The application of ‘native’ and ‘non-native’ labels to EFL professionals has been influenced by the argument over their discriminatory nature. L1 proponents claim that natives are innate with linguistic competence while non-natives are referred to as second-best. A review of studies investigating the coherence of these terms supported the validity of this phenomenon. However, competing theories emphasise the importance and impact of discriminatory terminology not addressed by natives This paper looks at this debate in some detail and aims to balance the need for accurate descriptive labelling against the damaging effects of pejorative categories. It also discusses teaching and linguistic competence in light of both “native�? and “non-native�? categories. The discourse focuses on the advantages and disadvantages attributed to the native versus non-native EFL teacher and employment discrimination issues faced by non-native EFL teachers in institutions, job advertisements, and in the administration of institutions themselves today. It was concluded that a more refined approach to describing different types of EFL professionals is required, which does not negatively disadvantage either L1 or L2 teachers of English.

中文翻译：

---

母语和非母语EFL教师二分法：术语，竞争力和就业歧视

“本地”和“非本地”标签在EFL专业人士中的应用受到其歧视性质争论的影响。L1拥护者声称，本地人天生具有语言能力，而非本地人则被称为次优人。研究这些术语的连贯性的研究综述支持了这种现象的有效性。但是，竞争性理论强调了本地人未解决的歧视性术语的重要性和影响。本文详细讨论了这场辩论，旨在平衡对准确描述性标签的需求与贬义性类别的破坏性影响之间的平衡。它还根据“母语”来讨论教学和语言能力。和“非本地”？类别。讨论的重点是归因于本地和非本地EFL老师的优缺点，以及当今非本地EFL老师在机构，招聘广告和机构本身的管理中面临的就业歧视问题。结论是，需要一种更精细的方法来描述不同类型的EFL专业人士，这不会对英语的L1或L2教师产生不利影响。