当前位置: X-MOL 学术Engl. Today › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
English as a facilitator of social mobility in India: The instrumentality vs. identity debate in language policy research
English Today ( IF 1.156 ) Pub Date : 2020-07-03 , DOI: 10.1017/s0266078420000164
Abhimanyu Sharma

In the introduction to the book he co-edited, Social Justice through Multilingual Education, Mohanty (2009: 3) mentions how, while conducting research in a remote underdeveloped area of the Indian state of Orissa, he came across a schoolboy who asked him about the purpose of his research. The schoolboy told him that indigenous tribal people in ‘this part of the world’ were the subject of too much research, but ‘nothing has changed, nothing will’ (ibid.). Mohanty (ibid.) notes that the encounter had a lasting impact on his thinking and academic work. This is reflected in the ideas underpinning the above-named book that focuses on the question of designing education in a manner that brings social justice to learners. One of its central points concerns the role of English in the Indian education system. It focuses especially on the debate of whether an English-medium education for speakers of minority languages further endangers their language. There are two seemingly intransigent approaches to the role of English in the Indian education system that shape the instrumentality vs. identity debate in language policy research. The instrumentality approach promotes English as a means of socioeconomic mobility for disadvantaged communities (Vaish, 2005; Weber, 2014). The identity approach argues that English-medium instruction leads to cultural alienation of schoolchildren and proposes mother-tongue-based multilingual education as the alternative (Skutnabb–Kangas et al., 2009; Mohanty, 2010). In this paper, I take a closer look at this debate by examining its four key aspects, namely the ‘decolonising’ role of English, language hierarchies, the linguistic double divide, and the problem of defining the term mother tongue. On the basis of this investigation, I describe the challenges this debate poses for policymakers, and explain why the instrumentality approach is a better way of addressing these challenges.



中文翻译:

英语作为印度社会流动的促进者:语言政策研究中的工具与身份辩论

在他合编的书的介绍中,通过多语言教育实现社会正义, Mohanty (2009: 3) 提到,在印度奥里萨邦一个偏远的欠发达地区进行研究时,他遇到了一个小学生,他问他研究的目的。小学生告诉他,“世界这个地区”的土著部落居民是太多研究的主题,但“什么都没有改变,什么都不会”(同上)。Mohanty(同上)指出,这次相遇对他的思想和学术工作产生了持久的影响。这反映在支持上述书籍的思想中,该书籍侧重于以一种为学习者带来社会正义的方式设计教育的问题。其中心点之一涉及英语在印度教育系统中的作用。它特别关注关于少数民族语言使用者的英语教育是否会进一步危及他们的语言的辩论。对于英语在印度教育系统中的作用,有两种看似不妥协的方法,它们塑造了语言政策研究中工具性与身份认同的辩论。工具性方法促进英语作为弱势社区社会经济流动的一种手段(Vaish,2005;Weber,2014)。认同方法认为,英语教学会导致学童的文化异化,并提出以母语为基础的多语言教育作为替代方案(Skutnabb–Kangas 等,2009;Mohanty,2010)。在本文中,我通过研究其四个关键方面来仔细研究这场辩论,即英语的“去殖民化”作用、语言等级制度、母语。在这项调查的基础上,我描述了这场辩论给政策制定者带来的挑战,并解释了为什么工具性方法是解决这些挑战的更好方法。

更新日期:2020-07-03
down
wechat
bug