moreover, he recommends that the traditional teaching of languages should be tightened through transmitting a receptive knowledge of the language. The languages on offer should be diversified in order to depart from the dominant role of EFL. Also, learning languages in modules should allow the acquisition of several languages.
In the following, three main areas (methodology, didactics and structure) of the teaching of EFL and other languages that should undergo a change will be illuminated with regard to Vollmer (1998).
4.3.1 METHODICAL CHANGES
Changes in methodology can be achieved comparably easy, as the teacher is, in principle, the one who can use new methods in his own authority. The following methods seem to me particularly suitable, as they are practically whereby motivation and fun is enhanced.
In the face of Europe, "Tandem" classes (largely independent cooperation between pupils with different native languages, for example exchange, email- or pen-pal contact) improve the linguistic ability and allow an insight into other cultures. Moreover, the use of media, in particular the Internet, video, TV and radio offer a unique possibility to get into contact with authentic material and impose pupils to the manifold of native as well as non-native varieties of English (as opposed to the traditional approach, where only British English and if at all American English was used to present authentic material). With respect to the internationalisation and the role of ELF, the confrontation with various "Englishes" is crucial in order to ensure intelligibility.
4.3.2 DIDACTIC CHANGES
Changes on the level of didactics are more large-scale because new thoughts and approaches have to be conveyed to the teacher first. The aim of these changes is to enable the individual to interact in the multicultural society.
Learner autonomy as well as intercultural education, the ability to act by means of several languages and languages levels in a responsible way in different cultural or social situations) contribute to the intercultural understanding.
4.3.3 STRUCTURAL CHANGES
Though it takes more time to realize structural changes, they are probably most efficient.
One recommendation is bilingual teaching, which is, in Germany, understood by the teaching of subjects other than languages using English. Also, English should be offered in primary school (what has already been realized in some schools) in order to make the teaching of languages more efficient and, as a consequence, enabling pupils to learn more than one foreign language. This would correspond with the call of the European Commission for multilingualism.
4.4 WHICH "ENGLISH" SHOULD BE TAUGHT?
Proceeding from the assumption that English as a lingua franca will extent to more and more areas of life, the question arises which "English" should be taught in school. This issue has been addressed by, amongst others, Meierkord (1996), Hüllen (1982), and Jenkins and Seidlhofer (2001), who stated that the use of English as a lingua franca in Europe could result in the emergence of a new variety of English.
English used as a lingua franca is characterised by features, e.g. interference of the native language as well as simplification of the target language. Moreover, speakers take their own culture's communicative norms and styles into lingua franca communication (Meierkord, 1996). As Hüllen (1982: 86) points out, the result is a new speech community:
"English as a lingua franca does not rest on the everyday hypotheses of Englishmen or Americans. (...) If English does continue to be employed as a lingua franca in Europe (or as one of several linguae francae) (...) there will arise a secondary speech community which is maintained neither by the understanding of reality by native English speakers in their society nor the knowledge of professional specialists. In such a case, neither the everyday knowledge of Englishmen nor the shared knowledge or behavioural norms of scientists, technologists or businessmen form the decisive background, but a complex consciousness of reality of the partners who are of different nationalities but who all use a common language."
Hüllen's view has been confirmed by Meierkord (1996) who researched aspects of the non-native/non-native speaker discourse, found out that the lingua franca variety used by non-native speakers "showed much similarity with the standard varieties British and American English for length of turns, simultaneous speech and back channel behaviour", but on the other hand "characteristics generally attributed to learner language" were existent. In the face of teaching EFL, she suggests that:
"... Learners should be equipped with strategies to overcome their own productive problems and to react to their partners' difficulties. Learners should be trained and provided with the respective strategies they can use when facing own communicative problems, such as the use of synonyms or circumscription or direct and indirect requests for help."
Assuming a new speech community arises, the traditional teaching of EFL pronunciation (which in Germany is adjusted to Standard British and American English) might have to change. In the face of the criticism on the superior position of English native speaker countries and the negative attitude towards their power - for fear of being economically and politically overtaken by these countries, the teaching of ELFE (English as a Lingua Franca in Europe), which would be a "European variety of English" without the cultural context of English native speaker countries, could be a solution to settle the debate. ELFE, a core focusing on characteristics in pronunciation and grammar, has been developed by Jenkins and Seidlhofer (2001) who argue that:
"English as a lingua franca in Europe (ELFE) is likely to be some kind of European-English hybrid which, as it develops, will increasingly look to continental Europe rather than to Britain or the United States for its norms of correctness and appropriateness."
They assume that ELFE will develop certain characteristics which reflect features of the native language of each European. Important is that English, whatever variety, must still be mutual intelligible, which would be guaranteed when using the ELFE-core. Jenkins and Seidlhofer (2001) make a suggestion for the teaching of English in Europe and argue that "it is crucial for English language teaching in Europe to focus on contexts of use that are relevant to European speakers of English". I agree with this, as it could be argued that communication amongst Europeans with different native languages predominates communication between native and non-native English speakers, and, therefore, Europeans are more often exposed to ELFE than to native varieties. Another point to mention is that ELFE takes into consideration the pronunciation and grammar of the other European languages, so it could be assumed that it is easier for Europeans to learn this variety of English rather than a native variety. This would have the effect that more Europeans, even those who regard themselves as being not good at languages, would stand a good chance of learning English (and the they will have to, if English is used in more and more areas). A direct implication for the teaching of English would be an increased exposition to different varieties of English as well as "European English". Therefore, new material, e.g. spoken language on video or tape and written language, reflecting features of different varieties, in books, articles, etc. will have to be developed.
5. CONCLUSION
To conclude, Germany's (and Europe's) answer to linguistic diversity should be the promotion of individual multilingualism. The learning of other European languages as well as English should be fostered to ensure Europe preserves its' multilingual and multiculatural state. Nevertheless, the role of ELF should no longer be denied, as it could untangle the linguistically complex situation and hence contribute towards a peaceful and working Europe.
Therefore, in order to learn more languages, the time to learn a single language has to be reduced, which implies beginning earlier to teach and learn languages. Thus, teaching English (and, in my opinion, other languages as well) in primary school is a useful approach. Another point is that the expectations of the "near-native competence", in particular in English, should be rethought and probably reduced. It is, in my view, not necessary to be fluent in several languages, but rather to be able to understand and communicate in different levels and different languages, though this does not mean that being fluent in one language is not desirable, but priorities should be established, depending on the context in which the individual learner will use a particular language.
With regard to ELF, in case it developes into a new variety of English, ELFE, I consider it should obtain a 'special status' in European society as well as the school curriculum. In that case ELFE should be taught as a communication tool that everybody has a good command of. All the same, people should still have the opportunity to learn native speaker varieties of English, in the same way they would learn Spanish or French, e.g. in connection to the cultural context of native speaker countries. After all, English, as other languages, has a rich and valuable cultural background and heritage, too, and therefore should not be limited to being a lingua franca only.
6. BIBLIOGRAPHIE
Ammon, U. (1994). The Present Dominance of English in Europe. Sociolinguistica 8: 1-14.
Ammon, U. (2000). Sprachwahl und Macht. Merkur Sonderheft "Europa oder Amerika", 9/10 2000, pp. 867
Bausch, K.H., Königs, F.G., Kogelheide, R. (1986) (eds.). Probleme und Perspektiven der Sprachlern-forschung. Bochumer Beiträge Zum Fremdsprachenunterricht in Forschung und Lehre. Frankfurt: Scriptor Verlag.
Beacco, J.-C., Byram, M. (2002). Guide for the Development of Language Education Policies in Europe: From Linguistic Diversity to Plurilingual Education, Strasbourg, Council of Europe (Executive Version).
Beneke, J. (1991). Englisch als lingua franca oder als Medium interkultureller Kommunikation. In: Grebing, R. (ed.) Grenzenloses Sprachenlernen. Berlin: Cornelsen. 54-66.
Berns, M. (1988). The Cultural and linguistic context of English in West Germany. World Englishes 7:
37-49.
Burger, G. (2000). English als globale lingua franca: Überlegungen zu einer notwendigen Neuorientierung des Engischunterrichts. fsu 44/53: 9-14.
Canale, M., Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical Bases of Communicative Approaches to Second Language Teaching and Testing. Applied Linguistics 1, pp.1-47.
Carmichael, C. (2000). Conclusions: Language and National Identity in Europe. In S.Barbour and C. Carmichael (eds.) Language and Nationalism in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 280-289.
Christ, H. (1998) Bildungspolitik für Mehrsprachigkeit in: Gogolin, I., Graap, S.,List G. (1998) (eds). Über Mehrsprachigkeit. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag, pp.337-360.
Council of Europe. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference forLanguages, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. On line on the Council of Europe website www.coe.int
Crystal, D. (1997). English as a Global Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Denninghaus, F. (1986). Evolution, Epochenwandel und Kontinuität in der Geschichte des Fremdsprachen-unterrichts in Bausch, K.H., Königs, F.G., Kogelheide,R. (1896) (eds). Probleme und Perspektiven der Sprachlernforschung. Bochumer Beiträge Zum Fremdsprachenunterricht in Forschung und Lehre.
Frankfurt: Scriptor Verlag, pp.63-88.
Finkenstaedt, T., Schröder, K. (1990). Sprachschranken statt Zollschranken? Grundlegung einer Fremdsprachenpolitik von morgen. Essen: Stifterverband für die deutsche Wissenschaft e.V.
Gnutzmann, C. (ed.) (2000). Teaching and Learning English as a GlobalLanguage, Native and Non-Native Perspectives, Tübingen.
Gogolin, I., Graap, S., List G. (1998) (eds.). Über Mehrsprachigkeit. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.
Gogolin, I., Krüger-Potratz, M., Meyer, M. A. (1998) (eds.). Pluralität und Bildung. Opladen: Leske + Buderich.
Graddol, D. (1997). The Future of English? London: The British Council.
Hoffmann, C. (2000). The Spread of English and the Growth of Multilingualism with English in Europe. In Cenoz, J. and Jessner, U. (eds.) English in Europe. The Acquisition of a Third Language. Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters. 1-21.
Howatt, A. P. R. (1984). History of English Language Teaching. Oxford.
Huber, L. (1998). Lingua Franca und Gemeinsprache. Gehört zur Allgemeinen Bildung eine gemeinsame Sprache? In I. Gogolin, M. Krüger-Potratz, M. Meyer (eds.) pp. 193-211.
Hüllen, Werner (1982). Teaching a foreign language as `lingua franca´. Grazer Linguistische Studien 16, 83-88.
Janssen, H. (1999). Linguistic dominance or acculturation - problems of teaching English as a global language. In C. Gnutzmann (ed.) Teaching and Learning English as a Global Language, Native and Non-Native Perspectives.Tübingen: Stauffenburg. pp. 41-55.
Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an international language. Oxford.
Strasbourg);
Jenkins, J. and Seidlhofer, B. (2001). Bringing Europe's lingua franca into the classroom. The Guardian Weekly. Online on: www.guardian.co.uk/GWeekly/Story/0,3939,475315,00.html (19.04.2001)
Kachru, B. (ed.) (1992). The Other Tongue. 2nd edn. Urbana and Chicago:University of Illinois Press.
Mackiewicz, W. (1998). "Wie viele Sprachen braucht die EU? Zeitschrift für KulturAustausch 1/1998
Meierkord, C. (1996). Englisch als Medium der interkulturellen Kommunikation.Untersuchungen zum non-native-/non-native speaker - Diskurs. Frankfurt/Main: Lang.
Piepho, H.-E. (1989). Englisch als lingua franca in Europa. Ein Appell zur didaktischen Bescheidenheit an das Fach Englisch und seine Vertreter. In Kleinschmidt, E. (ed.) Fremdsprachenunterricht zwischen Sprachenpolitik
und Praxis. Festschrift für Herbert Christ zum 60. Geburtstag. Tübingen.41-49.
Raasch, A. (2001). "Sprechen Sie europäisch?" und "Sprechen Sie europäisch!". Zeitschrift für Erwachsenenbildung IV/2001
Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2002). Why should linguistic diversity be maintained and supported in Europe? Guide for the Development of Language Education Policies in Europe: From Linguistic Diversity to Plurilingual Education
Strevens, P. (1980). Teaching English as an International Language. Oxford: Pergamon.
Viereck, W. (1996). English in Europe: its nativisation and use as a lingua franca, with special reference to German-speaking countries. In Hartmann, R. (ed). 1996. The English Language in Europe. Oxford: Intellect: 16-23.
Vollmer, H.J. (1998). Fremdsprachendidaktik im Aufbruch: Zwischen Selbstverständnis und Fremdverstehen. In: Gogolin, I., Krüger-Potratz, M., Meyer, M.A. (1998) (eds.). Pluralität und Bildung. Opladen: Leske + Buderich.
Vollmer, H. (2001). Englisch und Mehrsprachigkeit: Interkulturelles Lernen durch Englisch als lingua franca? In D. Abendroth.Timmer and G. Bach (eds.) Mehrsprachiges Europa. Festschrift für Michael Wendt zum 60. Geburtstag. Tübingen: Narr. 91-109.
Zimmermann, R. (1984). Pragmalinguistik und kommunikativer Fremdsprachenunterricht. Heidelberg: Groos.
Ministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft und Weiterbildung,Mittlere Bleiche 61, 55116 Mainz
